Trumpter's 1:32 Su-27 molds updated

[JJam]

Well, I've just got my Flanker from LuckyModel yesterday (yep, better late than... than early!), and was planning to get Zactoman's correction MEGA-pack to build accurate model. Opened the kit box, and started looking and most inaccurate parts - canopy, intakes and nosecone.

Beat me, but it seems these guys fixed these flaws (or, at least, made them much less pronounced). I've compared parts with pics available online (Cybermodeler, Masa Narita's build, Flankers-Site.Co.UK), and it clearly visible that:

- intakes are competely retooled, they now look VERY similar to Zactomans' resin replacement. IMHO - that's a direct copy of Zacto's resin parts, but it's just my imho. "Neat" seamlines there, so very careful filling/sanding/rescribing is requiered.

- front canopy piece edge is straight now. No more curves Although, overall canopy shape seems to be slightly off comparing to Zacto's one.

- nosecone - hmm, it seems like it was retooled too (there's seam line running that wasn't there in original molds), but I cant say 100% it was corrected. Seamlines there, too, but they wll be easier to fix than those on intakes. Details level is far from Zacto's cone

More pics here

I've saw shot of upcoming 1/32 Family Flanker parts (btw, it's on preorder at GMW for US$150 with MSRP of 200, my god) a while ago at some russian forum with notice that canopy/intakes/cone were fixed, so it seems like Trumpeter decided to update single-seater, too.

Edited April 24, 2008 by JJam

[CF104]

For those that aren't as familiar with the Trumpy Su-27, can you post comparison pictures so we can see what differences there are?

[loftycomfort]

That's certainly good news. I wanted to build another big flanker but was discouraged by the additional money that needs to be spent on correction sets.

Now the question is: judging from the box, how can one tell if it's the old kit or retooled version?

Terry

Edited April 24, 2008 by loftycomfort

[JJam]

For those that aren't as familiar with the Trumpy Su-27, can you post comparison pictures so we can see what differences there are?

"Old" parts:

Intakes:

Image courtesy of Zactomodels.com

Image courtesy of Flankers-site.co.uk

Canopy:

Image courtesy of Flankers-site.co.uk

[Berkut]

Thanks dude!

[Zactoman]

- intakes are competely retooled, they now look VERY similar to Zactomans' resin replacement. IMHO - that's a direct copy of Zacto's resin parts, but it's just my imho.

Strange, I received no royalty check... Any lawyers in the house?

New

Zactomodels

Old

New

Old and Zactomodels

- front canopy piece edge is straight now. No more curves Although, overall canopy shape seems to be slightly off comparing to Zacto's one.

I'd agree that it still looks off a bit. It looks like they straightened the side profile of the windscreen but left the rest of the canopy too bulbous. Did they add any new detail on the inside of the framing?

New

Old and Zactomodels

- nosecone - hmm, it seems like it was retooled too (there's seam line running that wasn't there in original molds), but I cant say 100% it was corrected. Seamlines there, too, but they wll be easier to fix than those on intakes. Details level is far from Zacto's cone

Nosecone appears unchanged and still in need of replacement. I doubt that they lengthened it and if they did they didn't fix the scribe lines or the profile.

That nasty seam was there on the first tooling but didn't look as prominent. Maybe their tools are wearing out?...

New

Old and Zactomodels

[JJam]

Now the question is: judging from the box, how can one tell if it's the old kit or retooled version?

Can't help much here, since dont have old one around. No "UPDATED!" or "Yeah, Retooled!" stickers/labels on the retooled version box, moreover - box art still has shape issues

One thing that cought my eye - Cartograf label on one side, can't remember any review mentioned that decals are printed by Cartograf, so may be decals are updated as well and this label is is the mark.

Luckymodels.com definitly have the retooled version (and, I guess, Hobbyeasy.com too), since I've got mine from them.

[Berkut]

Maybe it is something with code on box? Could anyone check old box?

