Members Mikester Posted April 13, 2013 Members Share Posted April 13, 2013 Steve, Thanks for your insight, always an educational experience! Based on what you've pointed out looks like I might keep buying Hasegawa. With current exchange here in Japan I'm paying about $37 for their 109's. Not sure what the target price will be for Revell but I don't see it being considerably cheaper. Interested to see what the spinner will look like as well, will we get an overly blunt version like Hasegawa and Trumpeter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave J Posted April 23, 2013 Share Posted April 23, 2013 Sprue Shots are up on this website - http://www.plastik-modellbau.org/blog/testshots-vorgestellt-messerschmitt-bf-109-g-6-revell-132/2013/#more-20735 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmayhew Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Cheers Dave I guess the difference in price points Europe vs Far East is a key factor in whether we consider this kit a major improvement over the Hasegawa offerings...wonder how it will be priced in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mikester Posted April 24, 2013 Members Share Posted April 24, 2013 Already see some things I like, posable control surfaces, cowl covers that are laid out closer to the the real thing, wheel bumps molded in top of wings, lightening holes in gear strut bays opened up, smooth and treaded tires. Still no profile shot of the spinner which nobody has gotten right so far. Cockpit appears like it might be a minor upgrade over Hasegawa, Didn't notice any gondolas for wing mounted MG 151's or 210 mm rocket tubes, hoping they will be included in the final release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest styrenedemon Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Looks fairly decent to me, but I'm not accuracy nut, nor a 109 expert. Price point will be the deciding factor, though I can't imagine that it won't come in under the Hasegawa kit...which I'm assuming is the best/only 32nd G-6 offering....no? I built one years ago, I remember a good fit, but probably not the greatest detail for the scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mikester Posted April 24, 2013 Members Share Posted April 24, 2013 Looks fairly decent to me, but I'm not accuracy nut, nor a 109 expert. Price point will be the deciding factor, though I can't imagine that it won't come in under the Hasegawa kit...which I'm assuming is the best/only 32nd G-6 offering....no? I built one years ago, I remember a good fit, but probably not the greatest detail for the scale. The Hasegawa kit overall is very good, a little short in length, the spinner is a little too blunt but otherwise they got it mostly right. The Revell kit looks like they've improved a couple of areas and added some detail but not by a huge magnitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmayhew Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 that's a very cool idea but i thought Jim had given Revell 'das boot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mikester Posted April 24, 2013 Members Share Posted April 24, 2013 that's a very cool idea but i thought Jim had given Revell 'das boot? Nick, was this supposed to be in the thread I started in the staff area? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmayhew Posted April 24, 2013 Share Posted April 24, 2013 Err yes Good spot Just keeping you on your toes and all that 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wumm Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 I hope this isn't meant to be the "other series of test shots" that Brett Green expected to be released soon... http://www.network54.com/Forum/149674/message/1365320195/Test+Shot+Build Because nothing much has changed from the errors evident earlier. The port-side cockpit vent is still too far back. The kompressor intake is still mis-shapen at the base and the MG bulges appear either too small or too high up on the fuselage. It looks to me as if Revell have studied the G-4 airframe at the Technikmuseum Speyer... This airframe has no cockpit side-wall air vents and also has the kompressor intake base with the straight top trailing edge because there is no bulge for it to form around. Revell have made a guess for the position of the outside vent and the corresponding lever inside the cockpit, and would have us just attach the bulge onto the side of the airframe where they think it belongs, rather than have it sit up close to the intake which is then designed to then form around it. As Revell put it: "The area above the supercharger air inlet: With or without bulge." Yes, but the side-wall with bulge has a different intake... No word yet as to whether it's short either. Still really, really hoping to be proved wrong... S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingco57 Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 Let's not jump to any conclusion as long as this chicken hasn't hatched yet. Too many forums doing that Already. Just wait and see what Revell delivers. Cees 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant Posted April 25, 2013 Share Posted April 25, 2013 I want the car !!! I saw a whole convoy of these Messerschmitt cars quite near Duxford a few months ago (now there's irony for you!) all going, I assume, to an owners' club meeting. Great sight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wumm Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 Not jumping to conclusions... Let's not jump to any conclusion as long as this chicken hasn't hatched yet. Too many forums doing thatAlready. Just wait and see what Revell delivers.Cees Merely stating what is obvious. By posting these sprue shots before release, Revell has an opportunity to use the resources of the wider Modelling community to recognise these kinds of errors and make the necessary changes, such as Zoukei-Mura are doing with the front canopy of their He219. S 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmayhew Posted April 27, 2013 Share Posted April 27, 2013 I agree with you Steve I will probably get quite a few of these, purely on basis of its cheaper (for me in UK) than the Hassy Yes we all know 'it looks like a 109 to me...' will apply, but ultimately, something's either correct or it's not. @WingCo There are lots of Internet Experten out there who can fire off their (often misguided?) opinions faster than a MG42, but there are also certain people for certain subjects that I trust, just because they know their stuff; Steve is one of those guys we can trust Cheers Nick (who spent waaaay too long in the Bell & Jorrocks last night!) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingco57 Posted April 28, 2013 Share Posted April 28, 2013 Nick and Steve, Not aimed at anyone, but this kit isn't out yet. We all know that models at shows can be misleading. As soon as the definitive kit is released then the frenzy can begin. I fully agree that manufacturers can learn from the expertise on here, but wouldn't it be more effective to contact the manufacturer directly? Just my views. Cheers Cees 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave J Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 I see Brett Green has been busy building one... http://hyperscale.com/2013/galleries/bf109g6latenewrevell32bg_1.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest styrenedemon Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 Thanks for the link. I'm no 109 expert, so I don't know how accurate it it, but it looks to be a winner as far as OOB detail and builability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmayhew Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 cheers Dave "Outline accuracy appears to be spot-on. The fuselage length is correct..." oh really now? my guess is Wumm would beg to disagree I would also like to know what refs he used, and what measurements he came out with, but hey he's BG and he owns scale modelling if you trawl back through previous BG build reviews, you'll realise you'd better get your technical research elsewhere (Trumpeter EE Lightning *ahem*) issues aside, i still like it vs Hassy on price for us here in Europe... Steve, care to comment on what you see? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radub Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 I can confirm that I measuired this model and the total length is 282mm. ;-) In fact it is slightly longer... Radu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest styrenedemon Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 I can confirm that I measuired this model and the total length is 282mm. ;-) In fact it is slightly longer... Radu Is that right or wrong....oh wait...I probably would rather not know...ignorance is bliss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingco57 Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 Looks good, like a 109 Cees 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mikester Posted May 3, 2013 Members Share Posted May 3, 2013 Looks like Brett gave a reasonable assessment of the kit. I'm still not convinced that the spinner is correctly shaped (hard to tell due to the angle though) and the beule do not appear to go up high enough on the fuselage as has been noted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wumm Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 This is completely confusing now... I can confirm that I measuired this model and the total length is 282mm. ;-) In fact it is slightly longer... Radu And as I stated, I was hoping to be proved wrong on this, as the alternative was just another Bf109 kit with incorrect dimensions. However, Revell may want to adjust their promotional material, which has gone from the original 280mm to the now-stated 284mm. Well, which is it now? At first slightly short, now slightly long? http://www.revell.de/index.php?id=203&KGKANR=0&KGKOGP=10&KGSCHL=1&L=1&page=1&sort=0&nc=&searchactive=&q=4665&SWO=&ARMAS4=&PHPSESSID=712c1c6051223e2a3d9b8000203cb843&KZSLPG=&offset=1&cmd=show&ARARTN=04665&sp=1 Nick and Steve,Not aimed at anyone, but this kit isn't out yet. We all know that models at shows can be misleading. As soon as the definitive kit is released then the frenzy can begin.I fully agree that manufacturers can learn from the expertise on here, but wouldn't it be more effective to contact the manufacturer directly?Just my views.CheersCees I would not expect to be taken seriously were I to contact Revell directly. They appear to have made engineering decisions based on their available references, and seem happy to let the aftermarket industry take up the slack. This is more than confirmed in the Hyperscale review by Brett Green, who knows a thing or two about Messerschmitts himself I believe. His admission that there are or will be aftermarket fixes for the shortcomings he has identified means that we can almost guarantee that Revell have decided to leave those errors in. The 1/32nd scale Hasegawa Bf109's have a few shortcomings, but these kits are 12 years old now. Quite a few aftermarket sets were created to make those kits more accurate, but we now seem to have come full circle in the hobby. We are now having kits released where the Manufacturers admit the shortcomings before they are even released to the public, while relying on the aftermarket industry to provide fixes for the errors the Manufacturer can't be bothered to do right in the first place. So, 12 years on, we still have glaring inaccuracies, just different than those on the Hasegawa kits. And this is progress? Were Tamiya to do a Bf109G; I'm sure we would not see a seat tub with the seatbelt moulded on, nor inaccurate MG bulges and kompressor intake, nor a port-side cockpit ventilation hatch that's so far back it cannot be reached by the pilots left hand! S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest styrenedemon Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 Yeah...that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wingco57 Posted May 4, 2013 Share Posted May 4, 2013 I agree, but Revell has some nice prices that enables you to get some of those aftermarketsets without having to Get a bankloan. Something that is always bugging me is this: On forums people are eager to point out terminal errors on a new kit. Manufacturers can never do good. Even Tamiya Has aftermarket sets thrown upon them. But how many people who cry out about defects are in fact " experts". Or Even build the thing. Must be a case of the armchair and the clicking mouse. Ohoh Cees 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now