AM TBM-3 Avenger

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by BatlWag » Mon, 03 Feb 1997 04:00:00



I just got mine yesterday. Yes, I am a little slow sometimes, but I
eventually get it right!

I am very impressed with this kit so far. This is the first AM kit I have
bought, but it won't be my last!

Are there any areas I should be aware of before I start on it? In several
reviews they said to look out for the turret, but on first examination,
without removing parts from trees, that is, it looks pretty
straight-forward.

Love to hear from anyone that has built this kit!

Semper Fi!
Fly Navy

Rick

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Dave Sea » Mon, 03 Feb 1997 04:00:00


The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)



Quote:
> I just got mine yesterday. Yes, I am a little slow sometimes, but I
> eventually get it right!

> I am very impressed with this kit so far. This is the first AM kit I have
> bought, but it won't be my last!

> Are there any areas I should be aware of before I start on it? In several
> reviews they said to look out for the turret, but on first examination,
> without removing parts from trees, that is, it looks pretty
> straight-forward.

> Love to hear from anyone that has built this kit!

> Semper Fi!
> Fly Navy

> Rick


 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Kevin Carrol » Mon, 03 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
> prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
> earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

Gee, I don't know about that. While the B/C has gotten mixed reviews (I
haven't built it), I did do the A-36. It's a sweet, neat kit.

Kevin

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Dave William » Tue, 04 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
> prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
> earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

Could you explain exactly why one should beware of AMs P51s?  Except for
the recent P-51B and C, I haven't heard anything but positive reviews.
I also have all the P-51 kits and nothing is apparent to me.  The worst
I have heard about the B/C kits is the lack of fairings on the wing,
poor wingroot fit, and a lot of reviewers mention that the left bottom
wing is warped in their kit (it's warped in my kit too).  I wouldn't
hesitate recommending the kits.

Dave

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by sclexi.. » Tue, 04 Feb 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

> However, beware their
>earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

Hey, that's not fair!  Their earlier stuff (Allison Mustangs: P-51, P-51A,
A-36) is superb.

Simon Craven

Lexicat Ltd
England

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Joe Heged » Tue, 04 Feb 1997 04:00:00



Quote:



>> However, beware their
>>earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

>Hey, that's not fair!  Their earlier stuff (Allison Mustangs: P-51, P-51A,
>A-36) is superb.

>Simon Craven

>Lexicat Ltd
>England

I'll second that comment!   I have built the A-36, and have at least one of each
of the other Allison-engined Mustangs from A-M, and they are great kits!  The only
problem I had with the A-36 was with the radiator intake door, and that was self-
induced (poor technique on my part, did a lousy job of glueing the trailing edge
of the intake). No experience with the A-M P-51B/C, as I already have enough
B-Mustangs for my requirements.

Joe

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by then.. » Tue, 04 Feb 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
>prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
>earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

What on Earth do you recommend being wary of re. the early Mustangs ?
Please do tell.  I know they don't have a relief tube, but what else :) ?

Todd Henry

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Dave Sea » Wed, 05 Feb 1997 04:00:00


I am assuming that the name Todd Henry has something specific to do with AM
as I have seen numerous postings about AM products from that indiviual so
here goes.

The obvious first...

The instructions are next to useless.  What you don't communicate with all
those words, good manufacturers communicate  without words with decent
drawings.  The old saying 'a picture is worth a 1000 words' is so true!

The decals are some of the worst I've seen.

If you are going to build the model and include a photo of it on the box,
you might want to pay more attention to detail.  The P-51C tail stripes
placement don't match the instructions or a good reference, the Aeromaster
sheet with the same markings.  Also, just nit-pickin', the color of the
text on the propellor hub in the photo is not the same as on the sheet
(yellow vs white).

The method of attaching the strut bay doors to the struts is very
confusing.  Most companies use the round-peg-in-round-hole method of
joining parts.  You seemed to opt for the round-peg-meets-round peg
method... very strange.

The fuselage, took a lot of force to make all the points line up.  With the
top of the fuselage aligned, the bottom was off by a 1/32 th of an inch (a
considerable error in 1/48th scale).

The method of securing the 'rear' windows is not existant.  Most companies,
especially a good one like Tamiya, provide , at a minimum, very small tabs
to glue against.  You even provided proper backing for the fuselage windows
of the TBF-1 (by the way, this kit looks great and I am really looking
forward to building it!) as these windows have a frame on them. A small
raised edge would have been appreaciated.

Now, I have already heard from the John Wayne section of our news group who
think working on a poor quality model makes you a special and creative
person.  Personally, I'd rather spend my time working for ultimate
refinement, not making up for poor design.

In the words on Dennis Miller, this is just my opnion, but I could be
wrong....  have a nice day!



Quote:


> >The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
> >prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
> >earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

> What on Earth do you recommend being wary of re. the early Mustangs ?
> Please do tell.  I know they don't have a relief tube, but what else :) ?

> Todd Henry

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by ABirkbe » Wed, 05 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Todd Henry, You Devil!!   As of when did you get this plum job with
Accurate Miniatures??  And if you are working for them, they obviously
can't give you any sort of employee discount, 'cause you are purchasing AM
kits from mail order firms.  What gives??