[RedStar]

Did they include the updated missiles from the Fulcrum kits or weapons sets?

I'm sure this is a result of the re-tooling that they've been doing getting ready for the Su-27UB and Su-30MKK releases.

Don't worry Zactoman - I'll still get your stuff for my other "old" kit.

[Dave Williams]

Strange, I received no royalty check... Any lawyers in the house?

New

Zactomodels

Does it really look the same? Maybe there is some distortion in the pictures, but the new plastic Trumpeter parts look different than the “in the white†Zacto parts to me. It looks to me like the angle of the intake is different with the Zacto part being like 45 degrees and the Trumpy part being greater. Also, the panel along the top with the rows of gill vents seems “squashed†horizontally, being shorter and talled than the Zacto parts. Again, it may be some photographic distortion of the kit part, but it does seem that Trumpeter has done something to the kit intakes. The gill vent detail is definitely different.

Also, in this shot, the Trumpy kit part still seems too bulged at the bottom where the aux intakes are.

I still think the Zacto parts are better.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Dave Williams

[Berkut]

Well, i also dont think that it is a copy. If you look closely it is differents in rivets for example. And couple of other things is not same iether.

Also, in this shot, the Trumpy kit part still seems too bulged at the bottom where the aux intakes are.

Of cource they are. It is because those are old intakes.

[Zactoman]

Does it really look the same? Maybe there is some distortion in the pictures, but the new plastic Trumpeter parts look different than the “in the white†Zacto parts to me. It looks to me like the angle of the intake is different with the Zacto part being like 45 degrees and the Trumpy part being greater. Also, the panel along the top with the rows of gill vents seems “squashed†horizontally, being shorter and talled than the Zacto parts. Again, it may be some photographic distortion of the kit part, but it does seem that Trumpeter has done something to the kit intakes. The gill vent detail is definitely different.

I still think the Zacto parts are better.

Thanks Dave!

The angle on the front is probably close to the same. The picture of my white intake was taken directly from the side where JJams was taken more from the rear Add to that that the new Trump piece is very warped and curves away from the camera and they do look different. Mine was actually slightly a more acute angle than the original part which you can see by comparing my white resin part to the old trump part pictured next to the scale drawing (which also shows the more acute angle.).

The gill vents on the new part are an improvement over the old part, but still lacking compared to either my parts or typical Tamiya/Academy/Monogram type molding of a similar part. Each vent hole should "right angle in and 45 degree angle out"' giving a louvered effect rather than the "right in, flat, right out" that they've done here. Plus the louvers look rounded and shallow especially next to the 'big' rivet holes. It will be difficult to wipe dark oil paint in the louvers without over-doing it in the rivet holes...

I am certain that they used my parts as reference. For one reason, I was told months ago that they had 'obtained' my combo set and were using it as reference for fixing the Su-27ub kit...

What's a guy to do? Blacklist a whole country?

While the parts are obviously not 'exact' copies of my parts, they did make the same mistakes that I did

Yes, I'll admit that mine aren't 100% accurate!

One area in particular that is a dead give away are some of the small access panels on the inner surfaces. I didn't have the best reference available at the time and missed a bit:

Newer, better reference photo of the real plane:

>>>here<<<

Did they include the updated missiles from the Fulcrum kits or weapons sets?

Don't worry Zactoman - I'll still get your stuff for my other "old" kit.

Did they actually ever correct the missiles?

I thought that the 'weapons set' that they released included the same missiles as the original Flanker kit. Were the MiG-29 missiles any different?

Thanks Paul. I'm not planning to discontinue sales. Particularly since I just invested in a bunch more photo-etch mirrors (did they correct the mirrors on this kit?).

Did they make any other changes? (Canopy Internal framing detail? as previously asked)

Did they add the hole pattern detail to the splitter plates (parts D24 and C54)?

I'm sure I'll lose some business because of this, but hopefully I can make up the difference by selling lots of my new Su-27 Flanker profile prints (Yet another shameless plug!!!)

