Trumpeter Kits

[CATCplSlade]

I've only built the MiG-3, which compared to the 70's-era Revell kits I had built prior seemed to be a breeze to assemble, similar to my Tamiya armor. I have the Hellcat (which I know has issues but I got it really cheap) and the TBM-3 Avenger. Beyond that I really only look to them for armor kits not covered by Dragon and Tamiya, which seem to be more accurate than their aircraft from all the reviews I read.

[DougN]

Personally, there are a lot more Trumpy kits I think are good than I think are bad.  And while there are some with - what most would consider - some major shape issues, even those are probably fine for a casual builder not overly concerned with the shape issues.

[Out2gtcha]

Their SU-25 and their SU-27/30-MKK are both stellar kits in my opinion. Although I havnt put an SU-25 together I have heard good things................although it sounds like your not much into Russian subjects, and are looking for more prop kits.

And seems you have your subject already worked out as well. 

 

 

 

As it seems that there would be a LOT of explaining to do where "copies" stolen from another modeling company would have come from to produce 75% of their good kits from beyond the TBM and SBD................Su-30, Mig 3, A-6, 1/24th Hurries, A-4, F-117, (from what I have heard) F-14...........ect, ect.   

[Juggernut]

As a fellow modeler who has purchased and built a few Trumpeter kits in the past, I will give you my opinion of their products.  Their older kits are challenging to say the least, in terms of accuracy, fidelity of detail and assembly.  Their later kits are much, much better and as been said, some of their releases are pretty damn good.  Others, not so much.  Personally, I won't buy any more Trumpeter kits until such time as they get their R&D down (for whatever reasons prevent them from getting it right) and raise their own bar.  I am just not that modeler who fancies identifying and/or correcting all of a kits shortcomings; I'm getting too old to give a damn (but still do).  Trumpeter has the technology to do it right, they just need the R&D card to knock one out of the park.  Again, in my opinion, the Me262 (either the A or the B ) is the best kit they've produced to date.  No kit released to date by any manufacturer is "issue free", including Tamiya but Trumpeter seems to be plagued with major  shape/design issues in a portion of their releases.  Should Trumpeter shift gears and put their money where the rubber meets the road, they can and will produce Tamiya quality kits.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Juggernut

[LSP_Ron]

I don't think it's any secret here that I am not a fan (speaking just on their 1/32 props). I first built their Dauntless and was impressed although I have to agree with Jennings that it does seem to be a scaled up version of the 1/48 AM kit. I then did the Swordfish which was ok although blatantly obvious it is based on the 1/48 Tamiya kit and builds like a 1/48 kit.  I then did the Hellcat which had me at a Hmmmmm not sure I am overly impressed here, then the Bear Cat which was OK although I love building engines, and their interpretation of an R-2800 in the last mentioned two kits is a huge disappointment. I guess it looks like a lump with cylinders when viewed from the front and mostly hidden by a cowl but its really a joke as proper R-2800 if you want to show the engine exposed.

 

I did the P-40B and it's a boarder line dog that doesn't quite look right for a P-40B for some reason? and the cockpit is way to shallow, then the P-51B and it's a BIG dog (if I could make "big" flash in neon I would) then the F4-U1 Corsair and it's double dog.  I figure I've wasted enough money with them and the AM required to fix the last three (not that it fixed the P-51) and I find their construction break down frustrating to say the least so I don't really even look at their kits anymore.

 

I have a Mig 3 and a Hellcat in the stash with AM improvements that I acquired off LSP-Dan that I will likely build. There isn't much left in their line that interests me anyway, I'd consider an early TBM but Sprue Bros hasn't had stock of these quite sometime.

