Zoukei-mura 1/32 Fw 190 A-4

Rob said:
Everything fit in perfectly just like the picture with my finger. It's when I started putting on the side pieces and the round front that I ran into trouble. I swear, it's almost like too much paint and just that little bit expanded it or swelled it or something to make it just not fit perfectly by a millimeter or two. And I airbrushed everything

View attachment 133981

View attachment 133982
Click to expand...

Andy the Sheep said:
I read on another forum some times ago, and got stuck in my mind, that ZM kits have such tight fitting that even a thin layer of paint can create problems like yours.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm thinking and you seconded it so that's what I'm going to blame it on. I tried to get into the engine or whatever I thought was doing it and all I succeeded in doing is making this a closed cowl model. It's a habit of mine to make sure nothing comes loose. Oh well. Live and learn. Working on the landing gear. Going to head out back and get some painting accomplished

20250111_164430.jpg

20250112_131924.jpg

20250112_132212.jpg
 
Rob said:
I swear, it's almost like too much paint and just that little bit expanded it or swelled it or something to make it just not fit perfectly by a millimeter or two.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert on ZM having yet to finish one. Hell, I'm no "expert" on much of anything.

I do not think paint thickness is your issue, maybe a contributing factor, but not the only issue. On my Bf109 and J2M3 the destructions had the engine built a day or few weeks before these panels get attached. I assume you did the same?

On both of mine, there's no jig or even measurement (down to 100th of a mm?) of where your engine mounts should be in relation to each other. Yet I think it is that important as the glue and paint cure to hardness.

On my Messerschmitt, I did have some issues with the cowl panels closing the gaps. Now mine was an inverted V-12 not a radial, so my bigger issues were where the cowl panels covered the exhaust. I chalked it up to the fact that the cowl panels I chose to use were the "open" version and that meant they would not fit right in the "closed" position. Those closed parts are still on the sprue.

However, with the MGs on top of the engine, they were square with the block and all was good, the engine mounts looked good too. Until I mounted the engine mounts to the firewall, and they were skewed! :eek:

I', getting close to attaching the cowling around my other ZM kit with a radial, and that older kit does not have a provision for "open" cowl. I'm a bit worried I'll have the same or similar issue. But I'll keep you updated.

Here's my current state...
1736722095459.png
Well not quite, I did attach the other half of the fuselage.

1736722189967.png
But I think these pictures show what I mean about the faith you must have that the engine is mounted correctly, with no good way to be sure.

That is IF you follow the destructions completely. I'm thinking I'll be using the cowl panels to test engine mounting for any future ZM kits. I do love their approach!
 
Edbert said:
I'm no expert on ZM having yet to finish one. Hell, I'm no "expert" on much of anything.

I do not think paint thickness is your issue, maybe a contributing factor, but not the only issue. On my Bf109 and J2M3 the destructions had the engine built a day or few weeks before these panels get attached. I assume you did the same?

On both of mine, there's no jig or even measurement (down to 100th of a mm?) of where your engine mounts should be in relation to each other. Yet I think it is that important as the glue and paint cure to hardness.

On my Messerschmitt, I did have some issues with the cowl panels closing the gaps. Now mine was an inverted V-12 not a radial, so my bigger issues were where the cowl panels covered the exhaust. I chalked it up to the fact that the cowl panels I chose to use were the "open" version and that meant they would not fit right in the "closed" position. Those closed parts are still on the sprue.

However, with the MGs on top of the engine, they were square with the block and all was good, the engine mounts looked good too. Until I mounted the engine mounts to the firewall, and they were skewed! :eek:

I', getting close to attaching the cowling around my other ZM kit with a radial, and that older kit does not have a provision for "open" cowl. I'm a bit worried I'll have the same or similar issue. But I'll keep you updated.

Here's my current state...
View attachment 134158
Well not quite, I did attach the other half of the fuselage.

View attachment 134159
But I think these pictures show what I mean about the faith you must have that the engine is mounted correctly, with no good way to be sure.

That is IF you follow the destructions completely. I'm thinking I'll be using the cowl panels to test engine mounting for any future ZM kits. I do love their approach!
Click to expand...
That plane looks great. Yeah I don't think it's the paint either to tell the truth. I think I messed up a little bit on the body and Wing attachment and a little bit on the engine and with both of those factors it just did not work. What did work was snip snip and yep that fits.

20250112_145428.jpg

20250112_171741.jpg

20250112_173217.jpg

20250112_174255.jpg
 
Those landing gear are insanely good! You nailed the RLM02 in my opinion as well.

