Meng F-4G versus Zoukei Mura F-4G

[Curt B]

Hi All,

 

There seems to be a lot of writing about both the new subject jet models, more about the Meng than the ZM, or so it seems to me.  But I haven't yet seen anyone do a head to head comparison between the two, such as, which one is better.  Maybe that's not a good question to ask.  Especially since 'better' is so subjective.  How would you answer that?  Which is easier to build?  Which is more accurate?  Which fits together better/easier?  I know that Doog's has been doing a 'Weasel-Off', comparing the 2 kits, subject area versus subject area, but no final determination as of yet.  So does anyone have an opinion?  I've actually bought both kits myself, so perhaps asking this question is either a little late...or perhaps stupid.  But I'm curious if anyone has a thought on this.

 

I'm still waiting on the Quinta cockpit sets for both (and the Quinta reinforcing belly strap for the Meng plane) before I begin building either of them.  I've gotten so spoiled with having aftermarket 3D panels, or at least pre-painted photo etch and pre-cut canopy masks that I almost can't even THINK of doing (at least newly molded or recently re-introduced) plane models without them.  The same goes for the new Academy A-10C, though for THAT plane, which I have, I'm waiting for the 3D-printed Phase Hangar engine parts, in addition to the Quinta cockpit and cockpit masks...

Edited May 27, 2023 by Curt B

[Studneru]

So Doogs build is inconclusive for you?

Edited May 24, 2023 by Studneru

[boom175]

IMHO The ZM kit has finer and better detail. The Meng kit has simplified details but better engineering for assembly.  A lot of this boils down to personal preference, People complain about the ZM spine insert ( a valid point that could have been engineered better) and they complain about the exhaust shield on the Meng phantoms ) I cant stand it and that's what prevents me from buying the Meng kit. But I love how Meng does the outer wing panels. So you pick your poison.

[Geoff M]

I have built both and as Boom175 you pick your poison.  But they are both nice kits and better than anything that came before them.  You won't be sorry with either one.

 

[Curt B]

1 hour ago, boom175 said:

IMHO The ZM kit has finer and better detail. The Meng kit has simplified details but better engineering for assembly.  A lot of this boils down to personal preference, People complain about the ZM spine insert ( a valid point that could have been engineered better) and they complain about the exhaust shield on the Meng phantoms ) I cant stand it and that's what prevents me from buying the Meng kit. But I love how Meng does the outer wing panels. So you pick your poison.

Excellent point about the heat shield on the Meng kit.  I would agree that the 3D effect in plastic is pretty poorly implemented, an attempt to make simple a visual detail that is similar, to my mind, to the over-exaggerated Hasegawa F-22 RAM panels.  

[Buckmeister]

ZM did their research better than Meng. Neither kit is perfect, but ZM is arguably more accurate overall.

[JackMan]

8 hours ago, boom175 said:

IMHO The ZM kit has finer and better detail. The Meng kit has simplified details...

 

To my eye, the ZM does have finer and better details. To me, Meng's panel lines seem a tad too deep.

 

 

[BillS]

I agree the heat shield detail is overdone but I personally like it because it accentuates the real look of that area. It also simplifies assembly. I’d love it if Meng did a J. It’s a great kit and fun, trouble free build.

[Buckmeister]

4 hours ago, BillS said:

I agree the heat shield detail is overdone but I personally like it because it accentuates the real look of that area.

 

Go look at a real F-4.  Meng’s heat shield area looks nothing at all like a real F-4 in any way.  Whoever designed it obviously never got close up with a real F-4. And in any event, on 99% of F-4s that area is coated with a thick layer of soot.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Buckmeister

[BillS]

I was a maintenance officer on F-4D and Es. I have seen one or two heat shields.

[arnobiz]

I agree with Bill on this one. Is it overdone? Yes. Does it help get a final look close to the original more easily than if it were smooth? Definitely!

[Buckmeister]

To each his own, I guess. It’s your money. Those ribs stand about a scale inch or more proud of the surface. On every F-4 I’ve ever been close to and run my hand over, you can barely feel any discontinuity in the surface. Not even close to enough to measure.

[BillS]

It’s totally about preference. The details on even Tamiya’s brilliant F-4B are not truly to scale or even totally accurate but if you love the F-4, to me every new release is worth building and musing over like a bottle of chianti. Meng has features the others don’t. It’s such a  lovely modeling experience and (I think) looks like an F-4, heat shields and all.

[GeneK]

11 hours ago, BillS said:

... but if you love the F-4, to me every new release is worth building and musing over like a bottle of chianti.

Well said, Bill.

 

Have you posted other pictures of your beautiful model elsewhere?

 

Gene K

[RichB63]

3 hours ago, GeneK said:

Well said, Bill.

 

Have you posted other pictures of your beautiful model elsewhere?

 

Gene K

 

I’d like to see more of this lovely build too. I’m guessing that the markings are from the IPMS 2021 Convention decal sheet.

[BillS]

Thank you Rich and Gene. You don't know me but I know you. Rich, you sent me an aileron for a Has. F-104 that I just posted on Hyperscale’s Plastic Pics. And Gene, F-4 pilot and fount of knowledge on USAF F-4s and balanced critic of the plastic ones. 
I only took 5 or 6 pics of the Meng and put in on Plastic Pics as well. And yes the Bullseye sheet was the basis for that scheme, but I found a shot of “my” jet that wouldn't require the mold line reinforcement on the wing. I scratched together the c/l ejector rack, added Quinta 3D cockpit and 3D print seats. It’s a very easy model and I loved building it. But hey, I loved the old Monogram F-4D too!

