Revell P-51D - Great, or merely Good, or ??

[Night Hog]

Seems pretty obvious that:

1) No notch can be "drilled" into the edge of the fuselage halves before they're assembled - it must be cut (hence the proper cut icon). 

2) The arrow leading from the cut icon points directly to the exact spot that needs to be cut out (the location of the light to be installed in step 74). 

3) Nothing in the diagrams for steps 18 & 19 suggests doing anything at all with the tail alignment tabs. 

 

HTH,

D

 

I can see your point. Regardless, removing the forward set of tabs seems to minimize the fit from the canopy track aft. Who knew? Considering all of the discussion I think it's safe to say that sometimes a picture isn't worth the words it replaces. Best of luck everybody. The kit is pretty impressive nevertheless.

 

I am using the extra Fillet Tail from the ZM kit. Fits like a glove. Thanks for the clarity D.

 

Dick

[D Bellis]

 

Quick set glue one side, let it dry / cure, pull the other side flush and glue that side,

or make a wooden spreader. It's not much of a stretch.

Spreading the windscreen to fit the fuselage flattens the side-to-side curve, and leaves the windscreen short in height. Hence the width and height shims needed to make it fit properly.

 

That shot does illustrate the poor fit of the windscreen, though, as well as the too-wide fuselage caused by the cockpit being too wide to properly fit between the halves. 

 

The canopy parts present more problems than just fit. JohnB has documented the distortion problem quite well in his build thread, and there is some discussion there concerning the milky plastic of the canopy parts. Hopefully these shots will illustrate the milkiness of the Revell canopy:

 

 

The distortion is also plainly visible. But, it is really noticeable when trying to see the cockpit through the milky, distorted parts:

 

Compare that to the Zoukei Mura canopy (note the seatbelts in both shots):

 

Also note that there's no filler used anywhere in those shots.

 

The milky, ill-fitting canopy parts present a serious problem. The only aftermarket canopy are the 2 Squadron vac canopies intended for the old Hasegawa kit. That kit is wider through the cockpit area than any of the modern P-51D kits, so those canopies might not fit the Revell fuselage. Without leftovers (such as the Zoukei Mura parts that I used, or the Tamiya which JohnB is using for the sliding part), one is left without any option but to accept having a milky canopy.

 

I started out making every effort to use the Revell canopy parts, but just couldn't let the milky problem slide when I had an alternative handy. In the end, I removed the sims and set about fitting the Zoukei Mura windscreen and canopy instead. 

 

D

[Cees Broere]

The P-51K on display at the Military Air Museum at Soesterberg (the old location) used to have a canopy that had completely turned opaque with age and looked indeed almost white. It has a proper one now. Will make a nice diorama I think.

Cees

[RLWP]

That shot does illustrate the poor fit of the windscreen, though, as well as the too-wide fuselage caused by the cockpit being too wide to properly fit between the halves. 

 

 

 

 

The part is dropped in, it slightly overhangs the side. 

[RLWP]

I really should listen to my own advice

 

I can see I'm going to have to drop out of this thread. My experience has in general been very good. I'm just not getting the problems others are

 

Richard

 

Carry on guys, but please read the words I write as well as look at the pictures.

 

I'm out - I have painting to do

 

Richard

[quang]

For what it's worth, here's the canopy and tail fit on my Revell kit. Quick dry assembly, no glue except for the tail section.

While not 100% perfect, the fit is quite acceptable by my standards.

HTH

Quang

 

 

[quang]

Close-up

 

[Lothar]

After seeing your close-ups Quang I'm glad I have that kit in my stash. Thanks for posting.

 

Lothar

[Jack]

The P-51K on display at the Military Air Museum at Soesterberg (the old location) used to have a canopy that had completely turned opaque with age and looked indeed almost white. It has a proper one now. Will make a nice diorama I think.

Cees

 

Here you go Cees:

 

[wunwinglow]

....... It seems to me the kit can build very well indeed - if you take time to work out why something isn't fitting and fix that first

 

Richard

I think you just defined model making.....

[dashotgun]

i have some extra   tamiya canopy so that problem is solved.   so is the consensus for the windscreen  to  shave the forward part of the fuselage and shim the canopy?   the tight fit on the  cockpit you have to thin the walls?  I  am an ace at filling the seams  but the step on the windscreen will bug me.  interesting on brett's build there is no step on the windscreen

 

http://www.hyperscale.com/2017/reviews/kits/revell03944reviewbg_1.htm

 

 

and in the  revell advertisement build the side to side fit of the windscreen is fine bu the height is off a bit.  ( also the wings to fuselage is terrible)

 

Edited March 2, 2018 by dashotgun

[quang]

There are many ways to build a model.

My windscreen fit perfectly. No step whatsoever. See my pics above.

Now that distorted central panel is another matter 

[dashotgun]

in the picture you posted there is no cockpit if the  cockpit is to big and spreads it then you may get a step.   I am just obsessing a bit  I  am scheduled to  get mine delivered today and  I also  have two unbuilt tamiya's in the pile.   I do not mind   the process of  overcoming difficulties that in part is the fun of modeling to me otoh some  struggles  are just not worth it.  Everyone has a different point from only wanting a snaptite fit to  scratch building something.  I think it does depend on your subassembiles as I pointed out the two professionally built models above there are discrepancies.  BTW  squadron has vacuum formed canopies in 1/32.  I have never had much luck with them but it may be worth a try for the windscreen.  I have extra tamiy  canopies and may put some off them on the  trader forum as well  for some minor swag.  Anybody have some Frenesi decals for a canopy?

[1to1scale]

I had all the same issues with the windscreen and the canopy. I did sand the cockpit in certain areas to get the rear fuselage to close better, but I never considered that there would be canopy fit issues before I glued it together. 

 

I shimmed the windscreen out .020 on each side, that made it slightly wide, but acceptable, I think .015 would have been better (perfect), I also glued it in place with a gap at the bottom, so the top front edge matched up. I then filled the gaps with acrylic putty and wiped it off with my finger and a thinner soaked cotton bud. 

 

For the canopy, in the closed position, the step is so huge, I am forced to glue it in the open position, I possibly may look into the hasegawa or Tamiya canopy, but since it will be in the open position, it wont obscure the detail inside. I deduced that some shims will make the fit acceptable in the open position, but its too much closed. So my final fix will be open canopy with shims.

 

I am leaning all the quirks, on the next build, I will do things differently.

 

1. I will glue the cockpit sides to the fuselage after sanding some thickness off them.

 

2. Next I will open up all the slots that fit together, sand a good portion off the rear bulkhead.

 

3. Sand the IP sides for clearance, sand the front bulkhead for extra clearance. 

 

4. Shave a little off the upper cowl halves.

 

Fortunately, as frustrated as I get sometimes, I remember that this is a $25 Revell kit. The trade off for Tamiya quality is that it is 1/4 the price.

[Plasto]

Fortunately, as frustrated as I get sometimes, I remember that this is a $25 Revell kit. The trade off for Tamiya quality is that it is 1/4 the price.

I think the Revell kit is good. It needs a good dose of modelling technique to get it to build up nicely.

 

I don't think it's the same ‘quality' as The Tamiya kit.

 

Which is ok because it's significantly less expensive. What it has is great / adequate ‘quality' for its price point. Which is fine.

 

John