1/48 - Supermarine Spitfire F.R. Mk.XIVe by Airfix - released

[Jon Bryon]

31 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

This dude would be well advised keeping to snap together kits, he has certainly lost sight of what modelling is about. I say that as someone who has not bought an Airfix kit in many a blue moon.

 

Tommo.

 

 

You need to see more of his stuff. The man machines landing gear from brass. I doubt many on this forum, if any, could match his model-making abilities.

 

Jon

[tank152]

39 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

This dude would be well advised keeping to snap together kits, he has certainly lost sight of what modelling is about. I say that as someone who has not bought an Airfix kit in many a blue moon.

 

Tommo.

 

 

I suggest you take a look at his YouTube channel before making laughable comments like that 

[The Tomohawk Kid]

12 minutes ago, Jon Bryon said:

You need to see more of his stuff. The man machines landing gear from brass. I doubt many on this forum, if any, could match his model-making abilities.

 

Jon

If that is the case he is well advised from not producing Vlogs of that nature as it does him no credit. Why is he not producing a masterpiece out of the kit, that would be far more credible.

 

BTW I'm allowed an opinion.

 

Tommo

 

 

 

 

[Jon Bryon]

7 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

BTW I'm allowed an opinion.

 

You are, but you've said his opinion is undermined by his lack of modelling ambition. Two minutes on his website shows that's foolish.

 

In what way does it not do him credit? The images speak for themselves. I might have been interested in the Spitfire Mk.XIV (I can take or leave the subject matter), but with moulding quality like that I'll be giving it a pass; who needs the aggro? 

 

Jon

[Tbolt]

13 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

If that is the case he is well advised from not producing Vlogs of that nature as it does him no credit. Why is he not producing a masterpiece out of the kit, that would be far more credible.

 

BTW I'm allowed an opinion.

 

Tommo

 

Because as he stated it's a review so he's just putting the kit together so people can see what it's like. He's not doing it to show his skills, those are well proven. I'm sure with his other three kits he will make some very nice Spitfires.

[NPL]

1 hour ago, Tbolt said:

Agreed. I just treat Airfix kits like a good limited run kits - accurate  but they need a little bit more work to get a good finish.

And costa less than Tamiya I had a Honda CVR with everything. It ended when some fool drove his car out just in front of me. Was substituted by a Suzuki Vitara, cost 100.000 SEK less, but the quality was no way the same. Same with Airfix compared to Tamiya. It cost about 2/3 or less of the Tamiya, You pay for what you get.

 

And thanks to Eduard, you can make good for the difference, and at the end your Airfix will be more expensive-- because, as the rule says, it cost a lot of money to be poor.

[The Tomohawk Kid]

5 minutes ago, Jon Bryon said:

You are, but you've said his opinion is undermined by his lack of modelling ambition. 

No I didn't.

 

Tommo.

[Sturmovik]

1 hour ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

he has certainly lost sight of what modelling is about

And apart from gluing parts together and making a pretty replica of your favourite subject, what's modelling about?

[VMA131Marine]

44 minutes ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

If that is the case he is well advised from not producing Vlogs of that nature as it does him no credit. Why is he not producing a masterpiece out of the kit, that would be far more credible.

 

BTW I'm allowed an opinion.

 

Tommo

 

 

 

 

I've been familiar with Paul Budzik's work since I saw an article in Fine Scale Modeler in the 1990's on correcting the 1/48 Monogram B-24J. He does stunning work. That said, I thought the tone of this latest review was overly negative. I've got one of my Spit XIV kits built up to the point that the airframe is together and close to ready for painting. It certainly was not as miserable an experience to build as it is made out to be in Paul's review. 

The kit is obviously more accurate than the Academy kit and has better detail; a point not made so far in the review. I also did not need to modify the cockpit assembly sequence as Paul did.

There are issues with the kit, two of which the review points out:

1: many of the small parts are crammed onto a single small sprue. It is difficult to separate many from the sprue because of the limited space and because it's difficult to establish where the part ends and the sprue begins on some parts. This is just poor design and Airfix could benefit from looking at how Eduard does sprues of small parts.

2: the fit of the fuel tank cover ahead of the windscreen is poor and does not have positive location. The part is too short in length by half a millimeter or so and the ends merely butt join with the fuselage sides so it's a very weak joint.

3: for the first time in recent memory with a new tool Airfix kit, I ended up with a sizeable gap at the wingroot on both sides of the model. There is nothing to capture the top of the wing and hold it in place against the fuselage halves. The dihedral of the wings is set by the partial spar and you can't bend to wings up to close the gap without inducing too much dihedral. I filled the gaps with perfect plastic putty; it's not ideal because it doesn't have a lot of strength, but requires minimal sanding so no detail is lost.

