Trumpeter

[DoogsATX]

Perhaps the Spitfire & 109 kits were simply additions to an otherwise already crowded market? How do you know it was critical opinion that impacted those kits, rather than a simple case of too much supply?

 

Perhaps - but what crowded market?

 

The only other Emils at the time that Trumpeter was releasing theirs were the Eduard lineup and far, far older Hasegawa and Matchbox offerings. Dragon's excellent 109Es weren't on the scene yet.

 

So far as I know, the only other Spitfire Mk.V available in 1/32 is/was the Hasegawa, which isn't even in production. Looking at how well Airfix's new-tool 1/48 Spit V seems to be doing, in a far more competitive field (the Tamiya Vs are still very good...) I have to assume it's not a lack of interest in the subject.

 

I can understand why things like the Spiteful might be a bit more vague in why they don't seem to sell well (again, mainly judging by how fast and deep they go to discount). Accuracy-wise it's a mess, but it's also a rather obscure subject, comparatively.

 

I don't know. Forums may not have much weight, but maybe online reviews do?

[D Bellis]

Perhaps the Spitfire & 109 kits were simply additions to an otherwise already crowded market? How do you know it was critical opinion that impacted those kits, rather than a simple case of too much supply?

No one makes a good Spitfire Mk.Vb in 1/32. Still. So, a "crowded market" doesn't exist for that kit. It must be that the Hobby Boss kit doesn't look enough like its intended subject.

 

But,  the Bf 109E is currently a crowded market. However, when the subject of which Bf 109E kit is the best comes up, it is almost exclusively a discussion of the pros and cons of the Dragon and Eduard kits. Trumpeter, Hasegawa and Matchbox generally aren't even considered contenders.

 

D

[DeanKB]

But how many people, when buying a 109, will go for a specific model, such as an Emil? We all would because we're all a bit daft, but would most buyers just pick up  a 109 or Spitfire kit because they liked the box?

 

We seem to be assuming all buyers exhibit our behaviour in that respect, and I'm not convinced that is the case. 

[Juggernut]

As someone who owns one Trumpeter kit (an Me262B, having dumped the others I had) I will say that I don't give a damn about their business model if it entails designing and marketing well fitting but poorly researched kits.  I don't care what their limitations are as excuses for shape issues and poor research.  I don't have time to address shape issues that matter and design flaws that shouldn't be there but are.  I'll spend my money on less "F'd up" kits and actually enjoy the process of completing the kit not worrying about throwing an equal or greater amount of money into aftermarket just to make the thing acceptable and here's the kicker.... TO ME.  I just don't want to be bothered so I don't buy them.  They can keep their mediocre plastic or sell it to someone else and I'm fine with that.  No kit is ever 100% perfect but theirs always seems to be luke warm.

 

EDIT:  The above post refers to Trumpeter aircraft kits only.  The armor kit I own is very nicely done; it has some issues but overall, nicely done.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Juggernut

[Artful69]

You guys are sounding like old cranks. Trumpeter has a business model that works very well for them, and your opinions mean squat to them. Let's talk about something else.

 

LMAO! Bill 

 

I understand your disdain ... ... but the thread IS about Trumpeter!

 

Like it or not, opinions on the company are more extremely polarised than most manufacturers out there ...

 

Nowadays (read: the last 3-4 years!) I tend to take every kit, by every manufacturer, be it LSP, LSA, Figurines and even AM, on individual merit as far as accuracy, engineering and assembly are concerned - waiting for reviews to be done before purchasing.

 

So My opinion of Trumpeter tends to wildly fluctuate like an unstable woman's mood swings.

 

I think that having a 'fixed' opinion on any manufacturer ... be it WNW, Tamiya, Revell, HK, Dragon or even Trumpeter is silly - Trumpeter do, after all, make some very good gear ...

 

It's just that: When it is good, it is very, very good ... and when it is bad it is shocking!

