Tom S. (Login deskflyer) HyperScale Forums 93.136.63.32
Without any intention to create quarrel or a dispute...
July 30 2012, 1:47 PM
this in my opinion is one of the most non objective and vicious reviews I have ever seen. To an extent I find it amusing how reviewers struggle to explain why one should buy ZM kit, but this quasi review shows serious lack of good taste by the author.
...the reviewer seems to not be a big fan of Tamiya for what ever his reason. Though the ZM P-51 looks nice, I doesn't appear to compare with the engineeing, molding and crispness level of the Tamiya kit.
Maybe Tamiya turned him down for free review kits in the past, who knows
Considering all that the Tamiya kit has above and beyond the ZM
July 30 2012, 3:14 PM
kit, I find this "review" quite interesting. It strikes me as a paid advertisement. Very similar to a "review" of treatment options in medical literature paid for by pharmaceutical companies.
The review appears to be a straightforward description of the kit by a disinterested party. I might disagree abut the Tamiya kit being an "expensive toy," based on an examination of Tamiya's 1/32 Spitfire, but then again I haven't seen Tamiya's Mustang.
I'm not really a pompous ***; I just play one on HyperScale!
Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
IPMS-Canada #1426
Carrollton, Texas
The review, on its face, appears to offer a description of the kit and a comparison with another, similar, kit from another manufacturer. How is that ridiculous?
I'm not really a pompous ***; I just play one on HyperScale!
Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
IPMS-Canada #1426
Carrollton, Texas
If you can't see that calling the Tamiya kit "toylike"
July 30 2012, 5:19 PM
is totally ridiculous, then there is as little hope for you as there is for Mr. Benolkin! The Tamiya Mustang is as far from toylike as any plastic model ever made. While the 1964 Monogram 1/32 F-51 was toylike, the 2011 Tamiya Mustang is a work of art that very well may be the finest kit in production.
that I might not agree with that assessment, but a comparison is not a review. His review comments seem to be free of hyperbole, unlike your comment that the Tamiya Mustang "very well may be the finest kit in production."
I'm not really a pompous ***; I just play one on HyperScale!
Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
IPMS-Canada #1426
Carrollton, Texas
"the Zoukei-Mura kit is a highly detailed model whereas the Tamiya kit, just like the Spitfire and Zero kits before it, have working features to make it more of an expensive toy."
"I believe we have a new 'best kit of the P-51D in any scale (except 1/1)"
"While Pocher kits are long out of production, they are still the gold standard that no other car kit maker has ever come close to matching. I dare say that this kit has raised that bar above Tamiya as well."
"With an MSRP of around $150.00 USD, the Tamiya kit is not a bad value but gets more expensive when adding those detail and correction sets. Here is a very detailed model that has an MSRP of under $100.00 USD and won't need those corrections." What "details and corrections" is he talking about? All the Tamiya kit really needs is a set of tires to replace the rubber ones.
"the layout of this kit hints of a number of Mustang variants to follow from Zoukei-Mura. The separate tail may hint at an early-block P-51D (sans filet)." Sorry - that and any other early-block parts should have been in there from the start, that's one area the Tamiya kit wins hands-down, no doubt about it, is the ability to accurately model just about any WWII P-51D with what's in the box.
IMO, the only areas the ZM kits wins in is price-point and that's it's all-styrene if working with PE parts scares you, which would seem to be the case with the reviewer.
This message has been edited by barrowb98 from IP address 68.84.237.54 on Jul 30, 2012 5:50 PM
Christian A. (Login tourist51) HyperScale Forums 99.140.189.68
Everything.
July 30 2012, 5:58 PM
Everyone knows Mr. Benolkin reviews everything very favorably, including some crappy kits, which insures a steady flow of freebies.
He did however find faults with the Tamiya Mustang, one of the finest model kits ever produced, and gives a total pass to the Zoukei-Mura kit which has real accuracy issues.
The Tamiya kit isn't absolutely perfect of course, but the flaws are are minor and can easily be corrected.
Keep in mind that the Tamiya kit is probably the best kit he has ever reviewed (though unknowingly) and that he gives 5 stars to everything else.
I can deal with that, after all he clearly doesn't know anything about Mustangs.
The one thing I find hard to deal with is that he makes up stuff as he goes:
- "Conversely, the Zoukei-Mura kit is a highly detailed model whereas the Tamiya kit, just like the Spitfire and Zero kits before it, have working features to make it more of an expensive toy."
- "...you see many of those working features being removed from the Tamiya P-51D by many of the aftermarket detail sets that have followed to render the detail accuracy that was lost to allow for those working features."
I will not quote the conclusion, it's just too painful, you have to read it on your own.
The bottom line is that the Tamiya kit is the ONLY accurate Mustang in any scale on the Market.
The Z-M kit is far behind.
The bottom line is also that a review should describe the content of the box, if an opinion is offered it should be an informed opinion.
