Excellent review Peter. I purchased this kit on a wing and a prayer and was very impressed with the quality of the moulding myself. I believe the black oil-like substance on the Spures is releasing agent.
AUD$123.50 + shipping at the always best buying estore in my country. Getting a bit rich, it'd want to be the bees' knees and one would really have to want it to pay that. Last pricey Revell kid I forked out for was their 1/48 Tornado Gr. 4, and I thought that was a stretch this time in 2017 at AUD$66.50! OK. It's not just Revell. Five years on, model kit prices across the board are scary. Thanks for the review regardless.
I bought and built the 2-seat night fighter variant of this when it first came about 5 years ago.... It's a lovely kit, with amazing detail, however, I did have a small amount of trouble around the cockpit tub with the fit. Took quite a bit of effort to get it fit correctly between the fuselage halves and the lower wing/ landing gear bay!
Be sure to paint the inner wheel-bay and cockpit undersides in NMF- that area was only painted RLM 02 on the prototypes and 1944 first production run planes.
Nice! I'm building this one at the moment. Well that is to say I started with it several weeks ago and there is a good chance it will be ready before winter begins... The only problem (wel , two problems) I have so far is with the Revell paint colours. Now I have dozens of Revell 14 ml tinlets but I'm not going to buy a new tinlet for every paint colour I haven't got - I also have dozens of Humbrol tinlets, and some Vallejo and Tamiya paints. The first problem is the CORRECT shade of RLM81 and RLM82. As everyone knows Revell paints are closely related to the RAL colour system, but not with the old Reichsluftfahrtministärium colours. I'm pretty sure Revell is slightly off although some of the late war RLM paints were not even clear to the factory or Luftwaffe people painting the aircraft themselves, in all the chaos in Nazi Germany at the time. I've visited quite a few sites where this problem (really a postwar problem for native English speakers) is being adressed, and I have come to my own conclusions. The second problem is I hate mixing paints. And why should I, when I have other shades form other brands available to me. As far as I know RLM82 ''lichtgrün'' was a rather light shade of green. RLM81 ''braunviolett'' had three variants it seems. I think I'll settle for Humbrol 88 or Revell 360 in stead of Humbrol 252, and Revell 42 for the darker shade. Or maybe another colour... I still haven't decided for RLM81 and RLM82.
G'day Peter, I'm no defender of Revell or any other model manufacturer. To quote you: "Yes, but Revell made a LOT of poor kits...," that may well have an element of truth. There is, however, no way they are on their own in that category. One should look at the bigger, historical picture of injected plastic models. There are so many factors that influence the finished products of model companies. Age of, and money spent on moulds; amounts of kits produced from any given set of mould assemblies; the expertise of the moulding employees and maintenance given to mould equipment etc., the list goes on. With the possible exception of Wingnut Wings, and a new ‘off-shoot’ company I’ve just learned about in New Zealand; we would be hard pressed to identify a company that hasn't produced a lot of 'rubbish' kits at some point in their histories. It has been common practice for model companies to contract out work to moulding facilities in other countries, (in the US it's 'molding' facilities). Airfix has had kits produced in India, France etc. Revell, a German parent company have had kits made in nearly every country that have had advanced moulding capabilities. Then there are situations where model making companies have been taken over, or merged; sometimes falling into the hands of companies that have had no history in model making. I believe one of the world's experts in the history of model making is Mr Alan Bussie of Old Model Kits in the US. He has an encyclopaedic knowledge of wooden, plastic and metal model making going back many decades. Here, in Australia, Mr Harry Houdini [real name], has been building model kits since childhood and, like me, is closer to 70 than he is 60. He is also extremely well versed in the minute detail of wooden and plastic model kits. His speciality is devising ways to make modelling easier and more enjoyable for both beginners and experienced modellers. Peter, you hit the nail on the head when you remarked that buying model kits is like a 'lucky dip', only, I think, you were referring mostly to Revell. It is exactly