Zoukei Mura Bf 109 front cowling shape issue?

[pugo3]

Hello,

 

First post on this forum, as I believe I found an issue with the Zoukei Mura Bf 109G front cowl area and searched online for comments of others who may have also noticed this matter, but found none, so I will post my finding here for others opinion and comments, and for feedback for ZM.

 

First, go to Zoukie Mura Japan Old Man Blog 114 intro page main photo, a front port view. Note the smooth curved transition from spinner, oil reservoir panel cover to front cowl / engine door to the front of the ‘bump’

 

Now examine Old Man Blog 115 Intro page main photo.  Same view, photo taken a little lower. Note the evident front bulge of the forward most front cowl / engine door area.To me this bulge seems overly prominent, yet I have not found photos to corroborate this at present.

 

As the lower engine oil cooler is oversized in the OMB 114, it would appear that this was a earlier prototype initial build, so that might account for these differences, the front engine cowl perhaps being an initial place holder so to speak. But note the front bulge mass of OMB 115; here is my theory of what I perceive to be an subtle error of the front aircrafts finished shape.

 

Examine OMB 118 main photo; place a straight edge from the forward most edge of the ‘bump’ to the forward most front cowl / engine door area, at its intersection with the oil reservoir panel cover. You will see that it is a straight line; now notice the rather sharp angle downward from this point of the of the oil reservoir cover panel to the spinner rear edge. I believe this is where an error occurred, or was required due to necessity.

 

My theory is that due to having a complete [wonderful] DB605 engine included in situ, a concession had to be made due to the out of scale thickness of the plastic used for the cowl (and the entire model of course) Now there must be higher placement of the front engine cowl, therefore the front engine cowl / oil reservoir intersection to fit over this engine, necessitating a steeper drop downward from this point to intersect the rear spinner edge.  If you place a straight edge from the front of the ‘bump’ all the way to the rear spinner edge, and compare a side photo of a G14 with OMB 118, you will see that the resulting raised area is taller in the 118 model profile view. Again recall the ‘overly prominent’ front view bulge of OMB 115 mentioned above. I believe this is due to the overly steep angle drop and resultant overly built up / bulged surrounding cowl area.

 

It’s a subtle error, not critical necessarily; I’m hoping to carefully sand the upper oil reservoir cover / front engine cowling area to diminish this overly sharp angle, but the buldged cowl areas probably cannot be completely corrected without overly weakening the plastic. My thinking is to concentrate on the upper areas, as this has the greatest visual impact as evidenced by OMB 115.

 

I didn’t notice this issue initially as most of the photos were of front, angled and views of the internal detail areas, but instinctively I began to become aware something didn’t quite look right. I hope very much I can successfully mitigate this issue by the technique described.

 

Perhaps Zoukie Mura can incorporate a correction in this area in future G6 offerings. I would bring to their attention the very thin engine cowling covers achieved by Eduard in their Revell Bf 109G6 engine detail set. Their engine cowls are very thin, practically scale thickness, being resin of course. Perhaps this remedy might be used to avoid the need for a complete fret redo. 

 

Most people may not even notice this issue, the kit is overall very good, but this is an extremely sensitive matter regarding the accuracy of the aircrafts overall lines; nothing is more important that the front panel / oil reservoir cowling / spinner intersections in the 109’s overall appearance. Zoukei held off the 1/32 He 219 to correct the front shape of the aircraft, but here it seems to me that they may have somehow neglected this vitally important visual / aesthetic detail of the 109G.

 

Again, much love to Zoukei, this will be my fourth kit purchased; my observations are presented to call this to their attention to perhaps remedy future offerings, as I understand a series of G6, 14, G6AS, etc. will follow this initial offering. 

 

Regards and respect,

 

p3

[Darren Howie]

And there it is i was wondering how long it would take.
So you say this “will be your fourth kit”, in short you dont have the kit so exactly what are you comparing things to?

A kit that has been designed by a group of some the best 109 researchers in the world.

It been looked at in extreme detail by some of the most critical eyes in the world who haven't spotted any issues.

Yet by looking at copies of the OMB you think both groups have missed something?

Good luck making that Pelican fly.

Maybe wait till you have the plastic in your hand and present some side on photos clearly highlighting what you think is wrong with the real plastic compared to images of the real aircraft.

Then someone might listen.

Im sorry to sound dismissive but the internet is full of false accusations etc backed up by no evidence, dont be one of them.

ZM continually make adjustments to test shots so anything in OMB will not be what is in the final box.

As for out of scale plastic which you havnt seen yet the cowls are similar thickness to Tamiyas Mustang cowls so very thin indeed not Revell or Hasegawa thickness you are presupposing. 

But suggesting corrections are needed when you have provided absolutely no evidence in relation to the real kit is drawing a long bow.

Sorry but come back with actual information not just words based off pre release test shots.

Then people will be happy to listen.

 

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Darren Howie

[Artful69]

+1 with Darren ...

 

Firstly ... The 'Old Man' ZM certainly knows his stuff, but more - he's very passionate about this business ... and for what he doesn't know, he engages people who do. Not people who think they know - but people who actually do know the subject matter ... Radu for example.

Secondly ... He listens to the people giving input - he doesn't just include them on kit boxes or instructions as "references" ... So if you think your criticisms (based solely on photographs or 2D images at this point) have merit - there is a link provided at the bottom of each blog for your feedback and suggestions ... even I've received a reply while offering a "wish-list" suggestion.

Thirdly ... If you STILL really think there is an issue with the kit after buying it - please take photo's and supply comparison ones with the real deal for us all to see - highlighting the particular issue you wish to bring to light ... Until then, it seems that this post is a little premature, perhaps?

