Jump to content

A2Zee Resin Broad-Tail for the Eduard FW190D-9* deleated


Gary Adams

Recommended Posts

Hi Gary

I have no problem with you or anybody for that matter doing reviews, I agree unbiased reviews are few and far between these days, it is just a pity that you and others do not write directly to cottage industry producers like myself and discuss your findings. I just wonder how many websites you are going to post on. It is always a shame finding out something is not right via the back door. There are also many referance sources out there as well and not all are correct.

You and others need to remember that there are a lot of us SMALL guys out there producing sets and things do slip through the net from time to time.

We have already corrected omissions and errors on our Mosquito sets and with our Gannet kit, and all of these have been publicised and sorted out and I think from that we have developed and given modellers what they have wanted and needed. For these two sets we have sent corrections and or amended parts to all that purchased the sets or for folk that requested them.

It is so easy swish and make paint marks over folk’s workmanship and come to conclusions that are not true, just one SMALL issue a Eduard 'A' kit tail WAS NOT used!!!!

We will be looking into this matter over the next few days and from that I will make a decision on the way forward.

I am also fascinated by the comments by other manufacturers and producers, and them having a knock, I would just hate it one day if they perhaps MAKE AN ERROR or are the rest in the world PERFECT, I wonder!!!!!!!! There is an awful lot of subjective thoughts that arise when it comes to colour schemes, exact aircraft dimensions, and other issues, from historical subjects from just six months ago in Afganistan conflict, never mind WWII or even WWI subjects.

As has been seen before (I) that is A2Zee Models, along with Alley Cat as my main brand, have and will fix and or address issues, now and in the future. I do this full time and I and trying to make a living from doing so and therefore building and improving my brand is what I intend to do.

Bottom line if you have a problem or would like to discuss any issues and or products with me my door (email or phone call is open) that way we can sort out and resolve issues.

I will confirm my findings and will gladly refund or supply new parts to you or any customer if we deem it to be necessary.

cheers Ali

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here I was thinking it was common courtesy to contact the manufacturer of AM stuff if I found something drastically wrong with it BEFORE going to print. This was you could find out which plans or WHY they made it as they did.

It wouldn't change my review but it gave further information for the review and showed good faith. An example, I did a review on a set of decals that I found the instructions incorrect in the cam scheme. When I approached tha manufacturer it turned out I had better images of the aircraft in question that covered the incorrect area. Once I supplied the images he corrected the instruction sheet for the betterment of everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a very fair response Gary. It's a difficult question about what to do about things you perceive to be inaccurate. Of course not every perceived inaccuracy is what the complainant thinks.

Some manufacturers welcome criticism with open arms and are responsive to doing fixes. Others either don't respond (most common) or act as though you have spat on them.

A lot of the time, the manufacturer has produced a large number of the product and it's probably not financially viable to fix them - the larger the manufacturer, the more likely this is.

Generally, I am guessing, the smaller the manufacturer, the more likely you are to be able to have a dialogue with them about the product.

I was going to give some examples, but on reflection, maybe not!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find Ali's and Ollie's responses refreshing. If manufacturers paid attention to every last rivet-counter (no, I am not characterising any individual or all critical/discerning reviewer(s) as such but we can surely acknowledge that the species exists), they would never produce anything. Secondly the economics of manufacture are surely so marginal for small-scale producers that the consequences of getting it wrong despite best endeavours become serious in financial as well as morale terms.

So I find Ali's and Ollie's commitment not only to customer service but also to getting it right a real tonic, especially in contrast to the dump-and-run "near enough is good enough" approach we have got used to from some of the major manufacturers. More power to your elbow, gentlemen!

PS I know absolutely zero about Fw-190D tails. Nor (heresy!) do I particularly care.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personl thing is i want to make sure my products are as good as i can possibly make them with as few a compromises as possible. If i have made a mistake my email inbox is always open and you are more than welcome to contact me and i will do my best to resolve the issue as soon as possible. At the end of the day we are all human and make mistakes be it big or small. The changes may not happen right away but i will make them happen when it is possible to.

