NEWS IN HpH !!!

[Out2gtcha]

I will say up front, there are a lot of things I like about HpH kits, they are chalk full of detail, with accurate outlines, and subjects that no one else will be producing in 32nd.

However,

Reading Mark's statement above, in conjunction with my experience building their Walrus and Tigercat along with others experiences here, I can only come to the unfortunate conclusion that fit and buildability of their kits is a distant second to adding as much detail as possible.

Their "resin pool" method of making small parts in their kits for me is nothing less than dread even thinking about doing all that sanding and guess work.

 

This being said, I will definitely be giving HpH the benefit of the doubt on their hopefully forthcoming IM project. I'll likely be buying something of their IM line to try it.

[Markjames1968]

I posted it here in their vendors forum in the hope that they would read it,  complaining wont solve anything and they have already said they are moving to IM

 

its a shame as i have built all their other 1/32 kits and loved most of them (fw189  is may fave) 

 

i was about to order  the b52 but wont now , im aware that resin kits have pitfalls and have built many as i said and there are issues but i was even happy with and got a good result from the Tigercat that many hated for one reason or another.

 

this c47 kit is a different matter , perhaps my resin parts had been cured or mixed incorrectly but the shrinkage was ridiculous making aligning and fitting of interior parts impossible, 

[Woody V]

On December 28, 2019 at 3:03 PM, Markjames1968 said:

Have been a fan of HPH and enjoyed building their kits, EXCEPT their Latest, the C47, i bought it, (from Hannants , £750 plus extra £80 for flaps)

 

i wouldnt say the kit was unbuildable as i pride myself in tackling anything , it is almost unbuildable and frankly i wont expect to see many if any completed , the c47 has exquisite surface detail but terrible fit of interior parts that are badly designed. And seem to suffer from terrible shrinkage compared to fuselage halves, (in total the interior floor is over 1cm short, the formers re too small, the quilted sidewalls at least 6mm short etc etc)

 

if this was a 50 quider, i would get on with it and shut up, if it was a hundered quider, I would be annoyed, at 830 quid im reall peed off with it and after building all the other kits in the range expected some issues but nothing as bad as this

 

the etch in the kit is too thin and has been annealed and 80% is too soft to use for the tasks required and consequently needs binning , the 80 puond extra etch flap is made of material that is too thin and is unusable and a waste of money and efffort,

 

my resin parts are batch 62 where the fuselage is batch 70 though this shouldnt really make a difference 

 

i hope their move into injection kits improves this poor over priced performance as i wont buy the b52 based on this now as i gave a 830 pound kit sat on the shelf of unfinished crap..

 

How did they handle this when you contacted them directly before posting this? 
You did contact them directly first, didn't you?

Please say yes.

[Markjames1968]

22 minutes ago, Archer Fine Transfers said:

 

How did they handle this when you contacted them directly before posting this? 
You did contact them directly first, didn't you?

Please say yes.

Nope, saw no need, not saying anything that others havent said before and wasnt trying to get anything out of it  just disappointed  in the lack of  quality on something so expensive, would have posted the same and had the same opinion had i contacted them, 

[Anthony in NZ]

On 12/29/2019 at 9:03 AM, Markjames1968 said:

Have been a fan of HPH and enjoyed building their kits, EXCEPT their Latest, the C47, i bought it, (from Hannants , £750 plus extra £80 for flaps)

 

i wouldnt say the kit was unbuildable as i pride myself in tackling anything , it is almost unbuildable and frankly i wont expect to see many if any completed , the c47 has exquisite surface detail but terrible fit of interior parts that are badly designed. And seem to suffer from terrible shrinkage compared to fuselage halves, (in total the interior floor is over 1cm short, the formers re too small, the quilted sidewalls at least 6mm short etc etc)

 

if this was a 50 quider, i would get on with it and shut up, if it was a hundered quider, I would be annoyed, at 830 quid im reall peed off with it and after building all the other kits in the range expected some issues but nothing as bad as this

 

the etch in the kit is too thin and has been annealed and 80% is too soft to use for the tasks required and consequently needs binning , the 80 puond extra etch flap is made of material that is too thin and is unusable and a waste of money and efffort,

 

my resin parts are batch 62 where the fuselage is batch 70 though this shouldnt really make a difference 

 

i hope their move into injection kits improves this poor over priced performance as i wont buy the b52 based on this now as i gave a 830 pound kit sat on the shelf of unfinished crap..

Oh dear, that's so upsetting, I was quite looking forward to getting into this one.  Mike Swinburne warned me about this considering the other later kits issues.....

[ericg]

I tend to agree with Mark James. I have completed one HpH kit, being the L-39 and whilst it is one of my best finished kits, the effort required to get there was fairly extreme and the kit fought me every single part.

 

I have a reasonably complete 1/48 Concorde that has sat unfinished for a few years now as the fit of the parts was so bad that I have had to rethink the entire kit just so that it looks like a Concorde. If I had my time again I would never have purchased it. A huge waste of money.

