notflip Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Does anyone know why Revell is making me do this on the Spitfire Mk IX c? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Yes. The is the 32nd kit? The moulds are based on the Mk.II kit, and the modifcation allows for the horn balance elevator seen on later Mk.IX's the 1/48 Eduard and ICM kits come with both types of tailplane for example. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Newsome Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 If you have a look at the marking option in steps 74 and 75 you will notice the difference between the wingtips. You need to choose whether to build the camo (early) step 74 version or the later clipped wingtip version, step 75, with metal finish. Roger. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Newsome Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Sorry, I hope I haven't caused any confusion. Troy's information is correct, however follow my reply for steps, 31, 32, 36 and 37. Roger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notflip Posted May 21, 2019 Author Share Posted May 21, 2019 53 minutes ago, Troy Smith said: Yes. The is the 32nd kit? The moulds are based on the Mk.II kit, and the modifcation allows for the horn balance elevator seen on later Mk.IX's the 1/48 Eduard and ICM kits come with both types of tailplane for example. It is the 32 kit, so I should clip them, right? Otherwise the movable part doesn't fit in? I decided I'm going for the late build (less complex camo paint, since I'm new) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted May 21, 2019 Share Posted May 21, 2019 Yes. The elevator (the movable part) will be your guide for clipping the stabilizer tip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Gordon Posted May 22, 2019 Share Posted May 22, 2019 These piccies might make things a little clearer; From the BM Spitfire Mk I walkaround thread Found on a quick Google search here Hope these help. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberleutnant Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 All I can add is that I'm building the Revell 1/48 mk. IXC and its a rubbish kit. Nothing fits properly to the point you wonder what happened to their quality control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 (edited) Deleted as irrelevant: I based it on a massive misreading of the previous post... Edited May 23, 2019 by Work In Progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio N Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Oberleutnant said: All I can add is that I'm building the Revell 1/48 mk. IXC and its a rubbish kit. Nothing fits properly to the point you wonder what happened to their quality control. Is this the Mk.IX/XVI box ? That would be unusual as the kit was originally a Hasegawa mould, that is known for being inaccurate but also have a good fit. Revell also reboxed the ICM XVI, that on the other hand is known to be accurate but not good fitting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberleutnant Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 18 minutes ago, Giorgio N said: Is this the Mk.IX/XVI box ? That would be unusual as the kit was originally a Hasegawa mould, that is known for being inaccurate but also have a good fit. Revell also reboxed the ICM XVI, that on the other hand is known to be accurate but not good fitting Morning, It is the Mk IX or MK. XVI reference 04554 (https://www.scalemates.com/kits/revell-04554-supermarine-spitfire-mkixc-xvi--103969) which appear to source its history directly to Revell. Scalemates also show parallels with ICM. Every single element I've either had to fill and sand, or just sand - some pretty major sanding works too with the fit way off at times. Even parts which don't match each other. For example in the cockpit there was a square lined bit of plastic sitting proud to fix a square piece into. However when you offer up the bit its rectangular! Several other cockpit issues too which made me think this is a bodge between two different kits - or there are new bits and they've not checked the fit. The panel lines are good, but its really slow progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Smith Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 40 minutes ago, Oberleutnant said: which appear to source its history directly to Revell. Scalemates also show parallels with ICM. It's a reboxed hasegawa sprue shots here of the Hase http://www.internetmodeler.com/scalemodels/flaviation/Hasegawa-1-48-Spitfire-Mk-IXc.php You may have had a poor moulding is my suggestion, plenty of complaints about the too small rear fuselage, never seen any moans on fit. Certainly in Europe, the Eduard Merlin 60 Spitfire (VIII/IX/XVI) kits have made all other 1/48th Spitfire of the same mark obsolete if you want accuracy and detail. The only close contender is the ICM, and that is tricky to build, and has enough flaws to not be worth the bother, though leftover Eduard parts can be used to tart it up a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberleutnant Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 41 minutes ago, Troy Smith said: It's a reboxed hasegawa sprue shots here of the Hase http://www.internetmodeler.com/scalemodels/flaviation/Hasegawa-1-48-Spitfire-Mk-IXc.php You may have had a poor moulding is my suggestion, plenty of complaints about the too small rear fuselage, never seen any moans on fit. Certainly in Europe, the Eduard Merlin 60 Spitfire (VIII/IX/XVI) kits have made all other 1/48th Spitfire of the same mark obsolete if you want accuracy and detail. The only close contender is the ICM, and that is tricky to build, and has enough flaws to not be worth the bother, though leftover Eduard parts can be used to tart it up a bit Strange how Scalemates makes no reference to it being previously a Hasegawa kit but the sprue shots are identical suggesting it is. Finding it quite a slog atm. Some of it I can put down to me being inexperienced but other bits are just plain wrong or poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 It is definitely the Hasegawa kit. Scalemates is often incorrect... like Wikipedia, it's only as good as the input. What fit problems have you had? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberleutnant Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Work In Progress said: It is definitely the Hasegawa kit. Scalemates is often incorrect... like Wikipedia, it's only as good as the input. What fit problems have you had? Wing roots are too high for the wings requiring sanding and filling along the seem. Putting the two wing parts together there is a gap of a good couple of mm on the leading edge of the wing on the section below the exhaust stack (thickest part of the wing butting up to the wing root). Rear wing level/root off requiring sanding and also some filling. Two parts of the nose different levels requiring loads of sanding and filling along the join. The underneath of the wing connecting to the main fuselage towards the rear was a mm out requiring a large amount of sanding as well as some filling. The wing tips where they join the main fuselage required filling and sanding. Some sanding round the canons due to flash. Cockpit wise - half of the fittings simply don't fit correctly and required cutting down and gluing. Just poor design and manufacturing of parts originally from a different kit which aren't compatible. I've offered up the canopy glazing which isn't a great fit. Other than that its been great 🤣 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tempestfan Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Work In Progress said: It is definitely the Hasegawa kit. Scalemates is often incorrect... ...and/or misleading. The 1979 Spit II is entirely unrelated to this kit, and the 1991 boxing of the II has no new parts over the original that I'd be Aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted May 23, 2019 Share Posted May 23, 2019 (edited) Well, yeah. It's misleading because it is incorrect. Similarly, if you look at the actual Scalemates entry for the 1/48 Hase IXc, it wrongly claims that kit to be descended from the 1/48 Hase Vb. Which it isn't. The IXc was a completely new tool. Oberleutnant, that is a weird set of problems to have. The only thing I can think of is that they must have taken some of the kits out of the moulds too soon, or possibly some other process error which has led to shrinkage or warping of the parts. Edited May 23, 2019 by Work In Progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bell209 Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 I built the Revell kit a while back with the Brigade Models Tr9 fuselage. Any fit problems were of my own making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonj Posted July 9, 2019 Share Posted July 9, 2019 On 6/19/2019 at 11:27 AM, Bell209 said: I built the Revell kit a while back with the Brigade Models Tr9 fuselage. Any fit problems were of my own making. Where did you find the Brigade Models conversion kit for the TR9 ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bell209 Posted July 11, 2019 Share Posted July 11, 2019 I got mine from Hannants but it looks like they're out of stock now. 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