One of my pet hates is decal sheets with only one set of national markings, where possible i will not do that. Then i have a problem with instruction sheets that the artworks been printed so small you cant read the numbers to know where to put the decals. With all my sheets i will provide enough sets of national markings for each aircraft on the sheet and there will be no compromise on the instructions. My BF110 sheet has a complete A4 page per aircraft and i have made sure every bit of text is readable.

I agree if we all listened to every rivet counter out there we would never get any product released. There has to come a point where we say right ive done what i can lets produce it. If we have made a glaring error i would hope people would contact us and let us know.

Edited by ollieholmes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I was going to let this thread die a natural death without further comment from me, as I have been in contact with Ali directly and we have exchanged emails which I believe have cleared the air between us. But as it has been perpetuated by others, I'll publicly state that my post on HS in support of Gary's findings was not well-judged in itself (from a "stones and glass houses" viewpoint) and I fully accept that Ali was justifiably peed off with me in particular from that point of view. We know each other quite well and have always had good relations previously - in fact we have been reciprocal customers!

At the end of my HS post I asked whether Gary had contacted Ali first. That really should have been my only comment, if I was going to make any. I have great respect for Gary as a very pleasant individual but also as someone who really knows his stuff, particularly on Fw 190s but on many other subjects also - not only that but he builds some pretty spectacular models and his diorama of a riverside scene has to be seen to be believed! :

http://www.network54.com/Forum/47751/messa...8image+heavy%29

His subsequent comments here took a lot of guts and speak volumes for his character and intent.

Let's be careful about throwing the term rivet-counter around willy-nilly; it's become almost a term of abuse over the years and as far as I can tell was originally applied to people who continually criticize (quite often incorrectly) but rarely actually do anything themselves. Not a set of criteria that Gary Adams satisifes in any way!

Criticism is the life-blood of improvement and any manufacturer worth his salt welcomes it with open arms. It can sometimes be inconvenient and often expensive to put right (ask me how I know!) but it is highly necessary. The down side is when it is voiced publicly first without giving the manufacturer the opportunity to respond and if they agree, correct the issue. If they choose not to respond, then fair enough, fire away (and that includes me!).

I've had some very helpful advice or criticism privately and some publicly. The results are that I have produced a better, more accurate product as a result. I've also provided a little of that myself (as Ollie can perhaps testify) and will do so again. Having said that, on one particular occasion I thought I had seen a mistake on a manufacturer's pre-release photos of a kit and contacted them. The response I received proved conclusively that I was wrong and they were very much correct - if I'd have done that publicly not only would it have caused unhelpful and inaccurate questioning of the product, but I'd have looked pretty daft as well! - not that that is an unknown feeling.......

Edited by Rowan Broadbent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err... not meaning to stir the pot, but generally speaking what's so wrong about a modeler posting the proven, non-imagined errors in an clearly unoffensive way before contacting the manufacturer?

I, as a customer, want to know of such things before I buy the product. If he only contacted the manufacturer and not informed the public, I could have bought the flawed product. Which would make me very unhappy and unlikely to ever buy again from the same manufacturer.

Also, I want to know if indeed the manufacturer corrected the product. It increases my confidence in the manufacturer and increases the likelihood of repeat purchase from the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Err... not meaning to stir the pot, but generally speaking what's so wrong about a modeler posting the proven, non-imagined errors in an clearly unoffensive way before contacting the manufacturer?

I, as a customer, want to know of such things before I buy the product. If he only contacted the manufacturer and not informed the public, I could have bought the flawed product. Which would make me very unhappy and unlikely to ever buy again from the same manufacturer.

Also, I want to know if indeed the manufacturer corrected the product. It increases my confidence in the manufacturer and increases the likelihood of repeat purchase from the same.

Personaly i would consider it nicer if i was contacted first and made aware of the issues becuase i would hope then the reviewer might either say that things where being improved or hold off reviewing the bad product and review the corrected product.

Edited by ollieholmes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must be missing something here.

