What corrections or aftermarket are needed for Revells He 219

[csavaglio]

I agree with the last few posts.

 

To add, if I've noticed one thing in the modeling world over the years, it's that many times, jumping through all of the crazy hoops to make a perfectly accurate model is seldom worth the trouble. I'm not talking about major fixes, but spending dozens and dozens of hours fixing something that's a couple tenths of a mm off will not give much bang for the buck....buck being time and money. It's a matter of personal opinion as to what's acceptable. The bottom line is that when properly built, either kit is nice and reasonably represents the aircraft it's meant to.

 

Several years ago, I built one of the Model Airways wood/metal framed 1/16 Nieuport kits. I basically build the majority of the kit out of box, concentrating on areas that were really worth doing in regards to visual impact, like scratching a woven seat instead of using the poorly cast, single sided metal one. I spent about 6 months building the kit, which is reasonable given it's complexity. I had a good friend who spent about 3 years building it.....and those are retirement years where he spent most of his time working on it. He went through every single aspect of the kit, including reworking the wing spars to the proper dimensions. In the end, we both had very nice looking models. However, my friend looked whole heartily broken at the end when we put our two models together. Even for both of us, who knew exactly what was corrected, it was very hard to tell the difference. He even commented about how thousands of hours were wasted.

 

Take that for what it's worth. Personally, I will build up the Revell kit and not get hung up on the minutia. In the end, it will probably be difficult for people to tell which kit was used unless they've spent an obsessive amount of time studying them.

 

I have a book that's on nothing but 1969 Corvettes. If you want to know what the head of the rivet on the jack of an early built 1969 Vette as opposed to a mid or late looks like, you can find it in that book. Some people get hung up on such things. I don't. I'm glad there's guys that are out there that do, but sometimes things can get out of hand.

 

A slightly inaccurate finished model is better than a perfectly accurate one that will never be finished, in my opinion. I've seen too many modelers who haven't finished a kit in a decade because nothing is perfect enough for them.

 

Again, no offense to anyone, no matter what camp you fall into.

Chris

Edited September 10, 2013 by csavaglio

[Mikester]

Good post, Chris. Although I greatly admire the people who tackle the huge re-construction projects I have neither the skill nor the patience to tackle such endeavors. Too many things I want to do and not enough time do them as it is.

[Artful69]

Nice thread, properly discussed and civilised without anyone getting all bent out of shape, offended or launching personal attacks - just like it's supposed to be

 

Both kits were announced at roughly the same time - the Revell kit, much to my dismay - but only because I wanted my elusive Do-17z!!! ... This aircraft was not really a subject matter that interested me at the time and thanks to my heavy disappointment ... it's taken me some time to 'warm' to the idea of getting one ...

 

There are only three things that have swayed me in the desision to place my order for a ZM-SWS kit (done yesterday):

 

* Most of the 'stuff' that you might ordinarily go for in a 'light' dosage of detailing AM is already inside the box ... I don't own a Tamiya kit yet, but I'm lead to believe that it's similar in that regard? ... or like a newer release Dragon 1/35 armour kit.

 

* I'm buying a kit from the same supplier, for someone else, at the same time - postage was only, incrementally, slightly more expensive ... so I thought WTH - go for it!!

 

* The main reason though is that I've never owned a ZM kit ... In fact, I only discovered the existence of them when this kit was announced!!

 

So ... in answer to the original post ... If I was to buy the Revell kit and was looking for detailing AM etc, I would pretty much buy cockpit interior detail, Brass gun barrels (or blast tubes), nose weight material and a set of metal landing gear (as that additional weight just has to be pushing the plastic leg strength!) ... maybe some paint masks.

 

From all the photos and reviews I've seen of both kits - they each build up nice in their own way - the 'tick' of dimensional accuracy going to the ZM.

 

Happy building!

Rog

Edited September 11, 2013 by Artful69

[do335b6]

I have both kits and am currently building the ZM kit. The ZM kit is fantastic but some of the fit issues are tricky and require alot of work to get everything to fit right. It's a great kit if you want to show off the interior and the cockpit is awesome. I've done a little work on the Revell kit so far and I can tell you as far as fit the Revell kit is a much better kit for overall fit even if there are errors in the kit. I plan on doing my Revell one in flight so I don't need all the interior for it.

[scvrobeson]

Matt:

 

I have built three ZM kits and had no problems with any and almost no filler. Fit has been great if you follow the instructions and line things up. I will say one misalignment and it can FUBAR things quickly.

 

Dave

 

 

I'm with you on that. They're a lot like Wingnut kits, where everything has to be perfectly aligned in order for things to fit together. Just means taking time and following instructions to make sure it all goes together perfectly.

 

 

Matt

[Darren Howie]

Anyone who has a ZM kit and Revell will quickly testify about the differences.

If you intend upgrading the Revell sorry dont bother by the time you get a kit half as good and barely as detailed you will of spent twice the ZM price and it still wont be as detailed nor as accurate.

If you building OOB it is good value as long as accuracy isnt an issue.

In all setiousness it is not unlike comparing a Trumpeter Mustang and the Tamiya one..

If you havnt seen the ZM kit in person do yourself a favor..

[DougN]

Anyone who has a ZM kit and Revell will quickly testify about the differences.

If you intend upgrading the Revell sorry dont bother by the time you get a kit half as good and barely as detailed you will of spent twice the ZM price and it still wont be as detailed nor as accurate.

If you building OOB it is good value as long as accuracy isnt an issue.

In all setiousness it is not unlike comparing a Trumpeter Mustang and the Tamiya one..

If you havnt seen the ZM kit in person do yourself a favor..

 

Your post assumes that the ZM kit is accurate, which it is not. While it may be true that the Revell kit has more noticeable shape problems, the ZM kit has it's problems too. Since neither kit is 100% accurate and both have issues, to me the Revell kit, even with a couple PE sheets is likely the better deal for all but the 219 "Nut". Especially considering the difference in effort required to get a finished model.

 

Personally, on the one hand I am disappointed that neither company could get it right, but at the same time grateful to have a choice in which kit will better fit my modeling needs.

[Darren Howie]

Hey Doug

What specific problems are you referring to on the ZM kit?

Comparing the issues is interesting.

For Revell...incorrectly proportioned fuselage..nacelles hosed..props..canopy..cowl flaps..landing gear...if you know of an easy way of fixing the entire fuselage let me know..

The only issue i have seen or heard about ZM is a minor quibble on the canopy which i think is a hang over of the retooling to correct the changes made to the front one.

Like to know what the issues are you know about.

The Revell kit has large errors all over the place and imho comparing its errors and the ZM kits is again like comparing Trumpeters and Tamiya's Mustangs. The differences are about as large.

Feel free to let us know the errors in the ZM kit as i would like to know.

The OOB detail in the ZM kit is as good as anything you can get. Not quite as sharp as Tamiya but close..

Pricing wise the Revell kit where i live i paid 95 for Revell which is a fair price here and i paid 170 for ZM.

To get a Revell kit even close to ZM woukd essily triple the price and still leave you with shape and accuracy issues far in excess of an OOB ZM kit.

Photo etch doesnt help Revells issues maybe a chain saw some bog and about 200 bucks worth of resin may.

Ive got two Revell ones in the stash all your for free if you want to come to Cairns to collect them..

Have you got or seen in person the ZM kit?

If not do so you will see immediately why people love it..