Artful69

Eric ... this all sounds logical to me ... and I defer to your experience of such things in this regard ...
 
The main issues being raised with the Tigercat gear as presented are the following:
 
* HpH have elected to use resin gear ... the resin, according to your theory, should be able to take the weight by itself ... and as I have no evidence to the contrary I'm inclined to agree with you.
* HpH have deemed this not to be the case (for whatever reason) ... and decided to reinforce the gear with metal pins.
* The system used (metal pin strengtheners) interferes with the detail of the landing gear ...
* Therefore ... If HpH deemed the resin gear to be insufficient in it's own right ... why not move to a straight up metal cast?
That way the detail is kept (if not enhanced) ... without the obvious strengtheners poking out everywhere ...
* Also ... people buy AM metal landing gear all the time just for the detail aspect (G-Factor) ... and possibly for the extra inherent strength of the part itself (to help withstand breakage) - not necessarily for the support requirement.
 
Either way ... the kit part as presented kind of looks like a cheap-n-nasty solution ...
 
Rog

I'm beginning to wonder ... with a master being made for all landing gear components ... why a full metal set (in the appropriate weight bearing metal) could not have been cast?
Sure ... it would take a different kind of mould ... perhaps costing a bit more ... but would metal have cost that much more to make than reinforced resin?
I mean ... when you're talking $300 for a kit to begin with ... how much extra to add metal gear? ... AND it looks more professional ...
It seems like a no-brainer for me ...
 
Still ... I could possibly be convinced to handle cheapskate landing gear ... even reshape ill fitting nose weights ...
... but non-matching external detail (fill and re-rivet) - that IS obvious and in photographic evidence - no matter what others want to post without pictorial evidence ...
... or details designed to occupy the same space (try fitting this when something else is there) ...
... would be the straw that broke the camels back for me ... 
Ridiculous ... as is the reply given by the manufacturer when advised that said goods were defective!
 
Rog

Hi Peter ...
 
They put up an article on their website addressing the landing gear/weight support issue ... it  is showing the kit with weights placed on top of the assembled model ... 
As I said ... all well and good - but this isn't a $50 Revell/Trumpeter kit - and how long were the weights left there? What would be the result over an extended time period?
While it's an effective demonstration ... it isn't really an engineering "proof" ...
the response Brian got to his enquiry is shockingly poor ... Jiri might as well have said "too bad, so sad - your problem"
 
Rog

I'm a little late to the party here ...
 
I decided to walk through a few of the build threads this morning ... waking up a little earlier than expected and not being able to get back to sleep.
I'm very surprised to hear about the detail alignment areas ... and also the sorts of fit errors with parts occupying the space of others.
 
We can always understand that fit issues will occur with a resin kit ... and a bit of additional sanding/test fit work will be required - it's a given.
AKA the Walrus ... Even with the cost of an HpH kit - they're never going to be "snap-together".
HpH have, in the past, always offered bang-for-buck when it comes to a fully detailed out-of-box build ... drive away - no more to pay.
 
But seriously? ... The misalignment of the wing rivets is an amateur mistake!!
... and you'd think that in their test-build of the model they'd have noticed that ... and the issues with the cannon barrels ... 
Where's the quality control?
To not advise customers prior to purchase is bordering on deception ... and extremely poor form.
 
I'm also disappointed in Jiri's reply ... if you're going to charge large amounts for a "specialty" kit like this one ...
The least you can do is retool the faulty mould and re-issue replacements ... when you're notified of an error of this magnitude that will be so obvious on completion!
If it means the loss of a bit of profit (or make a loss of sorts) ... there is a need to man up and understand that it is your fault - and not the fault of the customer - nor should the issue be borne by them.
 
They went to the trouble of "proving" that their landing gear will hold up to support the weight of the kit ... although whether this will stand the test of time remains to be seen!
Why not fix an obvious issue so that good people, who have paid good money, actually get what they paid for ... 
 
I'll definitely be checking reviews of the A-20G before I hand over coin for it!
 
Not impressed at all.
 
Wishing you all the best on your big fix Brian!
 
Rog

If it's lithium powered, I'm surprised it didn't cook you alive!!
 
Rog

If it's lithium powered, I'm surprised it didn't cook you alive!!
 
Rog

Damn, it was hard to get this thing to 88 mph….I just got back from November 15th 2024 and apparently it’s a Hurricane.

 

He's in a different time zone.   He'll report back to us any day now on what the new kit is.  

Ooooof!
 
Rog :/

Ooooof!
 
Rog :/

Warming up to 1/32 sets……. 

In the current economic climate, I would be very surprised to see a sharp reduction in pricing for the 'Basic' series, compared to what kits were selling for 10 ... or even 5 years ago. I think a lot of people will be disappointed if this is their focus.
 
This SWS Fw.190A-4 is a 'Special Edition', which along with their 'Eric Hartmann' Bf.109G-14 is being released to celebrate an event (I think it was ZM's 10th year of releases?). The point being, that these two kits are released at a far cheaper purchase price than the standard release ... by pre-order only - one and done! ... We haven't yet seen the standard A-4 boxing which should be the next release and will retail for significantly more than the special edition (I'm guessing 30%+).
 
The first 'Basic' series kit due for release is the A-3 ... Bearing in mind that Kotare's Spitfire would be about the same sort of part count / level of engineering, I'd be thinking along this level of pricing also ... definitely not cheap.
 