 

Corsair

 

P-51B

 

Swordfish

[Tony T]

Of the bunch of 1/32 Trumpeters I have and have got around to starting or building properly,

 

I would give multiple stars to the:

* Me 262A-1a Schwalbe

* F-8J Crusader (but dropping the LE flaps requires patience)

* MiG-29K (but it's a prototype and sadly unrepresentative of the latest production type for the Russian Navy)

* A-6A Intruder

 

and dog bones to the:

* A-7D/E (but hey, it's the only game in town. The OOP Zacto correction set and Aries gear turns it into a four-star)

* BAC Lightning (but hey again, it's a Lightning! Patience, some cutting and Aries work wonders)

* MiG-23 series, which are lovely in the box but fraught with (thankfully, correctable) errors.

 

Undecided about the Su-25K. It needs work opening up the tail showing the all-moving trim gizmo, and wing flaps. But nice.

Ditto the MiG-21s - need lots of work but with Eduard cockpit interior stuff you can rebuild it. My -21F-13 is starting to look good!

 

Having said all that, I am deriving perverse pleasure in correcting the A-7 Corsair IIs and rough MiG-21.

 

And it's slightly sad, all things considered, to see a lot of the early "rough" kits disappear from the market shelf. The MiG-19 seems to have gone.

 

Tony

[Bill Cross]

I don't think it's any secret here that I am not a fan (speaking just on their 1/32 props). I first built their Dauntless and was impressed although I have to agree with Jennings that it does seem to be a scaled up version of the 1/48 AM kit.

With all due respect, Ron, do we really care if it's based on someone else's kit who doesn't offer said kit in 1/32 scale?

 

If one manufacturer copies the work of another, that IMO is a matter for the judicial process to remedy. AM is a great company for 1/48 scale aircraft (I built their DB4/5 kit to honor my later father-in-law), but to my knowledge, they are not introducing much new product due to the rising cost of molds. No one else IIRC is making any Dauntlesses in 32 scale, so shouldn't the question be: is the Trumpy kit good or not?

 

I hope this is not seen other than as a respectful disagreement with part of your post.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Bill Cross

[LSP_Ron]

With all due respect, Ron, do we really care if it's based on someone else's kit who doesn't offer said kit in 1/32 scale?

 

If one manufacturer copies the work of another, that IMO is a matter for the judicial process to remedy. AM is a great company for 1/48 scale aircraft (I built their DB4/5 kit to honor my later father-in-law), but to my knowledge, they are not introducing much new product due to the rising cost of molds. No one else IIRC is making any Dauntlesses in 32 scale, so shouldn't the question be: is the Trumpy kit good or not?

 

I hope this is not seen other than as a respectful disagreement with part of your post.

 

Not at all Bill, nothing wrong at all with a disagreement of opinion mate!

 

I do think it's a poor way of designing a new kit when it is almost 100% the same as a competitor's but scaled up to be bigger. It just puts me off,  it's like Ford coming out with a new Mustang and it's a 100% copy of a Corvette.  That's just my personal opinion and should be viewed as that of LSP overall.   However my real point was toward the Swordfish is it builds like a 1/48 scale kit scaled up to 1/32. Parts are bulky and look to thick. If you look at the engine and cockpit parts in my build link I think you'll see what I mean. Thick push rods on the engine, simplified detail, thick cowl support braces, gun mounts that look like they could support a bridge, thick tubulars in the cockpit, sparse cockpit detail  etc.  It ends up a decent looking build though. 

[Darren Howie]

Having spent a lot if time looking at them and reading I recently picked up a 109 G-6.

Lovely kit and i have picked up several more like the G-2.

Great cockpits..dimensionally accurate other than the spinner and rudder.

Both of those need fixing which you can do for under 15 dollars.

Best surface detail and spot on for all other areas its a lovely kit for an OOB kit.

The engine is a waste of time as the engine bearers have some big geometry issues so build it cowl closed and you have a lovely G-6 probably the easiest to build and most detailed OOB.

Some other Trump favorites.

F-8..262..Dauntless..Avenger..swordfish..F-117..F-100...Mig-23..Su-25..Su-27UB..SU-30..Tu-95..Tu-16..there KV tank series is just spectacular as are the big T-34's..