the same with other famous, large and smaller, lesser known model manufacturers. One of the reasons why there is a burgeoning aftermarket model industry is because of the historic shortcomings of model kits the world over. When I was a kid and WW2 was not so far back in history; it was almost 'compulsory' for children, mainly boys, to make their first model aircraft a Supermarine Spitfire or a Hawker Hurricane. The frail quality of plastics back then meant the models had to be made with thick mouldings to survive the handling of young children, or if the company was on a budget the kits had thinner parts prone to snapping or deforming. It was common practice for companies to replace broken, bent and/or missing pieces free of charge. The whole industry was aimed squarely at children and, as such, these companies were seen only as toy manufacturers. Damage to the products was expected. They were never seen, back then, as static display models with any kind of planned longevity. Through pure chance, the only dedicated model or 'hobby' shop in my State's capital city happened to be an early Airfix distributor; so that is the model company I 'grew up' with. Only in my mid-teens did kits start to appear from the US, then followed kits from European countries. Most of the early 'white box' Airfix models were, in retrospect, quite decent in overall quality; yet for years I had a 'benchmark' but nothing to compare it with. Now we have, if anything, an oversupply of model choices and, just sometimes it gets a little crazy. At the present time we are going through a 'Parts Race'. It now seems like quality in plastic model kits is determined by the ever-growing number of parts each model has to complete one build. Just fine for experienced modellers; if a novice or first time modeller chooses to build a kit with 273 parts, the crushing disappointment of that model's probable failure can turn a person off plastic modelling forever. To this day I have no clue where most of my first tank track parts ended up... so began the tales of the 'Carpet Monster', except a large chunk of my very first tank track 'vanished' as I was working on a wooden floor. ;) I do commend Airfix, and any other company, that focuses on making kits for beginners; what they are really doing is taking their craft back to the beginning of the hobby. I'll end with a prediction. I see a future where the fundamental costs of mass, 3D printing will plummet and, then, begin a serious challenge to the entire moulded model kit industry. Even now it's theoretically possible, given the money and computer expertise, to produce one's own 3D kit for later assembly. Just the other day I saw a 1/72 plastic kit advertised for a retail price of AUD$299.99 ! Perhaps the 3D printing 'revolution' is closer than anyone might imagine. Cheers, Peter and all the best. BH
Thanks for the informative comment Bill. 👍🏻 But if you watch my other vids you will soon see how Airfix get a real beating for their dodgy quality in the 70's & 80's in particular...indeed we have a Premiere later today on the channel of a 1972 tooled Airfix that has plenty of issues...see you later I hope. 👍🏻
You seem quite well informed about modelcraft... perhaps you can explain something I've always wondered about? Why are aircraft models always done in 1/32 scale, while armor, vehicles and figures are usually 1/35 scale? Granted, the difference is only slight, but it makes it very difficult to try to incorporate both into dioramas, displays, etc. Any thoughts or ideas?
Charles Larson Hi Charles, Sorry for my late reply, only just saw your question, which is a very good one! I saw another RU-vid vid a few months ago that explained there is no technical reason but that Tamiya started 1/35th scale for armour in the 1960's whereas 1/32 was already established as a scale for aircraft prior...it seems bizarre and rather annoying, doesn't it?
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab Thanks Peter, that helps. I had another thought as I was reading your answer... If 1/32 scale was already established in the 1960s for aircraft, I'm guessing it had long been based on the Imperial system, thus 1/32" in scale would equal 1' in full size. But when Tamiya (in a nation using the Metric system) started producing armor kits, 1/35 scale was used because it could easily be scaled from Metric. Sound reasonable?
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab A long established scale for plastic toy soldiers in the US is 1/35th. I think it predates the 1960's. This may be related to the armour conventional scale. I saw no 1/32 scale aircraft prior to 1960.
