Despite the fact tolerances were off, among other items, your recovery for a complete showcase model was very successful ! Much appreciate the heads-up for this kit. Well done ! 🙂👍
Thank you for the in depth review I found it very illuminating. I have never built Eduard However I see the kit designers of this company are the sadistic school of thought of give the builder as many pains as possible. I have built a Monogram 1/48 Zero and it had working landing gear and rotating props and that kit is a 1960's kit that was easy in comparison to this Eduard mess. I have also built a 1/48 Tamiya float Zero that was an absolute joy to build with beautiful fit and finish I only wish all the companies are as good as Tamiya they are fun to build.
I love to see you having a rant .Not because i like to see you suffered, but you remind me of myself. I can understand why my daughter laughs at me. I cracked up when you were going on about the gun sight. Great vid though mate. 👍👍
I for one appreciate your rants and reviews. Gives me an idea of what to expect while window shopping for kits. I'm not a novice builder, but I'm no master modeler and if something has frustrated you then look out if it gets me lol ginger rage and flying kits 😂😂😂
Welcome back Peter! Despite the numerous loose teeth from all the gnashing. You have managed to make that Zero a Ten. Funny awhile back I was looking at that exact kit with its beautiful artwork and the excellent movie in mind . But in the end I went with the Tamiya one . I can’t help myself . Tamiya is my “ten” and has been for many decades….
Hi Peter. I'm having a bit of trouble posting this comment! I can't quite see for certain but it looks to me at 0.02 that the oleo legs on the undercarriage are facing inwards away from the undercarriage doors. On a zero they face outwards, towards the undercarriage doors I think? This might indicate the legs are the wrong way round. Could this explain some of the fit issues in this area? I just checked the model I built and mine are indeed the other way around to yours. On line pictures have them facing outward, toward the undercarriage doors. UA-cam won't let me post a link to the many photos available.
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab i am so sorry Peter! Not my intention to be a "rivet counter" and certainly not my intention to create more work. I simply wondered if this accounted for some of the fit issues with this area. This does not excuse some of the obvious defficiencies elsewhere. I do love your "rant" videos. Funny and accurate. Helpful to others. Again my apologies for creating work!
Beautiful detail. Wow you did a great job on that zero. I to have been battling a bug. But I banged off two messerschmitt Bf109e-3s. One tamiya one air fix. Most enjoyable pain in the ass flu bug I’ve had to deal with. 😅
Hi Peter , happy to see you back again and great after build review as always , huge follower of the show and thanks for your reviews and advice , keep up the great videos and may start the hobby boss A10 I purchased from you soon , all the best Peter and best regards, Rob .
They are the greatest 1/48 WWII kits ever made imho, especially with the new decals. They do need a vacu-form Malcom hood, which was inevitable, but even there the plastic is ok, if left open... (I tend to close the canopy)
@@wrathofatlantis2316 No they're not. With what Peter has ranted about here I can say with confidence that the Tamiya A6M5 from the 70's is a better kit. YEAH it's a dated tool sure but it's assembly puts a lot of modern kits to shame, including Eduard.
Glad to know you and your good lady are on the mend, l don't mind the rants because it saves me pain and heartache just sorry you at too but you overcame and have a really nice Zero to show for it 👏l now know exactly what you mean about the build of a kit l have now completed 7 kits and out of all of them the one that was a real joy to do was a Tamiya 1/48 ME 109 E4 and no l am not a fanboy 🤣 l am fan of kits that go together well and instructions l can understand, looking forward to Mosquito updates and coming reviews 👍
Nice job on the Zero model despite the issues you had with the kit. I agree with you on Eduard test building its kits before releasing them and fixing any fit issues. It is the smart thing to do if they want to promote confidence in their brand.
Glad you are on the mend!!!!! There has been one serious bug around! As for Eduard, I have a serious love-hate relationship with them......Love their subjects & marking choices.......Hate to build them! On a side note I built an Arma 1/48, which to my mind reminded me of an earlier Eduard effort.......At every stage it went together PERFECTLY! Anyways love your vids and get better soon. Might have to get my Mosquito out now!!!
With respect Peter the modern day Eduard kits are first well presented , second fabulous value for money and with weekend editions pocket money prices . I'm not into Zeros but that's my Birthday ( Pearl Harbour ) ! Maybe a bit to much red wine going on ? For moi bring on the cold Pinot Grigio ? Anyway always enjoy the videos .
@@Phantomflyer56 I paid for it, I built it, and so am entitled to my view. I needed more red than I had in stock to cope with this one...And regarding value for money: why on earth do they put 2 in a box? 😨 Just give us one, but cheaper! It's a bit mad TBH. But Thanks for watching & commenting though. ☺️
Blimey! I don't think I've heard you use language like that before 😂. Lovely result though Peter. A testament to your skills. Good to see you back lad 👍🏽
is it a rescaled 1/72 and the scaling calculations were off from the CAD to tooling, i've had it a couple of times with 1/48 planes 'especially' the tail wing root gaps/
Hi Peter, great to see you back. I'm in the middle of building the Eduard "Hamp" version of this kit, from the Weekend Edition. Just for a laugh I thought I'd also build a Tamiya 1982 vintage Hamp alongside the 'Modern' Eduard kit. Like you, I have been swearing whilst putting the over-fiddly Eduard kit together (it still isn't complete) whilst the Tamiya version went together with no issues. OK it's not as subtly detailed but not by much considering it was moulded in 1982! I also have the two fairly recent Zeros (with figures) released by Tamiya and I expect those to be the go-to 1/48 Zeros after making the Eduard kit. I can't wait to see you relaxing whilst making your big Mossie. Take care. DD
Thanks! Agree...To be honest, having recently reviewed the Tamiya Zero kit, in all areas except fine surface detail, it runs rings around this Eduard disaster.
Pretty much what you described is why I bought a 3d printer and learned CAD to make my own parts, and bought a Siser Juliet cutter to make my own mask. And as you said, from this manufacturer and the price we pay...it should be damn near perfect.