Oh did i mention the A-6 one if the best 32nd and 48th releases ever.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Darren Howie

[Grizly]

As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. While none of my Trumpeter kits were built 'out of the box' and I have ten of them completed, here are five of the ten that I have and that I consider good kits........ The Mig-19, Crusader and Avenger are very good while the 262 and Dauntless are great!

[Gisbod]

Lovely!

 

Can't wait to make 'em!

 

Guy

[Propwash]

My problem with Trumpeter kits is that in view of the price they're going for, I would expect a higher lever of perfection than is generally offered.  I only have one aircraft kit, a 1/24 Hurricane, which is currently sitting at the bottom of my stash closet waiting to be built.   However, after a close in-box examination, I can't find much to criticize.

 

Trump's 1/16 armor kits are mostly spot-on when it comes to overall shape, but the KT in particular has a good many internal errors.  I've heard that these errors are in part due to the designers having used the engine compartment of a Panther as their reference. But for those willing to make the investment, there's a boatload of expensive aftermarket available to correct these imperfections.  However, in spite of these problems, I consider the KT to be an absolutely stellar kit.

 

Here's hoping Trump has learned from its previous mistakes and won't disappoint us with its forthcoming 1/16 Pz-IV.  

 

Jerry Peterson 

[LSP_Ron]

Very nice builds Grizly

[Lee_K]

Every Trumpeter kit I've owned or built in the past 10 years has had issues.  Some can be overcome with modeling solutions, some can be overcome with aftermarket solutions, and some are unforgiveable.  Here is my personal experience, going from memory and only hitting the issue highlights.

 

A-10 Thunderbolt II: Grade D.  In addition to the miserable ordnance selection (inaccurate, misshapen), the profile of the nose and canopy is too wide and throws the whole look off to the point that no matter how many correction sets I had (Cutting Edge, at the time), it still didn't fix the profile enough for me build the model and I gave it away.

 

P-38L Lightning:  Grade B+.  This one is pretty good, save the propellers that are too short and fat.  I used Contact Resine replacements and the model turned out quite nicely.   I also used CR's resin wheels, but that is not an absolute requirement.

 

P-47D Thunderbolt (Razorback): Grade A-.  Yes, you have to build the entire engine and turbocharger ducting in order to attach the cockpit properly, but the rest of the model goes together quite nicely.  There are some details that need to be updated like the skinny control stick, the inaccurate wheels (Barracuda now has replacements -- they weren't available when I built mine), and the DC-6 Hamilton Standard propeller hub (I replaced mine with one from the Hasegawa kit), but in general they got quite a lot of things right on this one.

 

F-8E Crusader:  Grade B.  I converted mine back to an F-8C using the excellent Fisher Models conversion set which addressed a couple of the Trumpeter goofs, like inaccurate windescreen framing and the improper raised electronic cooling panels on either side of the nose.  The control surfaces don't fit very well in the deployed position, but the rest of the model goes together pretty nicely with a lot of small details in the wheel wells.

 

A-7D Corsair II:  Grade: D.  Like the A-10, it has a unforgiveable error in shape across the air intake and canopy.  I had the Zactomodels correction set but after working on the Crusader for some many months, didn't have the energy to do another nose-ectomy and sold the kit.  Trumpter recycled a number of their miserable ordanance sprues from the A-10 to add insult to injury.  The Mk 82 500 lb bombs are anorexic, which is really unfortunate on an attack airplane.

 

A-4E Skyhawk:  Grade B-.  While I used the AMS Resin correction set for the air intakes and ejection seat, the kit pieces aren't so terrible.  You do have to cut out the leading edge slat wells and reposition them to be even with the surface of the wing, fill the gaps around the landing spoilers (not present on most Es), and separate the nose wheel from the strut (in 1/32?  Really?), add the missing hole behind the horizontal stabilizer, correct the rudder line, and deal once again with the lousy ordnance selections.