Andrew Birkbeck
(twice a month, and proud of it!!)

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Paul R. Howar » Wed, 05 Feb 1997 04:00:00


OK, let me see, I just went through the box on the Tamiya P-51D what do I
see?  Incorrect gun fairings staring back at me.  No, I won't rhyme this
whole message. The lower portion of the radiator doesn't have the right
curvature, the***pit detail is disappointing( not even a hint of
instrument markings in either molded in OR decal form.  The shape of the
doesn't compare well to the photos I have, and the US national insignia are
printed so dark that the difference between the invasion stripes and the
insignia is hardly noticeable.  Wasn't  this supposed to be a shining
example of a good model company's product.  I'm affraid there might even be
a need for some sandpaper and such. Well there was one thing that was above
reproach, there were lots of pictures....
Accurate puts out high quality kits, so does Tamiya, Hasegawa, and others.
The point is none of them are perfect.  If you are waiting for that perfect
kit on which to do your "ultimate refinement " don't hold your breath, or
you'll be waking up with a headache an awful lot.

P Howard

PS  If you really want a laugh, take a look athe canopy and the forward
fuselage of the Tamiya Dora 9.......



Quote:
> I am assuming that the name Todd Henry has something specific to do with
AM
> as I have seen numerous postings about AM products from that indiviual so
> here goes.

> The obvious first...

> The instructions are next to useless.  What you don't communicate with
all
> those words, good manufacturers communicate  without words with decent
> drawings.  The old saying 'a picture is worth a 1000 words' is so true!

> The decals are some of the worst I've seen.

> If you are going to build the model and include a photo of it on the box,
> you might want to pay more attention to detail.  The P-51C tail stripes
> placement don't match the instructions or a good reference, the
Aeromaster
> sheet with the same markings.  Also, just nit-pickin', the color of the
> text on the propellor hub in the photo is not the same as on the sheet
> (yellow vs white).

> The method of attaching the strut bay doors to the struts is very
> confusing.  Most companies use the round-peg-in-round-hole method of
> joining parts.  You seemed to opt for the round-peg-meets-round peg
> method... very strange.

> The fuselage, took a lot of force to make all the points line up.  With
the
> top of the fuselage aligned, the bottom was off by a 1/32 th of an inch
(a
> considerable error in 1/48th scale).

> The method of securing the 'rear' windows is not existant.  Most
companies,
> especially a good one like Tamiya, provide , at a minimum, very small
tabs
> to glue against.  You even provided proper backing for the fuselage
windows
> of the TBF-1 (by the way, this kit looks great and I am really looking
> forward to building it!) as these windows have a frame on them. A small
> raised edge would have been appreaciated.

> Now, I have already heard from the John Wayne section of our news group
who
> think working on a poor quality model makes you a special and creative
> person.  Personally, I'd rather spend my time working for ultimate
> refinement, not making up for poor design.

> In the words on Dennis Miller, this is just my opnion, but I could be
> wrong....  have a nice day!





> > >The TBM/TBF line looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews and the
> > >prelimary reviews of the SBD's are also great.  However, beware their
> > >earlies stuff ( specifically the P51 line.)

> > What on Earth do you recommend being wary of re. the early Mustangs ?
> > Please do tell.  I know they don't have a relief tube, but what else :)
?

> > Todd Henry

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by then.. » Wed, 05 Feb 1997 04:00:00



Quote:

>I am assuming that the name Todd Henry has something specific to do with
AM
>as I have seen numerous postings about AM products from that indiviual so
>here goes.

I wish !  I am in no way, shape, or form associated with Accurate
Miniatures, other than the fact that I have bought and will continue to
buy their kits from retail and mail order outlets, same as you.  If you
infer my association from another post where I 'rant' regarding the
ump***th rumor of AM's demise, the Facts I stated were all common
knowledge to anyone who took the time to research the facts.

Quote:
>The obvious first...

>The instructions are next to useless.  What you don't communicate with
all
>those words, good manufacturers communicate  without words with decent
>drawings.  The old saying 'a picture is worth a 1000 words' is so true!

>The decals are some of the worst I've seen.

I also think the instructions are not up to snuff.  However, I would
hardly call them next to useless, unless of course you don't read them.
Accurate Miniature's intstructions attempt to make up for the paucity of
graphic detail with more detailed text descriptions, something that I tend
to like. I do know that the problems that a number of people have had
building the Avenger have come from not reading the instructions.  As
others have posted here, RTFM.

Quote:

>The method of attaching the strut bay doors to the struts is very
>confusing.  Most companies use the round-peg-in-round-hole method of
>joining parts.  You seemed to opt for the round-peg-meets-round peg
>method... very strange.

I don't opt for any of it, other than building them like you.  I haven't
built the B/C kits yet, but I have built two of the Allison engined
Mustangs, and I don't remember having any problems whatsoever with
assembly.  They were among the easiest to build kits I've ever done,
something I've heard from many other modellers.

Quote:
>The fuselage, took a lot of force to make all the points line up.  With
the
>top of the fuselage aligned, the bottom was off by a 1/32 th of an inch
(a
>considerable error in 1/48th scale).

