Revell, Hasegawa and Trumpeter Me109G6s

[MikeMaben]

Has anybody seen the AlleyCat improvement set for the Revell Bf 109G-6 yet?

 

Looks pretty good to me.

 

http://www.a2zeemodels.co.uk/messerschmitt-bf-109-upgrade-set-for-revell-kit-6258-p.asp

 

 

28 cents less than what I paid for the kit itself 

[Mikester]

Hey Mike did you compare the Revell with the Hase 'K' fuselage at the Hase panel line that includes the repositioned radio cover? Think they'd match up top to bottom?

Mike Horina

 

Mike, I have not.  It might be feasible but projects like that are out of my comfort zone.

[Mikester]

Mikester,

Do you think the Trump cowl covers can be used on the Hase G6/14 without too much work.

Asking these questions because the Revell, Trump kits available in the $20 range would be easier and probably cheaper if a resin part ever became available to help the Hasegawa short comings. TIA for any comments by anyone. I have already mated the Revell fuselage from above the cockpit to the Hase G-10 nose and intend to use the Hase wings only a little work needed to mate on the bottom.

Mike Horina

 

I suspect they would fit with a little work.  I'm using the leftover non-Beule cowl panels that come with Trumpeter kit on a 21st CT 109F and they fit pretty well, I've got a 1 mm gap to fill but otherwise they match up well.

[Darren Howie]

Is anyone else like me completely disapointed in the Revell kit?

All the hype Revell pumped out about it being the ultimately accurate 109??

I have a pile of 109's in the stash with MDC cockpits waiting and spinners and cant see one single reason to buy a single Revell kit.

I had one in my hand in Tokyo a few weeks back and it came close to being bought but all the issues stopped me from picking it up and the price in Japan didnt help.

I cant see the "length issue" and IIRC no one in 12 years has clearly shown where it lies and every review of the Has kit other than the known shortcomings like gear bays,spinner etc have been well corrected with aftermarket.

With every kit needing aftermarket to one degree or another it looks like just buy the cheapest or stay with what you already have.

In any way its not really good for Revells sales.

Nice write up Thierry but my MDC kitted Has kit with spinner that i have already paid for is a clear winner over an upaid for Revell kit with an unpaid for resin correction set and a whole pile of build dramas.

Thanks.

[DoogsATX]

Is anyone else like me completely disapointed in the Revell kit?

 

 

I wouldn't say completely disappointed, but in our staff build-off over at LSM, I certainly went into it as one of the more optimistic, and came away quite jaded.

 

Honestly, I see Revell's effort as one step forward, one step back vis a vis the Hasegawa. Better spinner shape, but a nasty and pointless seam. Fuel line provided as a separate and clear part, but the design of the cockpit leaves seams all over the cockpit sills that are difficult to clean up without getting all kinds of grit into the finished-out cockpit. Posable surfaces - with all kinds of overwrought detail. Really well-done gear bays, with overly-complicated and poorly detailed gear struts (why are they three pieces? Why is the oleo just as fat as the strut, with basically no demarkation?). Thinner canopy glass, but that distorts in a way that makes it look like you screwed up the masking. Oh...and forgetting to put a hole in the rear canopy glass for the aerial. That made rigging a joy.

 

I built my Revell G-6 side-by with a Hasegawa G-4...I'd say the G-4 has a slightly stockier feel aft of the cockpit, but you can judge for yourself...

 

 

G-6:

 

 

G-4:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personally, the next 109 I build will be a Trumpeter. The rivets don't bother me, the QB control surfaces for the Hasegawa F can correct the kit rudder, and I am a fan of the way the kit is engineered (i.e. the accurate cowl panels arrangement, etc).

[SinuheH]

Regardless of your problems, Matt - those are 2 mighty fine 109's!!!

 

 er no GREAT JOB!

[Artful69]

To be really honest Matt ... I can't tell the difference (appart from the marque i.e. 4 or 6) ... but then again, I add the caveat - that I'm no expert!

 

Hell ... I have 109's from Trumpeter, Hasegawa, Cyberhobby (some built, some not) ... and recently aquired Eduard (3 x E-1's) and Revell ... and at just a cursory glance over the sprues there doesn't seem to be a heck of a lot of difference (except in the way the parts go together, or the amount of engineering in the build) ... or at least none worth really having a winge about ...