 

Rog

[DoogsATX]

 

I think that having a 'fixed' opinion on any manufacturer ... be it WNW, Tamiya, Revell, HK, Dragon or even Trumpeter is silly - Trumpeter do, after all, make some very good gear ...

 

Rog

 

The only kits I will buy sight unseen, review unseen, are WNW and Tamiya. I feel like they've proven themselves to me. Almost everything else demands at least some proof.

 

I'm not a massive stickler about accuracy - and even then dimensions and shape don't bother me as much as missing detail (as much as I enjoyed Kitty Hawk's AH-1Z, the lack of representation for the rotor fold hinges drove me batty) - but the combination of accuracy, detail, fit and engineering (how a kit goes together vs. whether it fits) all play a role. 

 

Trumpeter can be a bit inconsistent in all four. But when they do a good job with a kit they really do make great stuff. Though I will admit that I see them "nailing it" more in armor than aircraft. I just got their SCUD kit the other day, and holy cow, it's mind-blowing. Impeccable detail, wonderful engineering...if it fits anything like their T-80BV I'll be happy as all get-out when I build it.

[Darren Howie]

What Rog said!

I still think it's amazing the double standards modellers apply when the T word is mentioned.

They are happy for Revell to continually put out kits with more issues than any Trumpeter kit for almost ten years because they are cheap.

Seriously if Revell put out a P-51B in 32nd with a 8 gun wing..a bubble top canopy and a T tail for 29.95 people would lap it up and ask for more.

Yet then turn around and question Trumpeters corporate model regarding accuracy?

Trumpeter have released some utterly outstanding armor kits over the last ten years met with glee from the armor community.

Not one or two either the entire KV family plus T-90..80 and now the 72..plus plenty of others like BTR's and Pions etc.

They have just released a 1/16th Mk IVH that's is simply amazing and that's on top of the highly praised T-34 family and Su-100.

Buy the kits on there merits and judge every one seperately as the track record in aircraft of either manufacturer is inconsistent at best.

 

Revell is very very happy to pump out inaccurate difficult to build kits and how many people do we see questioning there methods?

Edited April 19, 2015 by Darren Howie

[BradG]

I think Revell copped a hammering over the 109 Darren, yet virtually no one mentioned their MG 17s in 1/32 Heinkel 111P are 1/48. Eduard got smashed over their 109G problems.

 

As for Trumpeter, I do wish their kits were better for the price asked as they do many subjects I like. The problems that irritate me the most as the surface roughness and I'm yet to see one of their kits that doesn't have the molds misalignment causing issues at the mating surfaces. I also believe that many reviews either photoshop out or photograph the kit parts in a way that disguises that problem.

[DoogsATX]

Revell is very very happy to pump out inaccurate difficult to build kits and how many people do we see questioning there methods?

 

I don't think it's that Revell gets a pass (Hasegawa's 109s have plenty of issues, too) so much as Trumpeter has a mark on its back. Granted, they've committed enough flubs to have some responsibility in putting it there. That's what drives me nuts about the 109, though. The Hasegawa, Revell and Trumpy kits all have significant flaws - and they're all different flaws! If you could somehow mash them together and just keep their strengths you'd have an amazing kit.

 

 

As for Trumpeter, I do wish their kits were better for the price asked as they do many subjects I like. The problems that irritate me the most as the surface roughness and I'm yet to see one of their kits that doesn't have the molds misalignment causing issues at the mating surfaces. I also believe that many reviews either photoshop out or photograph the kit parts in a way that disguises that problem.

 

Having written a number of reviews in my time, I highly doubt it. Is it possible that the company build-ups disguise those things? Sure. Most review photos I've seen only use P-shop to do color correction, sharpening and maybe add some call-out arrows.

