Fantastic Video bud!! I feel Eduard is a major rip off.. He in the U.S. people always 'roll their eyes' when you mention that company.. they are hated like Revell.. their kits are often from other molds.. they include a couple of extra parts and charge CRAZY prices.. NOT WORTH IT. this is why their sales are flat. The only good model they make are the Mig-21. THAT's IT. Once again.. ty for the fantastic and detailed video!!
Really enjoyed this video. Would love to see more experienced (than me) modelers do this type of comparison. Maybe they are out there and I just haven't seen them. Regardless, thank you for this.
Hi Jason, great comparison. It's really interesting how two different manufacturers approach the same subject. I guess it all comes down to what the modeler wants in the end. If you want a decent looking model, ease of building, it's Tamiya. If you want a kit you can buy at a reasonable price and more of a challenge to build, it's Eduard. Thanks for sharing.
Nice comparison. For what it's worth; I don't find the Eduard kits to be as easy to build. They are not the Lego style build that Tamyia's kits are often referred to which means you clearly have more room to make an error in the build. But, hands down from my experience Eduard beats them out in detail. All comes down to how you want to model and whats important to you in your builds. Enjoyed your comparison and thoughts on the two kits.
Just think of how nice a model you would have if you combined the two. Eduard takes it up another notch if you include the resin cockpit. One of Tamiya's Achilles Heels is their decals. I'm really surprised that they haven't improved them over the years, not that the Eduard set is better in general. Plenty of aftermarket out there though, especially for this subject. Great comparison video!
Great video! Wonder how Hasegawa compares ? Over here you can get a 1/32 scale example abit cheaper than a 1/48 scale, Eduard is more expensive, I find assembly fit is so-so on Eduard. Cheers!
I was going to suggest Tamiya was an older kit, but having checked it was issued in 2017. Certainly a current issue Tamiya kit would or could be super detailed, but those tend to be £80 ish these days. I think we are paying for ease of assembly and fit with Tamiya for a mid range kit, whereas new manufacturers (Eduard/Special Hobby in this case) tend to go for more detail. I'm not so sure the Eduard kit would be much worse than Tamiya assembly would be either. Having recently built the Special Hobby Tempest II, both mistakes I made were my own fault, due to my unfamiliarity with their design process and instructions.Both fit and detail were otherwise excellent. My biggest bug bear with Tamniya is their apparant unwillingness to issue some aircraft as kits at all and they continue to sell older poorer quality models that can catch people out. Anyway, in conclusion, it seems you should build the Eduard kit with some tamiya parts using the pilot and built the Tamiya kit under "repair" in a diorama.
Great comparison Jason, definitely makes you think when it comes to detail. Although, it could really depend on the kit itself. Now my question would be, what was the year the molds were tooled? Could that be a factor in the difference between the detailing on the Eduard kit, when comparing it to the Tamiya kit? I would be curious about that. I don't know if that might factor into the differences you're seeing. Just a thought. Nevertheless it still is a great comparison video. Thank you for sharing.
I mostly build Eduard kits when it comes to aircraft. I have tried many companies and I find that Eduard models have great detail for the money you are spending on the kit. I have never had issues with parts not being aligned or that they do not fit together. The kits also do not need any extensive flash removal and hardly any putty application. I had only one instance when I had fix a small gap, whcih happened with one model. To me Tamiya is overpriced for what you get.
👍 I hope Tamiya engineers/designers are watching reviews such as this. Over priced and under done imo..they were the leaders. Great to see competition in the market place
@@fridrih-erkh would love to see your evidence. I can only judge on what I see when I compact the two kits. Its absolutely not as straightforward as Tamiya is always best, they have some really bad kit too
@@ModelkitStuff I have Tamiya, Zvezda and Eduard on my hands. Eduard is the worst model of this trio. I don't consider riveting an important advantage. In detailing, Eduard is simpler. In the docking of parts, Eduard has a lot of problems. The quality of Edward's glazing also raises questions. There are no transparent side lights. And most importantly, it has very serious problems with geometry. Just for an example. Edward's landing gear is 2.5mm larger. And this is not all of his problems.
The gear legs of the Eduard are 2 mm too long and skinny like F/G-2 gear. Even the expensive Eduard bronze legs are fat but still 2 mm too long. Surprisingly, Tamiya has the only correct fat gear for post G-2 variants in all 48 scale(!), except for the ancient Revell G-10 gears of 1979... The leg difference is massive. Eduard also has a tail 1 mm too deep, while Tamiya is correct and agrees with Zvezda. The Tamiya windscreen is much better than Zvezda(and all others), but Tamiya has 2, so Zvezda can borrow one to make a very good thin legs G-2! Eduard G-10s still have skinny F legs but add completely wrongly shaped noses... Eduard G-6/14s are better than their G-10s noses, and so decent, but still not quite as correct as Zvezda or Tamiya in nose depth.
