A6M3 model 32 - better base kit for conversion?

[Anthony in NZ]

Here ya go Mike.  This is how I was doing it.  Trouble is that I got bogged down on wiring up the engine.  Must get back to it

Cheers Anthony

 

[seiran01]

Cheers. No, you need to finish the Phantom. And then the mossie.  

[amurray]

I agree that the Tamiya A6M2 and A6M5 kits are the best bases for the A6M3

 

Some observations different than those above.

 

• The Tamiya A6M2 wing is the better of the two.  The A6M5 fuselage is the better of the two.  The ailerons are easy to shorten.  Only the small scribed section closest to the fuselage was removed.
• The areas most overlooked are the shell collection blisters and surrounding area.  It is entirely different from the A6M2.  Cut out this area from the A6M5 kit and put into the A6M2 wing; or, re-scribe and add some small scratchbuilt parts to the A6M2 wing.
• The cowling gun ports on the A6M3 are a different shape from both the A6M2 and the A6M5.  Dave Thompson of UMI Resins made an A6M3 cowling before he passed away.  IIRC the 21st Century A6M2 cowling is actually an A6M3 cowling.  The air intake on the A6M3 cowling is a different shape than that on the A6M5 cowling.  Don't use the A6M2 cowling as it has open gun troughs and the air intake is on the bottom.
• Use the A6M2 spinner, not the A6M5 spinner.
• The cockpits were very close among all Zeros.  Probably some minor differences but not enough IMO to worry about.

Edited December 3, 2021 by amurray
Omitted a thought.

[seiran01]

1 hour ago, amurray said:

I agree that the Tamiya A6M2 and A6M5 kits are the best bases for the A6M3

 

Some observations different than those above.

 

• The Tamiya A6M2 wing is the better of the two.  The A6M5 fuselage is the better of the two.  The ailerons are easy to shorten.  Only the small scribed section closest to the fuselage was removed.
• The areas most overlooked are the shell collection blisters and surrounding area.  It is entirely different from the A6M2.  Cut out this area from the A6M5 kit and put into the A6M2 wing; or, re-scribe and add some small scratchbuilt parts to the A6M2 wing.
• The cowling gun ports on the A6M3 are a different shape from both the A6M2 and the A6M5.  Dave Thompson of UMI Resins made an A6M3 cowling before he passed away.  IIRC the 21st Century A6M2 cowling is actually an A6M3 cowling.  The air intake on the A6M3 cowling is a different shape than that on the A6M5 cowling.  Don't use the A6M2 cowling as it has open gun troughs and the air intake is on the bottom.
• Use the A6M2 spinner, not the A6M5 spinner.
• The cockpits were very close among all Zeros.  Probably some minor differences but not enough IMO to worry about.

Thanks for all that. What’s different between the two kit fuselages? I noticed the A6M2 has a separate spine but otherwise I don’t know the difference.

 

From the photos I was looking at, looks like the long spinner in the -2 box is correct, I was guessing the longer diameter prop from the -5 is better to use with that. 
 

Can you recommend any references that show the difference in cowl gun ports and  other details clearly? The unused shell blisters in the Tamiya -2 kit look to be about right for a model 32 or 22, but I’m only going off of some photos I found online and could be way off.

 

 

 

[Kagemusha]

If you look at the cooling vents just in front of the windscreen, the position of latter two are the same

 

A6M2

 

 

A6M3

 

 

A6M5

 

 

Regards the spinner, there are some A6M3 specific only in the A6M2 kit, they didn't just use one, so check your references.

[Juggernut]

14 hours ago, amurray said:

I agree that the Tamiya A6M2 and A6M5 kits are the best bases for the A6M3

 

Some observations different than those above.

 

• The Tamiya A6M2 wing is the better of the two.  The A6M5 fuselage is the better of the two.  The ailerons are easy to shorten.  Only the small scribed section closest to the fuselage was removed.
• The areas most overlooked are the shell collection blisters and surrounding area.  It is entirely different from the A6M2.  Cut out this area from the A6M5 kit and put into the A6M2 wing; or, re-scribe and add some small scratchbuilt parts to the A6M2 wing.
• The cowling gun ports on the A6M3 are a different shape from both the A6M2 and the A6M5.  Dave Thompson of UMI Resins made an A6M3 cowling before he passed away.  IIRC the 21st Century A6M2 cowling is actually an A6M3 cowling.  The air intake on the A6M3 cowling is a different shape than that on the A6M5 cowling.  Don't use the A6M2 cowling as it has open gun troughs and the air intake is on the bottom.
• Use the A6M2 spinner, not the A6M5 spinner.
• The cockpits were very close among all Zeros.  Probably some minor differences but not enough IMO to worry about.