The Academy kit appears to be much better, the wingtips fold, and the kit is $40 CAD. Granted the painting instructions are poor, but I suppose the Eduard instructions could be downloaded as a guide
Glad you are feeling better Peter. Your Zero looks great. Shame about the build experience. Eduard are not the best engineered kits but this does show that buying dual boxings or multiple kits before you've built one is not the best idea ( I've been caught out here myself! ), but of course, a lot of us buy quicker than we build! If Eduard had Tamiya's engineering they would be as good as Arma 😉 Im still going to buy Eduard kits, I really enjoyed their Tempest Mk.II and I'm looking forward to their P-51B and when they get around to doing a P-47 I'll have to retire!Intresting to see what you do with the Mosquito, it should be a fun build.
Not too much of a rant, so much as calling out issues during the build. Sure, model builders can expect to have to make effort to adapt to issues here and there, but there's a level of expectation. Eduard has built up an expectation - so I can't fault you for your perspective. Looking forward to your next, hopefully more enjoyable project. Get well soon.
Ohh god I have a dual combo of this… Btw despite the complications I like Eduard because they are pretty busy making these WWll subjects. Looking forward to their P51b and P40e kits. Right now I’m at the painting stage of their FM-2 Wildcat and for my surprise it went together without any issues. Some of their other kits were just meh… That Mosquito will be FUN. Take care!
Interesting tales of woe Peter. I do wonder if the proliferation of in-box reviews where panel lines, rivets, PE and fine details are salivated over and trumpeted while construction is rarely considered or tested has somewhat skewed the over-favourable reputations that some manufacturers have.
I had the same issue with excessive sprue contact points on radial engine parts when building the ICM 1/72 Do-17 z10 and z2 kits. really irritating design flaw in an otherwise flawless kit.
You have made a great job of it. Trouble is it’s going to put off a lot of people. I am not going to want anything with that sort of basic fundamental issues. I guess it’s going to be a Tamiya zero for me. Thanks for the honest review
really enjoyed that video last night - great end result with your Zero . Got to admit I prefer the 1990's Hasegawa Zero , as it seemed easier to assemble , and just as detailed ( especially with etch ) - I have made about 4 of them and they were a joy to made . Not like your hassles with assembly , you are right the tolerances should be better for a crucial part . i am surprised Eduard have full length nose machine guns - as Hasegawa / Tamiya have just the Gun Butts showing in the Cockpit , and you added the nose guns after cowling was sealed ( I think Master Model brass machine guns are better than the Eduard kit examples ) - the only Eduard Kit I made was Fw 190A-8/R2 ProfiPack edition Eduard No. 8175 - and it was beautifully made and designed - but needed care during assembly, it certainly wasn't shake and bake ( or Tamiya ) . I think you are dead right , Eduard are not putting the old effort into the kits being well designed to be assembled easily , and have rested on the laurels . I think it is arrogance .
Sadly a lot of manufacturers suffer from these issues that should not be happening. The two best kits fit wise I have made recently is the Meng Apache, the fit is flawless, also Border models Stuka, again the fit is fantastic, but the instructions are terrible.
Hi peter glad to see you back to your old self nearly,great video on the zero it’s a shame you had such a bad experience,i for one will not be buying this kit i will stick with Tamiya,well done mate.
Just took possession of a HK Models 1:48 B-17F, due to watching Masters of the Air. Any issues with that kit, I should be aware of ? Glad to hear you're both on the mend by the way. Nasty bug season out there.
Hi Peter glad to see you back. Your opening shot of the Zero nI noticed something wrong with the undercarriage,, then looking at the instructions it shows the wheels and scissor joint should be sandwiched between the undercarriage leg and the undercarriage door. You have somehow managed to rotate the undercarriage leg 180 degrees? or you've attached the left leg to the right hand door? hence the undercarriage and wheels are sitting at the odd angle. If you get the chance check-out the Airfix 1/72 Zero and you'll see what i mean.Maybe it can be put down to your feeling very under the weather as I've done something similar in the past. I agree with a lot of your comments especially about the sprue attachment points , a problem many manufactures have not only Eduard. It sometime seems the big parts have nice fine attachment points but when it come to the smaller delicate parts many manufactures seem to out of their way and use too many, thick, hard to reach sprue attachment points that it's virtually impossible to remove the part without breaking the part; the antenna of the Airfix 1/72 Bf 109E being a case in point. I actually noticed the problem in you 'in box' review, and was surprised that you missed it. Anyway thanks for the review with rant, I'll not be making this kit, not because of your review but becauses I only make 1/72 aircraft.
Hi, nice build, glad to see you overcome the illness. One question, the wheels seams oddly mounted, I building the Type 11 this days and I think the strut is mounted 180 degrees off. Or it is something in the instructions ?
Beautiful build, I really love it, well worth the battle you had with the kit and not feeling well. I haven't built a zero since the 70's ( it was a Matchbox one). I would never have noticed the undercarriage issue that you discussed in the subsequent video. I would like to build one now, but I think I will invest in a Tamiya! I like Edauards after market products, but I am unsure about the kits, too many people appear to be unhappy with them. I have one Eduard model in my stash. It is a 48th scale Mig 21 MF, weekend edition. Do you have any experience with this model, and if so, what are your opinions on it? It doesn't have the new style decals that you describe! Thanks for another great video. It's very enjoyable as always. All the best, Seb.
Despite all the "Eduwardian" horrors, you got a very nice model out of it:-) I may have got this wrong but wasn`t Matchbox kits superior to most in the 70s and early 80s? Your ranting is in its place and well-founded. After all, model builders are also consumers👍🍻
Spark plug rings I would mold the wires with plugs on them too. Make them with that black plastic Tamiya used on the landing gear. Couldn't even break it. LOL
Speaking of anniversaries, your review of the Zero is appropriately timed, given that yesterday (Australian time) was the eighty-second anniversary of the bombing of Darwin; the only strike mounted by the Japanese which synchronised operations by both the land and carrier-borne air-arms of the Imperial Japanese Navy in two attacks some ten minutes apart. Another fun fact: Japan was the only combatant in World War II whose pursuit of several advanced projects, most notably the A7M Reppu (the designated successor to the Zero) was terminated due to earthquakes destroying the assembly lines. Get better soon and keep up your excellent videos.
