Eduard Bf 109 G-10

[Zigomar]

Hello friends.

Could someone with knowledge, point out the trouble with Eduard G 10s? As it seems there are some and I just ordered a bunch of them! I am dealing presently with the very nice Vector+ Zvezda 109G6 body to get a decent WNF G 10, and thats a lot of precise work. BTW the Zvezda 109 ,althought a bit over engineered is certainly one of the best 109 on the market. Thanks in advance for your help. best regards

[JackG]

Others are much more knowledgeable about the 109G, but concerning the Eduard kits, the second release of the G-6 apparently corrected the dimensional oversize in the wingspan and fuselage length, so G-10 should be fine in that area..   

 

Main issue still appears to be the exhaust stacks are too tall and the angle in which they protrude.   Not sure if these are corrected with Eduard's own aftermarket sets, so may have to rely on another brand?   Eduard example is darker plastic while beneath is a Quickboost product:

 

 

 

The other detail to watch out for is underneath where the wing assembly joins the fuselage.   They have engineered the joint  chevron shaped, but there really is no panel line of any kind here so just sand flush.  

 

 

 

Not sure if there is more, so hopefully the hive mind will add more....

 

regards,

Jack

[Zigomar]

Thanks a lot. I have already made my share of Eduard 109s but the G 10 differs because of the bumps on the cowling, which depends of the factory of origin! I have a lot of doc on the subject but, yet it seems that Eduard did get things wrong in this area. Nevertheless that will keep me occupied if it 's true. best regards.

[dov]

Hallo

 

Don't fall into despair.

The G-10 is a series that actually didn't really exist as a variant. It was a link from the G-14 to the K-series.

The 10 series has so many differences within the 10 series that I can say with certainty that there are no true 10 series, but umpteen different ones.

Nobody can verify that anymore.

The book by Harald Helmut Vogt, Messerschmitt 109 Einsatzmaschinen, Das Nachschlagebuch, book actually says everything about it.

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109-Einsatzmaschinen

 

It is in German.

All books on the subject are fables and stories.

Specially Allied books and booklets.

The number of copies is not equivalend to the facts told!

No, the topic is unfathomable.

I have read 1000 posts worldwide on the subject, only stories and fairy tales.

Also the picture in the previous post, I can only frown at that.

 

Happy modelling

 

P.S.: Ask me, I will tell you!

[VolkerR.]

23 hours ago, Zigomar said:

Hello friends.

Could someone with knowledge, point out the trouble with Eduard G 10s? As it seems there are some and I just ordered a bunch of them! I am dealing presently with the very nice Vector+ Zvezda 109G6 body to get a decent WNF G 10, and thats a lot of precise work. BTW the Zvezda 109 ,althought a bit over engineered is certainly one of the best 109 on the market. Thanks in advance for your help. best regards

I agree on the Zvezda 109 kits. Very underrated, not easy to assemble but very good. I built two and they are great!

[Tomas Enerdal]

I too agree.

(The Tamiya G-6 is obviously very accurate, I wonder if it can be combined with the Vector WNF conversion...?)

Well, the Eduard problems seem to lie in the nose; the overly thick exhausts and, as a result, the slightly too large (approx. 1 mm) nose and spinner diameter.

 

I'm too much of a nitpicker to be able to accept the Eduard G-series faults, but a possible compromise fix is perhaps to correct the exhausts.

Do that by making the opening for the exhaust stubs narrower. Remove lower plate (the one that is just below the exhaust stubs), fill from below with styrene strip, restore surface detail, add replacement plate and finally add replacement exhausts. The ones from Quickboost above looks very nice, but I suppose there are others around.

I suppose this should improve the look of the finished model a lot.

[Zigomar]

Many thanks to you gentlemen!

[Tomas Enerdal]

Just checked a bit out of curiosity; by correcting the exhaust opening as per my suggestion above, the nose will become more accurate with respect to the surface details as well. See 

[JackG]

5 hours ago, dov said:

P.S.: Ask me, I will tell you!

 

That response is odd as the thread is already asking about accuracy on a specific subject. so why would the members have to ask again?   If you know more,  just post it as obviously by the number of views many are interested.

[dov]

@JackG, too much to post it. Impossible!

Happy modelling 

[Graham Boak]

I can understand that justifying such a large claim would require a significant amount of information, but simply mentioning a single article is not adequate.   (There is always the possibility that he is not entirely correct.  There has been a lot of detailed research by many individuals of several nations - including Germany - behind modern writings on the subject.)  It is undoubtedly true that much of what was said in the past about the G-10 was wrong, not least because different versions of its history differed, but also because of a lack of understanding of what was required from the information that was available.  However, I would suggest that most of the comments made in the 21st century have been both consistent and backed by evidence.  Not least that the DB605D required a "refined" cowling.  So you are saying that that is wrong?  The G-10 was not powered (generally) by the DB605D?  That this engine did not have a larger supercharger and hence a bulged fairing over the rear of the engine?  That this fairing differed depending on different factories?  All wrong, all wrong?  If these were not G-10s then what were they? 

 

As for the G-10 not being a variant - the RLM thought that it was, and they have to be taken as the authority on the subject.  That it was a link between the later G and the K is clearly true -but this is one of things stated in the very sources you claim are all fables and fairy tales.  I would suggest that it was an expedient to use the more powerful engines in advance of switching production lines to the K, and the G-14 simply followed it as a means of producing fighters using the engine with the small supercharger.  But it is difficult to accept that 10 has to come after 14, this is totally illogical.  (If not entirely unheard of.)

 

I suspect that you may have meant that the G-10 existed in a number of different (sub)variants, but this is acknowledged even in older references.  Or is even this wrong?  Certainly not, it is entirely normal for any fighter in production at this time.  Do you imagine that every Spitfire Mk.9 was the same?  The same designation applied to aircraft with different engines, different rudders, different canopies, different armaments, before looking at lesser items such as wingtips, axle alignments, internal fuel tankage, different store carriage arrangements.  Much the same as published accounts of the G-10.

 

Even discounting the more "over the top" claims, some justification for your comments is required.  It should be possible to make a precis of Herr Vogt's arguments, and his evidence for them.  Please do.

[Zigomar]

Well! The can of worms is now open! I can tell! But, the purpose of this post was to be aware of the defaults of the Eduard 's G 10 serie, and obviously the drift from the shore has been a strong one. As a French modeler I am glad to be in touch with Jean-Claude Mermet whose work on the G/K 109 has been internationaly acclaimed, and which is used as a main reference by manies. Being an old modeler but still enjoying a precise work as precise can be , I will adjust my skill to the eventual problems, at 70 I still can do that. So once again many thanks to those of you who took on their precious time to try to answer my request. Best regards from France.

[MDriskill]

As most know, the Eduard kit was originally released as an embarrassingly inaccurate "1/46 scale" G-6; then re-issued with corrected wing and fuselage moldings. But the original big sprue of common detail parts was carried over into the new versions. To my eye these "inherited" parts create two noticeable problems: a) the already-discussed over-wide exhaust pipes; b) the landing gear legs, which are slightly too long, and easy to mount at incorrect rake and splay angles creating a "standing on tiptoe" stance. Based on some great online builds I've seen though, this is easy enough to fix.

 

The late DB 605AS and DB 605D-engine variants (G-6AS, G-14AS, G-10, K-4) with so-called "refined cowl," have been criticized for being too dainty on the rear port side of the cowl, i.e. the bulge over the enlarged supercharger is too low. Thus the cowl's famous asymmetry is not quite as pronounced as it should be. Aside from this, it appears to me they did a good job of picking up the detail differences in bumps, hatches, etc., between variants and manufacturers, including the greatly revised Erla "Type 110" G-10 cowl.

 

But complaints aside, I like these kits. They are accurate (if not microscopically perfect), beautifully detailed inside and out (I particularly like the petite rivet detail), not hard to assemble, widely available, and reasonably priced. And - unlike any competitor - Eduard offers a wide range of variants, all with the same "hand" to the look, in this popular scale.

 

 

Edited December 16, 2022 by MDriskill

[Zigomar]

29 minutes ago, MDriskill said:

In my opinion, Eduard's landing gear legs are slightly too long, and hard to mount at the correct forward rake angle. Based on some great online builds I've seen, this is easily fixable though. The much-discussed exhausts are the other glitch common to all the kits. Both are among the detail parts inherited from the unfortunate initial "1/46 scale" G-6 release.

 

The late DB 605AS and DB 605D-engine variants (G-6AS, G-14AS, G-10, K-4) with so-called "refined cowl," have been criticised for being too dainty on the rear port side of the cowl, i.e. the bulge over the enlarged supercharger is not pronounced enough. Thus the cowl is not quite as asymmetrical as it should be. Aside from this, it appears to my eye they did a good job of picking up the interesting detail differences between various manufacturers, including the greatly revised Erla "Type 110" G-10 cowl.

 

I like these kits though. They are accurate (if not microscopically perfect), beautifully detailed, and reasonably priced. And unlike any competitor, Eduard offers a wide range of variants - all with the same "hand" to the look - in a popular scale.

 

 

That's what I was excpecting so, Merci beaucoup mon ami!

[Zigomar]

I have received today my G 10s boxes from Eduard, and after a quick check I have noticed something rather disappointing: Eduard has provided all the wings with the small tyres configurations and the bean blister on the upper wing. If you want a G 10 with the large tyres, you cannot do it due to the lack of the larger blisters, and this is bad as most of the G 10 had this wing/fairing configuration! I am on my way to scratch a pair of those, but sincerely......

[GiampieroSilvestri]

According to the ipms Deutschland web page a way to correct the wheels and wheel bulges is to use the parts from a Fujimi or Hasegawa kit which are the right size if you have those in the spare parts box.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited December 8, 2022 by GiampieroSilvestri

[tempestfan]

On 11/27/2022 at 9:37 AM, dov said:

Hallo

 

Don't fall into despair.

The G-10 is a series that actually didn't really exist as a variant. It was a link from the G-14 to the K-series.

The 10 series has so many differences within the 10 series that I can say with certainty that there are no true 10 series, but umpteen different ones.

Nobody can verify that anymore.