[Artful69]

... I don't think it's that Revell gets a pass (Hasegawa's 109s have plenty of issues, too) so much as Trumpeter has a mark on its back. Granted, they've committed enough flubs to have some responsibility in putting it there. That's what drives me nuts about the 109, though. The Hasegawa, Revell and Trumpy kits all have significant flaws - and they're all different flaws! If you could somehow mash them together and just keep their strengths you'd have an amazing kit ...

 

Agreed! ... I have all three G-6's and G-10's (albeit that Revell's G-10 is an Erla Variant) ... It seems quite astounding to me that no-one got it right.

 

Out of all of those manufacturers, though, I'd give Revell the most stick! - They had a golden opportunity to make (finally!!) the 'accurate' G-6 - and promptly blew it.

 

I wonder if Tamiya, ZM or Dragon/CH will ever have a go?

 

Rog

[LSP_Matt]

I like a bit of everything...like Tapas.

 

Whilst I do very much enjoy Tamiya I'd be bored off my skull if every kit fit that well together. They're almost Lego-like they're so good.

 

I've learnt more and challenged myself further by building poorly fitting kits but I still enjoy a good fitting kit.

 

But...like Tapas...if you have too much of one thing its boring.

 

I'm really interested in the shape issues/corrections that come to light and I definitely enjoying watching someone wrestle with the issue and correct it.  I just don't let those issues become things I get frustrated about.

 

I'm glad Trumpeter has the subjects it does.  Not sure I've ever paid a RRP for one though.

 

Matty

[BradG]

Having written a number of reviews in my time, I highly doubt it. Is it possible that the company build-ups disguise those things? Sure. Most review photos I've seen only use P-shop to do color correction, sharpening and maybe add some call-out arrows.

 

I don't trust any review written by one of the luminaries of the modeling internet.

[thierry laurent]

Well, why some companies are making some engineering choices will stay a human mistery. Similarly, some kit problems are discussed at length on forums whereas others are simply ignored for years!

 

One glaring example: if Hasegawa kits have generally excellent fit qualities, the inserts they put in kits often do not fit and this also apply to recent kits such as the Ki-44 or the P-40 which is one of their worst kits regarding this! So, I'm really wondering how the Trumpeter P-40E will look and will with any doubt get all of them if they are more accurate than their P-40B and if we do not have the tail or nose fit problems we have with the Hasegawa kits!

 

Another example: the Tamiya zero has a major landing gear leg retracting system inaccuracy caused by the toyish system used to close the landing gear. However, nobody ever released a correction set as this problem is simply ignored as well.

 

Conclusion: some kits are more accurate than others, offer better value for money or are easier to build but no company is releasing perfect kits in 100% of the cases even if some have a better track record than others. So, act as consumers with a brain and limited resources: wait for various reviews if you are not prepared to possible major correction work or additional aftermarket cost!

 

My 2 cents

 

Thierry

[wunwinglow]

I only have one Tamiya kit, the Phantom, which I understand had numerous features that need correcting. I also have 4 Revell Hunters, which also have a few issues whuch need correcting. They all have some challenging assembling issues, but they also make up into impressive and instantly recognisable models of their subjects.

 

They also cost about the same: 4 Revell Hunters, 1 Tamiya Phantom.

 

Something to think about.....

 

Tim

[Tony T]

Agree with Matty.

 

Currently "wrestling" with a Trumpeter Fishbed C and will reward myself with a relatively easy Tamiya F-4C afterwards, albeit a conversion with a more complex paint job.

 

The Tamiya - and later HK Models - Mossie builds will be rewards for "fighting" my way through another pair of shelf-sitters, namely two Trumpeter A-7E Corsair IIs, which are dogs without the Zactomodels correction sets.

 

But the later Trumpeter kits are better fitting and more accurate. I can't speak for the props but the A-6 Intruder is exquisite, and the MiG-23 series (with minor tweaks) very impressive.

I just hope that, when and if it's released, the F-100F Hun is in part a fresh design which doesn't simply enlarge errors from the smaller scale offering, particularly the overly long canopy hood.

 

Tony