Yes it was, and it was a complete rip-off of . If you observe closely, there are American battleships at anchor in Darwin Harbour. Spare me!! Without a doubt one of the worst films ever made, only matched by with the guided-missile frigates in the background. If film studios wish to make military history-based films, at least they should put a smidgen of effort into getting the history right. Thats my rant for the day.@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab
The Grinch of Plastic Modelling 😅. I LOVE YOUR RANTS!! Can you do a rant review of this pseudo WWI airplane modelling basementshop manufacturer from Poland, sure you know it, I'm talking about Lukegraph. I would interesting to see what you have to say about those super expensive resin/3d printed kits...
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab Sorry Peter, couldn't resist! I'm a recent discoverer, and subscriber, of your channel, and am enjoying your general manufacturer reviews and, especially, your rants!
I feel your pain Peter. I've got 2 of these in my stash and the Rufe too. Not looking forward to it follwoing the issues you've had. Anyway, glad to see you back and hope you get better soon...
Peter;- This project sounds very similar to Revell's 32 scale FA/18 Super Hornet debacle. To remain constructive and potentially helpful to Eduard, why don't you send them a copy of the instructions with all of your notes and write them a detailed email outlining your observations? At the end of the day Peter it's all about a constructive outcome, and this would be a positive approach to Eduard on their product. All the best and I hope you feel much better soon Sir.
Thanks. But this video shows all the issues clearly. Eduard need to completely rethink their strategy and stop thinking that ignoring the customer is a good business strategy.
I am NOT above fixing and revamping as required. My biggest pet bitch is that for the money asked we expect fairly precise products. I do not like to be treated as "dumb ass modelers will buy anything". Yes, I can fix it but it should not be necessary. Thanks, Dane
I must say I've not had any fit issues with my zero. My only disappointment with the kit was the gear struts and their somewhat vague fit to the wheel wells. As for your anti biotics, they don't cure viral infections so it makes sense you weren't given any
Try eduards wildcat or new tooling FW190. Fits like a glove. Eduard are ment to use with their extra parts- engine, metal undercarriage legs, flaps. Plus those are ment for experienced modellers.
I have 50 years experience, (Whch I think is OBVOIUS from my results...) and someone in the chat tonight said the recent 190 was horrible fitting if you wanted to close up the engine cowls? ...And then there are the bloody awful decals...Ooof!
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-LabThe new 2017 FW-190s don't have an open cowling panel option. They have by far the best airframe, but bad landing gears and cowling: I mix Hasegawa parts as Tamigawas are nowhere near Eduard since Eduard's 2013 Spitfires. The Eduard decals work for me, especially peeling over metal (no peeling on camo for me).
@datamek Still doesn't excuse the shotty fit, and also if it takes this many kits to find one that's good, then the company probably needs to clean house.
@@Lv-sl3rm In 1/48th WWII, Eduard is the world leader since 2013. All the runner ups are Ukrainian or Russian, with only 2-3 comparable Tamiya kits in that period. I do like Tamiya's Ki-61 and 109G-6, and their F4U of 1998, but that is not that many, and good Eduards in 10 years now outnumber them, like their Wildcat, Tempest, P-51D etc...
So does this mean you aren't making the other zero model out of the dual combo kit then? 😉 I also think I'm getting your chest infection. Joy! As for this kit - I already have a Rufe (floatplane) version, so now I know what to expect. At least it doesn't have the undercarriage, and perhaps the new lower wing panel in this kit fits better. Not holding my breath though. PS: I just opened my kit up and dry fitted the tailplanes and both wing halves. Perfect fits, on L/E & T/E. Tailplane parts a firm push required, but no reshaping, or sanding required just the usual clean-up on sprue attachment points. I prefer tight to loose, you can fix tight with a scrape of a blade. As for the flaps - since these are simple split flaps like a spitfire, they could be scratchbuilt, but I can see why Eduard didn't include them. They want to sell you a set of replacement pe parts for an extra £17 - more than half the cost of a single zero kit or Brassin parts for a bit less.
Good news on the tailplanes, though mine couldn't be forced in as way too big for the hole. I gave the second Zero to a relative when I bought it as I didn't want two.
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab it seems that my comments have been hidden from public view. I offered sincere points about the landing gear that highlighted a glaring error on your part. It was not my intention to belittle you or insult you - it's the kind of mistake we are all capable of. I just spent hours making some lovely metal handles for a Sherman tank engine deck, placed the improved deck grills on the tank, painted a complex north african camouflage scheme - only then noticed that I'd put the grills on the wrong way round. The fact my comments now seem to be hidden smacks of petulance and an unwillingness to accept you made a mistake. I had thought better of you. I've seen a good few of your videos recently and enjoyed them, and respected your fairness and integrity, but I have to say this casts doubt on that. I assure you I wasn't trying to be antagonistic, and I understand that you're well within your rights to block people who just want to badmouth you, but that is honestly not what I was doing. Maybe you could consider that while you believe I've slighted you, it's actually the case that by blocking my comments, you've slighted me. I would sincerely like to resolve this and will gladly delete this comment if you 'unhide' my original comments. It was only ever my intention to help ensure your critique of the kit was fair, and maybe solve a problem you had with it for your own benefit.
@@bengreen171 I think you have jumped to conclusions slightly...I was in fact investigating your points, you were one of 3 who made the same point. You are correct regarding the gear. I have spent the last 4 hours rebuilding the model with the legs now fully correct. I will show this again on the channel in the near future. Are we all good now? 👍🏻
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab excellent news. My only concern was that my comments had suddenly disappeared from public view - I checked on incognito mode. But I'm more than happy to take back my accusations, and I hope it wasn't too much hassle correcting the issue. Sadly, my Sherman engine grills were too well stuck down, so time for some judicious tarps and ammo boxes to cover up the offending area.
