Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

SA80A2AR

ZM SWS 1/48 Phantom

Recommended Posts

what are the above mentioned kits like?  i would like to buy one but i want to know what they are like first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of the small, barely noticeable shape issue near the exhaust the kit is by far the best 1/48 F-4 Phantom out, period. If cost is an issue, then Academy. I was going to get the HS correction set for the ZM kit but decided to leave it as is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will add they are a bit more complex in design, like the cockpit for an example. The scribing is top notch and reduced the need for a lot of aftermarket add ons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jpk said:

Regardless of the small, barely noticeable shape issue near the exhaust the kit is by far the best 1/48 F-4 Phantom out, period. If cost is an issue, then Academy. I was going to get the HS correction set for the ZM kit but decided to leave it as is. 

THIS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little addendum to my post. I don't want to make it sound like I don't like the Hypersonic  ZM correction set. I have several Hypersonic sets. I have them for the Academy F-4, the Hobby Boss A-6E and Trumpeter A3D and  will no doubt buy more as ones become available that I want, like Jeffrey's future A3D main gear wheel well, (hint). I feel his sets offer great value as well as correcting the previous mentioned kit's errors. The correction set for the ZM fuselage is very nice and does correct the design issue with the ZM kit. Is it needed? That is a personal choice for the builder that wants to have an absolutely accurate model. For me I'm ok with the kit as it is out of the box. For those that want their kit to be as accurate as they can make it, the set will give them that and at a very reasonable price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got one set of the Hypersonic corrrection set and have had a play with it. As well as correcting the barely noticeable error, it goes together really well. I have taken some pics and I'll try and get them up shortly if the interest is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the F-4S & it looks GREAT in the box!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just starting the F-4J marines boxing. This will be done as a 74sq F-4J(UK) a/c. Possibly the only things that needs adding are the underwing strengthening strap and rear seaters periscope. The Marines offering gives you the option of posable L/E slats and tail planes, although some surgery is required for these. The first boxing of the J did not give these options.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the F-4J shortly after its release, only to state that the nose/canopy complex is the wrong shape... better: they're not shaped at all, no contours as on the real thing. On the other hand, the detail is the forte of this kit and the same can be said of the overall fit, which is really state of the art.

 

You can see what's wrong with the nose in Jumpei Temma's drawings at soyuyo.main.jp/f4/f4-1.html

 

f4012.pngf4013.png

Edited by Francesco Blasi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear. Wonder if the new F-4E/EJ fuselage fixes this. 

Think I will stick to Tamiya 1/32 F-4s and wait for the Hong Kong Models 1/32 FG.1/F-4K

 

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/21/2019 at 3:09 PM, Francesco Blasi said:

I bought the F-4J shortly after its release, only to state that the nose/canopy complex is the wrong shape... better: they're not shaped at all, no contours as on the real thing. On the other hand, the detail is the forte of this kit and the same can be said of the overall fit, which is really state of the art.

 

You can see what's wrong with the nose in Jumpei Temma's drawings at soyuyo.main.jp/f4/f4-1.html

 

f4012.pngf4013.png

 

99% of modelers won't notice and 99% of the remaining 1% probably won't care. It is literally impossible to get every single contour and dimension correct on a scale model. Every item on a scale model has to be proportionally correct, as they can never be dimensionally correct.

 

I'll give an example. The real wing pylons (SUU-63) of the F/A-18A/B/C/D are 6 inches wide. The SUU-63's included in the Academy 32nd Hornet kits measure out to 5/32 of an inch (5 scale inches). They're too narrow, so I spent the better part of two days adding a shim to all four pylons, sanding them smooth and 'correcting' them. However, once they were put on the model, they didn't look right. Correcting them actually took away from the overall look of the model. They were proportionally correct to the rest of the model. 

 

I can pretty much guarantee that if you were to add that contour to the ZM 48th Phantom, it would completely ruin the overall look of the model as a whole. It's also why no aftermarket cockpit can be 100% accurate in dimension as you have to take into account the scale thickness of the plastic as it relates to the sheet metal used on the real aircraft. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/01/2019 at 15:12, Flying Leathernecks Decals said:

 

99% of modelers won't notice and 99% of the remaining 1% probably won't care. It is literally impossible to get every single contour and dimension correct on a scale model. Every item on a scale model has to be proportionally correct, as they can never be dimensionally correct.

 

I'll give an example. The real wing pylons (SUU-63) of the F/A-18A/B/C/D are 6 inches wide. The SUU-63's included in the Academy 32nd Hornet kits measure out to 5/32 of an inch (5 scale inches). They're too narrow, so I spent the better part of two days adding a shim to all four pylons, sanding them smooth and 'correcting' them. However, once they were put on the model, they didn't look right. Correcting them actually took away from the overall look of the model. They were proportionally correct to the rest of the model. 

 

I can pretty much guarantee that if you were to add that contour to the ZM 48th Phantom, it would completely ruin the overall look of the model as a whole. It's also why no aftermarket cockpit can be 100% accurate in dimension as you have to take into account the scale thickness of the plastic as it relates to the sheet metal used on the real aircraft. 

I agree for the most part. I, for one, will go building the kit as it is since I find it beautiful, to express it in one word. Conversely, there's little an average modeller can do to carve and shape the real Phantom nose/canopies contours. But scale thcknesses are a completely different question: almost always you have to reduce them to some extent (trailing edges, etc.).

 

That said, it is remarkable that Hasegawa in the quarter scale and Tamiya in 1/32 did much better years ago than ZM right today. The F-4 is among my absolute favourites, and I can't help looking at the forward area of the plane first whenever I see a Phantom model. It's simply me, though I know well that 99% of modellers won't even notice such a blunder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Francesco Blasi said:

I agree for the most part. I, for one, will go building the kit as it is since I find it beautiful, to express it in one word. Conversely, there's little an average modeller can do to carve and shape the real Phantom nose/canopies contours. But scale thcknesses are a completely different question: almost always you have to reduce them to some extent (trailing edges, etc.).