Making stuff up goes beyond a simple opinion and is reprehensible.
Curiously, he doesn't mention that both Tamiya and ZM are over engineered for the averaged
July 30 2012, 4:39 PM
...both Tamiya and ZM are over engineered for the averaged modeler.
However, and this has to be said, this average guy I'm mentioning who wants to try an approach to a top class 1/32 scale kit can build the Tamiya model quite easily and forgetting along the way many of the kit parts, specially in the engine area.
On the other way, I think it will be almost impossible to assemble the ZM model without all those invisible gizmos. It's a pity! Because their marvelous Skyraider can be made by both tribes: the beginners and the more demanding guys and this one appears to be complicated in areas where it should not be.
(well ... this is a mere suspicion by looking at the breakdown of the parts, nevertheless I surely know I will give this kit a try )
I just wonder how many copies would Tamiya sold of this Mustang if they had an approach similar to Hasegawa 1/32 109G: Minimum parts and price; maximum detail
He does say that "this kit's engine could be called over-engineered."
July 30 2012, 5:34 PM
And he goes on to say, "The rest of the airframe is equally super-detailed and if you recall the criticisms of Trumpeter for adding details into areas that can't be seen after assembly, those efforts pale in comparison to what Zoukei-Mura has produced here."
I suppose that's one way of saying the kit is over-engineered without actually saying it.
I'm not really a pompous ***; I just play one on HyperScale!
Michael McMurtrey
IPMS-USA #1746
IPMS-Canada #1426
Carrollton, Texas
"Over engineered for the average(d) modeler" is purely ....
July 30 2012, 6:13 PM
...an opinion by you and not really a fact. I have the Tamiya P-51 kit and to me (an average modeler imho), the engineering is near perfect for a mass produced, injection-molded kit.
ZM (according to all the sprue shots and pictures I've seen) is engineered in some areas that can't even be seen. So to me, it's overly engineered in the wrong areas.
And if it follows other ZM offerings, detail and molding is a bit soft. I will give them an "A" for effort but I haven't seen anything that puts it ahead of the Tamiya offering as the reviewer alludes to.
This message has been edited by Ghostmech from IP address 72.24.220.61 on Jul 30, 2012 6:16 PM
Aside from an absolute beginner (who isnt going to buy a kit over $50 anyway) pretty much anyone with any sort of experience can build a complex Tamiya kit.
What's the definition of this new over-used catchphrase "over-engineered"???
July 31 2012, 8:55 AM
Nobody has ever described to me what that means. It has too many parts? That's why they put an age recommendation on the box. The engineering of the Tamiya kit is nothing short of breathtaking. It's probably the single most well thought out design for a model kit in history. Clearly done by people who know models and who know the P-51. Anybody who can read basic instructions should have no problem assembling it. So how is it "over-engineered" for the "average modeler"?
The complete turbosupercharger intake piping on the Trumpeter 1/32 scale P-47D is required to be assembled for proper mounting of the cockpit tub, yet none of it is even remotely visible when the fuselage halves are glued together. The same thing occurred on the Trumpeter P-38L. Interesting? Sure. Educational? Yes. Needlessly complicated? I think so. Hence the term "over-engineered", which I think is an apt description.
Christian A. (Login tourist51) HyperScale Forums 99.140.189.68
Really?
July 30 2012, 5:43 PM
You can buy the Tamiya kit brand new for cheaper than the Z-M kit.
If you pay the full retail price for the Tamiya kit it's because you choose to do so, not because because you have no choice.
The price difference is a false argument.
Compared to every 1/32 P-51D before the Tamiya kit, the ZM kit is a masterpiece. But it can't hold a candle to Tamiya for accuracy nor for 'bang for buck'. Not in a million years.
Going out on a limb here but I would have been happy with a more basic new kit in 1/32 scale of the P-51. Don't get me wrong I like he Tamiya kit very much but, all the breakdowns of so many pieces to assemble a buttoned up aircraft with an accurate wheel well and positionable flaps with a nice cockpit would suit me just fine. And now the ZM breaking down the way it does to me seems just "plane" silly. Just my opinion.
This message has been edited by s2kx2 from IP address 173.58.106.45 on Jul 30, 2012 6:06 PM
....seriously, I personally WOULD NOT want a basic aircraft at that scale....especially with "Tamiya" stamped on the box.
I have come to expect more from them, whether its RC cars or models. They are always voted the best for a reason. If I wanted the basic aircraft, I would buy a Hasegawa...but Tamiya is synonymous with engineering and quality.
Ron Cline (Login roncline) HyperScale Forums 98.234.38.125
It's NOT just you...
July 30 2012, 9:42 PM
I haven't gotten the Tamiya Mustang simply because it comes with too many useless (to me) parts, such as the open gun bays and engine. I'd take an accurate kit with detail in the areas you mentioned ANY day over one with a jacked up price because it has a bunch of 'gee whiz' extras.