[Curt B]

2 hours ago, BillS said:

Thank you Rich and Gene. You don't know me but I know you. Rich, you sent me an aileron for a Has. F-104 that I just posted on Hyperscale’s Plastic Pics. And Gene, F-4 pilot and fount of knowledge on USAF F-4s and balanced critic of the plastic ones. 
I only took 5 or 6 pics of the Meng and put in on Plastic Pics as well. And yes the Bullseye sheet was the basis for that scheme, but I found a shot of “my” jet that wouldn't require the mold line reinforcement on the wing. I scratched together the c/l ejector rack, added Quinta 3D cockpit and 3D print seats. It’s a very easy model and I loved building it. But hey, I loved the old Monogram F-4D too!

Hey Bill, thanks for posting picture of both your airplanes.  You must have found an early source for the Quinta set for the Meng, as I've not found anywhere that has them in stock, currently.  Maybe stores had them and sold out quickly?  You made a good point about each kit having its own benefits.  Unless a model is identified by folks as 'unbuildable' due to various factors, I don't think that would stop me from going ahead with making that kit.  I have a few ZM F-4 kits, the F-4C, F-4S, and now the F-4G, the Tamiya F-4B, and the Meng F-4G.  I'd been hoping for a ZM later F-4E, but if I do the ZM F-4G, maybe the wing slats aren't such a big deal on their E variant.  When you wrote of not having the mold line reinforcement, are you referring to the belly reinforcement?  I was hoping to use the Quinta version of that, along with they cockpit set.  In any event, you did a great job on your F-4G!

[BillS]

Curt,

   First, I used the Quinta set meant for the ZM kit. It fit perfectly except a bit of gray trim on the lower left of the WSO’s panel. The rest were a slam dunk. I’ve noticed the Quinta G model sets for Meng have really nice sidewall stuff included now. They’re not cheap, like $35 but I’d buy them.

   Second, yes the mold line reinforcement is a fancy term for “belly strap”. Past 74-337 (I think), the wing came from the factory with reinforced internal structure.

I really like the current generation kits from all of the manufacturers. I still think Academy’s is pretty decent. I’ve built 2 Academy Bs, 1 C, 5 ZM Js, 1 E, 1 G, 1 C and 1 D, 2 Tam Bs and 1 Meng E. I still have a Hase K too. I enjoy the different engineering approaches and construction  ideas each has. I remember 50 years ago thinking the 1/50 Fujimi E was the last word in F-4s. Remember the ITC kit?
Good luck on your jets!

[Curt B]

49 minutes ago, BillS said:

Curt,

   First, I used the Quinta set meant for the ZM kit. It fit perfectly except a bit of gray trim on the lower left of the WSO’s panel. The rest were a slam dunk. I’ve noticed the Quinta G model sets for Meng have really nice sidewall stuff included now. They’re not cheap, like $35 but I’d buy them.

   Second, yes the mold line reinforcement is a fancy term for “belly strap”. Past 74-337 (I think), the wing came from the factory with reinforced internal structure.

I really like the current generation kits from all of the manufacturers. I still think Academy’s is pretty decent. I’ve built 2 Academy Bs, 1 C, 5 ZM Js, 1 E, 1 G, 1 C and 1 D, 2 Tam Bs and 1 Meng E. I still have a Hase K too. I enjoy the different engineering approaches and construction  ideas each has. I remember 50 years ago thinking the 1/50 Fujimi E was the last word in F-4s. Remember the ITC kit?
Good luck on your jets!

Hey Bill,

 

Thanks for the reply.  I do plan to wait for the kit specific Quinta set, but thank you for the thought on an alternate approach.  You're correct, THE LATEST QUINTA SETS ARE GETTING STUPID EXPENSIVE, and if they keep going up at the current rate, they'll be more expensive than the kits they enhance!  I remember those old kits...and they were throw-away cheap compared to today's prices for everything.

 

All that said, I'm sure I'll have fun with all of the models I have.  I appreciate your good wishes!

[arnobiz]

3 hours ago, Curt B said:

Hey Bill,

 

Thanks for the reply.  I do plan to wait for the kit specific Quinta set, but thank you for the thought on an alternate approach.  You're correct, THE LATEST QUINTA SETS ARE GETTING STUPID EXPENSIVE, and if they keep going up at the current rate, they'll be more expensive than the kits they enhance!  I remember those old kits...and they were throw-away cheap compared to today's prices for everything.

 

All that said, I'm sure I'll have fun with all of the models I have.  I appreciate your good wishes!

Either they're getting greedy or they're hit by the sanctions on Russia, or a mix of both!

[Ben Brown]

Hi All,

 

Not to get too anal enthusiastic about it, but 71-0237 was the first F-4E with the internal wing reinforcement. 🙂

 

Bill, beautiful F-4E and F-104C!!! You're making it very hard to resist the Meng kit. 

 

Ben

[GeneK]

17 hours ago, BillS said:

I only took 5 or 6 pics of the Meng and put in on Plastic Pics as well [as the F-104]

Thanks. Unfortunately I no longer have the time or patience to wade through Hyperscale's ads. 

 

Beautiful workmanship!

 

Gene K

P.S. PM me if you intend to work on your Hasegawa kit.

[mike_45]

I am excited as today my Quinta F-4G set for the Meng kit arrives in the ol' mail.  I acquired the ZM 3d decals and will combine them with some other quinta leftovers for seat stuff and will build both the Meng and ZM side by side here soon. 

 

Should be two fun builds.  

[Keith T]

On 5/27/2023 at 9:25 AM, arnobiz said:

Either they're getting greedy or they're hit by the sanctions on Russia, or a mix of both!

ResKit produce 3D decals under the Kelik brand that are every bit as detailed as the Quinta sets produced in Russia.

Their delivery, direct from Ukraine, is reliable and cost-effective. 

[metroman]

How are some of you still seeing ads on certain forums?  AdBlocker Plus to the rescue!