Pete "Pig" Fleischmann Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Hello boys! Hannants has the Trumpeter 32nd P-51D listed as a new arrival..... Has anyone seen a review or sprue shots? TIA Pig Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 (edited) Sprue shots and instructions over at Hobby Search http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10071047 Similar issues to their P-51B kit. Wrong cockpit floor, bulkhead behind the seat that shouldn't be there (simple to just leave off), incorrect wheel well (although all P-51 kits get it wrong), undersized engine, weird prop, etc., but at least this time they molded the shell ejection ports in the wings. I'm sure I'll get beat up for saying this, but I'd build this over the Dragon kit. Got my flame proof undies on! Edited July 8, 2008 by Dave Williams Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spaced Marine Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 It looks very, very nice. I think I'd like one too. The cockpit looks well apointed, atleast from the instruction booklet picture. I noticed the curved floor instead of the piece of plywood. Shouldn't be too hard of a fix. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Pete "Pig" Fleischmann Posted July 8, 2008 Author Share Posted July 8, 2008 Thanks Dave for the link! Regards, Pig Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spaced Marine Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Maybe it's just my untrained eye, but whats wonky-jaw with the prop? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
smutz Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 hi I know I'll get this baby, the floor shouldn't be a problem to put right & as for that bulkhead just leave it off prop & wells don't look bad (to me anyway). only two niggles from me I'd have liked a olive drab/ neutral grey option instead of both bare metal, the other a pet grip of mine all that interior & no open panels B) . Andy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thom Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 hi I know I'll get this baby, the floor shouldn't be a problem to put right & as for that bulkhead just leave it off prop &wells don't look bad (to me anyway). only two niggles from me I'd have liked a olive drab/ neutral grey option instead of both bare metal, the other a pet grip of mine all that interior & no open panels . Andy Dude, I've seen your work in the In Progress forum and I think you might just be good enough to get those panels open yourself. :D I call it Trumpeter's Added Value Program (TAVP for short) - they're giving you more things to do, and thus more fun to have! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rpeck Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 I think the bulkhead behind the seat in the built P-51 is a modeling BOO-BOO made by the builder. Instrustions have that panel behind the radio or a panel that looks like it. Rick Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 I think the bulkhead behind the seat in the built P-51 is a modeling BOO-BOO made by the builder.Instrustions have that panel behind the radio or a panel that looks like it. Rick It's a boo-boo by Trumpeter, not the builder. The kit instructions tell you to put that bulkhead (part J40) behind the seat in Step 14. The bulkhead behind the radio is another part, L3. They made the same error in the P-51B kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mungo1974 Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 Well it looks like a Mustang to me. I'll get one to go with the Trumpy P-51B im working on now. Just hope we get some nice P-51D decals as im kinda disappointed with the lack of P-51B options outthere, we dont all want to build Ding Hao! or Shangri La Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tbell Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 Unfortunately the canopy looks irredeemably wrong to my eye. The armoured glass is way too wide, the sliding hood too bulbous and the frame too narrow. To my eye it looks more like one of those 3/4 scale kitplane versions of the Mustang. I plan to wait for the 21st Century Toys P-51 to come out at 1/5th the price. It will be less detailed for sure, but most likely much more accurate shape-wise. 'll be passing on this one. Cheers, Tony Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Spaced Marine Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 A what point to we nit-pick our selves out of a hobby? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
smutz Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 A what point to we nit-pick our selves out of a hobby? Agreed. Andy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thom Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Agreed.Andy :o Thirded. See my signature. It's been that way for about three weeks now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dave Williams Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 This “nit pick†theme seems to come up when ever someone posts comments about errors in kits, and I’m not sure where it is going. Are people not supposed to make comments about kits? I’d offer that’s what forums like this are for, so people can find out information about models. And what is the negative aspect about “nit picking†that people find wrong? Is it that someone might decide not to buy or build the kit based on other’s people’s comments? That’s entirely an individual choice about whether to buy or build a kit or not. If the “nits†don’t bother you, then go ahead and build it and enjoy. No one really cares if someone chooses to build or not build a particular kit. Is there a worry that the manufacturer might be put off and stop making kits? Not likely. It hasn’t slowed Trumpeter one bit and they seem to come in for the lion’s share of the criticism. The Dragon P-51 also seems to be selling well, even with all the criticism. So, what is the value in criticizing the critics? One final thought. I’d consider something like the extra bulkhead in the Trumpeter P-51 cockpits a “nit" because it’s a simple fix; just leave it out. But something big, visible, and obvious like a very wide center windscreen is a bit more problematic and more than just a “nitâ€. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
