dutik Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 @32SIG Thank you for your kind words. My apologies again for missing the right tone. No favouritism/bias whatsoever - have met the ZM team a couple of times - but likewise have met members of the Revell team - all nice people (in fact Revell's UK office is about 100m from my office door in Tring). ... As I keep repeating - am aware of the sometimes misleading data photo's can throw up - but I am extremely careful. I said I have some experience of working with photos and drawings - this includes studying geometrical and engineering drawing to 'A' level standard here in UK, working as a Technical Author/Illustrator in the Aerospace industry, one time driver of AutoCAD and one of the first to supply computer generated artwork to the aviation/modelling press in the mid 1990's - so I do have a little experience and suitably trained (but not infallible) eye! Well, that are important informations I was not aware of. Thank you for sharing. Got any word by the Revell team how they designed the kit and tried to overcome the stored-in-pieces issue? Yours sincerely - dutik Iain, Uncarina, Kagemusha and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRutman Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Nice to read that the thin veneer of civilization that covers the beast in all of us has been retained. I look forward to the continuing quest for accuracy ensconced in this thread thus far. I also,would like to know how Revell got around the issue of the dissassembled airframe at Garber? Or was that even used at all? This same nebulous fuselage shape issue was my opponant when trying to get a decent looking P-51 out of the old Hasegawa kit so the different approaches to the subject at hand are intriguing to me. Nice to see it still alive. J nmayhew, Iain and A.Wolf Grant 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kagemusha Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 This is a very good and useful topic. I'm starting my Revell kit soon and building it alongside the ZM 219 test shot, so the reference here is definitely worth keeping! Jim, Is there any chance you or Dave doing a comparison of the ZM undercarriage with the Revell and see if one will fit the other? No doubt ZM will release a metal undercarriage, and maybe G-Factor will for the Revell, but one may be full extended where the other isn't, so would be useful to know. Ta! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Jim, Is there any chance you or Dave doing a comparison of the ZM undercarriage with the Revell and see if one will fit the other? No doubt ZM will release a metal undercarriage, and maybe G-Factor will for the Revell, but one may be full extended where the other isn't, so would be useful to know. Ta! the forward leg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kagemusha Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 the forward leg? All if possible? As the ZM u/c is more compressed I'd be inclined to buy the metal am ZM set for my Revell kit if they fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougN Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I am glad to see the thread stay. Interesting discussion, and I'm adult enough to make up my own mind as to whether or not I think the issues discussed are real or imagined, as well as which of the soon to be two available kits provide the best platform to build an Uhu for my personal tastes. And like others, I'll comment when I feel I have something to contribute to the discussion. Hopefully everyone else is adult enough to continue as well Doug JamesHatch and Shawn M 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 No worries. I'll take some photos later and pop them in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigelr32 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 No worries. I'll take some photos later and pop them in here. Hi James, while you have your camera out, could you please take a pic of the upper wing around the nacelle rear end, of both Revell and ZM side by side. It would be good to see them naked, unbuilt and unpainted. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 ZM's nacelles are separate to the wing. Is it the wing itself you're looking at, or the nacelle? I can't post too many pictures for obvious reasons, but I can give you a little detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kagemusha Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 No worries. I'll take some photos later and pop them in here. Cheers Jim, very much appreciated! Curiously David Parker of AFV/AIR Modeller has posted a "fix" of the Revell main u/c over on Hyper, on the left is the original, the modified on the right. He feels as it is represented in the "unloaded position" it sits a good 5 - 6mm too high, hence the fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigelr32 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 ZM's nacelles are separate to the wing. Is it the wing itself you're looking at, or the nacelle? I can't post too many pictures for obvious reasons, but I can give you a little detail. Hi James, Thanks for your response. I didn't realise the nacelle was separate on the ZM kit. Never mind, I was just trying to gauge the difference in the two kits with them side by side, at the same angle in the same light..etc..... Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Ok, I'll start with the images of the completed u/c that ZM released to SP&R. These are finished items, and not CAD, despite the appearance. I have tried to take quick photos of the areas folks seem to be interested here, and placed a steel rule alongside the compression struts on both ZM and Revell kits. I'll leave the rest to you guys, except to say that these ZM parts are test shots, and not indicative of the final product which, incidentally will be moulded in grey plastic only! Zoukei-mura Kagemusha and boogieman 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Revell Kagemusha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dekenba Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Seems to me that they are both outstanding kits, with the Revell offering superb value for money & the ZM amazing detail. Consequently they can co-exist quite happily in LSP land. nmayhew 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigelr32 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Seems to me that they are both outstanding kits, with the Revell offering superb value for money & the ZM amazing detail. Consequently they can co-exist quite happily in LSP land. I'll second that. Some will say the Revell kit is inaccurate (perhaps), whilst others will say the ZM is over engineered. Opinion is a funny thing!! I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now