 

I can 'see' the Trumpeter rudder issue in my E-3's and 4's - but they build fine! - and there's an aftermarket set I'll get for the G-2 recently aquired ... The Cyber Hobby kit parts can be a little fiddly (as can the Eduard kit apparently?!?) ... I have varying reports on the Revell kit (there's now an aftermarket set for that too!) ... and the Hasegawa kits came with almost no real detailing regardless of accuracy - so AM needed there as well ...

 

I think that whichever kit you buy (until ZM or Tamiya manufacture one) there will be some issue that needs finishing/adjusting with AM ...

 

Now that I just scored a Hase G-6 kit ... I think I'll buy a Trumpeter one as well ... and do a side-by-side build of the same aircraft (ie paint, markings and level of detail) and see which one costs the most over all and which is the easiest to build (which is what us, in the 'mainstream', are usually concerned about) ... If I'm game enough to post pics afterward - I'll let the 'experts' judge on the outcome!

 

Rog

[DrDave]

Wow Matt those are lovely builds. I know a lot of the group are real 109 nuts, but I can't tell the diffs between Matts 2 builds. I feel quite inspired now. I have a Trumpy and Hasegawa G6 in the stash and might have to do them next now once I finish this Spitfire.

I'll be intrigued to see how the trumpeter kit looks once painted as the I don't think the rivets look bad at all. It's overall a far better kit than their 109E which I have to agree looks obviously too thick and chunky, or at least mine did.

[thierry laurent]

For me, another noticeable problem with the Trumpeter Bf109 is the section from the spinner to the hinged cowls (where the oil tank is). On the real thing the cross-section of that part is circular at the front to meet the spinner. But at the back, the cross section is egg-shaped with a flattened bottom.

Because of this the transition from spinner to engine cowl is not a totally smooth line, it is kind of "stepped" when you look from the side (at the top) and creates a kind of "jowl" or "cheeks" at the bottom. On the Trumpeter kit that "stepped" look is absent making the nose seem pointy. The "jowl" is missing too. Revell got that right.

I also do not like the rivets - they are inaccurate in location, spacing and too big/soft-edged.

Radu

Yes indeed!

 

Yesterday, I had to look closely at this specific part to identify the problem. I think the worst option is leaving it open.

 

I also mentioned there were issues with regard to the rivet lines in the list but did not go into details as I realized this is mainly a matter of taste. To my eyes, the main problem is the fact they recycled the early G wings for the G6. This results in the lack of the rivet lines intended to re-inforce the round well. This is probably the most visible issue regarding rivets.

[thierry laurent]

Thierry,

You don't seem to put much emphisis on the one thing that is a HUGE turn-off for those of us that dispise it: The Trumpeter kit is festooned with rivets (or divots, as they appear to be).

 

I have all three (as well as the 21st Century '109F and G kits), and completely agree with Mikester:

 

 

D

 

They are reasonably fine and not comparable to the ones of the early Trumpy kits. They are not fully accurate but as I wrote before, I know this is mainly a matter of taste!

[thierry laurent]

Mikester,

Do you think the Trump cowl covers can be used on the Hase G6/14 without too much work.

Asking these questions because the Revell, Trump kits available in the $20 range would be easier and probably cheaper if a resin part ever became available to help the Hasegawa short comings. TIA for any comments by anyone. I have already mated the Revell fuselage from above the cockpit to the Hase G-10 nose and intend to use the Hase wings only a little work needed to mate on the bottom.

Mike Horina

Don't do it! The gun throughs are noticeably too short (7mm as I wrote in another thread). This may be corrected but won't be very easy. Use the Aires set. This is a far better option.

[thierry laurent]

Thierry,

 

 

With respect, can you please state clearly where you think the Hasegawa Bf109 kits are so significantly short in the nose area, and back these statements with either measurements or your point of reference please? And a comparison of the same areas on the other two kits, so that we have some clarity regarding the truth of these statements.

 

Steve.

 

Hi Steve,

 

the problem is not the length difference itself. Two millimeters on a more or less 27cm kit are totally negligible to my eyes. The problem lies in the fact the missing millimeters are located at a specific point! Just compare on the kits the length of the removable panels covering the MG131 breeches. You'll immediately see the difference.

 

Another hint: any modeller who assembled the Hasegawa kit noticed a problem to position correctly the nose Beule because of the location of the fastener of the aforementioned panel. The reason is simple: as the fastener is correctly located in the middle of the panel length, it is located one mm too far forward and this creates the beule location issue.

