Jump to content

Is Eduard coming back to 1/32


Recommended Posts

The only answer to such a question is: he presented such a possibility. And that's pretty much all, there is nothing more in that statement, nor is there anything more on the Czech Modelforum. Until the words 'we have started designing the new 1/32 kit' are published in Eduard Info or in the Eduard's thread on MF, guessing whether they will release something in 1/32, what they might release and when they will release it makes little sense.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you haven’t made/released the Me-109 model, then you haven’t succeeded as a manufacturer.
There are so many wonderful prototypes around, but everyone stubbornly focused on the Messerschmitt. And they will buy it too...)))

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

Eduard has truely great lineup of kits, but for some reason their Emil, Friedrich and Gustav( even in latest 1/72nd scale) have big shape and detail issues, most noticably fuselage being too high thus nose taper and spinner being wrong shape( for my lack of better words), they did three new toolings, and never solved the issue, if they decided to tackle another 109 in 32nd scale, would not hold my breath.

P.S. 109 family with Eduard's quality of surface detail would be phenomenal, but again them and 109's have some sort of bad energy...

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

3 hours ago, Overflow said:

Eduard has truely great lineup of kits, but for some reason their Emil, Friedrich and Gustav( even in latest 1/72nd scale) have big shape and detail issues, most noticably fuselage being too high thus nose taper and spinner being wrong shape( for my lack of better words), they did three new toolings, and never solved the issue, if they decided to tackle another 109 in 32nd scale, would not hold my breath.

P.S. 109 family with Eduard's quality of surface detail would be phenomenal, but again them and 109's have some sort of bad energy...

How much too tall are their 109 fuselages? Because if it’s less than a millimeter I’m not bothered.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1mm would certainly be noticeable on a 1/72 kit: whether it is on 1/32 I can't say through lack of experience.   However the human eye is remarkably efficient at noticing small differences.  My rule of thumb is that if it is more than 2% out of scale, it will be noticeable.  Not over such distances as span or length, but depth on fuselage might be another matter.  Not by everyone, either, but by those familiar with the type.  So is the fuselage depth of a 1/32 Bf.109 more than 5cm?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

How much too tall are their 109 fuselages? Because if it’s less than a millimeter I’m not bothered.

Have to learn how to upload pics, but best comparison is between Tamiya's G-6( accurate) compared to Eduard one, very big difference-fuselage wise. 

Another big omission in Eduard is universal F/G spinner that did not exsist, making both F and G spinners looking too short, its closest to one type of Regensburg's spinners but too wide.

 

Edited by Overflow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Ingo Ritz said:

Bf 109 lineup in 1/72 and 1/48, and speculates that he may consider 1/32 scale as an option for the future.

Horror. They (E...) couldn't do it 6 times. For the 7th time, they "could not" with 109, do not

Edited by Exam89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think KOTARE might have cut them of at the pass ,and 32nd you cant make mistakes .And given their 32nd E wasn't a sellar sucusses i doubt they will risk it .But WHO KNOWS 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can hope and wish for some more gliders in the scale! Revell did some good ones a number of years ago which I have. It's a good scale for them. 

Eduard have floated the idea of a 1/48 Blaník so is it totally hopeless? Maybe not, but probably. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

From Vladimir Sulc via the Hyperscale Forum...

 

"The main reason why my thinking about a new 1/32 scale kit leads to the Spitfire Mk.IX is that the 3D model design for this type is complete in 1/32 scale. In fact, 1/48 scale kits once arise by scaling down this design. Using this design saves us about 6 months of work compared to some kit we would have scaled up from a 1/48 scale 3D model, like Mustang or Bf 109 G. Plus we can easily create a base for later releases of the Mk.I and Mk.V Spitfires. This all offers some pretty irresistible advantages. 

As for other potential projects, we'll do what has been most successful in 1/48 scale, because the principles of why any given kit sells well are still the same, regardless of scale. 

The Hellcat is not a bad kit, it sells well, but Spitfires, Bf 109 F/G, Fw 190, P-51D and MiG-21 sell better. And that pretty clearly tells us what we will eventually be releasing in 1/32 scale."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/3/2024 at 6:28 PM, VMA131Marine said:

How much too tall are their 109 fuselages? Because if it’s less than a millimeter I’m not bothered.