And contrary to what others may think or say, we are not alone in feeling this way...
"Zoukei-Mura has provided the best scale model of the P-51D Mustang ever produced."
July 30 2012, 8:48 PM
That statement right there totally invalidates the reviewer's credentials as far as I'm concerned. It's patently, demonstrably, and factually incorrect.
John Ferdico (Login ferdico) HyperScale Forums 98.155.131.251
(Hopefully) Objective observations while building the ZM P-51
July 30 2012, 10:43 PM
The review is clearly a fluff piece. While I think the landing gear is gimmicky, it is not included at the expense of fit or detail. To say the Tamiya kit is "toylike," suggests a lack of critical observation.
I am working on the ZM kit right now, with the Tamiya kit nearby (for comparison and reference), and my experience leads me to believe there is a dismissive attitude about the ZM kit. It inclines me to consider that criticism of the ZM kit might also suffer some bias. Here are some observations of my building experience:
Yeah, it's over-engineered, but the fit is every bit as good-- and ingenious-- as the Tamiya kit (so far) which makes it a breeze to build. It seems to me the complicated instructions and unorthodox engineering are what people might be reacting to. In truth, I am finding it darn fun to build.
The detail isn't really "soft," though it is over-scale in places. On the upside, I am finding it easier to wash and drybrush for this reason. Once finished, the detail is as crisp and convincing as on any model I have built or seen.
Some of that "invisible" detail is more visible than one might think. I was about to toss the radiator structure and piping, when a review of some walkaround photos reminded me that these are visible through the opening in the wing fairing, when the flaps are down. Checking the kits: sure enough, ZMs is built to see it, and Tamiya's is blanked off. Now, this is a pretty minor point, but ZM has done a lot of nice little things that it isn't getting credit for.
As I compare both kits' parts to a variety of reference sources (sticking to period photos as much as possible) I am finding all sorts of little discrepancies on both kits. I consider this quite normal, but in this context I point it out because neither kit seems more perfect or faithful than the other in this regard.
This applies to shapes and dimensions as well. The variances are so small that no matter your expertise
(apologies to Christian, for whom I have respect and esteem) I don't think one can claim one has more accuracy problems than the other. The prop blades, for instance, are slightly different, but whichever one you think needs fixing will require no more than a few swipes of a sanding stick. They are that similar, and this seems typical throughout the shape and dimension differences I've noticed.
Here's where Tamiya's kit is clearly superior: The completeness and fineness of the surface rivets. While ZMs scribing is nice, and generally accurate, nothing comes close to Tamiya's Mustang. Except Tamiya's Spitfire. Perhaps if you are of the opinion that 1/32 rivets are invisible, you might like the ZM kit even better...
No one-- save a few suspect reviewers-- is trying to convince anyone that the ZM kit is better than Tamiya's, only that it is also a really nice model. But I feel the urge to defend it, and occasionally point out Tamiya's few flaws, if only because I infer from some comments that the ZM P-51D is so inaccurate, badly engineered, or poorly molded that it is not worth buying. Take it from someone who is actually building the kit-- and who cares as much about Mustang accuracy as anyone (and as expert as most people not named Christian)-- no such thing is true. Yet. If the build proves otherwise, I am sure to let you know.
Posting or replying to messages on Plane Talking requires visitors to register:
First you will need to register with Network 54, the Forum provider. Click here to register with Network 54. (If you already have a Network 54 Login you can go straight to the next step)
Your user name and password will give you full posting privileges to all of HyperScale Forums.
Please note the following conditions of posting:
All contributions are welcome but please refrain from political or abusive comments, racially or religiously offensive remarks, swearing (including the thin disguising of swear words with asterisks and other characters), insulting language and crude metaphors. Please do not use Plane Talking as a public platform to complain about retailers or manufacturers (about issues such as broken or missing parts) before you have followed all normal channels to resolve any greivance. Plane Talking is not the place to conduct personal feuds or for posting personal attacks. Please do not post in capital letters only, as this is considered to be shouting and therefore impolite. Also, please do not post in 'texting message' word format. Any posts breaching these guidelines will promptly be removed from the server and the offender may be excluded from further posting to the HyperScale Forums. Off-topic posts may also be removed from the server.
In addition, Plane Talking is not a forum for the public criticism of the models that appear as Galleries or Articles. Please make any suggestions for improvements or criticism direct to the author via the email link at the bottom of the Article.
Finally, please note that this Discussion Group is privately operated and that I reserve the right to delete any post or cancel any registration for any reason whatsoever.
![[linked image]](http://i945.photobucket.com/albums/ad294/stinkyfeet2/hsvette.gif)
)
![[linked image]](http://modelingmadness.com/review/allies/us/usaaf/kol47frame.jpg)
