Mark Aldrich Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 OK Airplane fans, I have a quetion? While I was perusing the review section I checked out this review. Mr. Guenther did an excellent job, by the way, comparing both the Quickboost "corrected" against the kit provided. How can quickboost tote this as "correct" when the additional work will ruin so much surface detail? By the way, the quickboost is on the left. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David M. Knights Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 I suspect that it is because the Quickboost one is the right size. My guess is that the right size is the "correction". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Aldrich Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 David, While I agree with your assessment, Would it not have been better for Quickboost to redo the whole Nacelle (I hope that's the correct terminology) and released a better set? I am looking at this from the amount of correction that would be needed to flare in the piece to match the rest of it. I feel for anyone attempting that job. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmorrissette Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Mark: I would expect that more of Aires. QB is meant to be inexpensive and simple replacements (they are that side of Aires- our contact is even the same). I expect fit is left to the modeler Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreamsof51 Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Looks like one of those projects you compare the part fit and put the whole thing away for another day. The day that never comes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Aldrich Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Dick, Just thought that whoever gets those is in for a terrible time. I reviewed their 773 liter spitfire slip tank and I thought it fit like a glove during the test fit stage. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David M. Knights Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 David, While I agree with your assessment, Would it not have been better for Quickboost to redo the whole Nacelle (I hope that's the correct terminology) and released a better set? I am looking at this from the amount of correction that would be needed to flare in the piece to match the rest of it. I feel for anyone attempting that job. Mark Mark, I completely agree. That is what I'd love to have had them do. However, as an aircraft modeler, I live to be disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Pruitt Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 I glanced at the review when it posted...but didn't click on the pics...and thought that I might pick up a set when I finally get around to building that Academy P-38 kit sitting on my shelf. Looking at this more closely now, and seeing that huge step...I think I'd save the money, build using the kit parts, and just learn to live with any inaccuracies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Aldrich Posted July 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 By the way.....This is the reason I love the review section. If I were a airplane builder and was thinking of getting this set, I now know I NEVER would. Great job to the reviewer for showing such a issue in the review. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghodges Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 I'm with you guys....if THAT is the "correct" size, I'll live with the kit parts. Could you imagine trying to do a NMF after recontouring the front end of the naccelles? And, what's worse is your going to lose some of the that already itty-bitty front end as you sand it along with the rest of the nacelle. No thanks...... GIL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Aldrich Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 Gil, What's worse is that you would have to do it twice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnRatzenberger Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 All of which is a great example of why we are trying to do build reviews of everything, rather than the in-box looks given by most websites and magazines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts