Jump to content

Eduard 190 Problems


GazB
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, GazB said:

Well, I mean, its not like I just made up all the issues experienced so far. There are significant fit and connection problems, incorrect or missing parts. Fitting the wing assembly leaves a pretty significant gap on the ventral tail connection, and panel lines are still slightly misaligned. The only way to get rid of the gaps on the wings is to spread the bottom of the fuselage, but in doing that you're pulling apart the upper connections and using tape to hold them together will pull it in away from the wing roots 🤷‍♂️

 

Gaz

I believe you will be having fit problems as it's not a shake and bake kit as most have said previously. If you don't go carefully and test fit with no glue before each stage you will definitely run into the kind of problems you are discussing.

 

This is usually where the first significant issues develop.

7D206DC8-AA19-414A-86D6-F2B1A37BB8E2_zps

 

If you don't get that spar lined up exactly then it throws everything else that follows out. Even though I was aware of this and I took my time I still had to remove a lot of material from the top of the spar to get it to fit without pushing the other parts out of place.

 

You can see there is a slight trace of the wing to fuselage joint on mine ahead of the yellow band but nothing too drastic.

AE936B37-9266-4A30-BA96-29FDD55FB5AF_zps

 

The bit that I do remember really getting angry at was the fit of the main undercarriage legs. Eduard were going for "total accuracy" of the leg locating slots rather than giving us something sturdy but not to scale.

 

I don't remember having any missing or incorrect parts and wonder if that particular problem is more to do with the Revell instructions not being clear enough?

 

Duncan B

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Duncan B said:

I believe you will be having fit problems as it's not a shake and bake kit as most have said previously. If you don't go carefully and test fit with no glue before each stage you will definitely run into the kind of problems you are discussing.

 

This is usually where the first significant issues develop.

7D206DC8-AA19-414A-86D6-F2B1A37BB8E2_zps

 

If you don't get that spar lined up exactly then it throws everything else that follows out. Even though I was aware of this and I took my time I still had to remove a lot of material from the top of the spar to get it to fit without pushing the other parts out of place.

 

You can see there is a slight trace of the wing to fuselage joint on mine ahead of the yellow band but nothing too drastic.

AE936B37-9266-4A30-BA96-29FDD55FB5AF_zps

 

The bit that I do remember really getting angry at was the fit of the main undercarriage legs. Eduard were going for "total accuracy" of the leg locating slots rather than giving us something sturdy but not to scale.

 

I don't remember having any missing or incorrect parts and wonder if that particular problem is more to do with the Revell instructions not being clear enough?

 

Duncan B

The incorrect (or nonsensical) part was a an S-shaped piece of piping that was allocated to a hole in the centre of the bay behind the engine. When I went to fit it, it was far too long and didn't match the drawing. Only a few steps later, it wanted me to add a different pipe to the exact same hole, and the previous piece was nowhere to be seen. The missing part (the air scoop that's quite prominent on the engine cover) at first looked to have snapped off, but since it was nowhere to be found in the poly bag, and from a closer inspection of the sprue nub, it wasn't actually moulded on at all. I also had to cut short another piece of piping because it protruded too far and interfered with the forward bulkhead. Oh also, another error is that the cover that goes behind the seat headrest isn't shown in the instructions at all. I only knew it existed because of the finished model photos on the back of the box, and wondered why that piece had a cover where the one I built up was spindly and likely out of shape to fit the canopy. 

 

With test fits I finally managed to get the fuselage to mostly fit the wing with the cockpit and gun bay installed (the lack of solid mounting position for the gun bay is really bad, though), but the fuselage then tucks together at the bottom, pulling it away from the wing roots and leaving a gap. Really wasn't expecting to be fighting this thing the entire way.  

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GazB said:

The incorrect (or nonsensical) part was a an S-shaped piece of piping that was allocated to a hole in the centre of the bay behind the engine. When I went to fit it, it was far too long and didn't match the drawing. Only a few steps later, it wanted me to add a different pipe to the exact same hole, and the previous piece was nowhere to be seen. The missing part (the air scoop that's quite prominent on the engine cover) at first looked to have snapped off, but since it was nowhere to be found in the poly bag, and from a closer inspection of the sprue nub, it wasn't actually moulded on at all. I also had to cut short another piece of piping because it protruded too far and interfered with the forward bulkhead. Oh also, another error is that the cover that goes behind the seat headrest isn't shown in the instructions at all. I only knew it existed because of the finished model photos on the back of the box, and wondered why that piece had a cover where the one I built up was spindly and likely out of shape to fit the canopy. 