 

The kit is not Tamiya quality by a long shot, but then Airfix is not charging Tamiya prices and that has to be taken into account.

[Sturmovik]

1 minute ago, VMA131Marine said:

ended up with a sizeable gap at the wingroot on both sides of the model.

That's an easy fix, add a spreader sprue inside the fuselage to widen it and make the roots touch the wings. 

[Tbolt]

1 minute ago, Sturmovik said:

That's an easy fix, add a spreader sprue inside the fuselage to widen it and make the roots touch the wings. 

That's exactly what I was just thinking.

 

It is strange though on a modern CAD kit how they have ended up with a wing root gap as well as the fuel tank panel gap. Obviously those are not there when they made the CAD 3D model so somethings gone wrong between there and the final product on this one for some reason.

[Sturmovik]

Just now, Tbolt said:

That's exactly what I was just thinking.

 

It is strange though on a modern CAD kit how they have ended up with a wing root gap as well as the fuel tank panel gap. Obviously those are not there when they made the CAD 3D model so somethings gone wrong between there and the final product on this one for some reason.

Must mean there weren't any final builds of the plane before starting the packaging and shipping. Maybe.

 

And it's not just Airfix, I've had wing gaps with many kits. Not with modern Tamiya though, but that's not the manufacturer being discussed here.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

15 minutes ago, Tbolt said:

It is strange though on a modern CAD kit how they have ended up with a wing root gap as well as the fuel tank panel gap. Obviously those are not there when they made the CAD 3D model so somethings gone wrong between there and the final product on this one for some reason.

Sounds like the plastic is shrinking when it leaves the mold ? They're pulling the parts off the molds before they've cooled down. That allows the parts to shrink as the mold isn't there to prevent this. 

[Tbolt]

16 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Sounds like the plastic is shrinking when it leaves the mold ? They're pulling the parts off the molds before they've cooled down. That allows the parts to shrink as the mold isn't there to prevent this. 

Could be, not understanding the whole process of producing a kit I don't know. It's just a bit annoying when a lot of the latest Airfix kits seem to fit pretty well.

 

You can see the fit issues in this video. Also note the cowl bugles seem to have quite a big gap, so will probably be best to fill those as mentioned earlier. Again nothing a little modelling can't overcome just a little disappointing from Airfix.

 

 

[Troy Smith]

12 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

There are issues with the kit, two of which the review points out:

1: many of the small parts are crammed onto a single small sprue. It is difficult to separate many from the sprue because of the limited space and because it's difficult to establish where the part ends and the sprue begins on some parts. This is just poor design and Airfix could benefit from looking at how Eduard does sprues of small parts.

2: the fit of the fuel tank cover ahead of the windscreen is poor and does not have positive location. The part is too short in length by half a millimeter or so and the ends merely butt join with the fuselage sides so it's a very weak joint.

3: for the first time in recent memory with a new tool Airfix kit, I ended up with a sizeable gap at the wingroot on both sides of the model. There is nothing to capture the top of the wing and hold it in place against the fuselage halves. The dihedral of the wings is set by the partial spar and you can't bend to wings up to close the gap without inducing too much dihedral. I filled the gaps with perfect plastic putty; it's not ideal because it doesn't have a lot of strength, but requires minimal sanding so no detail is lost.

 

@David A Collins  just built one, and didn't report any issues,  maybe it's another case of pot luck due to sloppy control of the final product?

 

PS 

Quote

 

On 04/06/2019 at 22:31, David A Collins said:

It'll be a short WIP as it's an easy build.

 

Excellent detail inside and out, and no need to use any filler or sanding.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for looking.

 

Quote

Aluminium top coat applied. It really highlights the fine surface detail well, and that it goes together accurately.

 

 

 

 

 

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

12 hours ago, tank152 said:

Nice honest review of the kit here.

 

For those that are saying it compares well with Tamiya and Eduard quality wise may like to book an appointment at the opticians after viewing it! 😉

Good tip on building the cockpit tub in there as well which i'll be using when I build mine.

The review is fair in my estimation. Paul budzik does excellent work, I've seen it for years in magazines and on websites. However whoever did the video for him needs to be hung up and beaten. I tried to watch it several times. Twice on my IPad, Twice on my brand new iPhone 10r, and couldn't get through it once without any issues. Every time I attempted to watch it the video was jumpy, and the sound would cut out multiple times. I even went to YouTube directly to watch it as maybe it was the link that was the issue ? No it was the video. Again he can build models,  he definitely knows his business and craft well. Though he can't for anything to save his life produce a coherent video ? One of the main reasons I am loath to use any video reviews, as most people don't know how to edit and upload properly. 