Edited April 24, 2008 by Zactoman

[snarlyq]

No worries Zacto, yours is still better

[JJam]

Did they include the updated missiles from the Fulcrum kits or weapons sets?

No, nothing new with missiles

Did they make any other changes? (Canopy Internal framing detail? as previously asked)

No

Did they add the hole pattern detail to the splitter plates (parts D24 and C54)?

Still no, nothing there :)

And nosecone seems left unchanged, shorter for about 9mm than it should be. Can someone measure "old" kit nosecone?

Box bar code: 6922803622248

[LanceB]

I am certain that they used my parts as reference. For one reason, I was told months ago that they had 'obtained' my combo set and were using it as reference for fixing the Su-27ub kit...

What's a guy to do? Blacklist a whole country?

Oh, that we could.... When I studied in college there for a year, myself and one of the Bulgarian students used to come up with creative ideas as to how to make China better. Usually these ideas involved the prodigious yet select use of tactical thermonuclear devices. However I now live downwind of China and realize that that was not such a great plan after all.

Or could Zactomodels make an improved Great Wall set, something reaching all the way up to the stratosphere, that would be a drop-fit into the Yellow Sea? :)

[Chox]

I guess Zacto might be a bit annoyed if Trumpeter have used some of the improvements to modify their kit but let's be fair to Trumpeter - at least they have made the effort to improve the kit. Lots of manufacturers would have simply written-off the kit and moved-on to something else, leaving us with an inaccurate kit forever.

Surely Zacto will still pick-up sales for those who want to improve the original kit, and those who think the revised version still isn't good enough. I think we should be congratulating Trumpeter for trying to respond to the kit's deficiencies. It's gotta be a good thing.

[RedStar]

Making the effort to improve the kit (based on fair critiques from customers), and doing the research and measurements necessary to get the job done right is one thing. Leeching the work off somebody else's efforts is another.

As always in a case like this, it's hard to tell just how much Zacto's parts were used, if they were, Trumpeter should have at minimum asked permission. Too often, intellectual property, copyright laws and similar go out the window in that part of the world - they'll rip anyone off to make a buck.

Think back to many of their earlier kits, you could see that they were straight copies of other efforts scaled up. It happens everywhere and enforcement is pretty much impossible.

[Chox]

I take your point but it's easy to take these things too seriously. It's just a hobby after all, and if they really have cheated a little bit then okay, that's not to be encouraged but at least they made the effort to do something about the kit's deficiencies. If they'd done the same as other manufacturers and just carried-on churning the kit out without any improvements we'd all be worse-off. I agree it's a bit frustrating to have one's efforts copied (and of course there's no proof that they have copied zacto, in fact I'd be surprised if they went to such trouble!) but at least they've tried to cater for our needs - and I think that's something to be commended. Surely a good (or at least better) kit, by fair means or foul, is welcome?

[Impatient Pete]

I take your point but it's easy to take these things too seriously. It's just a hobby after all, and if they really have cheated a little bit then okay, that's not to be encouraged but at least they made the effort to do something about the kit's deficiencies. If they'd done the same as other manufacturers and just carried-on churning the kit out without any improvements we'd all be worse-off. I agree it's a bit frustrating to have one's efforts copied (and of course there's no proof that they have copied zacto, in fact I'd be surprised if they went to such trouble!) but at least they've tried to cater for our needs - and I think that's something to be commended. Surely a good (or at least better) kit, by fair means or foul, is welcome?

Where to start?

It's just a hobby? Tell that to guys who put their talents and hard work into their products and make a living producing the hobby items we buy. It's OKAY if they "cheated a little bit"?! Not when they pinched the new material and duplicated Zactos parts -errors and all.

I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading these days...

Pete

[AnthonyWan]

But do Trumpeter kits come with a touch of TLC from this guy???

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j145/Zac.../Zactoman_b.jpg

Photo copyright Zactoman, All rights reserved Zactoman.

