Eduard Bf-109 E-1/E-3 Legion Condor in 2019 announced

[Dave Williams]

5 hours ago, ade rowlands said:

It’s tempting. It really is. Especially when you have an ICM Rata to do in the other sides markings too. Not sure which of the multitude of the I-16 versions they flew though and if the correct ICM one is out yet. Need to look in to that. 

 

You’d probably want the Type 10 kit with the tail skid.  I think the Type 24s and later were too late for the Spanish Civil War.

[Mark_C]

4 hours ago, Dave Williams said:

 

You’d probably want the Type 10 kit with the tail skid.  I think the Type 24s and later were too late for the Spanish Civil War.

 

And . . . it's been released, according to ICM:

 

http://www.icm.com.ua/news/610-i-16-type-10-wwii-soviet-fighter.html

[Mikester]

On 5/24/2019 at 2:28 PM, nmayhew said:

 

they still have sour grapes over the reception their 109 got... too scared to release anything new

 

same in 1/35 with their Hetzer

 

Curious since their "1/43" 109G-6 was absolutely crucified (justifiably so) and they want back and actually re-did it.  Their Emil is not perfect but it's still a decent kit.  They could upscale their current line of 109s up to 1/32 and it would be a license to print money, really don't understand why they have a such a tough time with 1/32.

[RBrown]

8 hours ago, Mikester said:

Curious since their "1/43" 109G-6 was absolutely crucified (justifiably so) and they want back and actually re-did it. 

 

Even he had an opinion on the Eduard kit...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndE06JfcWUA

Edited July 5, 2019 by RBrown

[Cheetah11]

20 hours ago, Mikester said:

 

Curious since their "1/43" 109G-6 was absolutely crucified (justifiably so) and they want back and actually re-did it.  Their Emil is not perfect but it's still a decent kit.  They could upscale their current line of 109s up to 1/32 and it would be a license to print money, really don't understand why they have a such a tough time with 1/32.

 

Not quite so. After the accuracy questions earlier on the Hasegawa 1/32 kit I measured all the 109's in my stash. The Hasegawa and Fujimi kits are both 2mm short from the accepted published dimensions. The NEW Eduard kit is 2mm long, making the difference 4mm between the kits. I do not have the Tamiya 1/48 kit but the dimensions on the box puts it spot on. The problem with the new Eduard kit compared with the other kits are the extra length seems to be only in the canopy and wing root section.  So my money will be on a 1/32 Tamiya kit to be the ultimate 1/32 109 if it ever gets released. But maybe only 1/32 modelers are so particular since the above 3 kits have the same percentage error as the 1/32 Hasegawa kit, yet this was not even mentioned in a review. Comments?

Nick

[19squadron]

3 hours ago, Cheetah11 said:

 

Not quite so. After the accuracy questions earlier on the Hasegawa 1/32 kit I measured all the 109's in my stash. The Hasegawa and Fujimi kits are both 2mm short from the accepted published dimensions. The NEW Eduard kit is 2mm long, making the difference 4mm between the kits. I do not have the Tamiya 1/48 kit but the dimensions on the box puts it spot on. The problem with the new Eduard kit compared with the other kits are the extra length seems to be only in the canopy and wing root section.  So my money will be on a 1/32 Tamiya kit to be the ultimate 1/32 109 if it ever gets released. But maybe only 1/32 modelers are so particular since the above 3 kits have the same percentage error as the 1/32 Hasegawa kit, yet this was not even mentioned in a review. Comments?

Nick

Eduard's 1/32 Bf109e has exactly the same faults as their 1/48th scale BF109e.

 

1/There are several, but the most obvious ones are that the kit oil cooler duct exit is too large because it is missing the fillet that closes the rear of the lower cowl - something very obvious but rarely mentioned.

 

2/ the cross section of the fuselage behind the mainplane is wrong - it is too oval, whereas the fuselage becomes a box shape where it meets the fuel tank and cockpit [something that is wrong on most 109 kits, and conspicuously wrong on the Cyber Hobby 1/32 kit where the fuselage section is too narrow at the top]

 

3/ The Eduard 1/48 and 1/32 fin stabiliser is too far back and they have given it the stabiliser of a Bf 109F rather than an E. - the marks had totally different fin stabiliser panels, with totally different leading edge shapes.

 

these are the three most visually obvious errors, there is also a change in direction looking from above of the Eduard 1/48 and 1/32  fuselage that is much commented upon, but hey at least there is a 1/32 Bf109e! - I discount the Revell Spitfire mk II which is 2 mm too long in the fuselage in front of the cockpit and all the wrong shape in the fuselage, so discounting Revell's terrible effort, at least there are several BF109 E's, there are no Mk1 Spitfires, Mk1 Hurricanes, no Defiants, No Blenheims, no Battles, = No aircraft from the single most important air campaign ever fought in 1/32 except the German 109, 110, He111, Ju88 and Ju87.

 

Shocking

 

If there was to be an area that I could hope WNW would bring their care, powers of research and love of historical accuracy, The Battle of Britain aircraft would be it!

Edited July 6, 2019 by 19squadron

[John1]

3 hours ago, Cheetah11 said:

 

Not quite so. After the accuracy questions earlier on the Hasegawa 1/32 kit I measured all the 109's in my stash. The Hasegawa and Fujimi kits are both 2mm short from the accepted published dimensions. The NEW Eduard kit is 2mm long, making the difference 4mm between the kits.

 

I do have to comment on this.  While I consider myself a hard core rivet counter, do you think anyone would actually note a 2mm discrepancy without having to break out a pair of calipers?

 

 

[19squadron]

2 minutes ago, John1 said:

 

I do have to comment on this.  While I consider myself a hard core rivet counter, do you think anyone would actually note a 2mm discrepancy without having to break out a pair of calipers?

 

 

yes

 

the kit just looks totally wrong

 

[Cheetah11]

3 hours ago, John1 said:

 

I do have to comment on this.  While I consider myself a hard core rivet counter, do you think anyone would actually note a 2mm discrepancy without having to break out a pair of calipers?

 

 

Hi John

I am certainly not worried about the 2mm and will build my 1/48 kits as is. When build they all look convincing.  The point I was trying to make is that the 1/32 kits ate criticized on the forums while similar errors in other scales are brushed off or not even noticed. BTW I was commenting on the BF 109 G models and not the E. I built the Eduard E in 1/32 out of the box and enjoyed it despite the faults.

Nick

[thierry laurent]

For Bob modellers, there are two quite good Hurricanes Mk. 1 released by Fly and PCM. 

[MikeMaben]

Revell's original Hurricane was a MkI as well.

 

 

[19squadron]

8 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

Revell's original Hurricane was a MkI as well.

 

 

I agree the Hurricane was a much better effort than the new Spitfire IIa 1/32, but it is a very old kit and OOP.

[19squadron]

15 hours ago, thierry laurent said:

For Bob modellers, there are two quite good Hurricanes Mk. 1 released by Fly and PCM. 

 

 

PCM is OOP, is the Fly Mk I still available? or OOP? too?

[Kagemusha]

The Fly Hurricanes are very much still available. 

[Dave Williams]

Have I missed something?  Why did a thread about the 1/32 Eduard Legion Condor Kit morph into BoB Hurricane talk?