Zoukei-Mura Bf109 G-14/U4 SWS-18

[rafju]

idem here , Thank you very much Carl, very helpful  although we do not have the kit still available here in France!!! (grrrrr)

and I do like your "philosophy" of that build from the box.

[BlrwestSiR]

The engine oil tank has a couple of hard line that are attached to the back of it. 

Once in place, the tank is glued to the gear housing. The fit is nice and tight.

There's more plumbing to be added to the engine. Here, I suffered my first broken part. I suspect the cat slept on it. 

Take your time attaching them. Some of the connections are not that clear in the instructions so here's a couple pics of the engine to help with placement. 

With that done, I gave it a light wash using Tamiya panel line wash. 

 

 

[BlrwestSiR]

While the engine was drying, I started on the cockpit. 

Here's the parts that make up the floor and rear bulkhead. 

Again, there is detail that won't be seen once assembled. 

The next set of parts are for the seat pan, pedal, stick and the expended shell casing container. 

Here's the two part wing spar mount. 

Once together, I painted them in RLM 66. The underside will get done in RLM 02 once dry. 

 

[BlrwestSiR]

The motor cannon ammo can is several parts. 

These were assembled and then painted. 

I then started on the rear fuselage bulkheads while that was drying. 

They were all glued in place and then painted. 

[BlrwestSiR]

At the same time, I started work on the wings. 

There's several control rods, coolant lines, rada and plates. 

The coolant lines are the first to go on. They are attached to a section of the spar.

This is then added to the spar assembly.

Control rods are next. 

The rad is in two pieces. I found the fit wants the greatest but with a bit of a clamp, they ended up going together ok. The seam won't be visible in any case. 

The wheel bay liner is supposed to go in at the this point. 

I found the positioning a bit vague so I took a different approach and left it out for the moment. 

The lower wing skin is next. It's comprised of several sections. 

Honestly it could have been done in fewer pieces but I understand they are mimicking the panel breakdown of the actual plane. 

These were test fitted prior to applying cement. The fit is good. Make sure you clean up any sprue attachment points. 

There's a couple small gaps around the middle panel. They're probably easily filled with a quick pass of putty or possibly even Mr Surfacer. 

Flipping it over, I fitted the wheel bay liner and I'm glad I left it until now. This way I can better line it up with the wheel bay opening. 

 

[Clunkmeister]

This is looking good, Carl.  It seems like a lot of effort for a simple little 109, but that’s how ZM does them. Built from the inside out. 

[BlrwestSiR]

8 hours ago, Clunkmeister said:

This is looking good, Carl.  It seems like a lot of effort for a simple little 109, but that’s how ZM does them. Built from the inside out. 

ZM have definitely crammed a lot into the kit. I think the Artsina Latina kit might be the only one with more internal detail and it doesn't have a skin to it 

 

[BlrwestSiR]

With the fuselage bulkheads in place it was time to address the elephant in the room- the rear tailplane. 

ZM has taken the approach of splitting the vertical tail in half where the horizontal tailplanes joins it.  This is a natural break in the actual aircraft so it makes sense with regards to their philosophies around model design. 

At the same time, they decided to mould the horizontal tailplane flange as a part of the tailplanes themselves. 

OOB, here's what the assembly looks like. For the record, nothing here is glued together, just tape. 

To me, it's a bit messy and somewhat simplistic. I understand what ZM are aiming for but the finesse is missing. 

After much discussion with Martin and seeing how other members have approached the issue, I came up with my approach. I will focusbon using the short vertical tail but this should work with the tall one as well. 

I Inserted a piece of sprue to spread the vertical tail slightly. I noticed that it was thinner than the mounting points on the horizontal tailplanes and had a slightly sloppy fit. This tightened it up. 

Then, using a ceramic seam scraper I scrapped down the vertical sides of the flange, referencing the vertical tail to determine how much. The scraper I use has a rounded tip so it didn't remove or scratch into the horizontal part of the flange. An Xacto would probably work too just be careful of any sharp tips they may have. For the moment, I am focusing on the right side of the tail and leaving the left one stock as a comparison.

Here it is from head one. You can see the difference in thickness.

Putting the parts together, here's what it looks like. First, the modified side:

The OOB one. 

From above. 