The difference is visually very noticeable, especially in comparison with Tamiya and Zvezda. And the landing gear struts are almost 3mm longer

 

On the left is the "Zvezda", on the right is Eduard

 

spacer.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Exam89 said:

The difference is visually very noticeable, especially in comparison with Tamiya and Zvezda. And the landing gear struts are almost 3mm longer

 

On the left is the "Zvezda", on the right is Eduard

 

spacer.png

Okay but which is correct?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am currently building Eduard’s Bf 109 G-6 and I don’t like it. The quality of the surface in some areas is poor.  I also feel that the landing gear is too long, changing the model attitude on wheels. Maybe they took measures from unloaded struts. This model was born flawed, we all remember that affair, and remains flawed. Simply scaling up these moulds would not solve the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This photo only shows the difference between the models, but is not particularly suitable for analysis. A photo of an aircraft from the ground will always be taken from a different angle.


The photo of the Croatian Bf 109 is well suited for analysis, of course with correction for a different tailwheel. When superimposing the models on the photo, it may come out that none of these kits are correct. Is it proof for anything? No, as I mentioned, such photo superimposition only makes sense if we have well photographed models. These are not, so if someone really cares about accuracy, he needs to do it himself.


Last but not least - how an aircraft 'looks' or 'feels' is irrelevant. Most people live their imaginations to the extent that they will not even agree with a very carefully conducted analysis if it does not confirm their vision of the aircraft.

 

Bf-109G.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, VMA131Marine said:

Okay but which is correct?

Left. 

The length of the landing gear is well known. Edward missed a lot. But the zvezda and tamiya have everything in order with the length of the landing gear

 

17 minutes ago, Piotr Mikolajski said:

This photo only shows the difference between the models, but is not particularly suitable for analysis

More than enough. Both zvezda and tamiya have no significant problems with geometry. And first of all, they have the correct length of the landing gear racks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this in other threads:

 

Eduard....if you are listening....

 

Scale up your F6F Hellcat to 1/32...then start your money making machine.

 

Heck...I will fly over there to get a few and bring back to the states.

 

Cheers

Collin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Exam89 said:

More than enough.

 

I am afraid that this type of opinion is meaningless if it is not supported by evidence. And evidence is not the claim itself, the opinion of person X or Y, a long thread on some forum or someone's deep belief.

 

Over the last decade I have seen many long threads about what mistakes manufacturers have made, how unfamiliar they are with the aircraft or tank, how they are unable to make the proper kit. When it turned out that the manufacturer had made the model based not on Holy Plans or the tales of Mr. I Have This Vehicle In My Shed but on surviving museum equipment and factory documentation, I have never seen an apology from those so keen to accuse the manufacturer of all the evils of this world. Therefore, if someone comes with complaints, he should immediately back them up with proper evidence.

 

In the case of complaints about Eduard models, giving feedback to the manufacturer is very easy. Mr. Sulc is present on the Czech Modelforum, he looks into the special thread concerning Eduard every day, so it is possible to discuss with him directly. They don't even need to know Czech, they can write in English. But I don't recall all those complaining on various forums daring to write there. It looked as if they wanted to complain about the models, but in such a way that the company would not comment on it in any way. Of course, I don't suspect them of lacking courage, certainly none of them knew of the existence of Modelforum. If they only knew, they would certainly have told that Mr. Sulc! Oh, how they would tell him. And how he would listen to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Piotr Mikolajski said:

I am afraid that this type of opinion is meaningless if it is not supported by evidence. And evidence is not the claim itself, the opinion of person X or Y, a long thread on some forum or someone's deep belief.

I don't really care. Problems 109 from Eduard have long been sorted out on scalemodels, by people who are well versed in the issue. However, that their messer is crooked, and there is no need for drawings. It's already perfectly visible. Pan Eduard has already been written by knowledgeable people in his time. As a result, the same curve 109th came out, but in 72. the errors are exactly the same

 

Yes, and I have a piece from Eduard, as many as two models. I even assembled one model. I got stuck on the coloring. I can see all his problems with my own eyes

Edited by Exam89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hasn't Mr Sulc already indicated that if Eduard go ahead with a new kit in 1:32 the first would be a Spitfire IX?

Later considerations would be the Bf 109, Mustang — and MiG-21 (oh yeah!) 

 

I think the Zero and Hellcat were ruled out as 1:32 candidates due to being relatively slow performers in 1:48. 

 

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tony.t said:

Hasn't Mr Sulc already indicated that if Eduard go ahead with a new kit in 1:32 the first would be a Spitfire IX?

 

That's how I understand quotation cited above by Ingo - Spitfire IX seems to be almost confirmed, followed by other Merlin variants. Hellcat indeed seems to be ruled out but Mr. Sulc doesn't mention Zero. I think of those others mentioned, the MiG-21 has the least competition at the moment.

Still, Eduard will analyse the 1/32 market on a regular basis, after all, other companies are also releasing kits in that scale.

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
×
×
  • Create New...