I think that gap at the leading edge of the wing can be covered, with patience.
 
Edbert said:
Those landing gear are insanely good! You nailed the RLM02 in my opinion as well.

I think that gap at the leading edge of the wing can be covered, with patience.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That Gap at the Leading Edge I haven't even looked at. But now that I did sneak a peek at it it does need a little work. That rlm02? That's actually xf-14 which is Japanese aircraft Gray and I know I added another color to it I just can't remember which one.
 
I'd say don't go crazy with putty filling gaps since these aircraft were not perfect when new.
The fit of panels was not as aero-tight as it is today.

The cowlings on these FW190s are never perfectly fitted and one side always seems to fit better than the other.

That leading edge gap is not really a gap, its a loose overlap..
The designer of this model appears to have ended the front of the wings and fuselage right at the engine cowling (underside).
Thus eliminating the slight overlap of the cowling (over the fuselage) and making it more difficult to tighten up that gap.

Maybe the cowling can be trimmed inside? to allow it to fit a bit tighter?
But I would still not worry about a gap.

fw190 detaiil.jpg
 
You are exactly right. Those old planes were put together with pieces from four other planes. I did put some Putty here and there just to make it look good to my eye. A little bit more light sanding here and there and I will throw a coat of primer on it and see how it looks.

20250114_135022.jpg

20250114_135026.jpg

20250114_135035.jpg

20250114_162510.jpg

20250114_162513.jpg
 
Rob & Dave are both right. Close is perfect!

IIRC, particularly in 1945, there were active duty aircraft flying combat with unpainted patch panels, it even came to attaching major components of two broken planes into one.

To be honest this was surprising considering the the factories made more Bf109s in 1945 (per month) than in 1944 despite non-stop strategic terror, errr bombing campaigns. So one would think there were plenty of freshly built planes ready to jump in. But the rail systems, and critical fuels, did not allow delivery to the Jagdgeschwader.
 
I have to confess. I've never paid attention to panel lines in my life. If it was off I put some Putty on it and sanded it smooth and painted. Looks good. But after watching a couple YouTube videos I said wow I have a lot to learn. You other modelers out there that make your own stuff and fabricate things? I'm giving you people are nod of the head, two snaps, and a thumbs up! Here's a picture of my first scribe line attempt and my second attempt. I think you can figure out which ones which LOL

20250116_164812.jpg

20250116_164757.jpg
 
What are you using as a scribe? I like dental tools, but the backside of a (sorta new) #11 works well if light pressure is used.

I think that is the key, light pressure + many passes. Heavy pressure, or a sharp tool, both lead to wandering lines in my limited experience.


Edit to add: those small round circles in the aft fuselage...I think they represent a hole that went right through the airframe. It was (again, I offer no warranty) a reinforced section that allowed ground vehicles to hook up a cable and drag the aircraft around.
 
Makes sense about the whole because that's where that tail wheel assembly is all reinforced and rides up and down. Apparently it was a design concept if you read that in the picture. I have these two items for scribing and I saw somewhere where a guy used a Post-It note so that's what I used. You know what I think would be perfect? When I was a kid I remember we had something that would punch letters or numbers onto a piece of tape round circle thing on the top.? Oh well live and learn that's how you learn how to do this stuff. So I'll get to sanding and will try that scribe again.

20250116_180231.jpg

20250116_175540.jpg

20250116_175529.jpg
 
s-l400.jpg


The scribing tape is similar .
Thick and rigid , providing a fence to ride the blade against
 
Okay I bought some scribing tape but it's not here yet so I doubled up on the Post-it note and this is the third attempt. I think it came out okay? Take your time is the key

20250116_202900.jpg

20250117_121423.jpg
 

Similar threads

Edbert
Zoukei-Mura J2M3 Raiden
Replies
15
Views
613
Steve Ski
Steve Ski
R
Border models FW 190 A-6
Replies
3
Views
263
BarleyBop
BarleyBop
Edbert
Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-14 (Zoukei-Mura 1:32)
2 3
Replies
59
Views
2K
Steve Ski
Steve Ski
Rod The Fixer
Fw 190 D-9 JV 44 [Sachsenberg Schwarm] "Red 1" - Tamiya 1:48
Replies
10
Views
364
Pantherman
Pantherman
M
FW-190 A Eduard 1:48
Replies
1
Views
685
Mycatistypingthis
M

Latest posts

Back
Top