 

With test fits I finally managed to get the fuselage to mostly fit the wing with the cockpit and gun bay installed (the lack of solid mounting position for the gun bay is really bad, though), but the fuselage then tucks together at the bottom, pulling it away from the wing roots and leaving a gap. Really wasn't expecting to be fighting this thing the entire way.  

 

Gaz

It does sound like Revell have made a hash of the instructions. They buy the bagged plastic parts from Eduard but print their own box, instructions and decals so the misleading instructions is down to Revell (generally Eduard instructions are superb and can be downloaded from their website for free in PDF form which is worth remembering if you ever buy another Eduard repop or one of their Overtree kits). Eduard's latest Fw190A-x and Bf109G-x kits are pretty much shake and bake so maybe one of those might have been a better introduction to their kits for you.

If I were you I wouldn't get overly worried about the rear of the engine bay pipework as you'll not be able to see very much in there once the kit is finished anyway (as you can see from my earlier photo). It's all experience for you anyway.

 

Duncan B

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Duncan B said:

It does sound like Revell have made a hash of the instructions. They buy the bagged plastic parts from Eduard but print their own box, instructions and decals so the misleading instructions is down to Revell (generally Eduard instructions are superb and can be downloaded from their website for free in PDF form which is worth remembering if you ever buy another Eduard repop or one of their Overtree kits). Eduard's latest Fw190A-x and Bf109G-x kits are pretty much shake and bake so maybe one of those might have been a better introduction to their kits for you.

If I were you I wouldn't get overly worried about the rear of the engine bay pipework as you'll not be able to see very much in there once the kit is finished anyway (as you can see from my earlier photo). It's all experience for you anyway.

 

Duncan B

Part of what guided me to this kit was this video 

 

 

Which makes it feel like everything fits like a glove and there are almost no problems. 

28 minutes ago, Bozothenutter said:

just checked the fit of the wing to fuselage.

fanny how everybody has gaps at the roots, whereas mine are minimal, the front of the wing however......😂

nothing too troublesome though.

I feel like I'll be in for some wrestling. Have considered using a piece of styrene as a spar to push the lower part open a bit more.

 

Gaz

Edited by GazB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GazB you know about the supercharger intake right?

Eduard mirrored it top to bottom (the long side should go on the bottom) still amazed they didn't fix it with a brassin part.

 

Fixed mine with some cutting and shutting, inserting plastic and filler.

Don't worry about losing the engraved lines, they should be welds and will be added with a fine brush and some Mr Surfacer.

20210816-163329.jpg

20210818-194440.jpg

20210818-194454.jpg

 

God those phone camera's make things look like a battlefield!

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bozothenutter said:

@GazB you know about the supercharger intake right?

Eduard mirrored it top to bottom (the long side should go on the bottom) still amazed they didn't fix it with a brassin part.

 

Fixed mine with some cutting and shutting, inserting plastic and filler.

Don't worry about losing the engraved lines, they should be welds and will be added with a fine brush and some Mr Surfacer.

20210816-163329.jpg

20210818-194440.jpg

20210818-194454.jpg

 

God those phone camera's make things look like a battlefield!

 

Had no idea about that lol. Will probably just leave it as is. Already missing the mini scoop above, so won't be accurate anyway :P

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 9/7/2021 at 4:00 PM, GazB said:

Part of what guided me to this kit was this video 

 

 

Which makes it feel like everything fits like a glove and there are almost no problems. 

I feel like I'll be in for some wrestling. Have considered using a piece of styrene as a spar to push the lower part open a bit more.

 

Gaz

 

Speaking of gloves.. I find it slightly disturbing watching a video like thise with someones glvoed hands.. ;) Yeah - yeah I know, keep the surface clean etc. But still.

(It is also similar gloves to what I use to check people´s prostate.. :) )

 

Glad I saw this, was about to buy this to a friend that still does Games Workshop figures - but has shown interest in aircraft. - and he seems to like German aircraft (which I know very little about!) Maybe an Anton instead?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Paramedic said:

 

Speaking of gloves.. I find it slightly disturbing watching a video like thise with someones glvoed hands.. ;) Yeah - yeah I know, keep the surface clean etc. But still.

(It is also similar gloves to what I use to check people´s prostate.. :) )

 

Glad I saw this, was about to buy this to a friend that still does Games Workshop figures - but has shown interest in aircraft. - and he seems to like German aircraft (which I know very little about!) Maybe an Anton instead?

Hah :P

 

I don't know if any of the newer Eduard kits are better made. I think there was a newer Dora, but unless its a new tool I'd be wary. 

 

Kind of a pity Tamiya hasn't done one with the level of their 109 or Spitfire. 

 

Actually kind of a pity Tamiya doesn't branch out to a lot more subjects in aircraft and vehicles. Maybe not always the most super detailed, but their build quality is always the best. 

 

Seems there is a Tamiya D-9, and seems like a typical Tamiya kit. However, a review noted the main wheels are a bit too small(?)

 

Gaz

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GazB said:

Seems there is a Tamiya D-9, and seems like a typical Tamiya kit. However, a review noted the main wheels are a bit too small(?)

And that it lacks the engine, which can be seen from below the wing. Hobby Boss released their 190D in 48th with the correct wing and the engine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sturmovik said:

And that it lacks the engine, which can be seen from below the wing. Hobby Boss released their 190D in 48th with the correct wing and the engine.

It seems the Tamiya sprues have an insert for the undercarriage upper to block the view. The Eduard kit has one as well, but its never referred in the plans.

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GazB said:

It seems the Tamiya sprues have an insert for the undercarriage upper to block the view. The Eduard kit has one as well, but its never referred in the plans.

 

Gaz

That insert is for the BMW 801 versions

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tamiya are so nice to offer to newer modellers.. I think I might have to buy that to my friend (he´s not a complete noob, just to aircraft).

 

Too bad about the Eduard though.. But it almost (almost!) made me wanna have a go on that one.. But I´m too busy with my Allied stuff.. For years it seems.. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Bozothenutter said:

That insert is for the BMW 801 versions

 

Huh, interesting 🤔

 

9 hours ago, Paramedic said:

Tamiya are so nice to offer to newer modellers.. I think I might have to buy that to my friend (he´s not a complete noob, just to aircraft).

 

Too bad about the Eduard though.. But it almost (almost!) made me wanna have a go on that one.. But I´m too busy with my Allied stuff.. For years it seems.. ;)

 

Heh. For a long time I did hardly any WW2 stuff, but I've dipped into it more frequently in recent years. Especially late war where camo schemes and potential for 'what if' stuff increased a bit. Should get around to posting my He-162 and Me-262 :)

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/09/2021 at 01:16, GazB said:

Hah :P

 

I don't know if any of the newer Eduard kits are better made. I think there was a newer Dora, but unless its a new tool I'd be wary. 

 

Kind of a pity Tamiya hasn't done one with the level of their 109 or Spitfire. 

 

Actually kind of a pity Tamiya doesn't branch out to a lot more subjects in aircraft and vehicles. Maybe not always the most super detailed, but their build quality is always the best. 

 

Seems there is a Tamiya D-9, and seems like a typical Tamiya kit. However, a review noted the main wheels are a bit too small(?)

 

Gaz

The problems being pointed out seem the same as the fit issues with the molding in the Fw190 A's. Judging by the colour of the plastic and if I'm correct Eduard used the same sprues on parts of the plane like the wings and fuselage.  They basically used a bad mold to make a new kit. Having said that I haven't come across complaints about this tooling which is interesting.  

 

I have built the original tooling of the A8 and its not perfect for sure but it wasn't terrible considering other manufacturers. Dragon kits have their problems too.

 

Eduard made a new tooling for 190A's which corrected a few errors and fit issues.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Walter said:

The problems being pointed out seem the same as the fit issues with the molding in the Fw190 A's. Judging by the colour of the plastic and if I'm correct Eduard used the same sprues on parts of the plane like the wings and fuselage.  They basically used a bad mold to make a new kit. Having said that I haven't come across complaints about this tooling which is interesting.  

 

I have built the original tooling of the A8 and its not perfect for sure but it wasn't terrible considering other manufacturers. Dragon kits have their problems too.

 

Eduard made a new tooling for 190A's which corrected a few errors and fit issues.

You're right about that, even the fuselage seems to have ugly mould lines on the inside, where I assume the longnose meets the standard fuselage.