 

Dennis

Edited June 15, 2019 by Corsairfoxfouruncle

[Sturmovik]

17 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

Every time I attempted to watch it the video was jumpy, and the sound would cut out multiple times.

Must be your connection, I was able to watch the first 40 seconds just fine.

[Tbolt]

32 minutes ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

However whoever did the video for him needs to be hung up and beaten. I tried to watch it several times. Twice on my IPad, Twice on my brand new iPhone 10r, and couldn't get through it once without any issues. Every time I attempted to watch it the video was jumpy, and the sound would cut out multiple times. I even went to YouTube directly to watch it as maybe it was the link that was the issue ? No it was the video. Again he can build models,  he definitely knows his business and craft well. Though he can't for anything to save his life produce a coherent video ? 

 

Dennis

I had no problems at all with the video on my phone, smooth seamless and no sound issues. If it's not your connection is it an Apple problem as I'm on Android? I tried the video on my PC also and worked fine there as well.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Possibly ? But normally not a common occurrence with stuff on youtube. Ive watched movies, TV, and music videos no issues. The only time i have issues normally is if someone doesn't upload properly.

[cngaero]

5 hours ago, The Tomohawk Kid said:

This dude would be well advised keeping to snap together kits, he has certainly lost sight of what modelling is about. I say that as someone who has not bought an Airfix kit in many a blue moon.

What a crass and utterly ridiculous statement to make. May I respectfully suggest that you spend a couple of hours acquainting yourself with Mr Budzik's fine work, which is freely available on the internet.

His work is outstanding in both his approach to any shortcomings with the supject matter and also to his solutions to rectify them to produce a faithful replica of the said subject. 

You go on to say that you haven't bought an Airfix kit for a while, may I suggest that you have a look at some, you may be pleasantly surprised. Granted, they may not all be "shake and bake" kits, but I suppose that would depend on whether one approaches the hobby as a model maker or as an assembler of kits. 

Yes, we are all entitled to an opinion, but an opinion should be based on researched facts and reasoned information and not just gleaned from an eight minute video. 

 

[dragonlanceHR]

While I still didn't recieve my XIV kit, but judging from Paul's video of the cockpit parts (remember, he brought several kits and says all are the same) the kit is a step back, quality vise, from the Mk.XIX.

 

On the other hand, the last Airfix I purchased - Blenheim - is much sharper. Almost as if Airfix has an A and a B team. Or the bean counters cut costs.

 

Cheers,

Vedran

[Tbolt]

3 minutes ago, dragonlanceHR said:

While I still didn't recieve my XIV kit, but judging from Paul's video of the cockpit parts (remember, he brought several kits and says all are the same) the kit is a step back, quality vise, from the Mk.XIX.

 

On the other hand, the last Airfix I purchased - Blenheim - is much sharper. Almost as if Airfix has an A and a B team. Or the bean counters cut costs.

 

Cheers,

Vedran

Well Airfix have been working on the 1/24th scale Hellcat at the same time, so if they do have a top team ( or maybe just one person ) you can bet they were working on that.

[Andrew Jones]

I have watched this video and have two of the Fr XIV kits , neither of the kits I have exhibit the flash issues highlighted in the video and appear very crisply moulded . Whilst I have no doubt that Mr Budzik is a very fine modeller , a claim I would never make about my own humble work , I was dissapointed to see in the video that he seemed to be attempting to fit parts together without removing or smoothing down the sprue attachments.  Could this be partly the reasons for the fit issues he has found ?

 

Andrew

[Biggles87]

I found the second video to be more negative, than the first. It didn’t help that the reviewer wasn’t really interested in the type, as he stated in the beginning, so amongst other things he wasn’t aware that the ‘ saddle tank ‘ should stand a little proud and had sanded it flush.

It does seem that these kits  came from two different sources ( or different batches ) as mine has no flash at all and is crisply moulded even if the panel lines are a little too deep.

[Tomas Enerdal]

The panel lines/gaps around the engine bulges are interesting. I looked at close-ups in walk-arounds and the real bulges protrudes up through corresponding openings in the engine cowlings. There should therefore be a "panel line" or "step" present, but not a normal one as between two parallel skin plates. Without having reached that stage in building yet, and only judging from pics from builds, Airfix have kind of captured this, but a little exaggerated. So don't totally eradicate that line.

An early guess of how to improve this properly may be to raise the bulge slightly from below, with thin styrene shims.

 

Tbolt; you are right in that the rivets/fasteners on the left wing have got too close/merged with the panel lines around the gun covers. If carefully comparing the surface details of the right and left upper wing they are slightly different, on the same sprue! The difference is subtle, but there. Can anyone with insight in producing tools from CAD-drawings explain this?