1/72 Macross group VF-1s, Tomahawk and Regult

[Gatsu]

Hello, i'm posting the pics of all my 1/72 macross kits i made recently so they can be compared in scale. My camera is definitely terrible and i needed to correct all pics with photoshop, definitely if you want to ruin your model kits look buy a Sony Carl zeiss Cyber shot compact camera... These camera lens simply don t capture light well.

P.S. i forgot to mount the small vf-1 nosecone wings... sorry. i usually remove them in battroid mode.

Edited September 9, 2016 by Gatsu

[Mazinger]

Very nice.

[cwmodels]

Looks great!

[Big s]

Nice paint jobs.

[slide]

Nice!

all Bandai kits?

[NZEOD]

I'm going to go with... Wave Tomahawk, Bandai VF-1, ARII Regult

[Gatsu]

The regult and the vf-1 are Bandai, the Tomahawk is the Wave one. The Wave is best model kit of the 3, the two Bandai were terrible in quality even if they look good in the pics, i'm sincerely really angry with the total lack of care by Bandai in their 1/72 model kit line for SDFM, they released a prototype kit like the vf-1 as a definitive one and they reissued all the old old Imaii molds as the regult and destroids instead of creating some new ones with the new producing tecnologies they have now... In the vf-1 there are some design flaws that simply leave you astonished. Just a simple model kit enthusiast as this guy on Youtube

was able to corrected all the model kit defects and made in my opinion the perfect and definitive vf-1 model kit. Bandai should hire this man in my opinion. Edited August 25, 2016 by Gatsu

[no3Ljm]

Great collections! And great job!

My comment on the definitive take is that model kits shouldn't treat it like action figures. Esp a transforming one. I guess if we need more an accurate take on all 3 forms, we should probably get the Hasegawa ones.

Edited August 25, 2016 by no3ljm

[Big s]

I also think transforming models are rarely good no matter the subject. I would have been happier if they did like hasegawa and released separate kits for each mode or a 3 in one bundle. I'm also not a big fan of part swapping kits, but the tomy tech valkyriesare fairly good.

[VF-1A Grunt]

i'm sincerely really angry with the total lack of care by Bandai in their 1/72 model kit line for SDFM, they released a prototype kit like the vf-1 as a definitive one and they reissued all the old old Imaii molds as the regult and destroids instead of creating some new ones with the new producing tecnologies they have now...

It would really be great if someone would produce new, quality, detailed models of the Regult (all four versions) and Glaug in 1/72, hopefully a little larger than the Bandai and Imai versions. I'm sure that we'd all buy a bunch of them. The Regult seems like a great opportunity for Wave to do something like they did with their Destroids - common parts in all four kits (even if it's only the legs for the Scout) with just the addition of specific parts for each variant.

[Gatsu]

I personally think the opposite about transforming models.... for me there is no sense on having a static model kit of a transforming mech, if the producer want to do a good job they can actually do it. Basically the Yamato 1/60 as well can be treated as a model kit and can be painted obtaining a great effect, if it s done in the correct way, with the proper protective clear and all the proper fixes it can transform quite well without paint issues, obviously you have to be careful when touching it, but i m always very careful when touching beatiful and fragile toys as Yamato's. The point of the Bandai one is not about the fact it is a model kit, but about the fact that there are obvious design mistakes and that there is a problem with posability as well... if a model kit shouldn t be intended to transform for sure it s intended to be posable. I never touched any hasegawa battroid so i can't know if they are as loose as Bandai's or more solid and posable. I'm sure that Gundam Bandai kits are not loose as Vf-1s and are a lot more posable because Bandai invested a lot more on this model kits line. I also know Macross Frontier model kits are a lot more solid and posable despite they are transformable because Bandai invested a lot on Macross Frontier merchandise.

[NZEOD]

See... the key is... its a model, not a toy, so it shouldnt need to transform. Or be handled once assembled and displayed.

I agree on the Regults and Glaug. Just finished my Regult and halfway through building/destroying the Glaug for a display with it having been gunned down and fallen through a motorway overpass... they are NOT pretty kits to assemble! Mine are the ARII ones.

Edited August 25, 2016 by NZEOD

[edstuff]

Those are beautiful

[Gatsu]

See... the key is... its a model, not a toy, so it shouldnt need to transform. Or be handled once assembled and displayed.