Thing is is that if the kits weren't as expensive as they were I'd accept some issues, but this is pretty poor. Built an early 80's Tamiya boxing of a 1970's tooling for the A6M5 Zero, and the fuselage fit into the wings like a snap kit. If Tamiya could do that then then what's Eduard's excuse? And sadly idk if they'll loose enough sales because the Eduard fans seem to be dedicated....
An excellent result from a poorly engineered model kit. Almost all model kits have some flash to remove and sanding to complete the model. Are different factories producing some of the plastic sprue parts?? Perhaps this could be the reason for poor alignment of parts.
You should have mentioned the lack of mold polishing on the leading edge. Looked pitted! A la Trumpeter. These folks live in the world of CAD. Not the real world.
That's for sure, I built the Tamiya 1/48 scale Zero a while back and it only took a couple of days. The Eduard kits do have an unusual and rare selection of models. but they require quite a bit of flash removal.
Do you like Tamiya decals ? You rant on Eduard, but Tamiya and Hasegawa decals are worse and modellers complain about those for years and nothing changed. True...Eduard kits are overengineered, but their surface detail is second to none and you always and up with lots of spareparts which you can use for other kits (to spruce up older and lesser detailed models) so you don't have to invest in aftermarket stuff. Ofcourse...i also like Tamiya for their ease of building, but i don't mind to do some extra work, it's the end result that makes everything worthwhile. To me, it gives me even more satisfaction, when i have to do a little bit more than building a foolproof Tamigawa kit. Eduard is also very customer friendly in buying their kits, you can choose to go cheap with their Weekend editions or Overtrees and you still end up with a very nicely detailed model. Greetings from Holland. Ps I'm happy with most kit manufacturers and because of them we can choose what we like and want to build and they all have their hits and misses. Thanks to reviewers like you Peter, we now know what to expect from a kit and if it's worth the extra hassle or not ! Someone already pointed out, that you made a mistake with the landig gear and that's the reason it didn't fit the way it should (yes we are human and we all make mistakes 😉).
Yeah... just like the Revell Dauntless that was tooled back in 1960 needs just a file, a scalpel and filler. That's not an excuse for poor fit, especially with how badly this Zero apparently went. It's one thing if there's one or two issues with a kit (produce enough and you will get an issue on occasion), but to charge as much as Eduard does and to have the issues the kits have? Yeah.... no. I'll sooner play the Revell lottery tbh.
How the build a nice Zero : 1.- buy a Eduard kit 2.- look at the wonderfull sprues, all rivets and panel lines 3.- put the sprues back in the box 4.- build a Tamiya kit
Great to see you back Peter! Hope you're back to 100% real soon 👍🏼
Thanks Gav! 👍🏻
Despite the fact tolerances were off, among other items, your recovery for a complete showcase model was very successful ! Much appreciate the heads-up for this kit. Well done ! 🙂👍
Thank you for the in depth review I found it very illuminating. I have never built Eduard However I see the kit designers of this company are the sadistic school of thought of give the builder as many pains as possible. I have built a Monogram 1/48 Zero and it had working landing gear and rotating props and that kit is a 1960's kit that was easy in comparison to this Eduard mess. I have also built a 1/48 Tamiya float Zero that was an absolute joy to build with beautiful fit and finish I only wish all the companies are as good as Tamiya they are fun to build.
Glad to see you back Peter ,hope you and Mrs Oxley are recovering well
Thank you. 😊 We are getting there slowly.
I love to see you having a rant .Not because i like to see you suffered, but you remind me of myself. I can understand why my daughter laughs at me. I cracked up when you were going on about the gun sight. Great vid though mate. 👍👍
Well bless your cotton socks. You saved me a lot of headaches later...I have 4 of those darn things. Many thanks!!
Glad I could help! 😂
Great build Peter, I'm so glad you're getting back to normal.
Good to have you back. Great build of the zero.
For all the problems Pete, you turned out a lovely looking Zero there, with nice subtle weathering without over emphasised panel lines. Well done!
Good to have you back on my screens
Great to have you back Peter, missed your conversations (rants), Zero looks great
I for one appreciate your rants and reviews. Gives me an idea of what to expect while window shopping for kits. I'm not a novice builder, but I'm no master modeler and if something has frustrated you then look out if it gets me lol ginger rage and flying kits 😂😂😂
Glad you like them! Fact based comments always...👍🏻
Welcome back Peter! Despite the numerous loose teeth from all the gnashing. You have managed to make that Zero a Ten. Funny awhile back I was looking at that exact kit with its beautiful artwork and the excellent movie in mind . But in the end I went with the Tamiya one . I can’t help myself . Tamiya is my “ten” and has been for many decades….
Hi Peter. I'm having a bit of trouble posting this comment! I can't quite see for certain but it looks to me at 0.02 that the oleo legs on the undercarriage are facing inwards away from the undercarriage doors. On a zero they face outwards, towards the undercarriage doors I think? This might indicate the legs are the wrong way round. Could this explain some of the fit issues in this area?
I just checked the model I built and mine are indeed the other way around to yours. On line pictures have them facing outward, toward the undercarriage doors. UA-cam won't let me post a link to the many photos available.
I reworked the legs earlier today (3 hours) They are correct now. 👍🏻
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab i am so sorry Peter! Not my intention to be a "rivet counter" and certainly not my intention to create more work. I simply wondered if this accounted for some of the fit issues with this area. This does not excuse some of the obvious defficiencies elsewhere. I do love your "rant" videos. Funny and accurate. Helpful to others. Again my apologies for creating work!
Beautiful detail. Wow you did a great job on that zero. I to have been battling a bug. But I banged off two messerschmitt Bf109e-3s. One tamiya one air fix. Most enjoyable pain in the ass flu bug I’ve had to deal with. 😅
Hi Peter , happy to see you back again and great after build review as always , huge follower of the show and thanks for your reviews and advice , keep up the great videos and may start the hobby boss A10 I purchased from you soon , all the best Peter and best regards, Rob .
