Mikester

Certainly nothing wrong with the kit supplied cockpit, except the silly molded on seat belts and the joystick. The resin sets tend be a little better detailed and have sharper molding, some people are fine shelling out the extra money, some aren't.

Glad to see all that money you save drinking watered down beer going to a good cause!

Looks like they do a set for the HK B-17 as well.

http://www.ka-models.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=63_64_74&product_id=573 Never heard of these guys, from Korea apparently. Set looks pretty extensive.

The gear look really nice, but...... If the main hit on Hasegawa is the price these add-ons make the Revell kit much less of a bargain.

I like to keep business out of my hobby.....and women out of my finances!

Wow, nice stuff my friend, I'm liking this!

One piece metal landing gear would be a huge upgrade, the kit supplied struts are awful in terms of strength!

I call it "analysis paralysis", although I enjoy the research immensely sometimes you get to point where you have to make a decision and go for it!

Santa's coming early this year!

Anal Drivel Spout? Isn't that where Gaston Marty's posts originate from?

Looks pretty nice but at $45 I don't see myself picking this up. http://store.spruebrothers.com/product_p/edu632022.htm

If you're a fan of Formula One or racing in general I'd highly recommend this film. Really well done, not only the racing side of things but showing the contrasting personalities and unlikely friendship that developed between Niki Lauda and James Hunt. Two thumbs way up!

Nice, looks like a huge upgrade over the old Hasegawa kit.

I think some people are elevating the Revell kit beyond where it really deserves to be simply because they don't like Hasegawa. They blame Hasegawa for the high price of their kits in some areas rather than placing the blame where it actually belongs, on importers and customs fees. I purchase Hasegawa kits in the $30-35 (US) range here in Japan which is the MSRP. My last rant at ARC was directed at someone who said anyone who didn't believe the Revell kit was better was just "pissed because their over-priced Hasegawa kits have been rendered obsolete by a $25 Revell kit". Then you've got twits like Gaston Marty (now posting as "robertson" at ARC, the only site he hasn't been banned from) trying to tell us that the Hasegawa 1/32 kit is an up-scaled carbon copy of the 1/48 kit which it is not. He declared the Revell kit more accurate by a "planetary margin" without ever seeing it! We all know that he's an obnoxious windbag but there's people out there that don't know any better and actually believe his line of crap and this is how misconceptions start to be mistaken for fact. I've stated before there are some aspects of the Revell 109 I really like, but it's far from perfect. It may complement the Hasegawa kit but it certainly doesn't supplant it.

Rog, Erla took a little different approach on their G-10 than WNF or Regensburg. You'll notice that the panel aft of the firewall on the port side is a rectangular rather than curved. It's also lacking the small bulges on the forward lower cowl, Erla also used the small wing wheel well bulges as opposed to the larger style used by the other two factories. These are the most noticeable differences, Steve or Matt can probably provide some additional info on the more subtle differences.

I'm guessing they'll engineer the Type 110 cowl to fit on to the existing fuselage. They seemed to go to great lengths to accomodate multiple variants, I'm thinking it will have new cowl sections with the fairings that extend back, a new upper cowl/gun trough area and the new oil cooler. Now if they plan on doing a WNF or Regensburg G-10 you'd have the problem of the cheek bulges on the forward lower cowl (unless these would be add on parts). I guess the question is will this G-10 be Erla only or a kit that will be able to represent all the variants.

Speaking for myself, it depends on the reviewer or the review site. Some people I trust, some I don't. As of today, we have 12,924 views on the piece that Matt and I did on the Revell G-6. Some kits I buy purely out of curiosity even though I know they may not be at the top their class. Revell is big enough that they're going to be able to shrug off some negative reviews (although I certainly wouldn't rate our review of the kit as an overall negative) and let's face it, they're going to sell a lot of these based on the price alone.

Agreed, it's pretty clear that the head honcho at Revell knew there were issues with the 109G. I realize that this is a business though and typically that means compromises somewhere along the line. My concern is that Revell hit home runs with the Ju 88, He 111 and Ar 196 but the He 219 and Bf 109G-6 have been put out there with known issues. Hopefully they get back on track, at least with the G-10 there won't be any Beule to worry about!

One thing I'd like a definitive answer on, and will probably never get is, is that 5% accurate? I'd think 5-10% would be fairly close. I know most of the membership of my last model club was not active in any sort of forum. Do companies consider us "average modelers" or are we are statistical anomaly that expects a better, more accurate product than John Q. Modeler?

And please don't construe what I posted as defending Revell or the production of shoddy kits by anyone for that matter. Although there are some things I like about the RoG Gustav I'm still firmly in the Hasegawa camp. Just found it interesting how model companies regard the comments made on forums and how we fit into the big picture.

Steve, Really not directed in anyone in particular, just found the numbers side of it interesting. Obviously the more accurate a kit is the the broader your appeal, but to those who don't hold the 109 as near and dear to their heart as we do there's going to be diminishing returns on the money spent. Of course if you do it right the first time, cost to correct is not an issue, but something always seems to slip between the cracks. I find my own standards vary by passion for a particular aircraft. A few years back I bought a Trumpy P-51B with a good amount of after-market thrown in because I got a good deal. I plan on building it OOB and will happy with it but I know a lot of P-51 purists wouldn't touch the kit with a ten foot pole. I don't intend to give Revell a free pass on the mistakes they made and I enjoy the discussions we have regarding what's right and wrong and what could be improved. But speaking for myself I think I sometimes lose sight of the fact that a lot of people build just for fun and really aren't concerned about the subtle, or not so subtle nuances of a particular aircraft.

This is from a post at LSP by Andreas Beck, who is not a Revell employee but was associated with their 109 project: "Revell´s product manager knows about all our desires and wishes. But the final word about production is felt elsewhere. Our bunch only represent less than 5% of the sales figures and at least Revell is just a normal firm and product decisions are a result of economic reflections." I find this both illuminating and amusing. Amusing because a certain contingent at another forum (that will remain un-named, but if you've been there you know) seems to think model companies hang on every post that is made there and should base their decisions on what gets posted. Basically what this means is for every one of us that posts on a forum and voices our likes and dislikes about a kit, there are 19 people who are just going to build it, put it on the shelf and be happy with it. I'm sure what gets posted is occasionally taken into consideration but we're just a small part of a very big picture.

Nice start!

Nice!