 

F-100D Super Sabre.  Grade C-.  Continuing with the theme of things that Trumper has a hard time getting right, the air intake cross section is noticeably wrong (Zacto Models needed here), the landing gear struts are too long (chop off 3 milimeters), the tail radar fairing is from a C model, the pitot tube is too thick and needs to be attached rearward of where Trumpeter wants you to, and there are numerous accuracy issues in the cockpit (AMS Resin again for at least the ejection seat).

 

AV-B Harrier II Plus.  Grade C-.  Missing the prominent air scoops on the top of the spine (Wolfpack Design), this kit has geometry issues with the nose area that are hard to correct but fortunately aren't too noticeable except to Harrier fanatics, and it is missing the characteristic "kink" of the outer wing panels that is complicated by Trumpeter's molded-in pinch of the leading edge.  I filled the pinch and introduced the kink by sawing halfway through the wing pieces from the back side and bending them to the proper angle.  I replaced the ejection seat (Wolfpack Design) because the cockpit is so prominent in this model.  The canopy detonation cord is the wrong shape, but that is very hard to correct.  The fit of the nose and air intakes leaves some tough seams to be dealt with.

 

I'll stand on a little soapbox here and remark that Trumpeter works at somewhat of a disadvantage because they are a Chinese company.  Traveling to other countries to measure museum or warbird aircraft is quite difficut (not impossible, but difficult) and they don't have the internet resources that we do (youtube is blocked, as are quite a few search engine results) in the West.  So they appear to rely on reference books quite a bit and this I feel is why they mess up canopy shapes so often (A-10, A-7, P-51D, RA-5C) because these are hard to determine just from plans or photographs.  I think this is why we see those howling spelling errors on some of the decals (F-100) as the artist doesn't speak or read English and is working from a small photo from a reference book.

 

More infuriating, they also seem to ignore the advice of modelers who offer their expertise, most likely because they have a crushing schedule of releases to deal with and can only devote so much time to the design stage.  These aren't excuses, but it appears to me to be the root cause of the issues we see in their kits.  As modelers, we have to decide whether we can live with the errors or endeavor to correct them.  Very often the anger at Trumpeter comes as a result of their relatively high pricing -- many modelers feel that the quality of the kits should be better for the money spent.  I don't disagree with that notion, but then again I don't bash Trumpeter completely as for many subjects their kits are the only way to get models of airplanes that I could only have dreamed about just ten years ago.  The recent issues with Kitty Hawk kits also seem to apply for the same reasons.

 

It also explains, I think, why Trumpter does better when they have an excellent 1/48 scale kit to use as a guide.  I don't agree with the statement that they just "scale up" a Tamiya/Hasegawa/Accurate Miniatures kit, but there is direct evidence of them using those kits in their design process.  A prime example is the P-47: they clearly copied Tamiya's erroneous design for the tail wheel assembly.  So I don't get too upset about it if that means we get a more accurate (or in the case of the tail wheel, not so much) kit.

 

Lastly, Trumpeter's design team doesn't appear to have the same passion for their subjects the way that other model companies like Tamiya, Airfix, and even Eduard do.  I am speculating here, but it appears to me that they have a set budget and time table to research, design, and manufacture a model kit and when that is expended, they move onto the next project.  Instead of a guy like Accurate Miniatures' Bill Bosworth or Revell-Monogram's Bill Koster who will sweat the little details because he loves the hobby and the subject, the Trumpeter design team's philosphy seems to be one of "good enough".  They don't appear to be modelers who strive to get things exactly right.  For them, it appears to be just a job and they could be designing a model kit or a new case for a cell phone.  I could be wrong, but that is how I perceive the issues we suffer with from Trumpeter/Hobby Boss/Kinetic/Kitty Hawk.

 

Lee K

 

Edited July 29, 2014 by Lee_K

[Cees Broere]

They look like nice models, and that's what's it al about.

The manufacturer gives you a blank canvas and the rest is up to you.

Althoug fatal flaws are inexcusable.

 

 

Very nice.

Cees