Glad to see you back. If a kit is bad in places it's only right that it is highlighted. Dreading having a go at all the eduard spitfires i've got.
They are the greatest 1/48 WWII kits ever made imho, especially with the new decals. They do need a vacu-form Malcom hood, which was inevitable, but even there the plastic is ok, if left open... (I tend to close the canopy)
@@wrathofatlantis2316 No they're not. With what Peter has ranted about here I can say with confidence that the Tamiya A6M5 from the 70's is a better kit. YEAH it's a dated tool sure but it's assembly puts a lot of modern kits to shame, including Eduard.
I have the same kit. Decals for the wing was very tricky indeed.
Glad to know you and your good lady are on the mend, l don't mind the rants because it saves me pain and heartache just sorry you at too but you overcame and have a really nice Zero to show for it 👏l now know exactly what you mean about the build of a kit l have now completed 7 kits and out of all of them the one that was a real joy to do was a Tamiya 1/48 ME 109 E4 and no l am not a fanboy 🤣 l am fan of kits that go together well and instructions l can understand, looking forward to Mosquito updates and coming reviews 👍
Peter, that is a magnificent Zero especially given your condition while building it! Well done.
Thank You. 😊
The Mosquito looks fantastic, I can't wait to see you start that one!
Nice to see you back and feeling a bit better 👍
Nice job on the Zero model despite the issues you had with the kit. I agree with you on Eduard test building its kits before releasing them and fixing any fit issues. It is the smart thing to do if they want to promote confidence in their brand.
Glad you are on the mend!!!!! There has been one serious bug around! As for Eduard, I have a serious love-hate relationship with them......Love their subjects & marking choices.......Hate to build them! On a side note I built an Arma 1/48, which to my mind reminded me of an earlier Eduard effort.......At every stage it went together PERFECTLY! Anyways love your vids and get better soon. Might have to get my Mosquito out now!!!
Thanks! And you remind me: I really must build my ARMA Hurricane IIc sometime!
With respect Peter the modern day Eduard kits are first well presented , second fabulous value for money and with weekend editions pocket money prices . I'm not into Zeros but that's my Birthday ( Pearl Harbour ) ! Maybe a bit to much red wine going on ? For moi bring on the cold Pinot Grigio ? Anyway always enjoy the videos .
@@Phantomflyer56 I paid for it, I built it, and so am entitled to my view. I needed more red than I had in stock to cope with this one...And regarding value for money: why on earth do they put 2 in a box? 😨 Just give us one, but cheaper! It's a bit mad TBH. But Thanks for watching & commenting though. ☺️
Excellent work Peter! The cockpit looks exquisite! Get well soon.
Hugh. 🥇👍👋
Thanks hugh. 😊
100% correct on vague fit and intstructions
Lovely build -
obs haven't tried to bash the 1/32 Revell F18G together!!!
Peter, the finish on the Zero in excellent, I am glad to see you are not a weathering fanatic!
Blimey! I don't think I've heard you use language like that before 😂. Lovely result though Peter. A testament to your skills. Good to see you back lad 👍🏽
Thanks Faron...Sorry...a sign of my frustration! 😩
is it a rescaled 1/72 and the scaling calculations were off from the CAD to tooling, i've had it a couple of times with 1/48 planes 'especially' the tail wing root gaps/
Hi Peter, great to see you back. I'm in the middle of building the Eduard "Hamp" version of this kit, from the Weekend Edition. Just for a laugh I thought I'd also build a Tamiya 1982 vintage Hamp alongside the 'Modern' Eduard kit. Like you, I have been swearing whilst putting the over-fiddly Eduard kit together (it still isn't complete) whilst the Tamiya version went together with no issues. OK it's not as subtly detailed but not by much considering it was moulded in 1982! I also have the two fairly recent Zeros (with figures) released by Tamiya and I expect those to be the go-to 1/48 Zeros after making the Eduard kit. I can't wait to see you relaxing whilst making your big Mossie. Take care. DD
Thanks! Agree...To be honest, having recently reviewed the Tamiya Zero kit, in all areas except fine surface detail, it runs rings around this Eduard disaster.
Pretty much what you described is why I bought a 3d printer and learned CAD to make my own parts, and bought a Siser Juliet cutter to make my own mask. And as you said, from this manufacturer and the price we pay...it should be damn near perfect.
i've built both in the kit and they were great. no probs at all
I have the kit as well. Did you have any issues with cleanup? Also did you have to buy aftermarket decals?
Peter, when I saw the picture for this episode I chuckled too myself. 😂..Lol. I knew this was going to be a good one.
The Academy kit appears to be much better, the wingtips fold, and the kit is $40 CAD. Granted the painting instructions are poor, but I suppose the Eduard instructions could be downloaded as a guide
Well done👏👏. I’ll never buy another Eduard kit!
Good luck with the Mosquito. 👍 I'm currently reading 'Mosquito' by Rowland White, deals with Amiens and goes up to Copenhagen (Op Carthage)
Thanks! I am listening to the Audio book version! 👍🏻
Glad you are feeling better Peter. Your Zero looks great. Shame about the build experience. Eduard are not the best engineered kits but this does show that buying dual boxings or multiple kits before you've built one is not the best idea ( I've been caught out here myself! ), but of course, a lot of us buy quicker than we build! If Eduard had Tamiya's engineering they would be as good as Arma 😉
Im still going to buy Eduard kits, I really enjoyed their Tempest Mk.II and I'm looking forward to their P-51B and when they get around to doing a P-47 I'll have to retire!Intresting to see what you do with the Mosquito, it should be a fun build.
It’s the biggest comeback since Lazarus. Welcome back Peter.
Thanks Ian! 🤣
Not too much of a rant, so much as calling out issues during the build. Sure, model builders can expect to have to make effort to adapt to issues here and there, but there's a level of expectation. Eduard has built up an expectation - so I can't fault you for your perspective. Looking forward to your next, hopefully more enjoyable project. Get well soon.
