D Bellis Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Can you please explain what is so wrong with the ZM P-51 kit? I have 3 of them with 1 having given up its interior structure to fill out a Monogram Phantom Mustang. There are 2 things that jump out as being noticeably wrong: 1) The ZM P-51D kit's cuffed Hamilton Standard prop to too small in overall diameter by almost 1/8" (2.5mm). 2) The wing spar is incorrectly swept forward. I'm sure there's more, but those are the obvious ones to me. D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesHatch Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Am I? I'm just curious how you would know something about something that doesn't exist, and in fact hasn't even actually been announced by the company. The known facts about the company don't support your statement. I live in the world of science, where a statement of fact has to be supported by evidence. Brad-M 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scvrobeson Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I live in the world of science, where a statement of fact has to be supported by evidence. Says the man constantly dropping "hints" at various manufacturer's future projects, and goes off on kits that "look wrong" without providing facts and drawings to back it up. On topic, would love to see Z-M tackle these subjects. They produce top-notch kits that yes, require work and forethought, but produce beautiful builds when done. Really enjoyed the Shinden, and need to get their Raiden and Mustang. Matt Lee White, Artful69, D Bellis and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 There may be a Thomas Dolby joke in here somewhere. LMAO ... Old sales technique "If you can't blind 'em with science, baffle 'em with bulls***!!" Rog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 Ha finally some recognition.......my useless knowledge of 80's pop performers has finally paid off! Ryan Artful69 and scvrobeson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 I think that ZM kits are comparible to Tamiya in terms or accuracy and detail ... ALL kits have pluses and minuses - these are no different ... The ZM P-51D isn't perfect, but neither is the Tamiya - I have yet, ever, to see THE perfect kit ... And ZM does a Mk.IV!! - no Tamiya with roundels?!?! Well ... We know ZM is doing Fw190s due to the official announcement (fact) and most would put their money on the PROBABILITY of ZM being more detailed and accurate than current releases to market (science). I'm sure if the rumors regarding the topic post are good ... ZM will do them justice. It kinda sounds like they're changing MO for those though. Rog Ryan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 An FGR.2 would be schweeet...... scvrobeson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Ron Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 This is not a knock just an observation in comparison between ZM and Tamiya. Both have their merits, flaws and following. To me ZM kits have allot of interior detail that is representative but not scale, it does give a builder an idea of how the plane is constructed but it's a representation not really scale. As for close up detail, I find Tamyia's molding is much more crisp and defined where ZM is more soft edged and not so defined. I haven't built a ZM yet, only fondled them but they appear to build fine. For me, assembling all that representative structure which isn't scale and most won't be seen doesn't interest me, I find that kind of building frustrating. But that's me. Many seem to really enjoy these kits and that is all the matters. I am looking forward to their 190 series..... Ron Artful69 and DougN 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 This is not a knock just an observation in comparison between ZM and Tamiya. Both have their merits, flaws and following. To me ZM kits have allot of interior detail that is representative but not scale, it does give a builder an idea of how the plane is constructed but it's a representation not really scale. As for close up detail, I find Tamyia's molding is much more crisp and defined where ZM is more soft edged and not so defined. I haven't built a ZM yet, only fondled them but they appear to build fine. For me, assembling all that representative structure which isn't scale and most won't be seen doesn't interest me, I find that kind of building frustrating. But that's me. Many seem to really enjoy these kits and that is all the matters. I am looking forward to their 190 series..... Ron That's a decent enough observation Ron ... If they were going to get internals accurate, you'd be putting the whole thing together with tweezers and a microscope ... PE would have been the medium to use ... When I put together my 219 I won't be doing a lot of painting and decorating with the covered up bits - I can see your point there as well. I find the external/engine/cockpit details and accuracy comparible between the two ... But I guess everyone's entitled to their own take eh? ... Rog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSP_Ron Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 But I guess everyone's entitled to their own take eh? ... Rog Absolutely! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerosystem Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Artful69 and Lee White 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Howie Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Can you please explain what is so wrong with the ZM P-51 kit? I have the two kits released so far. I like them a lot. Radu Well put Radu another of Jennings random unsubstantiated points.If he thinks the ZM one is no good i cant wait to hear what he says about the Tamiya wing with its rivets and god knows he has complained about Trumpeters rivets long enough. Its great to see a company who LOVES aircraft doing these super aircraft and in all seriousness anyone with a negative viewpoint to have someone like ZM on the job is out of touch with not only reality but just have no idea. A ZM Sabre will be superb hoping for either an A or Early E the real workers in Korea and ignored by Hasegawa..Tamiya and Monogram and Revell. Bring them on.. Youngtiger1 and Artful69 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironwolf80 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Accually he said one of these aircraft would be produced and then took a poll of the crowd. The F-4 won the poll. andromeda673, joe and Tony T 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Howie Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 ZM P-51. In short bring on the whole lot! Vandy 1 VX 4, Artful69, Paramedic and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful69 Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Well put Radu another of Jennings random unsubstantiated points. If he thinks the ZM one is no good i cant wait to hear what he says about the Tamiya wing with its rivets and god knows he has complained about Trumpeters rivets long enough. Its great to see a company who LOVES aircraft doing these super aircraft and in all seriousness anyone with a negative viewpoint to have someone like ZM on the job is out of touch with not only reality but just have no idea. A ZM Sabre will be superb hoping for either an A or Early E the real workers in Korea and ignored by Hasegawa..Tamiya and Monogram and Revell. Bring them on.. I don't know why Jennings does the "unsubstantiated" thing continually ... quite often he actually DOES have a valid point to make - it's just stated in a way that stirs up the hornets nest!! ... I tend to just roll my eyes and move forward, lol - the thing about taking offence is: you actually have to TAKE it - it doesn't just happen I was saying earlier that I think both kits are comparable with each other in terms of accuracy and detail ... they've taken very different paths with differing outcomes ... both are excellent - and for my mind I couldn't pick one over the other - EXCEPTING personal preference for type of build, inclusions and AREAS of preferred accuracy ... Of course we all wish every kit could achieve a kind of 'sainthood' in perfection ... but the reality is every single kit has imperfections ... Thanks for highlighting one of the Tamiya ones, that I couldn't think of, off the top of my head!! What we tend to lean toward (unless we really enjoy the 'challenge' thing continuously) irrespective of our error tolerance levels - is working with the least amount of imperfections that we are prone to struggle with or dislike ... if filling and sanding puts you off - you'll avoid deep panel lines, rivet holes and ill fitting kits ... if bucket loads of parts/assembly put you off, you'll avoid kits like ZM ... Like I said to Ron earlier, everyones got their preferences ... Since I've been introduced to both marques - I love both, each for the different ways that they've gone about what they do ... importantly, both companies have a passion for what they do! ZM has a very unique style of kit ... and I for one, get excited about every new product that they release - I might not purchase every new subject they release (such as that Horten thing! lol) ... but they are always awesome! Rog Vandy 1 VX 4 1 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