Wish they'd update this kit as they did the A's.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Bodenplatte dual combo with a 190d and I want to buy a Hobby kit as they go together really well. I'll open up the box this thread has pricked my interest. 

Edited by Walter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2021 at 8:26 PM, Antti_K said:

Hello guys,

 

I have no experience of the Eduard Focke-Wulffs, but I'm currently building their 1/48 scale P-39Q Airacobra (kit #8470). The fit is OK, no big nasty surprises there. The kit is rather inaccurate when compared against the real thing and some factory drawings. Here are my findings:

 

- the nose is pretty accurate. There are some hatches that shouldn't be there and some missing

- the fuselage overall shape is good

- the number of screws is wrong on many panels (usually one missing)

- replace the air outlets on the nose with scratch built items as the kit parts are out of shape and too small

- the wing leading edge is located at the right position

- the wing chord is some 3 millimeters too short!

- the wing cross section is completely wrong and especially the trailing edge is far too thick

- the wing panel lines are completely wrong for a P-39Q; especially on the under sides

- some bulges are missing from the fuselage bottom

- main gear bays are over simplified

- painting instructions for interiors and details are inaccurate

 

Then comes the really nasty part:

 

- the clear parts are 1,3 millimeters too tall (look at the door window shape. It is a demanding and frustrating correction to do)

- thanks to the "narrow" wing, all rear fuselage panels are of wrong size and at wrong locations. Eduard has done a great job masking this problem out of sight

- aileron, rudder and elevator hinge lines are far too shallow

- at least half of the stencils are missing from the decal sheet (Foxbot offers a very good looking set for P-39Q)

 

I'm not impressed by this kit. I was expecting a lot better mainly because Eduard kits are so popular. It seems I have to try my hands on a couple of more Eduard kits to see if they are better.

 

Cheers,

Antti

 

That's unfortunate :(

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, GazB said:

That's unfortunate :(

 

Gaz

 

It's one of Eduard early kits so isn't up to the standards of their modern tooling, but I wouldn't worry about one screw missing from all the access panels 😂

 

While the Hasegawa P-39 isn't perfect it's the way to go for a 48th Airacobra.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, GazB said:

That's unfortunate

 

You need to check what age is the tooling  and what is the accuracy of those moulds. Eduard continue to offer Airacobra boxings still based on their 2000 kit. Yet, what a huge step up was their 2000 Airacobra from their 1997 Tempest V which is nothing like the standard of their 2018 Tempest V. The 2013 1/48 Spitfire Mk IX ushered in Eduard as a tier 1 supplier with the slight hiccup with their first Bf-109 G6 release since improved. Since that time new tools have been in the top league.  You need to study what you are buying. Scalemates is your friend.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ray_W said:

 

You need to check what age is the tooling  and what is the accuracy of those moulds. Eduard continue to offer Airacobra boxings still based on their 2000 kit. Yet, what a huge step up was their 2000 Airacobra from their 1997 Tempest V which is nothing like the standard of their 2018 Tempest V. The 2013 1/48 Spitfire Mk IX ushered in Eduard as a tier 1 supplier with the slight hiccup with their first Bf-109 G6 release since improved. Since that time new tools have been in the top league.  You need to study what you are buying. Scalemates is your friend.

Scalemates, as well as numerous written reviews and a build video, where what I looked to when choosing the kit. That and seeing so many people praising Eduard. Since I've never used Eduard before, I assumed it was going to be a decent build. 

 

Gaz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gaz that's the challenge that's the way I see it. Unfortunate maybe but I will not let it beat me. I had a look at my kit and it's obvious they couldn't combine some parts of the new tool. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just spent at least 45 mins being totally confused by pics of the NAFM Dora with a single shell shute between the wheel wells......

Then I remembered it had the wrong wing for the longest time....😬

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2021 at 12:41 AM, dov said:

I asume, with your kit, the Revell moulds would have reached the end of their lifetime.

Whoever did the injection moulding process. 

Rebox: As I understand it: The carton, box and instruction printed on paper as well decals are from Eduard.

Happy modelling 

No. In general "reboxed" means that the , in this case, the sprues, parts, etch etc are moulded by Eduard and the box, decals and instructions are done by Revell. That said I wonder if the OP means DML/Dragon moulds as Revell have reboxed those moulds and they are getting a bit long in the tooth nowadays?

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...