The fillet at the base of the vertical tail could also use a light sanding to reduce its height. It's like the moulded on RAM panels you see on almost all F-35 kits. 

I will make the same changes to the left side and then glue things together. Overall it is a reasonably simple fix but changes how the model looks significantly.

Edited October 6, 2022 by BlrwestSiR
Fix typo

[nmayhew]

I am still in two minds how I will tackle this area, and might even leave it as is. I just think the attempts to sand away the excess material will look like just that ie be obvious the area has been given a right seeing to.

The fit also looks looser than a whore's drawers!

This area could have been such a win for Z-m, and lead other manufacturers to approach tail planes like this, but just turned out that what they gave with one hand they more than took away with the other.

I have read all the back and forth between Radu and Vincent on this one but can't help think Z-m massively dropped the ball here. What they ended up with is a 1/72 scale interpretation of fine detail, just scaled up to 1/32!! #fail

Thanks again for putting this together in such a detailed and helpful manner. As someone who used to do this occasionally (for LSM and its predecessor), I know how much work it is.

Cheers

Nick

[Redshift]

On 10/5/2022 at 2:48 PM, BlrwestSiR said:

The engine oil tank has a couple of hard line that are attached to the back of it. 

Once in place, the tank is glued to the gear housing. The fit is nice and tight.

There's more plumbing to be added to the engine. Here, I suffered my first broken part. I suspect the cat slept on it. 

Take your time attaching them. Some of the connections are not that clear in the instructions so here's a couple pics of the engine to help with placement. 

With that done, I gave it a light wash using Tamiya panel line wash. 

 

 

Excellent review and build.  I have to say though that Eduard’s resin engine kits are the only ones that include the oft omitted starter crank pinion that goes into the starter motor - it is visible and if Eduard can do that in 48 then there should be no excuses at 32!  Plus a lot of very visible wires are missing, especially on the port engine side - wires that run over the supercharger and many other places on that side.

One of the ZM crew said some small cable was left out because it would interfere with a closed option.  Really?  If someone wants to turn a 450 piece kit into a 70 piece kit then that’s their choice.  But if you are going to seal up the engine you don’t even need an engine per se!

Airfix at 1/24 deal with any potential issues like this by stating what parts to ignore if a closed up version is to be built.

Finally, it seems that ZM is relying on the builders ignorance by not including all the visible cables.  Even taking injection moulding limits into account, ZM could still have played an Eduard card and stated the dimensions and illustrations of cables needed.  That would have been a great move.

I do have this kit btw.  It’s the best one out there at 32 but I think they could have done feasibly better

[Martinnfb]

Nice fix Carl, simple and effective, no drama there .  ,,,needless to say that Tamiya has chosen this approach with their 109G in 1/48 scale. And it worked.   ZM is known for listening to the modellers feedback, so perhaps they may amend the forms in the near future.

[BlrwestSiR]

2 hours ago, nmayhew said:

I am still in two minds how I will tackle this area, and might even leave it as is. I just think the attempts to sand away the excess material will look like just that ie be obvious the area has been given a right seeing to.

The fit also looks looser than a whore's drawers!

This area could have been such a win for Z-m, and lead other manufacturers to approach tail planes like this, but just turned out that what they gave with one hand they more than took away with the other.

I have read all the back and forth between Radu and Vincent on this one but can't help think Z-m massively dropped the ball here. What they ended up with is a 1/72 scale interpretation of fine detail, just scaled up to 1/32!! #fail

Thanks again for putting this together in such a detailed and helpful manner. As someone who used to do this occasionally (for LSM and its predecessor), I know how much work it is.

Cheers

Nick

Thanks Nick! Especially since you've done reviews before as this is really my first attempt at one.

Putting the spacer inside the vertical tailplane really helps take some of the slop out of the fit. Plus with it going in after the halves are glued together, it doesn't create other work down the line. 

The kit is let down by the execution of the parts. A bit more refinement to the fit and the detail and modelers would have been swooning over this and wondering why it took so long. Instead it's become a site point on an otherwise excellent model.

[BlrwestSiR]

2 hours ago, Redshift said:

 

Finally, it seems that ZM is relying on the builders ignorance by not including all the visible cables.  Even taking injection moulding limits into account, ZM could still have played an Eduard card and stated the dimensions and illustrations of cables needed.  That would have been a great move.