 

Where did you get your information from if I may ask because some of what you've written just isn't fact:

• This has already been established by me in an earlier post.
• The A6M3 used a larger magazine drum than did the A6M2 and therefore the "blister" on the wing underside of the A6M3 was larger than that of the A6M2.  The larger 100 round blister is included in the A6M2 kit and marked not for use; there's no need to cut anything from the A6M5 wing.  I have no idea what you mean by "shell collection blister", please elaborate if you wouldn't mind.
•   The cowl gun ports on the A6M5 are  different than the A6M3....  They are exactly the same between the A6M3 and the A6M5.  They only changed when the Japanese added a 13mm machine gun to the A6M5 Model 52b. The unique shape of the A6M3 intake has already been mentioned in an earlier post.
• The A6M2 spinner (part Q21) is incorrect for the A6M3 but the correct spinner (part Q22) is included in the A6M2 kit but marked not for use.  NOTE:  Part Q22 may be the larger spinner for Nakajima built A6M2's but may work for the A6M3, check your references.  You are correct that the A6M5 spinner is wrong for an A6M3.
• Cockpits differed in various details between A6M2, A6M3, and A6M5; consult your references. 

 

Sprue Layout from the 1/32 Tamiya A6M2 kit:

 

Shorter ailerons for the model 32 (I believe)

 

100 round drum blisters for the A6M3

 

 

Larger A6M3 spinner (also reputed to be the larger A6M2 spinner from the Nakajima built A6M2 so consult references and see if this is correct)

 

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by Juggernut

[seiran01]

Thanks Juggernaut!

 

I'm looking at the M sprue now, the parts you circled are just the underside halves of the ailerons with adjustable trim tabs (model 22?) so either way the builder must shorten the parts. From what I could tell based off the photos online, it seems that the model 21 ailerons from the P sprue used in the tamiya A6M2 kit are better suited to shorten as they have the fixed trailing edge tab visible in some of the capture photos.

 

I've gone and bought a spare A6M5 fuselage sprue, whichever fuselage I don't use can certainly be put to good use with another random project. 

 

 

[Juggernut]

Ok, if those are just the bottoms of the ailerons then you'll just have to cut the ailerons and add the missing section to the wing.  I'm sure you can do that without any issue.

 

Yes, use part P9 and P11 (along with their respective bottom halves) for the model 32. Apologies for the oversight, I don't currently have the kit...though I do have one built in my case

Edited December 3, 2021 by Juggernut

[seiran01]

Yeah, that part will be the easiest item of the conversion work

 

Is it worth adding the flotation bag behind the seat bulkhead? I’ve not found a photo or drawing yet that shows me how it should look so I’m open to suggestions.

[Juggernut]

 

The above illustration came from the Design Analysis of the Zeke 32 (Hamp) website I linked earlier.  As I said before, I think this drawing is a little bit off in that it shows the fuselage bag too far forward and the wing bags don't seem to take into account the additional fuel tank that the model 32 had.

 

What I did to create the flotation bag is make a solid piece of plastic sheet in the shape of the cross section of the fuselage at frame 7 and covered it with a thin layer of milliput and sculpted some folds in it to represent a canvas bag shape.  I painted the milliput canvas and added highlight and shadows (cause I'm anal) and glued the plastic into the fuselage.  You'd only ever see the front end of the bag and even then it'll be extremely limited in what you can see from the cockpit so if you choose to omit it, you can always say it had been removed by the ground crew.

 

I've only ever found one photograph of a fuselage flotation bag and it was from a model 21 that crashed at Pearl Harbor.  That photograph was only sufficient to tell that there was a flotation bag in the fuselage as there was no shape to the bag within the wrecked fuselage.

Edited December 3, 2021 by Juggernut

[spacewolf]

The Doyusha kit is the old Tomy reboxed. Surface detail is lovely, exceptional for the day (1974) The wheel wells, cockpit and prop need replacing. Fit is not the best (typical for the year released) but it looks very good when assembled. Working on mine at the moment.

[thierry laurent]

The Doyusha kit has some dimension issues. I know it as I used the kit to make a model 22 with the help of leftover Tamiya parts and a 21st century kit. This applies at least to the aileron shapes and the upper cross section of the fuselage behind the cockpit. Nonetheless the panel and rivet scribing was incredible for this era.

[Juggernut]

I think I am mistaken about the Model 32 having an additional fuel tank in the wings.  That fact may be true for the model 22/22a but not for the 32.  I’ve read that the wing fuel tanks were increased in volume on the 32 but not that an additional fuel tank was installed.  Not that this would result in any major problems…. All that would need be done is fill an offending scribed circle for the filler cap.

 

Apologies.  My A6M knowledge apparently isn’t what it used to be.

Edited December 5, 2021 by Juggernut

[LSP_Mike]

Maybe, but clarifying the record is what we need in any discussion. This is an interesting airframe. It would be nice to see either a resin or 3d printed conversion.

[seiran01]

Just got my extra A6M5 sprue and compared the fuselage halves to the A6M2. Sure enough, the forward fuselage of the 5 is noticeably shorter than the 2 due to the new cowling. This is not a detail I would have noticed - thanks Juggernaut.

I’ll dry fit the A6M2 wings to the 5 fuselage later on to see how those fit, it appears from the wing roots that it should be a perfect match.