 

That said, it is remarkable that Hasegawa in the quarter scale and Tamiya in 1/32 did much better years ago than ZM right today. The F-4 is among my absolute favourites, and I can't help looking at the forward area of the plane first whenever I see a Phantom model. It's simply me, though I know well that 99% of modellers won't even notice such a blunder.

Hi 

Just found this thread and since I have just started the ZM F4C I thought I would add my thoughts to the discussion.  I bought the Hasegawa F4B/C/D/J when they first came out, they were better than the Monogram kits, but while they were good for the time, even with tweaks to the molds there are shortcomings like the lack of intake ducting, simplified cockpit , short span horizontal stabilators, etc.  The Academy F4B/C/D/J had much better surface detail but again issues with the horizontal stabilators, these and other areas can be improved with AM products at a cost that brings it up to the ZM price.  The ZM kit looks good with everything in the box, I have seen the Hypersonic correction for the rear body and can live without it, however I will replace the wheels and ejection seats, only because I have them already in my AM stash, so why not use the best looking parts available.  As for problems with the nose section, hopefully it will look like a double ugly rhino and like the 99% of modellers, that's the main thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's the thing I cannot stand in modelling! I challenge everybody to notice the ridicuolus error in the original ZM profile compared to the supposed right one. I repeat: it's ridicuolus. And in order to reach that perfection, a modeller should spend, sometimes, like another whole model kit. For heaven's sake, everybody is free to buy whatever, but in my opinion the makers have reached absurd levels that I'll never indulge. Come on! Sorry for my English, I'm from Italy and I love interacting with british friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not so much the straight fuselage as it is the flawed canopy shape that irks most.

If, like me, you build them hoods down, it won't look right. The rear of the front hood and front of the rear hood should be noticeably wider.

 

The 'it's not quite right' bell rang when I first saw the kit but I couldn't identify precisely what was wrong before Francesco posted Jumpei Temma's drawings. (I had put it down to the lack of canopy hood structure — thank goodness for Hypersonic, as the Hasegawa kits suffer the same malaise — but the bad shape was disguised by all the dark canopy trim on the seagoing editions.)

 

What concerns me is that this particular error is unlikely to be corrected on the F-4E/EJ, which was the big draw here. 

 

Tony 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I've understood ( I'm italian) I totally agree with you. My critique Is about the piece which should fix the wrong rear part of fouselage. It's noticeable only with a microscope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/01/2019 at 19:10, Graham T said:

Got the F-4S & it looks GREAT in the box!!

Does the F-4S have the underside main spar external strap included?

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Retired Bob said:

Does the F-4S have the underside main spar external strap included?

 

Bob

Assuming I'm interpreting correctly, yes it seems to be there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Graham T said:

Assuming I'm interpreting correctly, yes it seems to be there.

Thanks for that, a lot of late Phantoms including RAF ones had their life extended by an external strap bolted and riveted to the underside, just in front of the centre line store position and angled back and outwards to the wing fold joint.  It's very prominent so it would be quite an omission if ZM had not bothered with it.

 

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, giuseppe said:

As far as I've understood ( I'm italian) I totally agree with you. My critique Is about the piece which should fix the wrong rear part of fouselage. It's noticeable only with a microscope.

Giuseppe,

 

being Italian doesn't excuse ridiculing others, neither those who see the shape error and think it's important to them, nor the ones buying my correction set and not least me for seeing it,  wanting to correct it and making the correction set.

The shape difference is substantial, whether that's important to you is not for discussion, that's entirely up to you. You've made it clear that it's not important to you and that's fine. Just for info though, this has been one of my best selling products, I've sold a few hundreds of them already so I'm not the only one seeing the issue and thinking it needs correcting.

 

(Please also note that plastic modelling has changed a lot over the last 10 or so years. Many modellers want to be able to produce museum quality models with a minimum of fuss, effort and time spent (not least due to the internet and social media)  )

 

Jeffrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall several years ago rumor had it that Eduard was going to produce a quarter scale F-4 series. They abandoned it when it became known to them someone else was going to do one as well. That second company was Academy. I don't know if Eduard knew who was going to do it or just knew someone was. So as it turns out after Academy's release and the discovery of its flaws, it has diminished the value of the kit with some. Now, flaws with the ZM release are being revealed. So we have the older Monogram, ESCI and Hasegawa series with their well known issues to add to the list of imperfect Phantoms. Perhaps Eduard, seeing all this discussion on all the currently available 1/48 Phantoms and their issues might see an opening to review their decision to abandon their Phantom series and start it back up. I think they may be able to grab a huge number of disappointed F-4 fans with their own F-4. I would assume they were well on their way with research material before pulling the plug. They certainly have garnered praise with their recent 1/48 scale WWII kits.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, JeffreyK said:

Giuseppe,

 

being Italian doesn't excuse ridiculing others, neither those who see the shape error and think it's important to them, nor the ones buying my correction set and not least me for seeing it,  wanting to correct it and making the correction set.

The shape difference is substantial, whether that's important to you is not for discussion, that's entirely up to you. You've made it clear that it's not important to you and that's fine. Just for info though, this has been one of my best selling products, I've sold a few hundreds of them already so I'm not the only one seeing the issue and thinking it needs correcting.

 

(Please also note that plastic modelling has changed a lot over the last 10 or so years. Many modellers want to be able to produce museum quality models with a minimum of fuss, effort and time spent (not least due to the internet and social media)  )

 

Jeffrey

Quite right. We do not do ridicule here its not welcome and should not be seen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...