The book by Harald Helmut Vogt, Messerschmitt 109 Einsatzmaschinen, Das Nachschlagebuch, book actually says everything about it.

 

Messerschmitt-Bf-109-Einsatzmaschinen

 

It is in German.

All books on the subject are fables and stories.

Specially Allied books and booklets.

The number of copies is not equivalend to the facts told!

No, the topic is unfathomable.

I have read 1000 posts worldwide on the subject, only stories and fairy tales.

Also the picture in the previous post, I can only frown at that.

 

Happy modelling

 

P.S.: Ask me, I will tell you!

So you claim that Jochen Prien and Peter Rodeike are "Stümper" not knowing what they talk about? Starker Tobak. No one knows it all, and I do have strong reservations against anyone claiming so for himself. Excepting me, of course 🙂

By the same logic, you would have to claim there are no G-6s as a series, as there are standard 605s, AS's, low tail, high tail from wood, high tail from metal, and a bazillion of other differences.

Edited December 9, 2022 by tempestfan
A wonderful autocorrect feature had turned my "AS's" into something else :-)

[Zigomar]

1 hour ago, GiampieroSilvestri said:

According to the ipms Deutschland web page a way to correct the wheels and wheel bulges is to use the parts from a Fujimi or Hasegawa kit which are the right size if you have those in the spare parts box.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

I have done them from plastic cards and Model Art plan, not too difficult!

[GiampieroSilvestri]

Encore mieux que user des pieces d'une autre maquette.Si on sait faire les choses il y a jamais des problemes🙂

 

Even better than using parts from another model.If one knows how to do things there are no problems.

 

Saluti

 

Giampiero

Edited December 9, 2022 by GiampieroSilvestri

[Shorty84]

23 hours ago, Zigomar said:

I have received today my G 10s boxes from Eduard, and after a quick check I have noticed something rather disappointing: Eduard has provided all the wings with the small tyres configurations and the bean blister on the upper wing. If you want a G 10 with the large tyres, you cannot do it due to the lack of the larger blisters, and this is bad as most of the G 10 had this wing/fairing configuration! I am on my way to scratch a pair of those, but sincerely......

Well, if you want the large wheels/large wing blisters you need to buy the WNF/Diana boxing which contains this type of config:

https://www.scalemates.com/de/kits/eduard-82161-bf-109g-10-wnf-diana--1191493

 

Cheers

Markus

[Zigomar]

1 minute ago, Shorty84 said:

Well, if you want the large wheels/large wing blisters you need to buy the WNF/Diana boxing which contains this type of config:

https://www.scalemates.com/de/kits/eduard-82161-bf-109g-10-wnf-diana--1191493

 

Cheers

Markus

Naturally this is the only kit I did not order as I had done a WNF version with the Vector resin set. It is no big deal to do those with plasticard and elbow grease, the old school like I did. Thanks for the advice, best regards.

[Tomas Enerdal]

The Eduard 1/48 Bf 109G-10 WNF/Diana (Profipack #82161, w/ weekend and overtree versions and Bunnyfighter G-10 Erla with rectangular bulges,) have the larger wing blisters.

A set of overtrees, or the old, but still surprisingly good Revell G-10, neither of them too expensive donors. (a new Revell kit is £10.82 at Hannants)

(An idea: get the Revell G-10, use as much of the just lovely parts from the Eduard kit: landing gear, flying surfaces, canopy, propeller blades, interior, drop tank, etc. The only aftermarket item I can think of in addition is a set of Quickboost exhausts (the Eduard ones are too fat.) I suppose a lot of small, easy adjustments will be needed, but in the end you will be rewarded by a very accurate and detailed G-10)

 

Large bulges are included in the (expensive, but oh so lovely) Vector WNF G-10 resin conversion (VDS 48-131)

[Zigomar]

18 hours ago, Tomas Enerdal said:

The Eduard 1/48 Bf 109G-10 WNF/Diana (Profipack #82161, w/ weekend and overtree versions and Bunnyfighter G-10 Erla with rectangular bulges,) have the larger wing blisters.

A set of overtrees, or the old, but still surprisingly good Revell G-10, neither of them too expensive donors. (a new Revell kit is £10.82 at Hannants)

(An idea: get the Revell G-10, use as much of the just lovely parts from the Eduard kit: landing gear, flying surfaces, canopy, propeller blades, interior, drop tank, etc. The only aftermarket item I can think of in addition is a set of Quickboost exhausts (the Eduard ones are too fat.) I suppose a lot of small, easy adjustments will be needed, but in the end you will be rewarded by a very accurate and detailed G-10)

 

Large bulges are included in the (expensive, but oh so lovely) Vector WNF G-10 resin conversion (VDS 48-131)

Merci beaucoup! Concerning the Vector conversion, I did post mine some days ago on the forum. Anyway my scratched blisters are glued in place and look just fine!

[ABeck]

Go for the BRASSIN-legs if you can get them, expensive but a great improvement. Below picture compares different legs, in the middle Eduard which still regresents the not reinforced variant ( F through G-4), on the right side the old Revell and Tamiya.

 

[Zigomar]

Great ! Thanks.