 

Personally ... I think any Bf.109 coming out of Zoukei-Mura is likely to be the most accurate AND detailed kit of the subject in any scale to date ... And while no model kit will ever achieve scale perfection ... I'm pretty sure that ZM will get as close to it as is achievable with current technology to hand.

 

Rog

Edited September 4, 2022 by Artful69

[Kagemusha]

Photographs can be deceptive, influence on the type of lens used, how the light falls on the subject, etc.

 

I think you're looking for faults which aren't there. The ZM team will have been all over the 109 taking measurements, Radu produced an excellent set of G-6 drawings many years ago, these people know their onions.

[Troy Molitor]

..... My kit arrived in the US and yet I'm working in Spain for the rest of the month.  Grrrrr.   I for one can't wait to get my hands on this kit.  Maybe slight Faults and all?  (maybe being the key word as it's a model after all).  Thank you ZM for doing this iconic aircraft again with a major investment from your side for us mir mortals.   You have the talent to do the rest G-1,G-2, G3, G4,G5,G6, G8, G10G-10Erla, K4..........!  Bring them on please.  A Bf 109F would also be welcomed to my European friends noting the Hasegawa "F" kits are so hard to find these days.  Please inject hot plastic into ZM molds and Carpe Deum!     

[Rick Griewski]

This reads like a bot.  

[John1]

Wow, nice way to welcome a new member to LSP.   Far as I see, his post was respectful, and he simply tried to present a potential concern. 

3 hours ago, Rick Griewski said:

This reads like a bot.  

 

[Gary Needham]

....and so it begins.

 

Gary

[Juggernut]

I think Radu will have something to say about it as soon as he sees it considering he was a major contributor to the kit design.  We'll just have to wait and see.

[Rick Griewski]

4 hours ago, John1 said:

Wow, nice way to welcome a new member to LSP.   Far as I see, his post was respectful, and he simply tried to present a potential concern. 

 

Disagree. It seems like bait to me.  

[Rick Griewski]

3 hours ago, Gary Needham said:

....and so it begins.

 

Gary

  But true 

[Wurgermeister64]

Hey Pugo,

Thanks for your keen observation and review of a kit that you admittedly Do not have in your possession to measure. Personally, relying on extraneous sources in order to determine a kit's accuracy when you don't have the real deal in your hands is a nonstarter for me. Hey, but that's just me-you obviously differ, but I purchased the ZM Me 109 G-14 kit, and I have examined it very closely in comparison to the Revell Me 109 G-6 that I also have in my collection. I have also compared it to Brett Green's scale drawings in his book on the Revell Me 109 G. The ZM iteration is much more accurate that the Revell copy. Is this speculation from a guy who just thinks it looks right? yes, it is. But at least I have the real McCoy to examine, and Radu's contributions to the development of the ZM kit speaks volumes in re its accuracy. Just my 2 cents...others are free to contemplate the relative accuracy of drawings to the contrary.

 

WM1964

[pugo3]

Hello again,

 

I understand the loyalty of all respondents and therefore the strong inclination to defend any perceived or real insult, attack, or otherwise disparaging of the excellent Zoukei team. However, I did not do any of the above; I simply used actual high clarity photos posted by Zoukei themselves on their website [Old Man Blog] of actual professionally built models built by Zoukei themselves. The photos clearly back up all that I observed, especially the front port view side by side comparison of OMB 114 and 115. It cannot be denied that some concessions are made in any model offering, as full fidelity is rarely possible to be achieved. In the case of incorporating a fully detailed engine into a front nacelle, the out of scale thickness of model kit plastic must be compensated for. I believe from observing actual, factual, true, unbiased clear photos from the Zoukei site, that the concession in this case had to be the slight enlarging of the front engine panel area as I stated in my original posting. Not an attack, merely a truthful observation.

 

Several respondents stated I must first build the kit myself before offering any views; this is simply not true, as the fully built models by Zoukeis' I trust master builders themselves and photographed with excellent photography are abundantly provided on their website. Similarly untrue is the statement by several that I must purchase the kit first. Listen to what your saying, stop, calm down, and think rationally, not with emotionally derived and prejudiced attacks. Now, review what I posted; Is there a bulged area in OMB 115 compared to OMB 114? Actually perform the simple straightedge comparisons I suggested: is the area greater on the model as opposed to actual aircraft photos?

 

I'm buying the kit, as I plan on a stripped down display, I can accept the not perfect form, so no prejudice or attack on my part, but an honest observation. And I offered a possible remedy for future kits as to perhaps how to mitigate this out of scale plastic thickness dilemma for similar kits. No attacks, just fact backed up with evidence.

 

I realize some will still remain on lap dog attack mode no matter how truthful or factual I may put forth any argument. But to any who are truthful and clear thinking, I stand on the facts I presented above. I love Zoukei, doesn't mean I must become a dumb sycophant.

[Martinnfb]

Hello Pugo,

thank you for pitching in and welcome to the forum. I will investigate once my kit arrives .

Cheers

Martin

[Juggernut]

First off, welcome to our humble (most of the time) corner of the modeling world.

 

Are these are the two images you're comparing?

 

 

 

If so, I don't think a comparison of an artist's rendition of the 109G-14 against a model is valid critique.  If you're going to say there's an error in the tooling then I think you'd better use more substantial source information.  More credence would be given to blueprints and/or photographic evidence.  No doubt, some concessions had to be made to accommodate the thickness of the plastic but I don't think they bumped up the plastic cowl out of shape to do it.  As I said, Radu was instrumental in the design of this kit and if he sees this, I'm sure he'll enlighten us as to what you're seeing and what you're not. 

 

If these images are not what you're referring to, please identify the images you are using.

 

As an aside, here's another very knowledgeable persons appraisal of the kit:  Zoukei Mura 1/32 Bf109G-14 Quick Review

Edited September 4, 2022 by Juggernut