I do have this kit btw.  It’s the best one out there at 32 but I think they could have done feasibly better

I don't think that ZM are relying on the builder's ignorance by not providing a wiring diagram for the kit and things they will just ignore it. Making wiring fit under a closed cowling is not easy. Some of the best builders out there have had a hard time doing it and just getting the engine bearers to fit nevermind a closed cowl.

Very few companies have in fact ever provided a wiring diagram with their kits. WNW is the only one that comes to mind. When the Tamiya Spitfire and all their subsequent prop kits came out, no one complained that they didn't have an engine wiring diagram. 

Those with the skill and patience to do the wiring would most likely scoff at anything moulded in place much less done in IM plastic. The manufacturer has to draw the line somewhere. 

Me, I'm not a fan of wiring engines and really only do it when it's extremely visible like on a a radial engine. 

I do wish that ZM had included an engine blank and then I would have considered wiring the engine to display beside the finished plane. Which GWH has with their P-40. 

[BlrwestSiR]

19 minutes ago, Martinnfb said:

Nice fix Carl, simple and effective, no drama there .  ,,,needless to say that Tamiya has chosen this approach with their 109G in 1/48 scale. And it worked.   ZM is known for listening to the modellers feedback, so perhaps they may amend the forms in the near future.

Thanks Martin! Your help pointing out the issue and you suggestion to do the review are both greatly appreciated. 

I haven't seen the Tamiya ,109 but if they did the same breakdown, then it shows that the execution is where ZM needs that little bit more of a push. 

[Martinnfb]

Indeed the idea is brilliant, the execution not so much. 
Here is 1/48 Tamka , no filler, click-clack assembly as usually 

[Clunkmeister]

It’s pretty much a death horse now. Let’s let it lie. 

[Redshift]

2 hours ago, BlrwestSiR said:

I don't think that ZM are relying on the builder's ignorance by not providing a wiring diagram for the kit and things they will just ignore it. Making wiring fit under a closed cowling is not easy. Some of the best builders out there have had a hard time doing it and just getting the engine bearers to fit nevermind a closed cowl.

Very few companies have in fact ever provided a wiring diagram with their kits. WNW is the only one that comes to mind. When the Tamiya Spitfire and all their subsequent prop kits came out, no one complained that they didn't have an engine wiring diagram. 

Those with the skill and patience to do the wiring would most likely scoff at anything moulded in place much less done in IM plastic. The manufacturer has to draw the line somewhere. 

Me, I'm not a fan of wiring engines and really only do it when it's extremely visible like on a a radial engine. 

I do wish that ZM had included an engine blank and then I would have considered wiring the engine to display beside the finished plane. Which GWH has with their P-40. 

Which begs the question; why on earth would anyone want to build an accurate engine under a cowling?  As I inferred, I’m no hater and only wish to give constructive criticism that will serve both seller and buyer ie us!

I would like to reiterate that the wiring missing on the engine block is especially visible on a 1/32 kit so it’s not like I’m being a rivet counter.

I have 3 ZM kits now so does that not give me the prerogative to offer my humble opinion on the pros and cons of those kits?

[BlrwestSiR]

@Redshift, sorry if I came across as being too critical. It's not something that I would have considered to be lacking. If anything , I'd say the opposite true in that there would more complaints about I'd they had included moulded wiring as it would have been grossly out of scale. Or worse, moulded in place. 

Maybe they could have included a wiring diagram and that could be suggested to ZM. They do tend to listen to criticisms about their kits and have made changes as a result, ie their kits are in one colour now instead of multicoloured plastic. 

As for covering up a complete engine, I personally prefer the closed up look. I'm going to see if the cowl panels can be removed after completion. We'll find out soon enough. 

[BlrwestSiR]

Back to the build, I decided to use the clear IP and apply the provided decals to the back side as suggested. 

As I am terrible with a brush, I decided to airbrush the panel. I first masked off the dial faces using precut tape circles. The sheet I bought start with 1mm diameter circles and they increase in 0.2mm increments so it's way to find the right size. 

At this point I noticed that there is a mounting pin on the backside directly in line with the lower most rightside instrument. This means there's no way the decal could go on the back as intended. To remedy this, uncut the pin off and sanded and polished the panel. 