Ohh god I have a dual combo of this… Btw despite the complications I like Eduard because they are pretty busy making these WWll subjects. Looking forward to their P51b and P40e kits. Right now I’m at the painting stage of their FM-2 Wildcat and for my surprise it went together without any issues. Some of their other kits were just meh… That Mosquito will be FUN. Take care!
I did the type 32.The cockpit floor had to be trimmed to make the fuselage mate with the wings. Not a beginners model.
Same here!
Interesting tales of woe Peter. I do wonder if the proliferation of in-box reviews where panel lines, rivets, PE and fine details are salivated over and trumpeted while construction is rarely considered or tested has somewhat skewed the over-favourable reputations that some manufacturers have.
I think you summarise the problem well, Rob. 👍🏻
oh boy, all that rant made me want to retire soon and build my Frog and Matchbox Zeros hehehe
I had the same issue with excessive sprue contact points on radial engine parts when building the ICM 1/72 Do-17 z10 and z2 kits. really irritating design flaw in an otherwise flawless kit.
You have made a great job of it. Trouble is it’s going to put off a lot of people. I am not going to want anything with that sort of basic fundamental issues. I guess it’s going to be a Tamiya zero for me. Thanks for the honest review
really enjoyed that video last night - great end result with your Zero . Got to admit I prefer the 1990's Hasegawa Zero , as it seemed easier to assemble , and just as detailed ( especially with etch ) -
I have made about 4 of them and they were a joy to made . Not like your hassles with assembly , you are right the tolerances should be better for a crucial part .
i am surprised Eduard have full length nose machine guns - as Hasegawa / Tamiya have just the Gun Butts showing in the Cockpit , and you added the nose guns after cowling was sealed ( I think Master Model brass machine guns are better than the Eduard kit examples ) - the only Eduard Kit I made was Fw 190A-8/R2 ProfiPack edition Eduard No. 8175 - and it was beautifully made and designed - but needed care during assembly, it certainly wasn't shake and bake ( or Tamiya ) . I think you are dead right , Eduard are not putting the old effort into the kits being well designed to be assembled easily , and have rested on the laurels . I think it is arrogance .
Hasegawa make great kits, but they don't even come close to eduard for detail, you have a point make it reasonably.
That cockpit is a work of art!
Thanks! 😊
Sadly a lot of manufacturers suffer from these issues that should not be happening. The two best kits fit wise I have made recently is the Meng Apache, the fit is flawless, also Border models Stuka, again the fit is fantastic, but the instructions are terrible.
Good to hear your on the mend, I’m in on the Mosquito build haha
👍🏻
Hi peter glad to see you back to your old self nearly,great video on the zero it’s a shame you had such a bad experience,i for one will not be buying this kit i will stick with Tamiya,well done mate.
Thanks 👍
Just took possession of a HK Models 1:48 B-17F, due to watching Masters of the Air. Any issues with that kit, I should be aware of ? Glad to hear you're both on the mend by the way. Nasty bug season out there.
I dont know it well, but should be a decent kit…just be aware that a lot of the internal detail may not be visible
@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab thank you for your reply. Looking forward to spending many hours building the kit.
I would love to see some box art for a Zero kit involving the Zero dogfighting the poor old Wirraway: one of the biggest mismatches imaginable.
Hi Peter glad to see you back. Your opening shot of the Zero nI noticed something wrong with the undercarriage,, then looking at the instructions it shows the wheels and scissor joint should be sandwiched between the undercarriage leg and the undercarriage door. You have somehow managed to rotate the undercarriage leg 180 degrees? or you've attached the left leg to the right hand door? hence the undercarriage and wheels are sitting at the odd angle. If you get the chance check-out the Airfix 1/72 Zero and you'll see what i mean.Maybe it can be put down to your feeling very under the weather as I've done something similar in the past. I agree with a lot of your comments especially about the sprue attachment points , a problem many manufactures have not only Eduard. It sometime seems the big parts have nice fine attachment points but when it come to the smaller delicate parts many manufactures seem to out of their way and use too many, thick, hard to reach sprue attachment points that it's virtually impossible to remove the part without breaking the part; the antenna of the Airfix 1/72 Bf 109E being a case in point. I actually noticed the problem in you 'in box' review, and was surprised that you missed it. Anyway thanks for the review with rant, I'll not be making this kit, not because of your review but becauses I only make 1/72 aircraft.
Yes I fixed that gear issue the day after the vid was published.👍🏻
Hi, nice build, glad to see you overcome the illness. One question, the wheels seams oddly mounted, I building the Type 11 this days and I think the strut is mounted 180 degrees off. Or it is something in the instructions ?
I think you are right. They do seem odd.
...All fixed now! DAMN YOU ALL!!! 😡 (Just joking! 🤣)
Beautiful build, I really love it, well worth the battle you had with the kit and not feeling well. I haven't built a zero since the 70's ( it was a Matchbox one). I would never have noticed the undercarriage issue that you discussed in the subsequent video. I would like to build one now, but I think I will invest in a Tamiya! I like Edauards after market products, but I am unsure about the kits, too many people appear to be unhappy with them.
I have one Eduard model in my stash. It is a 48th scale Mig 21 MF, weekend edition. Do you have any experience with this model, and if so, what are your opinions on it? It doesn't have the new style decals that you describe!
Thanks for another great video. It's very enjoyable as always. All the best, Seb.
Ahh Peter, I am confident that the Tamiya Mossie is going to be just the right tonic!
👍🏻😊
Welcome back Peter.👍@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab
Despite all the "Eduwardian" horrors, you got a very nice model out of it:-)
I may have got this wrong but wasn`t Matchbox kits superior to most in the 70s and early 80s?
Your ranting is in its place and well-founded. After all, model builders are also consumers👍🍻
Spark plug rings I would mold the wires with plugs on them too. Make them with that black plastic Tamiya used on the landing gear. Couldn't even break it. LOL
Speaking of anniversaries, your review of the Zero is appropriately timed, given that yesterday (Australian time) was the eighty-second anniversary of the bombing of Darwin; the only strike mounted by the Japanese which synchronised operations by both the land and carrier-borne air-arms of the Imperial Japanese Navy in two attacks some ten minutes apart. Another fun fact: Japan was the only combatant in World War II whose pursuit of several advanced projects, most notably the A7M Reppu (the designated successor to the Zero) was terminated due to earthquakes destroying the assembly lines. Get better soon and keep up your excellent videos.