 

HTH

[thierry laurent]

Is anyone else like me completely disapointed in the Revell kit?

All the hype Revell pumped out about it being the ultimately accurate 109??

I have a pile of 109's in the stash with MDC cockpits waiting and spinners and cant see one single reason to buy a single Revell kit.

I had one in my hand in Tokyo a few weeks back and it came close to being bought but all the issues stopped me from picking it up and the price in Japan didnt help.

I cant see the "length issue" and IIRC no one in 12 years has clearly shown where it lies and every review of the Has kit other than the known shortcomings like gear bays,spinner etc have been well corrected with aftermarket.

With every kit needing aftermarket to one degree or another it looks like just buy the cheapest or stay with what you already have.

In any way its not really good for Revells sales.

Nice write up Thierry but my MDC kitted Has kit with spinner that i have already paid for is a clear winner over an upaid for Revell kit with an unpaid for resin correction set and a whole pile of build dramas.

Thanks.

 

Disappointed: NO when I'm comparing the price and the contents. However, do I think that an opportunity has been missed? YES!

 

The price of the Revell kit in Japan is probably comparable to the Hasegawa price in Europe: too high!

 

Last, I have more than a dozen of Hasegawa 109s if I take into account all the types. I also have resin pits and a ton of other aftermaket stuff for them. Am I going to sell them: NO way! This is not the point.

 

With regard to the length issue, I already posted where it is located. Personally, I'd not blame Hasegawa as they used the current status of the knowledge when they made the kit tooling. This is true a better check of a full scale airframe would have prevented this. However, as you pointed, nobody saw this error when the kit was released.

 

I had doubts some years later when I worked on the kit as I was puzzled by the Beule location problem. However, to be frank, I did not realize immediately this was linked to a nose length issue.

 

Thierry

[thierry laurent]

Mmmmh!

 

It seems we have an actual problem here!

 

I did not relay any comment. I took my callipers! There is a difference of 2mm of length between the Revell and Hasegawa kits. Put both kit halves together and this jumps to the eyes. The Revell kit has been sized thanks to a check of what is currently known to be the most accurate set of sources of measures. Refer to Radu post for more information. I used the kit as well as Radu's drawings to compare the three kits. I don't think this is the most erroneous approach considering I don't have a Gustav in my garden!

 

If we want to cut millimeters into microns, the differences are precisely located between frame 2 and the cowling parts. The cowling elements and nose section covering the oil tank are identical on both kits and all the rear frame positions are absolutely identical on the kits. The difference is visible behind the wing trailing edge (a portion of millimeter, so I didn't mention it) and in front of the windscreen.

 

Moreover, as I wrote, putting the Beule on the Japanese kit reveals a dimensional problem. So, I think my conclusion is a logical one. I'll leave to other people the possibility to agree or disagree and use the information I posted as they want. Personally, since I observed this assembly problem on the Hasegawa kit and did this comparison work, I'm convinced. And if I'd not be convinced, I'd simply look at the Hasegawa Friedrich. The fact it is at least 1mm longer than the Gustav is probably the best clue!

 

Am I going to throw away my Japanese Gustav kits? No, certainly not! Am I going to cut the kit in parts to solve this: No! BTW, I just ordered some resin parts for my Hasegawa kits. Nonetheless, it is a fact that:

 

1. Hasegawa kits are (very) expensive in most parts of the world.

2. There do not offer a large number of options (try building a G6 with the Erla Haube and short tail from Hasegawa kits and you'll immediately be afraid by the budget!)

3. They have a considerable number of errors or simplifications here and there. Just look at the incredible number of aftermarket sets to be convinced. For instance, I don't think that offering separate elevators would have killed Hasegawa budget!

4. There are other choices to build a G6.

5. I'm sure Hasegawa has sold enough Messerchmitts to accept that they made errors in the past.

 

So, I think it makes sense to take all the elements into consideration before spending hardly earned money.

 

Thierry

[Night Hog]

As to hard(ly) earned money, can anyone explain why the Hasegawa G-6 retails for $70.00 and the Trumpy G-6 retails for $53.00 while the Revell G-6 retails for $30.25. It certainly is not in the quality of the plastic or the accuracy and fineness of the moulding. There is no compelling reason (at least for me) to go Hasegawa or Trumpy.

Edited September 30, 2013 by Night Hog