Rog

The poses on this one look about as dodgy as a $3 bill ...
 
... and that guy behind looks super creepy!!! I'm a bit concerned about where his left hand is at!
 
Rog

As unlikely as this is ... it's not completely bonkers!  ...
We lack this Iconic BoB bomber from the 1/32 line up ... and also an accurate Ju.87B/R
Both of these fall under the "... something to shoot down" banner.
 
Rog

… Well that answers the nacelle question at least!! … Never noticed that before … I’ll get out the reference book when I get home and check for other design variations … I’m still fairly certain the fuselage moulds could be utilised with a plug - why Neil didn’t make them as a modular design in the first place, I don’t quite understand.
 
Rog

… Well that answers the nacelle question at least!! … Never noticed that before … I’ll get out the reference book when I get home and check for other design variations … I’m still fairly certain the fuselage moulds could be utilised with a plug - why Neil didn’t make them as a modular design in the first place, I don’t quite understand.
 
Rog

The exhaust on some A-20B/C routed out the outer side of the nacelle, similar to early B-25's. This would require a new nacelle side to accommodate the depression for the exhaust. Additionally, the A-20B/C had different cowlings than the G/J/K series. They were of the same shape as those included in the G kit, but had several cutouts in them around their circumference. See the photo below for what I am talking about:
 
 
I've also read in several sources that lend-lease aircraft were fitted with a different windscreen than US aircraft. It had a steeper slope, which meant a shorter instrument panel coaming and a longer distance between the windscreen and the nose. So that's a whole other can of worms :-)
 
- Dennis S.
   Mount Juliet, TN USA

Here's a few more photos showing the different exhaust and cowlings, compliments of a Paul Budzik article:
 
 
 
- Dennis S.
   Mount Juliet, TN USA

I think Neil should give us a B-26 Marauder, too, before Hobby Boss attempts to mess that up, too.
 
- Dennis S.
   Mount Juliet, TN USA

Having spoken with Neil yesterday, and introducing him to Mark Postlethwaite, it would appear an RAF boxing is definitely on the cards. I asked if he would be tooling an early "Turretless" fuselage and he replied "Yes"?? 
I wasn't aware that HKM own all their own cad and mold making facilities, so it's all done in house. One would assume, this being the case, they have a tried and tested fuselage cad/cam package, so a simple change in the bulged area and whatever else needs to be done to make an early fuselage would not be a comparatively "massive" task?
 
Wingleader are currently putting the final touches to the "Boston/Havoc in RAF service" Photo Archive series book. Following a conversation with Mark, this early/late subject is VERY confusing. Apparently the UK purchased French Havocs early in the war and gave them a later designation than the newer Bostons bought from the USA previously?... or something along those lines..

Just to stir again a little bit the hornets'nest:
Daryl Legg also painted a Do17...

After reading so much on multiple sites i was intrigued to see what the actual kit was like.
With numerous people posting some pretty disparaging remarks then directly comparing those opinions against the kit i must have a different kit, im buying another two.
I have been taking photos for 40 years had many images published in books, magazines etc so have some idea about cameras and photography.
One major issue ive seen appear is the use of mobile phone cameras for many images and people judging them on face value.
To be short those images can have major issues.
First most people RAW format isnt used.
With Iphones applying sharpening, contrast boosting and default HDR format any photos of plastic kits will immediately boost the appearance of panel lines and apparent depth as edges are all enhanced lighter areas brightened darker areas darkened etc.
Ive seen plenty of pics posted of this kit and the pictures with these default phone properties both Iphone and Android make this kit look FAR worse that it actually is.
Even poor editing of the best files ie RAW taken with a dedicated camera can unintentionally create artificial changes.
Id highly recommend anyone put off by images of the kit go look at it in person i have zero issues with the panel lines at all. In fact most of the debate after seeing the kit was a generated by people who havnt seen the kit judging it based on images clearly suffering from enhanced detail caused directly by poor quality cameras ie mobile phone based.
The properties of these cameras is not accurate capture of detail but 99% of their use is personal photography of places/events and not for product photography.
Basing any judgement of images which by default are altered to enhance colour, detail and contrast to make them more suitable for FB or Insta, Tik Tok etc is fraught with issues.
An excellent post at HS on the new 48th Corsair where the kit was being slaughtered by the usual suspects based on some mobile phone images.
When someone with correct light and a decent camera did a side by side of the new kit and the Tamiya kit unsurprisingly the depth and sharpness of the panel lines and rivets where almost identical.
Mobile phone cameras for assessing plastic and details are absolutely 100% not to be trusted.
 
  

I agree with most of what you’ve said - in relation to your opinion - we’re all entitled to one. Personally I have no interest in this kit or Italian subjects in general - so haven’t paid close attention to reviews etc …
 
In regard to pricing however - we have been hit with a staggering round of inflation in the last 2 years … COVID lockdowns killed a LOT of middle class industry and what little remained is now being killed off with inflationary pressures caused by a lack of supply for the hyper increased demand, in post lockdown dystopia.
 
Expect every kit price, everywhere to continue the northward climb in the short to medium term as the costs of materials and production continue to rise.
 
Rog

Oh I get you ... You're flogging the kit off! ... I thought that was a weird reply to my initial comment lol
 
Rog

What? ... The thread, Erwin or both?
 
Rog