Thanks Dude: Wasn't that attack featured in the 'Australia' movie with Hugh Jackman / Nicole Kidman?
Yes it was, and it was a complete rip-off of . If you observe closely, there are American battleships at anchor in Darwin Harbour. Spare me!! Without a doubt one of the worst films ever made, only matched by with the guided-missile frigates in the background. If film studios wish to make military history-based films, at least they should put a smidgen of effort into getting the history right. Thats my rant for the day.@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab
I'm sorry, but that should read "a complete rip-off of , Tora." And I was secondly referring to that horrible re the frigates in the background.
A poor fitting kit but your result is outstanding - such a lovely finish Peter. Looking forward to seeing the Mosquito build and updates 👍 Chris
Thanks Chris. 😊
The Grinch of Plastic Modelling 😅. I LOVE YOUR RANTS!! Can you do a rant review of this pseudo WWI airplane modelling basementshop manufacturer from Poland, sure you know it, I'm talking about Lukegraph. I would interesting to see what you have to say about those super expensive resin/3d printed kits...
Model making with Bob Fleming?
Cheeky Sir...CHEEKY!🤣 😷
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab Sorry Peter, couldn't resist! I'm a recent discoverer, and subscriber, of your channel, and am enjoying your general manufacturer reviews and, especially, your rants!
I feel your pain Peter. I've got 2 of these in my stash and the Rufe too. Not looking forward to it follwoing the issues you've had.
Anyway, glad to see you back and hope you get better soon...
Fingers crossed!😅
Peter;- This project sounds very similar to Revell's 32 scale FA/18 Super Hornet debacle. To remain constructive and potentially helpful to Eduard, why don't you send them a copy of the instructions with all of your notes and write them a detailed email outlining your observations? At the end of the day Peter it's all about a constructive outcome, and this would be a positive approach to Eduard on their product. All the best and I hope you feel much better soon Sir.
Thanks. But this video shows all the issues clearly. Eduard need to completely rethink their strategy and stop thinking that ignoring the customer is a good business strategy.
I am NOT above fixing and revamping as required. My biggest pet bitch is that for the money asked we expect fairly precise products. I do not like to be treated as "dumb ass modelers will buy anything". Yes, I can fix it but it should not be necessary. Thanks, Dane
Well said. 👍🏻
I must say I've not had any fit issues with my zero. My only disappointment with the kit was the gear struts and their somewhat vague fit to the wheel wells.
As for your anti biotics, they don't cure viral infections so it makes sense you weren't given any
Peter, you need to take a couple of shots of good booze for your health and to ease the pain of that model.
Try eduards wildcat or new tooling FW190. Fits like a glove. Eduard are ment to use with their extra parts- engine, metal undercarriage legs, flaps.
Plus those are ment for experienced modellers.
I have 50 years experience, (Whch I think is OBVOIUS from my results...) and someone in the chat tonight said the recent 190 was horrible fitting if you wanted to close up the engine cowls? ...And then there are the bloody awful decals...Ooof!
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-LabThe new 2017 FW-190s don't have an open cowling panel option. They have by far the best airframe, but bad landing gears and cowling: I mix Hasegawa parts as Tamigawas are nowhere near Eduard since Eduard's 2013 Spitfires. The Eduard decals work for me, especially peeling over metal (no peeling on camo for me).
@@wrathofatlantis2316 I think that is the generation I have (FW190 A4) and still hope to build...pre-2020 top-film decals of course
@datamek Still doesn't excuse the shotty fit, and also if it takes this many kits to find one that's good, then the company probably needs to clean house.
@@Lv-sl3rm In 1/48th WWII, Eduard is the world leader since 2013. All the runner ups are Ukrainian or Russian, with only 2-3 comparable Tamiya kits in that period. I do like Tamiya's Ki-61 and 109G-6, and their F4U of 1998, but that is not that many, and good Eduards in 10 years now outnumber them, like their Wildcat, Tempest, P-51D etc...
Night, Peter - sleep well.
Looks real the cockpit. except the seat. They are thin just sheet metal thickness.
"it's coffe, I promise ", maybe Eduard didn't have enough coffe as they engineered this kit
So does this mean you aren't making the other zero model out of the dual combo kit then? 😉 I also think I'm getting your chest infection. Joy! As for this kit - I already have a Rufe (floatplane) version, so now I know what to expect. At least it doesn't have the undercarriage, and perhaps the new lower wing panel in this kit fits better. Not holding my breath though. PS: I just opened my kit up and dry fitted the tailplanes and both wing halves. Perfect fits, on L/E & T/E. Tailplane parts a firm push required, but no reshaping, or sanding required just the usual clean-up on sprue attachment points. I prefer tight to loose, you can fix tight with a scrape of a blade.
As for the flaps - since these are simple split flaps like a spitfire, they could be scratchbuilt, but I can see why Eduard didn't include them. They want to sell you a set of replacement pe parts for an extra £17 - more than half the cost of a single zero kit or Brassin parts for a bit less.
Good news on the tailplanes, though mine couldn't be forced in as way too big for the hole. I gave the second Zero to a relative when I bought it as I didn't want two.
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab
it seems that my comments have been hidden from public view.
I offered sincere points about the landing gear that highlighted a glaring error on your part. It was not my intention to belittle you or insult you - it's the kind of mistake we are all capable of. I just spent hours making some lovely metal handles for a Sherman tank engine deck, placed the improved deck grills on the tank, painted a complex north african camouflage scheme - only then noticed that I'd put the grills on the wrong way round.
The fact my comments now seem to be hidden smacks of petulance and an unwillingness to accept you made a mistake. I had thought better of you. I've seen a good few of your videos recently and enjoyed them, and respected your fairness and integrity, but I have to say this casts doubt on that.