The panel was then painted. 

After removing a couple of the masks, I was happy to see that they had worked. 

There are a couple of the bezels that need to be done in yellow. For those ones, I left the instrument masks in place and added an exterior one to go around the bezel. Can you tell I hate brush painting?

The yellow was airbrushed and then I removed the remaining masks. 

It worked so now to apply the decals. 

[Clunkmeister]

5 hours ago, Redshift said:

Which begs the question; why on earth would anyone want to build an accurate engine under a cowling?  As I inferred, I’m no hater and only wish to give constructive criticism that will serve both seller and buyer ie us!

I would like to reiterate that the wiring missing on the engine block is especially visible on a 1/32 kit so it’s not like I’m being a rivet counter.

I have 3 ZM kits now so does that not give me the prerogative to offer my humble opinion on the pros and cons of those kits?

Funny, because when I build ZM I’m looking what I can actually leave OFF the build that won’t affect the build itself.  I expect this’ll be the same thing with mine when I tackle it. Just enough basics to make sure everything closes up nice and straight. 

[Clunkmeister]

The oNly person I know who routinely builds exposed engines fully and completely detailed, is Wolf. And possibly Karim and Chuck.  Las names not necessary, everyone here knows them personally, along with their work.

Personally, I’m not a fan of building wired and plumbed engines: too tedious for this hombre.  I don’t think Wolf even attempts to close the cowls on his Spitfie…

Great review so far, Carl.  I’m truly in awe of this kit and how you’re executing this build. 

[James H]

I really don't know what to say about the engineering choices on this kit, except that you'd think ZM would learn a little from previous kits which were over-fussy to assemble, going right back to the dog turd that's the P-51D.

I really, really was thinking about the forthcoming Henschel Hs 129B-3, but don't know if I should be spending hard-earned cash at a time like this. 

Kudos in cracking on with this build.

[DocRob]

Nice work on the IP Carl. I really like the idea of using the outside ring masks for coloring the bezels. I used these often for other jobs, but never thought of them for bezels.
Am I alone in thinking te ZM IP looks very soft in detail and a bit toyish? It was the same with the TA-152, where I used PE. I don't know what it is with ZM, The Phantom IP's look absolutely crisp, means, they are able to deliver.

Cheers Rob

[Clunkmeister]

3 hours ago, DocRob said:

Nice work on the IP Carl. I really like the idea of using the outside ring masks for coloring the bezels. I used these often for other jobs, but never thought of them for bezels.
Am I alone in thinking te ZM IP looks very soft in detail and a bit toyish? It was the same with the TA-152, where I used PE. I don't know what it is with ZM, The Phantom IP's look absolutely crisp, means, they are able to deliver.

Cheers Rob

The Phantoms are absolute gems, just awesome kits. 

[Redshift]

13 hours ago, Jim H said:

I really don't know what to say about the engineering choices on this kit, except that you'd think ZM would learn a little from previous kits which were over-fussy to assemble, going right back to the dog turd that's the P-51D.

I really, really was thinking about the forthcoming Henschel Hs 129B-3, but don't know if I should be spending hard-earned cash at a time like this. 

Kudos in cracking on with this build.

 

16 hours ago, Clunkmeister said:

The oNly person I know who routinely builds exposed engines fully and completely detailed, is Wolf. And possibly Karin and Chuck.  Las names not necessary, everyone here knows them personally, along with their work.

Personally, I’m not a fan of building wired and plumbed engines: too tedious for this hombre.  I don’t think Wolf even attempts to close the cowls on his Spitfie…

Great review so far, Carl.  I’m truly in awe of this kit and how you’re executing this build. 

Horses for courses.  And I get both sides - when you have ‘all the doors opened’ it does effect the lines of the aircraft - no doubt a closed up aircraft can look very neat and even stunning.  I mean take the Stuka - it looks like a miniature Klingon craft - but with the engine covers off it really looks discombobulated (I’ve been waiting to use this word for some time now 🤤) 

So I like to get a 48 scale kit so I can do just that (hobby 2000 Hs 129 1/48 - a neat little kit) but when a company goes to all that trouble to give you all that detail it almost seems a snub to them to shake the head and say ‘nah’! ☹️After all there are accurate kits out there that can only be closed up - cheaper and much less hassle to build.