Tbolt Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 22 minutes ago, Shrek51 said: Because I find yet another Spitfire release boring and unimaginative am I not then allowed to make any comment ?, its purely my opinion, I,m sure they will sell by the bucketload. Or am I not allowed an opinion on this site either? Sure make a comment, but just saying "yawn" isn't constructive or helpful to anyone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Procopius Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 Responding gives the remark an importance it in no way merits. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrek51 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 4 minutes ago, Tbolt said: Sure make a comment, but just saying "yawn" isn't constructive or helpful to anyone. It wasn't meant to be - it was just my opinion, I am allowed one you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 Opinions are fine, everybody has lots of them, and here's one of mine. If everyone who disliked a Spitfire/Phantom/Whatever posted to a thread saying nothing but that, it'd be a pretty boring thread, and given the number of members on this site it'd be an enormous waste of bandwidth. If someone doesn't fancy a kit/subject, but has something useful to add, then that's fine. The fact that someone doesn't post to a thread is sufficient proof of lack of interest or of anything to say. So why waste your time, our time, and the site's bandwidth making the point? Just to get your silly nickname published? 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrek51 Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 3 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: Opinions are fine, everybody has lots of them, and here's one of mine. If everyone who disliked a Spitfire/Phantom/Whatever posted to a thread saying nothing but that, it'd be a pretty boring thread, and given the number of members on this site it'd be an enormous waste of bandwidth. If someone doesn't fancy a kit/subject, but has something useful to add, then that's fine. The fact that someone doesn't post to a thread is sufficient proof of lack of interest or of anything to say. So why waste your time, our time, and the site's bandwidth making the point? Just to get your silly nickname published? Bit personal isn't it - or do you criticise anyone who doesn't use their real name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 No, I reserve comment if they otherwise add to the value of the site, at least for someone. I shall say no more to save this thread being cut. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thompson Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 I haven't the passion for Spitfires that I once had (I think by now most people know where my current obsession lies), but judging by what I see in the sprue images, the kit seems to have much to commend it, and I'll probably buy at least one. If the canopy is all that's wrong with it, well, it won't be the first time I've cobbled up a vacuform one intended for a different kit. Otherwise, it looks pretty decent. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 I was on the fence given I've plenty of Mk I/II Spitfires. Not that it ever stops me. I may buy only the one just to measure it and add to the measurements I've taken for the other kits. Consistency of data and all. If it's reported as a decent build I may pull it to the front and make it. Tim 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julien Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Graham Boak said: Opinions are fine, everybody has lots of them, and here's one of mine. If everyone who disliked a Spitfire/Phantom/Whatever posted to a thread saying nothing but that, it'd be a pretty boring thread, and given the number of members on this site it'd be an enormous waste of bandwidth. If someone doesn't fancy a kit/subject, but has something useful to add, then that's fine. The fact that someone doesn't post to a thread is sufficient proof of lack of interest or of anything to say. So why waste your time, our time, and the site's bandwidth making the point? Just to get your silly nickname published? Graham please do not insult other peoples user names. Julien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 No, your opinion is a valid as anyone's, I just found it curious someone would take the time to open a thread they have no interest in just to tell people they have no interest in it. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Lingener Posted December 13, 2016 Share Posted December 13, 2016 Hi Graham, Hi Shrek51: In the end it´s a thread about Spitfire Mk. II - isn´t it ? No need to have words just because of some lumps of plastic! It´s X-Mas time! Michael 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 14 hours ago, Greenshirt said: I was on the fence given I've plenty of Mk I/II Spitfires. Not that it ever stops me. I may buy only the one just to measure it and add to the measurements I've taken for the other kits. Consistency of data and all. If it's reported as a decent build I may pull it to the front and make it. Tim Keeping track of all new Spitfire kits is a tough job, someone's got to do it ! I'll likely buy one myself for similar reasons, check what it's like and report my impressions to the modelling community. And yes, I may build it too.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shrek51 Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 15 hours ago, Dave Fleming said: No, your opinion is a valid as anyone's, I just found it curious someone would take the time to open a thread they have no interest in just to tell people they have no interest in it. Dave - I was logged in anyway so didn't log in especially, neither did I say I wasnt interested in the thread, I looked through the thread to see what people were saying about the kit, and then literally just voiced a question if the world really needs another spitfire, when there are so many unkitted gorgeous subjects - it just seemed an unimaginative choice on Revells part - do I understand the commercial reasons for doing so? Of course I do. There was never any offence or dismissal intended. Merry Christmas. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Fair enough. The question of another mk I/II is one to ask, they could have done a Griffon, or a PR version or even a Seafire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 40 minutes ago, Dave Fleming said: Fair enough. The question of another mk I/II is one to ask, they could have done a Griffon, or a PR version or even a Seafire Likely already had research data for a Mk I/II. Had they done a Mk Vc and done it at well as most of their other 1/72nd kits we might be singing their praises. Likewise a rear view FR XIV or XVIII would have done well. Ah well, I'll continue to build the Sword ones... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 14, 2016 Share Posted December 14, 2016 Yeah, it seems to be a scale down of the 1/32 kit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 I finally have my first three and I can't see me getting any more. The negatives: Flash. Brand new tool and I have flash where it shouldn't be on the surface? Largely around the cockpit on the fuselage. Nasty steps that can be felt with the fingers. Slide tool usage? Fit. Only taped up the fuselage and wing so far and oh dear. The wing lower seems to fall into a gap, leaving a nasty step around the flaps Oddities. Why is the tailwheel moulded with the fuselage when common sense would tell you that it'll get knocked off? What the hell are those raised panels on the wings, that if scaled up would look the thickness of railway sleepers? The bulletproof armour glass - I refer the honourable gentlemen to my comments some moments ago. The other windscreen. Not a Spit one I've seen. Coffman starter bulge - waaaaay too small and insignificant. The nose looks too dainty. The 5 spoke wheels look more at home on an industrial lorry. The four spoke ones are nice, but have no place on a mk II. Oil cooler an odd mix of mk I and mk V. Ailerons wrong for mk II. Radiator looks just odd. Clipped tips on a mk IIa? No. Just No. I could go on and on here and I'm feeling the same disappointment I got with their mk Vb back in 1996. The shape is nice, it looks right, but there's soooo many niggly bits that are already bothering me and I've yet to start gluing it together. i really want to like this kit but for similar money, Airfix are going to get my wadge. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 10 hours ago, The Wooksta! said: The negatives: Flash. Brand new tool and I have flash where it shouldn't be on the surface? Largely around the cockpit on the fuselage. Nasty steps that can be felt with the fingers. Slide tool usage? Not been uncommon on recent Revell kits - The Hawk for example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modelldoc Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 My once was okay, interesting markings, more information? modelldoc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 Right. Putting me money where me mouth is and starting to glue this together. Already want to do serious harm to Revell's designers. As predicted, the tailwheel was knocked off during handling and has vanished somewhere across the floor. Well, it was cack anyway. I've just been trying to fettle the armour glass canopy and whatever you do, it isn't going to work. I may try the Pavla canopy intended for the Airfix mk Ia. The one which everyone seems to think is the internal armour glass isn't. It just looks... Odd. A quick try to get an Airfix canopy to fit reveals it's possible but with some work. Comparing it to the Airfix kit, the surface detail is more restrained, apart from the prominent raised rivets around the engine cowlings. Shapewise, it compares well with the Airfix kit and all the panel lines seem to match up. The Revell top cowl is a bit more rounded than the Airfix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 How's the cockpit? Would it be worth buying to cannibalize for less detailed but otherwise better shaped Spitfires (older Airfix Mk I/V)? I do that with the Academy Mk XIV... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 (edited) The cockpit interior is really nice and well detailed, although I'd have liked the ribs and stringers to go a bit further back into the fuselage like the Airfix kit. The seat looks a bit clunky, but it does have the flare cartridge rack built in. I'm not sure if it's applicable to the mk II though. No seat armour, which should be factory fitted for mk IIs The shape of the kit seems to be fine, it's just some of the smaller parts - wheels, radiator, oil cooler, canopy - that are letting it down. The shape compares well with the current tool Airfix mk I/IIa so I don't think it's best used for parts fodder. I'd be more inclined to use left over spares from the Airfix mk I/IIa/Va kit on this, along with some resin wheels and a new canopy. Wings. Shape seems fine, matches up with current Airfix but the fit... Not so nice. The trailing edge where the lower meets the flaps has a bit of a dip if glued direct. My way is to glue the leading edge and then glue the inside along where the fuselage meets up with the upper wing, alowing the wing to find it's own level and avoid the dip. There's two lugs which guide the fuselage in place which I really like. On the other hand, I really hate the separate tips - I hate them for any Spitfire that requires full span wings - and AFAIK, there was never a clipped mk II. Fit here is a bit "me"h and whilst the wing has a nice sharp trailing edge, the FS tips are somewhat thicker. We're back to railway sleepers but not the Giant Redwood trunks that characterise similar parts in the Fujimi Spitfires. Some sanding should sort it out. Where they join the fuselage is tight, so may be better to affix the lower wing and then the tops once it's all bedded down. Edited December 18, 2016 by The wooksta V2.0 Grammar and spelling nazism 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenshirt Posted December 18, 2016 Share Posted December 18, 2016 Thanks for that summary. I'm still of the mind to only get the one, simply because it's a Spitfire, as I don't like having to source other bits to make it right. Plus it seems like more effort than necessary for a 2016 era kit. If I didn't have some great Spitfire Mk I/II kits already... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanC Posted December 19, 2016 Share Posted December 19, 2016 Thanks for the early warning Wooksta. I shan't be bothering with this one. Life's too short. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted December 19, 2016 Share Posted December 19, 2016 Wooksta, Thanks for the summary and taking one (well three actually), for the team. Knowing your devotion to the Spitfire and knowledge of the available 1/72nd scale kits I'll bow to your superior knowledge. I'll avoid this one too. Wez 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