This may be the one I want. It is the only one I have seen with separate flaps. I'm sure I read that they are always down when grounded, but I have seen photos that appear to negate this statement. I'd like to be accurate on something this largely visible.
Being a German owned and run company now, Revell are subject to current GERMAN (and EU) laws... one of which specifically forbids any portrayal of Nazi Symbology - including "part-work" substitutes - which means they would be Prosecuted for each and every example, even if they are "Assemble yourself" markings, and a separate fine levied for each and every such sheet produced. (ie If they printed 10,000 sheets, they would be fined 10,000 separate times. - and those fines are pretty hefty, too.) So its easier, cheaper and simpler to leave it to the Aftermarket to fill the gap. This is also why certain SS symbols are never found in German kits of armor or vehicles. (One SS panzer Division had a Circular Hakenkreuz as their divisional Insignia) I believe the RUNIC SS letters are also frowned on. No use ranting about it - It is very unlikely to change, EVER. BTW Revell's new 1/48 Bristol Beaufighter kit is also a cracker. They do, ATM, a Beaufighter TFX (Both types of fin inclued and 2 types of tailplanes/elevators, both with dihedral) and a Beaufighter NF Mk 1 ( BoB era, With the early flat tailplanes!)
Airfix have still to sell their kits in the EU.... (Brexit notwithstanding) So it's cheaper to them to omit the Hakenkenkreuz. The Asian Companies can produce the assemble types or simply trim the decals . It is not against their laws. Companies like Eduard (Czech, so recent EU) simply place all Hakenkreuzen on the decal sheet where it can be easily trimmed off for EU sale, and retained on the sheet, for the rest of the world.
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab One other note_ about Airfix using one giant baggie for their grey sprues - Don't you think we have enough plastic pollution? Plus, if you check, they do try to take care that the major parts (wings fuselages are packed back to back (ie: With the EPMs facing each other), rather than face to face (ie with outer surfaces touching each other. I don't really have a problem with it, as long as they pack it right.
@@brettpeacock9116 That's a bit of a weak excuse for Airfix though, Brett. They could use biodegradeable or recyclable materials. I lost count of how many Airfix kits arrived with broken or scratched parts due to this. Airfix kits are not cheap anymore, and they need to apply more thought to it, especially when the single bags are hugely oversized, which rather undermines the defence.
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab Problem is that the recyclable/bio-degradable "plastics" are all 2x to 4x the cost of the standard baggies per unit (at least they are in NZ). Economics! Once the recyclables are made in enough quantity, that will change. I suspect they order their bags in bulk at only maybe 3 standard sizes and pack the kits according to which sprue tree fits best in that sixed baggie! Besides all that extra makes for padding!@ BTW, ever since the "new Airfix kits came out, I have had only 1 kit contain a broken part and 3 kits with a loose part or two. None were badly scuffed. And that was after a18000km journey to NZ! NZ usually gets the second production run kits, which are UK made, rather than the Indian pressed first run.
Are you kidding me? This is a perfect example of the short comings of an 'in box' review! I agree, it all looks promising, lots of sprues, lots of parts, but also lots of flash & nasty mold joint lines. The fit of almost everything in the forward fuselage is terrible & if you want the gun bay doors closed, then welcome to a world of pain when trying to deal with the gaps & sink marks without destroying the molded on detail. 0/10 - would not buy again, get the Trumpeter version instead!
Fair comment, I didn't build it: But I have said this repeatedly...that is why I like to also do 'After-build' reviews like Tamiya Spitfire Mk.1 (1/48) and recent Kinetic Sea Harrier (1/48) ...in both cases, as (old) Luke Skywalker said: "This is not going to go the way you think!" (And both had initially great in-box review scores).
Stop moaning man...the 1:32th scale Revell kits made the last few years are almost flash free. The reboxing from old kits obviously are not that good since they keep using the same old molds. Then again...for real reviews,who follows this channel anyway???