I agree on the Regults and Glaug. Just finished my Regult and halfway through building/destroying the Glaug for a display with it having been gunned down and fallen through a motorway overpass... they are NOT pretty kits to assemble! Mine are the ARII ones.

i thought the old ones Bandai reissued were IMAI... about the transformation theme i think a model kit should be just a detailed reproduction of something, cars model kits have moving steering wheels ,opening doors and motor parts, they are not intended to transform so they don't, valkyries transform so a detailed model kit should transform too. Just imagine a F-14 Tomcat model kit witout retracting wings...I know a model kit is a model kit but this should mean it is not intended to play with not that it should not be intended to transform or be posable. A model kit is not a sculpture. Basically Yamato made it and i think nobody complained about the quality, also the Yamato SDF-1 resin kit seem to be quite solid and well designed.

Anyway, have you seen that video i posted?? If that guy did it for sure bandai could have done a looooot better.

NZEOD are you making the Bandai vf-1??

Edited August 25, 2016 by Gatsu

[NZEOD]

giant step from opening doors and folding wings to full transforming 1/72 scale planes

After all that same F14 should then beable to deploy flaps, brakes, open the canopy, open and restrict the exhaust nozzles and fold away its undercarriage. Yet in this scale... they dont.

Usually because they arent toys and you can instead buy those same parts aftermarket to represent each form from places like Edaurds.

Another MASSIVELY important point would be the F14 is real. So then engineeringly sound and able to alter the parts that move.

The Transforming Planes... are fiction... and have never been proven or built to actually be able to do what they do in the cartoon. So making a model do it in a realistic fashion and still maintain detail would perhaps be beyond the marketing targets and budgets of Bandai?

Edited August 25, 2016 by NZEOD

[slide]

Then they lack Ambition!!

[VF-1A Grunt]

i thought the old ones Bandai reissued were IMAI...

The 1/72 Regult was originally Imai and the Glaug was Arii. As a kid, I remember thinking that it was strange that they were made by different companies. I guess I wasn't sure why one of them hadn't decided to make both. Maybe there was an intentional split of the licensing so that one company wouldn't have the monopoly on the "pods." I bought the Regult off eBay about a decade ago but now can't find it for some reason (moved about 5 times since then). I've never seen the Glaug in person - they were always too expensive on eBay - but have heard it is undersized (more like 1/100).

Edited August 26, 2016 by VF-1A Grunt

[kajnrig]

I also think transforming models are rarely good no matter the subject. I would have been happier if they did like hasegawa and released separate kits for each mode or a 3 in one bundle. I'm also not a big fan of part swapping kits, but the tomy tech valkyriesare fairly good.

Transformation isn't inherently a problem. If it can be achieved without compromising on the representation of the subject, then I don't think anyone would complain. Of course, such a thing is nigh impossible. Many Gundam kits transform, but while they might take on the right final shapes and such, they aren't exactly representative of the "actual" transformation. Armor panels opening/shifting, internal machinery moving around, etc. The Bandai VF-1, for all its faults, manages to faithfully reproduce the leg swing bar, and that's commendable. (I can and do fault it for all of its compromises elsewhere that ultimately negate that faithful reproduction, though.)

if a model kit shouldn t be intended to transform for sure it s intended to be posable.

By that definition, a bunch of these double ball joints glued together would be the ultimate Gundam model, whereas this would be tripe of the lowest caliber.

Just imagine a F-14 Tomcat model kit witout retracting wings...

You do realize that a good majority of (pre-modern) 1/72 F-14 kits DON'T have swiveling wings, right? The F-14 has inflatable air bags that "fill in" the empty space of the plane when the wings are fully open. A model kit with swinging wings would be an improper, un-"detailed reproduction" if it did not also have inflatable air bags. Most make do with allowing you to position the wings, then providing you with extra parts to "fill" or "empty" the air bags as appropriate.

[VF-1A Grunt]

By the way, Gatsu, I should have said this in my first post - your models looks great, and I'm especially impressed by the Regult, which I've always heard is a tough model to build (since I can't seem to find my kit, I can't try it for myself!). My first impression of the kit when I received it was that the brow(?) cannons looked much too thick compared to the artwork, but your model really turned out well and captures the colors, stance, and weathering that I had hoped to achieve with my own model. I may have to break down and buy another kit, but I keep hoping that I'll find my first one, or someone will produce a better model!

[NZEOD]

Then they lack Ambition!!

lol

You do realize that a good majority of (pre-modern) 1/72 F-14 kits DON'T have swiveling wings, right? The F-14 has inflatable air bags that "fill in" the empty space of the plane when the wings are fully open. A model kit with swinging wings would be an improper, un-"detailed reproduction" if it did not also have inflatable air bags. Most make do with allowing you to position the wings, then providing you with extra parts to "fill" or "empty" the air bags as appropriate.