Can't speak to this myself (I will try the fit tonight), but others who
have built the kit have mentioned wing root and underwing fit problems, as
well as wing warpage.  I know the early Mustangs I've built required no
filler at all.

Quote:
>Now, I have already heard from the John Wayne section of our news group
who
>think working on a poor quality model makes you a special and creative
>person.  Personally, I'd rather spend my time working for ultimate
>refinement, not making up for poor design.

As a builder of 'dog' kits, vacuforms, resins, limited run, etc. I
appreciate your opinion.  I love the new injection kits from Tamiya, AM,
Hasegawa, even Airfix now !, but to consider AM's Mustangs 'poor quality
models' is a bit excessive, and it is an opinion you will probably find
little agreement with.  It would be like calling Tamiya's Mustang a piece
of ***for having the wrong floor. (It's a great kit).

Quote:
>In the words on Dennis Miller, this is just my opnion, but I could be
>wrong....  have a nice day!

Dave, I have not built either of their new Mustangs, and I have heard that
they are not up to the standard they set with their Allison engined
Mustangs or the Avengers, but I have built the early models, and they are
fantastic.  You warned the original poster to stay away from Accurate's
early efforts, which are fantastic kits in anyone's book.  Build one !

Thanks

Todd Henry

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Bruce Butle » Wed, 05 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> I don't opt for any of it, other than building them like you.  I haven't
> built the B/C kits yet, but I have built two of the Allison engined
> Mustangs, and I don't remember having any problems whatsoever with
> assembly.  They were among the easiest to build kits I've ever done,
> something I've heard from many other modellers.

       I must agree with you about the Allison engined Mustangs.  I
didn't however follow the instructions.  I made two complete fuselage
halves, then glued the two halves together.  The instructions would
have you glue the rear 3/4 of the aircraft together, and the nose
together.  Then mate the nose to the fuselage.  The Allison Mustangs
are good kits.  The glass is on the crude side (not real clear).  
The prop will absolutely not work.  And the tires/wheels could use
replacing.  I recently posted pictures of the Mk.1A I built to the
alt.binaries.models.scale and got some compliments (although I'm
still learning about the photography part).  The kit gets thumbs
up from me.

                   Bruce

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Rafael Rodrigue » Thu, 06 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> I am assuming that the name Todd Henry has something specific to do with AM
> as I have seen numerous postings about AM products from that indiviual so
> here goes.

Snip...

Quote:

> The fuselage, took a lot of force to make all the points line up.  With the
> top of the fuselage aligned, the bottom was off by a 1/32 th of an inch (a
> considerable error in 1/48th scale).

Dave I'm currently building the four AM Allison Mustangs (P-51, P51A,
A-36 & Mk.IA) in parallel and I can tell so far that I only found the
problem you mentioned in the Mk.IA. And I had to apply some presure (not
a lot) to the P-51 fuselage in order for it not to open at the top.
Since the fuselage pieces come from the same mould (I assume) it seems
to me that this problem might be due to warpage on some examples. BTW,
taping both fuselages while de cment dried fixed the problem on both
cases and I only neded a minummum of filler. I haven't attached the
wings yet, so I can't further comment.

I hate the transparencies, but they aren't the worst I have worked with,
and I am going to try replacing them on the A-36 with the spare one (at
least the centre section) from Tamiya's Mustang Mk.III (I'm building it
with Malcolm hood) Let's see if it fits.

Regards,
RR

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Kai J Anttil » Thu, 06 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:

> What on Earth do you recommend being wary of re. the early Mustangs ?
> Please do tell.  I know they don't have a relief tube, but what else :) ?

> Todd Henry

  Also, they miss the armor behind pilot and decals are wrong for the
  P-51 version. Nothing major, but still ... I was really surpriced that
  AM didn't fix that missing armor in the P-51 B/C versions...

  I think that the worst mistake is those incorrect decals, they are bit
  hard to replace.

        kja

 
 
 

AM TBM-3 Avenger

Post by Jeffery S. Harriso » Thu, 06 Feb 1997 04:00:00


Quote:


> > I don't opt for any of it, other than building them like you.  I haven't
> > built the B/C kits yet, but I have built two of the Allison engined
> > Mustangs, and I don't remember having any problems whatsoever with
> > assembly.  They were among the easiest to build kits I've ever done,
> > something I've heard from many other modellers.

>        I must agree with you about the Allison engined Mustangs.  I
> didn't however follow the instructions.  I made two complete fuselage
> halves, then glued the two halves together.  The instructions would
> have you glue the rear 3/4 of the aircraft together, and the nose
> together.  Then mate the nose to the fuselage.  The Allison Mustangs
> are good kits.  The glass is on the crude side (not real clear).
> The prop will absolutely not work.  And the tires/wheels could use
> replacing.  I recently posted pictures of the Mk.1A I built to the
> alt.binaries.models.scale and got some compliments (although I'm
> still learning about the photography part).  The kit gets thumbs
> up from me.

>                    Bruce

I hear you Bruce, I'm working on the next part now. Just took a break to
see what was going on on the board.

Jeff