 

Whilst they produce some excellent subjects with great detail, I firmly believe that they do not spend enough time assembling the kit themselves to see how everything fits and what the modeller will have to go through to build their kits. It’s like they leave the test build up to the modeller.

[Out2gtcha]

30 minutes ago, ericg said:

Whilst they produce some excellent subjects with great detail, I firmly believe that they do not spend enough time assembling the kit themselves to see how everything fits and what the modeller will have to go through to build their kits. It’s like they leave the test build up to the modeller.

 

 

From my experience building 4 of their kits, I have to say this is spot on in my humble opinion. That is not to say there is no value there, as I want any company that makes models in my scale to succeed, it just seems like buildability and fit are of distant importance when producing the models. 

[thierry laurent]

12 hours ago, ericg said:

I tend to agree with Mark James. I have completed one HpH kit, being the L-39 and whilst it is one of my best finished kits, the effort required to get there was fairly extreme and the kit fought me every single part.

 

I have a reasonably complete 1/48 Concorde that has sat unfinished for a few years now as the fit of the parts was so bad that I have had to rethink the entire kit just so that it looks like a Concorde. If I had my time again I would never have purchased it. A huge waste of money.

 

Whilst they produce some excellent subjects with great detail, I firmly believe that they do not spend enough time assembling the kit themselves to see how everything fits and what the modeller will have to go through to build their kits. It’s like they leave the test build up to the modeller.

Well, I'm wondering if the problem is not somewhere else as, as far as I know, the guys have assembled all their models. I have seen some of them and I know that other modellers that are close to them saw most of them. However, they can obviously choose the best parts if there is a problem anywhere. I think the problem is rather a combination of design and material tolerance. I know guys who could assemble some kits with a reasonable amount of difficulty while others had to struggle with close to each part and this had nothing to do with a difference in experience or ability. Look for instance at the way Paul Fisher cleverly made his kit fuselages as a single part. That design choice is simple: it is very complicated to predict the shrinking percentage of the rubber and resin. If that is not a problem with small kits, this may be a nightmare for large scale ones. So design has to take that into account at all levels. The more complex is the kit, the highest chances of problems you get. This is possibly another reason why they want to move to plastic injection. Having up to 5% of dimension move may commonly occur when working with resin. If you have a 60 cm fuselage, error may go up to some centimeters in extreme cases! So, it is already an achievement to get such parts with a difference staying into a 1 or 2 mm margin... To me this simply demonstrates resin is not a medium that can be easily used for large kits and if you want to use it, kit design should be considered in a different way whereas Hph is generally designing kits in a classic way, as injected ones. 

[quang]

11 minutes ago, thierry laurent said:

To me this simply demonstrates resin is not a medium that can be easily used for large kits and if you want to use it, kit design should be considered in a different way whereas Hph is generally designing kits in a classic way, as injected ones. 

 

Add to it the fact that a silicon mold has a tendency to lose its suppleness and shrink after the first few castings.

[Mirek O]

On 12/28/2019 at 9:03 PM, Markjames1968 said:

Have been a fan of HPH and enjoyed building their kits, EXCEPT their Latest, the C47, i bought it, (from Hannants , £750 plus extra £80 for flaps)

 

i wouldnt say the kit was unbuildable as i pride myself in tackling anything , it is almost unbuildable and frankly i wont expect to see many if any completed , the c47 has exquisite surface detail but terrible fit of interior parts that are badly designed. And seem to suffer from terrible shrinkage compared to fuselage halves, (in total the interior floor is over 1cm short, the formers re too small, the quilted sidewalls at least 6mm short etc etc)

 

if this was a 50 quider, i would get on with it and shut up, if it was a hundered quider, I would be annoyed, at 830 quid im reall peed off with it and after building all the other kits in the range expected some issues but nothing as bad as this

 

the etch in the kit is too thin and has been annealed and 80% is too soft to use for the tasks required and consequently needs binning , the 80 puond extra etch flap is made of material that is too thin and is unusable and a waste of money and efffort,

 

my resin parts are batch 62 where the fuselage is batch 70 though this shouldnt really make a difference 

 

i hope their move into injection kits improves this poor over priced performance as i wont buy the b52 based on this now as i gave a 830 pound kit sat on the shelf of unfinished crap..

 

 

How can I help You. Just send me some photos and we will do my best .

 

M

[Mirek O]

Kokcpit for B-52 1:32 realased - www.hphmodels.cz

 

and some news from plastic age: https://www.modelforum.cz/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=105045&p=2296589#p2296589

 

Regads

 

Mirek

[seiran01]

That Vampire is starting to look good 

[Kagemusha]

4 hours ago, seiran01 said:

That Vampire is starting to look good 

 

It really is, can't wait.

[Iain]

Indeed - Vampire looks excellent!

 

Iain

[nmayhew]

Any pics or links?