Airbags?? Really?? I had no idea!

No into Gundams even though I grew up in the age of Jovian Chronicles mecha which I REALLY liked, but damn the Giant Gundam is detailed really well!

Edited August 26, 2016 by NZEOD

[Gatsu]

I don' t understand guys. The point is other companies already did it. I never said that transformation must be detailed at all. Yamato vf-1 model kits were far better than these Bandai, and anyway most of the defects of the Bandai ones are simply stupid and could have been avoided if they really wanted to do it. Nzeod i think you really need to build one of those by yourself WITHOUT fixing it in a single configuration or pose, then you will probably understand. Also that guy in the video achieved that result that you consider impossible! Come on, he did with basic means, just think at what Bandai could have done, maybe you haven t watched that video.

Anyway i know a lot of people said that Macross frontier 1/72 kits have not the vf-1 defects, i don t know if it s true but this could be the proof that vf-1 couold have been a lot better, macross frontier mechas seems even more complexes than vf-1.

Edited August 26, 2016 by Gatsu

[Gatsu]

By the way, Gatsu, I should have said this in my first post - your models looks great, and I'm especially impressed by the Regult, which I've always heard is a tough model to build (since I can't seem to find my kit, I can't try it for myself!). My first impression of the kit when I received it was that the brow(?) cannons looked much too thick compared to the artwork, but your model really turned out well and captures the colors, stance, and weathering that I had hoped to achieve with my own model. I may have to break down and buy another kit, but I keep hoping that I'll find my first one, or someone will produce a better model!

Thanks. The regult is hard to build in a decent way, because you can't build all single parts before assembling them, and as it is not suggested to paint the model kit once assembled it s impossible to avoid at all the seamlines... the quality is generally low and many parts doesn t fit well. It s also very loose in the articulations.

[kajnrig]

Airbags?? Really?? I had no idea!

No into Gundams even though I grew up in the age of Jovian Chronicles mecha which I REALLY liked, but damn the Giant Gundam is detailed really well!

Yeah, it's pretty neat. I only know about it because I got really into F-14 models a while ago, and a lot of modelers talk about dealing with that specific detail. HLJ did a build video of the newest Tomcat model (by Fine Molds) and talked about it as well:

https://youtu.be/Shm1JqLLcPI?t=2m23s

(Also check out 17:51, where he demonstrates it visually.)

I don' t understand guys. The point is other companies already did it. I never said that transformation must be detailed at all.

....

Anyway i know a lot of people said that Macross frontier 1/72 kits have not the vf-1 defects, i don t know if it s true but this could be the proof that vf-1 couold have been a lot better, macross frontier mechas seems even more complexes than vf-1.

Well, you yourself said that models should be "detailed representations" of their source material. And that if they want to represent a transforming mecha in detail, then they should also transform. But "detailed" and "transforming" aren't synonymous. The Yamcadia/DX Valks all transform insofar as they take on the "final appearances," as it were, of their various source materials. But a real VF-1 doesn't have exposed pegs and sockets in all three modes. A real VF-1 doesn't use ball joints that achieve poses through friction.

The Yamato VF-1, which you claim is "far better" than the Bandai kit, features legs on a swing bar; this is inaccurate to the actual transformation. You might say that it's a small detail that can be ignored because the final outcome is essentially the same as the actual VF-1, but whether the final outcome is the same/similar isn't the point. You said that models should be detailed representations of their source material. A swing bar in place of actuators is neither detailed nor representative of the source material.

The Yamato VF-1 and Bandai VF-1 differ in many aspects of their transformations. Which of these is a more "detailed representation" of the "real" VF-1? The Bandai kit's wings retract into the main body in order to fold all the way back; the Yamato toy's do not. The Yamato toy's arms peg directly onto the gunpod handle in fighter mode; the Bandai kit needs an adapter. Both of them have grooves in their arms for said gunpod gimmick that persist outside of fighter mode, whereas the real VF-1 doesn't.

In order to achieve their transformation gimmicks, all of these toys and models necessarily have to be less detailed representations. Even the Hasegawa VF-1s, which I consider the best representation of the VF-1 in all three forms (aside from some ridiculously gorgeous resin kits), have to make concessions for the sake of ease of construction/stability of model/etc.

This is all to say that your emphasis on transformation and articulation is misguided, as is your equating of transformation/articulation to detail. An F-14 with moving wings is all well and good, but if the air bags behind it don't inflate/deflate like they should, then what's the point?