If I've got this right Gary reviewed a commercial product he bought with his own money and published his findings. I take it he's not contracted to do R&D or QC for the manufacturer, he acted in good faith and has solid grounds for his comments, so why exactly should he be expected to give heads up to the manufacturer rather than the paying public? Why on earth should he feel chastised or made to feel he needs to apologise?

John

Edited by John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personaly i would consider it nicer if i was contacted first and made aware of the issues becuase i would hope then the reviewer might either say that things where being improved or hold off reviewing the bad product and review the corrected product.

................I must disagree. You are asking for a false review.

A review is made of the product as it exists and is sold. To correct or not correct is at the discretion of the producer. To buy or not buy is at the discretion of the buyer. If it is incorrect as offered to the public for sale, it's a disservice to someone buying the product to not point out problems. Someone purchasing the broad tail has an interest in the late D-9's that go beyond the casual "I-think-I'll-build-a-German-airplane" crowd. They will assume that the part is as accurate as possible

A review is simply that...a review of an available product, whether that product is a kit, book, decal or resin aftermarket part. As a reviewer, is it not my duty to say "the king has no clothes"?

My mistake here was in not giving Ali an email prior to posting my thoughts. It would not, however, change the fact that, in my opinion, the part had a flaw that needed fixing by the modeler considering the purchase of that part.

Two years ago, in '08, I was asked to evaluate the CG graphics of the upcoming Eduard FW190D-9. I pointed out two glaring errors that were present in the images 1) an enclosed wheel well 2) an incorrect insert between the wheel wells. Both were mistakes that Tamiya made in their D-9 10 years ago. Lesson not learned even after pointing out the error to the company (Eduard). Eduard at least quietly did not show the wheel well cover as being used. The mold on the wing was to be used on the new D-11/D-13 so all was not lost there. I am quite proud of my bonafides re: long nose FW's and have spent years studying the plane.

No, Alley Cat is not a large company like Eduard. I am aware of the labor of love involved. And for me, correcting the part is a simple, quick fix. But to a spend £13 for a pair of them as opposed to £1 worth of plastic card and putty? Most modelers buy these items because they either lack the time or experience to make the part themselves.

Big or small, offer a part that is correct.

As we say here in Kentucky "I don't have a dog in this fight" or an agenda, I just want what I buy to be correct and well researched.

BTW, thank you Rowan for the kind words. The boatyard diorama occupied a 2 year chunk of my life.

Again, Ali I do apologize if I offended. No offense was meant or, I hope, implied. I could have done better in that regard.......and yes I will post pictures of "Brown 4" when completed and it will have that A2Zee part (albeit corrected)gracing it's tail.

Cheers,

Edited by Gary Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

................I must disagree. You are asking for a false review.

A review is made of the product as it exists and is sold. To correct or not correct is at the discretion of the producer. To buy or not buy is at the discretion of the buyer. If it is incorrect as offered to the public for sale, it's a disservice to someone buying the product to not point out problems. Someone purchasing the broad tail has an interest in the late D-9's that go beyond the casual "I-think-I'll-build-a-German-airplane" crowd. They will assume that the part is as accurate as possible

A review is simply that...a review of an available product, whether that product is a kit, book, decal or resin aftermarket part. As a reviewer, is it not my duty to say "the king has no clothes"?

My mistake here was in not giving Ali an email prior to posting my thoughts. It would not, however, change the fact that, in my opinion, the part had a flaw that needed fixing by the modeler considering the purchase of that part.

If there was a problem im not saying dont mention it. Im saying have the decancy to let me know there is a problem before publicising it and i will work my hardest to sort it and i would ask that you mention the issues are being worked on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary, I may not have been clear enough in my original post about your review. I have no problem in the review in the slightest bit. As others have noted it was a factual review done with comparisons to certain drawings to show your point, this is unlike many others who just complain about an item with no facts to back up the statements.

My only problem is that I personally would have contacted the manufacturer first. Any comments from the manufacturer would not have changed the outcome of the review, as in this case the item was incorrect, but it is how I do business. It also alows the manufacturer to possibly rectify the issue and correct the it so the information could be added to your review, good PR for everyone! Admittedly though I have been doing reviews on items provided for websites so I have a different perspective to some.

