Eli Raphael Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KSL Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Basically it's rescribed Monogram with resin and brass. Sergey. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Exhausted Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Is that plagiarism? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 The modeling equivalent of putting lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Robertson Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 A re-scribed copy of the wildly inaccurate Monogram kit: That would be... No. Robertson Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Griffin Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 See by yourself, here and here At least, resin goodies looks nice…. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DonSS3 Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 "Wildly" inaccurate? My understanding from what I've read is that the major area of concern is a too wide cockpit area. To me, "wildly inaccurate" puts the kit in Starfix territory. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KSL Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 My understanding from what I've read is that the major area of concern is a too wide cockpit area. Too wide and too deep fuselage with wrong slope of the walls in a cockpit area, too long nose (about 7mm!!!) and wrong tail (vertical stabilizer leans forward). So I would call it wildly inaccurate, and almost impossible to correct. Sergey. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 (edited) The too wide cockpit is just one of the MANY problems this kit has. "Wildly inaccurate" pretty well sums it up. Easily the worst 1/48 kit Monogram ever did, and for absolutely no reason. They were given complete access to the B-26C at the Air Force Museum, and they blew it. Edited June 21, 2014 by Jennings Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FCM Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 What to do in such a situation? Make the model in full scratch? Between a terribly wrong kit, with raised lines, and other equally wrong, but with engraved lines, I still prefer the second option ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChesshireCat Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 The too wide cockpit is just one of the MANY problems this kit has. "Wildly inaccurate" pretty well sums it up. Easily the worst 1/48 kit Monogram ever did, and for absolutely no reason. They were given complete access to the B-26C at the Air Force Museum, and they blew it. Now if Tamiya wanted to make the supreme leap forward in their high tech series, then they need to look no further than the A26 series in 1/48th. Modelers would be all over it in a heart beat! I also believe that Meng and GW are capable of doing the same quality of work as well. The first time I ever saw an A26 (actually a B26K) I was stunned as to how narrow that air frame was. It was as sleek as a snake, and had this sinister look to it. gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PFlint Posted June 21, 2014 Share Posted June 21, 2014 the only way they would get my money is if they include the option to build the XA-26A Nightfighter version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cr7driver Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 Could someone post pics plz. The links dont seem to work.Thx Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DonSS3 Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 DML was at one time, going to release a A/B-26 series, but they dropped that plan. I can't remember if this was around the same time Monogram released theirs or afterwards. :blink: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 DML dropped theirs when Monogram announced theirs. The DML kit was going to be an On-Mark B-26K Counter Invader. The Dragon USA corporate holiday greeting card for 1992 featured the Shigeo Koike box art for their kit. I had it in my files before my fire. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
PMG Offramp Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 I read on a French forum that Must Have! supposedly said they were aware of the major inaccuracies affecting the Monogram kit and they took care of them... I'm not sure it's the case, at least it doesn't look so when comparing their parts to Monogram's. Plus, the recessed details look Matchbox heavy, but it's true photos tend to exaggerate that. Too bad, their F-86K fuselage was a nice try, perhaps we had too much hope regarding an "I promise 100% new tool" A-26 kit from them? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 There's no way they could "take care of them" without completely re-designing the kit from scratch, in which case it would have nothing to do with the Monogram kit. If they were going to that much trouble, they'd have a totally new kit that looked nothing like the Monogram kit, which from what I can see isn't the case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve N Posted June 22, 2014 Share Posted June 22, 2014 I remember seeing the Koike Shigeo painting in an old magazine..I believe the long-defunct Military Model Preview (I've always heard that the mag folded because their reviews were a bit too honest, and the manufacturers pulled their ads.) As for the Monogram Invader, I remember how excited everyone was when it was released..somewhere I've got an old Squadron catalog from 1993 proclaiming it "Kit Of The Year." Of course, even then our standards weren't quite as high..we were generally happy to get a new-tool of anything, as there were still a large number of important types that had never been kitted. And of course there wasn't an internet where the rivet-counters could tear a new kit to shreds within a picosecond of its release. I heard rumors at the time it was released that the Monogram Invader had actually been designed (and possibly tooled) over a decade earlier when Monogram was doing all the other US WWII bombers in 1/48, but they held off putting it into production because the hobby was beginning to slow down in the early '80s, as the new generation of kids weren't interested and today's adult crowd hadn't returned to the hobby yet. Even in 1993, I remember looking over the kit and thinking it seemed more like a late-70s Monogram product. I had standardised on 1/72 by then so I didn't much care personally..of course we "gentleman's scale" builders had to wait nearly two more decades to get a modern kit of the Invader (a less-than-stellar effort from Italeri.) Dang, I feel old. SN Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott McT Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Well I am a fan of the Invader, and bought a pair of the MustHave kits. Unfortunately I was expecting too much from this kit, and am now extremely disappointed and feel ripped off! They are a direct copy in every regard of the Monogram kit. A few tweeks here and there yes, but still monogram based.... Who in their right mind would spend good coin to scan and CAD up a new tooled kit yet directly copy someone elses faults... Oh and that resin that you get. Additional direct rip off's of the Paragon Nose and Flap sets. 6 Gun nose... Aeromaster. Yes I have the originals, and they match perfectly. I too was looking forward to the DML kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChesshireCat Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Well I am a fan of the Invader, and bought a pair of the MustHave kits. Unfortunately I was expecting too much from this kit, and am now extremely disappointed and feel ripped off! They are a direct copy in every regard of the Monogram kit. A few tweeks here and there yes, but still monogram based.... Who in their right mind would spend good coin to scan and CAD up a new tooled kit yet directly copy someone elses faults... Oh and that resin that you get. Additional direct rip off's of the Paragon Nose and Flap sets. 6 Gun nose... Aeromaster. Yes I have the originals, and they match perfectly. I too was looking forward to the DML kit. Meng proved to us that they could build a twin engine airframe, and do it very well. That of course was the ME410 kit. Now if they'd jump on the Invader platform, they'd be lined up to get one. Probably could forget about Revell doing a new as they already own the junky one. Couldn't afford a new 1/48th Hasegawa or Tamiya, but who knows for sure. On the otherhand, I wouldn't trust Kittyhawk or Kineitc to get it right as well. gary Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jwest21 Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Accuracy issues aside, if this is a direct rip-off of the Monogram kit, the CE Counter Invader conversion should fit this as well, right? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jennings Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I heard rumors at the time it was released that the Monogram Invader had actually been designed (and possibly tooled) over a decade earlier when Monogram was doing all the other US WWII bombers in 1/48, but they held off putting it into production Absolutely 100% not true. Research and design were done in 1991-92. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve N Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Thanks J. Like I said, it was just a (pre-internet) rumor I heard at the time. SN Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F4DPhantomII Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 I would love to see a 1/48 On Mark A-26K kit and was excited when DML announced theirs.Saddened when they dropped it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.