---

With regards to your other point, the "real" VF-25 was designed with simpler transformations/parts in mind. The franchise introduced some sort of magnet-based Overtechnology that allowed for faster and simpler transformation using fewer parts. This trickled down into the model kits as well, which explains why it doesn't have the same "defects" as Bandai's follow-up VF-1. (Though in reality, it was just that Bandai made a lot of design decisions that selected for gimmickry rather than prudence.)

That being said, the Frontier kits have their own share of problems that make them less "detailed representations" of their source material. And again, the Hasegawa kit seems to be an overall better representation of the actual design despite being limited to only fighter mode.

EDIT:

I should also add, like VF-1A Grunt, that the work you did on these kits is pretty darn impressive. The frosted canopy on the VF-1 is a bit of a shame, but actually it doesn't look that bad here. It looks like maybe Roy and Claudia are just having some fun inside there, if you know what I mean. Cramped spaces and cozy environs...

Edited August 27, 2016 by kajnrig

[Big s]

So my thoughts on the transformation thing with the vf1 is that the shows up until recently used animation magic, so one product may have to sacrifice a perfect fighter to make a good battroid or vice versa. And the part swapping kits like wave and tomy tech both have to sacrifice the look of the inside of the knee or maybe a thigh joint that isn't so good at movement on the gerwalk. The hasegawa separate mode kits are probably the best compramise that I have seen, but I think that a different company would probably have made a more poseable kit as far as the legs go or could have added a joint to tilt the waist or upper torso forward for more leg movement without the wings getting in the way of the intake.

Even on non macross kits things get sacrificed for transformation or part swapping. The rg zeta gundam is an almost scary thing to handle and its hg counterpart had some issues like a baby shield. For something like gundam most transforming mobile suits change into crap anyway, but I always feel like no matter what series they all do a compramise and almost none are perfect wether it's a pet swapper or full transforming kit.

All this is just my personal thoughts and no matter what I still am usually impressed by any one who does a good job and puts in the work to complete their projects.

Edited August 27, 2016 by Big s

[MechTech]

Great job on the models Gatsu! I love making models! When the Robotech kits came out and I could build a transforming aircraft, I thought that was AWESOME!!! Then when the series came out and I found out what they were all about, that was even better! The parts changing was annoying, but better than "static" for me after years of building plane ole planes. The Mospeada transforming models were even better in my opinion because they weren't parts formers. Though some say toys should be toys and models should be static, I love adding mechanical gimmicks to my models. Even the 1/350th valk I'm working on has swing wings with gear teeth on it. For me, it's the love of engineering and model making coming together. - MT

[Gatsu]

Yeah, it's pretty neat. I only know about it because I got really into F-14 models a while ago, and a lot of modelers talk about dealing with that specific detail. HLJ did a build video of the newest Tomcat model (by Fine Molds) and talked about it as well:

https://youtu.be/Shm1JqLLcPI?t=2m23s

(Also check out 17:51, where he demonstrates it visually.)

Well, you yourself said that models should be "detailed representations" of their source material. And that if they want to represent a transforming mecha in detail, then they should also transform. But "detailed" and "transforming" aren't synonymous. The Yamcadia/DX Valks all transform insofar as they take on the "final appearances," as it were, of their various source materials. But a real VF-1 doesn't have exposed pegs and sockets in all three modes. A real VF-1 doesn't use ball joints that achieve poses through friction.

The Yamato VF-1, which you claim is "far better" than the Bandai kit, features legs on a swing bar; this is inaccurate to the actual transformation. You might say that it's a small detail that can be ignored because the final outcome is essentially the same as the actual VF-1, but whether the final outcome is the same/similar isn't the point. You said that models should be detailed representations of their source material. A swing bar in place of actuators is neither detailed nor representative of the source material.

The Yamato VF-1 and Bandai VF-1 differ in many aspects of their transformations. Which of these is a more "detailed representation" of the "real" VF-1? The Bandai kit's wings retract into the main body in order to fold all the way back; the Yamato toy's do not. The Yamato toy's arms peg directly onto the gunpod handle in fighter mode; the Bandai kit needs an adapter. Both of them have grooves in their arms for said gunpod gimmick that persist outside of fighter mode, whereas the real VF-1 doesn't.

In order to achieve their transformation gimmicks, all of these toys and models necessarily have to be less detailed representations. Even the Hasegawa VF-1s, which I consider the best representation of the VF-1 in all three forms (aside from some ridiculously gorgeous resin kits), have to make concessions for the sake of ease of construction/stability of model/etc.