Edited by Harvs73
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue here is the tone of the original thread starting post. However it is meant and written, it reads with a tinge of glee. Whilst it's important to let those who want to observe and critique (in a constructive manner) to do so, particularly when they have crucial information the vendor may not have had access to - it's equally important to do so with a straight bat. Otherwise the reviewer runs the risk of undermining their own review, irrespective of the facts. That I suggest, is what is grating with some on here.

Marty...

Edited by marty_hopkirk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue here is the tone of the original thread starting post. However it is meant and written, it reads with a tinge of glee.

Marty...

Hello Marty,

Maybe I am grossly naive, but I am at a loss at the implication of glee. Really does it read that way? I have read and re-read what I wrote and just can't see it. Sorry if it comes across that way. :undecided:

critique (in a constructive manner) to do so, particularly when they have crucial information the vendor may not have had access to -

Marty...

The information on hand were the two public and common plans found in currently available commercial publications, Vol I of Jerry Crandall's "The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Dora", the most oft quoted and referenced work....something available to anyone wanting accurate information on this plane. The other available reference is the Kagero Vol 4 FW 190 series. Both would be the first source of material for someone producing anything related to FW's..................

..................I have nothing that is secreted away or unavailable.

Cheers,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean giving a bad rep to Ali's range? In fact, Ali and his range come smelling as a rose to me, willing to correct his one flawed product with no fuss.

Is it a one flawed product? Yes.

Will he correct it? He says he will.

Is he screaming bloody murder? Unlike one known Czech manufacturer, No.

If I ever get my hands on an Eduard Tempest, I'll buy Ali's corrected tail ASAP.

Vedran

PS

Now, on the subject of 1 mm error in 1/48 scale, well, we can open a nice new can of worms in a new topic :evil_laugh:B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I am grossly naive, but I am at a loss at the implication of glee.

However, the below does.

I'm afraid that A2Zee won't be overly happy with what I had to say. Pheon Models' Rowan Broadbent's reply is to the point and worth reading. Cheers,

A good confident reviewer would have come on here and just posted a link and let the review speak - I accept it may not have been designed to provoke, but that's the way it reads.

Marty...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK gents

As a manufacturer myself I can see both sides of this situation. While it may have been nice for Gary to contact Ali prior to posting his review, he wascertainly under no obligation to. On the other hand, I am sure Ali would have appreciated a heads up on the issue and it upset him that he didn't get one. Neither side is at fault here. How many times do big time manufacturers find out that their is something wrong with their product prior to someone posting a critical review? Heck I have seen kits deemed unbuildable in some cases ased on some low light sprue shots.

At the end of the day the issue is how each party handles the issues at hand. I think Ali spoe his peace and handled it the same way most of us who don't have huge factories with lots of payroll and the ability to just "redo" something. One thing that needs to be considered as well is that many of us, resin guys especially, that are smaller companies (compared to Aires etc) rely on outside help to do masters and in many cases we have to trust that the person doing the masters has done their homework and research to make it right. We cannot be experts on everything. However, when I do get masters from others I always try and do some research on them and make sure they fit the bill. Things do fall through the cracks though. Ali, said he will get the issue fixed and based on his business reputation I am sure he will make things right.

One thing that one must appreciate from Gary's review is that he actually backed up his findings with photos and that makes his review even that much more credible. It was much easier to grasp what he was trying to explain based on those photos. I also think the review was fair and balanced. At least it wasn't one of those reviews that is ased on ""this part is screwed" method. Gary went to great lengths to point out his findings. Actually at the end of the day with Gary being as knowedgeable on this subject as he is, he may find Ali asking him to look over a redone master to see what he thinks.

I hope this all made sense. :)

So, cheers to both Gary and Ali for keeping this civil. It really helps us little guys improve our products when we can get a fair, balanced and critical ear to listen to.

Cheers

Mike Reeves

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...