I assure you I wasn't trying to be antagonistic, and I understand that you're well within your rights to block people who just want to badmouth you, but that is honestly not what I was doing. Maybe you could consider that while you believe I've slighted you, it's actually the case that by blocking my comments, you've slighted me. I would sincerely like to resolve this and will gladly delete this comment if you 'unhide' my original comments. It was only ever my intention to help ensure your critique of the kit was fair, and maybe solve a problem you had with it for your own benefit.
@@bengreen171 I think you have jumped to conclusions slightly...I was in fact investigating your points, you were one of 3 who made the same point. You are correct regarding the gear. I have spent the last 4 hours rebuilding the model with the
legs now fully correct. I will show this again on the channel in the near future. Are we all good now? 👍🏻
@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab
excellent news. My only concern was that my comments had suddenly disappeared from public view - I checked on incognito mode.
But I'm more than happy to take back my accusations, and I hope it wasn't too much hassle correcting the issue. Sadly, my Sherman engine grills were too well stuck down, so time for some judicious tarps and ammo boxes to cover up the offending area.
@@bengreen171 I am a ‘Zero virgin’ so never noticed! 😆 It was a nightmare job but thank god for CA! 😜
Hmmm, Tomcat and Zero....I wonder what movie that's from😉
All is revealed! 'The Final Countdown'! 😂
Thing is is that if the kits weren't as expensive as they were I'd accept some issues, but this is pretty poor. Built an early 80's Tamiya boxing of a 1970's tooling for the A6M5 Zero, and the fuselage fit into the wings like a snap kit. If Tamiya could do that then then what's Eduard's excuse? And sadly idk if they'll loose enough sales because the Eduard fans seem to be dedicated....
The eduarde zero is no longer on my buy next list. Shame. Get well soon i have something similar now for 6 weeks. Debilitating. Not covid.
An excellent result from a poorly engineered model kit. Almost all model kits have some flash to remove and sanding to complete the model. Are different factories producing some of the plastic sprue parts?? Perhaps this could be the reason for poor alignment of parts.
You should have mentioned the lack of mold polishing on the leading edge. Looked pitted! A la Trumpeter. These folks live in the world of CAD. Not the real world.
You make an excellent point, I forgot to mention that.
morning Peter the book i read said the prison was hit and was a success but the school next door was hit as well
y
School? I never heard that? 😨 Are we sure that isn't operation Carthage where the girls school was bombed in Copenhagen?
Didn't have the altitude Nothing out run the 190 on the deck. Probably didn't see the German plane. Could out climb it.
Eduard said what can't take a joke. LOL
Aint no Tamiya
That's for sure, I built the Tamiya 1/48 scale Zero a while back and it only took a couple of days. The Eduard kits do have an unusual and rare selection of models. but they require quite a bit of flash removal.
@@BarryWinner2075flash? Seriously? Ive not seen any flash on an Eduard kit in 20 years..
@@Scarebus_Driver , , OK, sprue removal then,
@@Scarebus_Driver I seriously don't recall seeing any videos of your models
That's true, it's better in many ways, especially the decals. 👍🏼
Why do you always use gloves mate ?
I just handled my latest, best model...?
Haven't you figured he is the son of Blofeld😊
The CockPit looks so Beautiful great work and result!! Wow!
Thanks a lot!
Now you have to chuck it and do it again. LOL
In real life the guns have a leather sleave in the Cockpit. To stop the air blowing in on you. You never see that in a kit.
I’ve built two of these with no issues at all. 😐
And?
If you want a really crap kit, I dare you to build a Kitty Hawk kit :)
👀
Do you like Tamiya decals ? You rant on Eduard, but Tamiya and Hasegawa decals are worse and modellers complain about those for years and nothing changed. True...Eduard kits are overengineered, but their surface detail is second to none and you always and up with lots of spareparts which you can use for other kits (to spruce up older and lesser detailed models) so you don't have to invest in aftermarket stuff. Ofcourse...i also like Tamiya for their ease of building, but i don't mind to do some extra work, it's the end result that makes everything worthwhile. To me, it gives me even more satisfaction, when i have to do a little bit more than building a foolproof Tamigawa kit. Eduard is also very customer friendly in buying their kits, you can choose to go cheap with their Weekend editions or Overtrees and you still end up with a very nicely detailed model. Greetings from Holland. Ps I'm happy with most kit manufacturers and because of them we can choose what we like and want to build and they all have their hits and misses. Thanks to reviewers like you Peter, we now know what to expect from a kit and if it's worth the extra hassle or not ! Someone already pointed out, that you made a mistake with the landig gear and that's the reason it didn't fit the way it should (yes we are human and we all make mistakes 😉).
The difference is I don’t charge people for my mistakes…the landing gear issue on mine is now rectified, unlike the kit. 😉
The wheels are terribly out of alignment.
Harsh words, Sir! 😨 Anyway they were also wrongly facing inboard not outboard, all rebuilt now & 100% corrected. 👍🏻
Don't be too hard on them, just a file, scalpel and filler and all is good (not all can be Tamiya).
Mrsmith4662 - Will Edward accept me only paying them, say, 95% of the price they ask then? After all it’s only just a touch short.
Aside Tamiya's Ki-61 and Me-109G, thank God Eduard and Mini Art are not Tamiya!
Yeah... just like the Revell Dauntless that was tooled back in 1960 needs just a file, a scalpel and filler. That's not an excuse for poor fit, especially with how badly this Zero apparently went. It's one thing if there's one or two issues with a kit (produce enough and you will get an issue on occasion), but to charge as much as Eduard does and to have the issues the kits have? Yeah.... no. I'll sooner play the Revell lottery tbh.
@@wrathofatlantis2316 Mini Art from what I've seen is fine but Eduard need to be more like Tamiya or else it's gonna cost them.
I'm disappointed.
How the build a nice Zero : 1.- buy a Eduard kit 2.- look at the wonderfull sprues, all rivets and panel lines 3.- put the sprues back in the box 4.- build a Tamiya kit
🤣
What ?.