thom Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 (edited) This “nit pick†theme seems to come up when ever someone posts comments about errors in kits, and I’m not sure where it is going. Are people not supposed to make comments about kits? I’d offer that’s what forums like this are for, so people can find out information about models. And what is the negative aspect about “nit picking†that people find wrong? Is it that someone might decide not to buy or build the kit based on other’s people’s comments? That’s entirely an individual choice about whether to buy or build a kit or not. If the “nits†don’t bother you, then go ahead and build it and enjoy. No one really cares if someone chooses to build or not build a particular kit. Is there a worry that the manufacturer might be put off and stop making kits? Not likely. It hasn’t slowed Trumpeter one bit and they seem to come in for the lion’s share of the criticism. The Dragon P-51 also seems to be selling well, even with all the criticism. So, what is the value in criticizing the critics?One final thought. I’d consider something like the extra bulkhead in the Trumpeter P-51 cockpits a “nit" because it’s a simple fix; just leave it out. But something big, visible, and obvious like a very wide center windscreen is a bit more problematic and more than just a “nitâ€. I see it as an attempt to redress the balance a bit. Things like the deconstruction of the Trumpeter Dakota from a few test shots bother me. People seem to be of the opinion that a kit is fatally flawed if you have to put some effort in to make it as accurate as you'd like. The reality is that research can be limited by cost considerations, so won't always be 100% perfect. And even if references are used which are excellent, manufacturing limitations (in cost or technology) also tend to be an issue. I take your point, though, and I'll try not to let it go too far. I just feel that sometimes 'experts' spend a lot more time complaining about a kits deficiencies than actually fixing them and showing us how. EDIT: I can't type! Edited July 10, 2008 by thom Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Midnight Storm Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Yeah, but I'm with Tony on this one... that model looks all-wrong. :o Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Icehound Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 (edited) What is it about the Mustang that model companies cant get it correct! This Stang might be better than the Dragon Mustang which in my case was turned into spare parts for my Hasegawa Mustang when I get around to building it.To me apart from the windshield which does look wrong in the pics in this thread and the bulkhead behind the seat can be removed.I wonder if another 1/32nd canopy would fit the Trump kit? As to the 21st Century Mustangs I have two P-51B/C prebuilts I picked up in New York State earlier this year,they look pretty good to me,the wheels are a little off and the markings are a little blah,but after some weathering and me ignoring the wheels they look pretty good to me I also think its ok to take a close look at new releases,after all when you spend quite a bit of your hard earned money on them you would at least expect them to look like the airplane they are supposed to be. Its all up to the individual when it comes to spending money and buying a certain kit. All of the above is my opinion for what its worth. Mark Edited July 10, 2008 by Icehound Quote Link to post Share on other sites
smithery Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Looks nice, but I'll stick with my Dragon kit. Where skills allow, I can fix the errors that bother me, and ignore the ones that don't. It's my model, so I can do that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KOG7777 Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 I generally try to avoid nitpicking... but even I find the canopy shape a bit offputting... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TF51GREGWISE Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 The only "nitpicking" that is harmful to the hobby is the one that will point fingers and apply labels to anyone who offers any criticisms on a substandard model kit. The pile on effect by those who are hell bent on silencing anyone with a opinion will be the ones responsible for numbing the hobby and lowering the standards. No one is stopping anyone from buying crappy model kits... Dragon is selling that POS they call a mustang like hotcakes... Hasn't hurt them. I'll go the next step and say this- The new Trumpeter Mustang aint any better than the Dragon. And here is another thought from this "nitpicker" The North American P-51 Mustang hold a special place in my Heart not because I sweat my arse off keeping them in the air but for the old pilots I meet that owe their lives to the Mustang and to her history she holds. Why can they make a accurate flipping Nazi 109/190 down to the last rivet and not give a sh t about the Mustang. The Bastards are selling those kits on the Mustang name and history with no regard for either... go ahead buy em. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SBARC Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Greg, Of all the prople on here, I think I respect your opinion on the Mustang the most. What in your opinion the best Mustang kits in different scales? How does the old 1/48 Mongram kit measure up in your opinion? I've got the old 1/48 Monogram kit and I'm just wondering if it is worse the effort. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TF51GREGWISE Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 Greg,Of all the prople on here, I think I respect your opinion on the Mustang the most. What in your opinion the best Mustang kits in different scales? How does the old 1/48 Mongram kit measure up in your opinion? I've got the old 1/48 Monogram kit and I'm just wondering if it is worse the effort. Steve thanks for the kind words and to answer your questions IMHO... Hasegawa in 1/32, But the old Monogram/Revell Phantom Mustang has the best overall accurate shape and could be a show stopper with some effort. Tamiya in 1/48 and 1/72 . As for the old 1/48 Monogram she still can hold her own when talent is applied. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cap'n Wannabe Posted July 11, 2008 Share Posted July 11, 2008 <SNIP> The new Trumpeter Mustang aint any better than the Dragon. <SNIP> That pretty much sums it up for me. I doubt that I'll ever buy the Dragon or the Trumpeter Mustangs. Here we have the Hasegawa kit, which has been around for yonks, the Phantom Mustang, which has been around for even longer, and now the 2 new kids on the block. Yes, to me they all look like Mustangs, but the Dragon and Trumpeter kits are IMHO not worth the $$ because the standard in terms of accuracy by all accounts is no better than the older kits. Steve thanks for the kind words and to answer your questions IMHO...Hasegawa in 1/32, But the old Monogram/Revell Phantom Mustang has the best overall accurate shape and could be a show stopper with some effort. Tamiya in 1/48 and 1/72 . As for the old 1/48 Monogram she still can hold her own when talent is applied. Yay! I have 4 out of those 5..... Now just waiting for DH or HS uncuffed prop blades in 1/32..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.