I think NOT! :)

(Not responsible for nightmares...)

Edited April 26, 2008 by AnthonyWan

[loftycomfort]

Why are we jumping to conclusion that Trumpeter is copying Zactomodel's products? Let's not take the easy way out and just dismiss their efforts as plagiurism just because they happen to be from that part of the world.

[Chox]

Exactly. I can't believe what I read either sometimes. For heaven's sake, it's a hobby, that's all. You'd think that people would be grateful that, for once, a manufacturer has bothered to take any notice of us modelling geeks and spent money on revising a moulding. It's not like they needed to bother as they could have carried-on selling the unmodified kit to lots of less-particular model builders. They take the time to make the kit a lil' bit better and what do they get? Moans and groans that it's still not good enough and that they must have copied Zacto (even though the foregoing photos suggest that they didn't copy Zacto at all). Seems you really can't please some folks.

Edited April 26, 2008 by Chox

[Dave Williams]

And really, who's to say that Trumpeter didn't listen to the criticism of the original intakes and go out and get better pictures and info on the real thing and make the corrections themselves? There is nothing to suggest they simply copied the Zacto parts. Maybe their existence simply made them go out and do better research.

[Impatient Pete]

You guys missed the earlier post where Chris shows the incorrect panel lines on his parts and shows where Trumpeter duplicated the same panel lines?

I am usually one to defend companies when it comes to accusation (outright or implied) of copying, but look at the earlier post where the panel lines on the new part match exactly the ones on Zactos parts, which are wrong, as Chris himself stated. This is not an accident. Perhaps they both used the same refs? Then again, it might be easier for trumpeter to gain access to an Su-27 than Chris?

If Trumpeter went out and got better pictures to make corrections, why did they choose to duplicate the incorrect panel lines of Chris' parts?

Chox, when you say "It's a hobby" I tend to agree in regards to things that seem silly, like a misplaced panel line , rudder that's too "deep" or the "wrong" color paint.

I don't take it lightly when I see a cottage industry business' parts copied by a major injection manufacturer who cuts deeply into said cottage manufacturers business (as this may well do).

I would be singing Trumpeters praises if it was apparent that they did their own homework, but it doesn't look like they did.

And Lofty-you couldn't be farther from the truth in implying that it's solely based on Trumpeter being "from that part of the world" (whatever that means :-( )...

Just look at my steadfast defending of Hobby Boss.

Pete

Edited April 26, 2008 by Impatient Pete

[Zactoman]

Thanks for stepping up Pete...

I'm really surprised and disappointed at the comments I've read from some of you here...

I'm sure if one of you had spent hundreds (thousand(s?)?) of hours creating these parts you might feel differently...

You guys missed the earlier post where Chris shows the incorrect panel lines on his parts and shows where Trumpeter duplicated the same panel lines?

They must have also missed where I said:

"I am certain that they used my parts as reference. For one reason, I was told months ago that they had 'obtained' my combo set and were using it as reference for fixing the Su-27ub kit..."

Would it make a difference if I told you I had documentation to prove this?

I've known for over six months that they had my combo and were using it as their "main reference" for the two seater, but what was I to do about it?

From what I've been told, even if I could afford lawyers I wouldn't have much of a case. I knew their parts would be different enough simply because they were injection molded parts and not castings.

Would I have liked a royalty check?

Sure! I did, as I mentioned above, invest several hundred (maybe over a thousand) hours into making the master patterns.

Trumpeter is selling thousands of these kits for well over a hundred dollars a piece.

Did I expect a check? Yeah right!

Some free kits might have been nice.

Credit on the instructions or box might have been nice.

Simply asking my permission would have been a good start...

Yes I am upset.

This will certainly hurt my business.

What's next? My A-7 correction? I know that they have seen it and I'm pretty sure they have a copy of it...

Where to go from here?

Do I dare do more correction sets? Detail sets? Just give up on Zactomodels and find another job?

Yup...It's just a hobby...