Eduard 1/32 P-51B/C Birdcage for October release

[quang]

1 hour ago, Kagemusha said:

 

It's going to be interesting to see if it has the fin fillet, or not, or maybe both. 

Indeed the 51st FG P-51B would have a retro-fitted fin fillet. I added one to my Revell P-51D-5 when it was released. But I was a few years younger and foolish 😇.

[zeusbheld]

On 8/2/2026 at 1:34 PM, drsquid142 said:

One thing I've noticed now that I have my kit is that both the wings and fuselage have cut lines moulded in, so you can remove the gun bay doors and the nose to add the upcoming 3D printed AM upgrades for the kit. The gunbay is already available to buy, and Eduard has shown the engine set in the design process on their Facebook page.

TBH, not having an engine at the price they are asking for this kit was the main disappointment for me, but it makes sense as I'm sure many other builders of the kit wouldn't want an engine if it meant the kit cost more. I just hope the 3D print engine set isn't going to cost too much.

also a problem with included engines is it often means poorly fitted cowling parts and overly complicated assembly if you want the cowl closed. Kitty Hawk, i am looking at YOU.... 

got mine, this kit does the things i care about rigtht. the shape looks good (haven't measured yet though) detail is excellent on both the 3dp and the plastic, and it's a new tool p-51B in 1/32. the clear parts are impressively thin. 

for an engine and just about anything else you won't see if you have everything closed, ZM still plan a B as far as I know. 

[MikeC]

31 minutes ago, zeusbheld said:

also a problem with included engines is it often means poorly fitted cowling parts and overly complicated assembly if you want the cowl closed. Kitty Hawk, i am looking at YOU.... 

Interesting, as I recall the cowlings and other removable panels on my P-39 fitted very well in the closed position, unlike others I have encountered.  Having said that, that's the only Kitty Hawk kit I've done, although I'll get around to my Bronco (another horse, so I submit that's technically not off-topic ) one day.

 

The trouble wirh any included engine is that the thickness of the plastic cowling parts on any kit is  usually (stand fast Tamiya Spitfires and Mustangs) way too thick and not in scale: so any engine has to be undersized to stand a chance of fitting with closed cowlings.  Better to leave it to the aftermarket or an add-on option for  those who  (unlike me) who want an exposed engine.

[zeusbheld]

4 hours ago, MikeC said:

Interesting, as I recall the cowlings and other removable panels on my P-39 fitted very well in the closed position, unlike others I have encountered.  Having said that, that's the only Kitty Hawk kit I've done, although I'll get around to my Bronco (another horse, so I submit that's technically not off-topic ) one day.

 

The trouble wirh any included engine is that the thickness of the plastic cowling parts on any kit is  usually (stand fast Tamiya Spitfires and Mustangs) way too thick and not in scale: so any engine has to be undersized to stand a chance of fitting with closed cowlings.  Better to leave it to the aftermarket or an add-on option for  those who  (unlike me) who want an exposed engine.

yeah totally not a fan of included Engines for the undersize/overthick reason. i'd prefer a to-scale aftermarket for the maintenance scene option (or separate display). 

[MikeC]

30 minutes ago, zeusbheld said:

yeah totally not a fan of included Engines for the undersize/overthick reason. i'd prefer a to-scale aftermarket for the maintenance scene option (or separate display). 

Or even (although it adds cost to the it) an included engine plus stand for separate display,  not for fitting in the kit. This is what Revell will be offering us with the forthcoming Harrier.

[csavaglio]

The Gwh P-40 gives a good approach, separate parts from the firewall forward for opened closed and double parts where needed like the exhaust. It'd take a lot to get a proper seam and use the magnets to make it swappable, but the engine made a nice display built up on its own.  It's detailed enough with all the plumbing to be very presentable. Honestly, for future ones, I'd prob skip the engine altogether and either save it for a fun build or sell it at a swap meet later. 

 

The down side is the added cost, but what would it really save off the kit? 

 

[drsquid142]

However, if they had included an engine, I would assume they would have left the IM fuselage as is, allowing those who don't want to display it to build it as is, and then included the upcoming 3D-printed engine for those who want to cut off the nose and add it. As this is a "Royal" edition release, TBH, I think this kit should have come with the engine and gunbays they plan to sell separately, even if it cost more, as it's supposed to be the premier boxing of this tool. And then the regular hybrid edition versions of the kit would be the cheaper ones with just the 3D-printed cockpit and landing gear.

 

I suppose you can't win, of course, as if that jumped the price up to ~$200 US, there'd be plenty of complaints too. Still, getting them in the box with a "Royal" edition would have been cheaper than having to buy them separately from Eduard, but I guess that's what they want, so they can extract maximum profit, and well, they are a business...

On a side note, when speaking to an experienced 3D-printing modeller at my local club about the layer line issues people are reporting, he suggested that, as a higher volume manufacturer making parts for a kit rather than a print-to-order aftermarket company, they likely have to balance print time vs. print quality to get the parts ready for the kits in a reasonable timeframe. So it's not unexpected that the 3D-printed parts might not be printed to the same level as some other aftermarket sets people have used. 

[Johnny Cloud]

5 hours ago, drsquid142 said:

...

On a side note, when speaking to an experienced 3D-printing modeller at my local club about the layer line issues people are reporting, he suggested that, as a higher volume manufacturer making parts for a kit rather than a print-to-order aftermarket company, they likely have to balance print time vs. print quality to get the parts ready for the kits in a reasonable timeframe. So it's not unexpected that the 3D-printed parts might not be printed to the same level as some other aftermarket sets people have used. 

It's a good point but one that raises questions about the validity of a mass produced "Hybrid" concept.

[quang]

58 minutes ago, Johnny Cloud said:

It's a good point but one that raises questions about the validity of a mass produced "Hybrid" concept.

If it’s good enough for @Antonio Argudo, it’s good for me. 🤓

[Bill Cross]

On 8/5/2026 at 4:39 PM, csavaglio said:

Honestly, it's interesting to me because the aircraft in the CBI got well used and weathered and I tend to like the types deployed there. 

 

Congrats on the cancer win, Bill. 

Thanks.

 

I have to admit, though, I didn't realize at first you were being sarcastic. I'm glad to see more about the theater here, as the more I learn about CBI, the more admiring I am of how they made do with less.