This is all to say that your emphasis on transformation and articulation is misguided, as is your equating of transformation/articulation to detail. An F-14 with moving wings is all well and good, but if the air bags behind it don't inflate/deflate like they should, then what's the point?

---

With regards to your other point, the "real" VF-25 was designed with simpler transformations/parts in mind. The franchise introduced some sort of magnet-based Overtechnology that allowed for faster and simpler transformation using fewer parts. This trickled down into the model kits as well, which explains why it doesn't have the same "defects" as Bandai's follow-up VF-1. (Though in reality, it was just that Bandai made a lot of design decisions that selected for gimmickry rather than prudence.)

That being said, the Frontier kits have their own share of problems that make them less "detailed representations" of their source material. And again, the Hasegawa kit seems to be an overall better representation of the actual design despite being limited to only fighter mode.

EDIT:

I should also add, like VF-1A Grunt, that the work you did on these kits is pretty darn impressive. The frosted canopy on the VF-1 is a bit of a shame, but actually it doesn't look that bad here. It looks like maybe Roy and Claudia are just having some fun inside there, if you know what I mean. Cramped spaces and cozy environs...

What's the pont of your reasoning?? All or nothing? Then the real f14 is not made of plastic so there are no detailed model kits out there. The logic of your reasoning is faulty, even if i undertsand where you are going. Yes, STATIC model kits should be static. I know. But nodoby impede you to doing differently if you have the technology to do so. Obviously the answer should be "moderation" and "compromise". Obviously you have to do compromises expecially if you look at the old Kawamori drawings wich are quite ingenuous. Obviously a real valkyrie could not have those big mickey mouse hands, and the same parts could not change in shape and proportions when transforming. The answer is "rationality". I think that on a real mech a pair of retracting wings as those shown in the drawings of battroids could be quite possible (i have no idea if they could be used to fly) but obviously you can not made tiny inside wings mechanisms in a model kit in 1/72 scale. But some things are possible in a 1/72 model kit. I m sincerely quite lazy and hate to write, expecially in english but it seems i have to make a detailed list of this model defects. Just remember when Yamato made the first YF-19 ?? I suppose then you would have done the same argument to defend that toy (wich i always considered ugly in battroid mode) saying that they had to sacrifce the battroid look as a "compromise". Well a few years after they released the VF-19 wich is basically the same mech and the proportions were correct!! Still the Arcadia one seems to be based on the old Yamato vf-19, and it's beautiful. So it was possible to do better.

The defects:

the hands are TOO BIG to get inside the arms for transformation, this mistake is simply too stupid and can not be justified. Also the hands wrist artciulation is tooo thin and fragile, once you have mounted them as soon as you touch hands for posing they break. Maybe if they have made these parts in abs they could have been more durable, but for some strange reason these are the only articulation parts which are not in abs. My hands broke just as i tried to move them.

There are 2 small pegs in the back piece (where the wings are attached) wich are supposed to be used to block the legs in fighter mode. There are similar pegs on Yamato's as well. Well these 2 pegs are simply positioned in the wrong position making the legs in fighter mode stay croocked, they are simply a few millimeters too much in the inside. No reason for this defect. This is not a compromise, this is just sloppiness.

There is not any mechanism that block the back pack in the battroid mode, so when you mount the super parts the back pack simply fall down. I made a simple fix with a piece of metal to correct this, but again why Bandai did not make this??? There s no reason but sloppiness.

Why the thigh articulation is so low? They made a panel line where it should be but they made it at almost half the thigh so that you can't really bend the leg in battroid mode without an odd looking. Also for this i find no reason.

Also the kit is generally very loose... i don t know if hasegawa's or Frontier kits are loose as well. And the decals are incomplete, i bought a decal sheet on ebay for all the red writings on the wings and other details.

It seems like you never built this kit... am i wrong? Generally this kit have received terrible reviews anywhere, i still believe it s good looking and some of the defects can be fixed with a bit of work. It seems that the only fans of this kit are here.

About the hasegawa kits: i don't like them. They are full of beatiful details but the proportions are totally wrong. Different proportions of the same parts in the 3 different modes. If somebody really want something wich is accurate to the old kawamori drwings then he should like this http://articulo.mercadolibre.cl/MLC-436025332--maqueta-bandai-vf-1j-battroid-macross-robotech--_JM

P.S. Somebody know why i cannot post any pic from my PC in a reply?

Edited August 28, 2016 by Gatsu

[Gatsu]

There is a way to change the pics in my first post here? It seems i can not change or add any pic here...

[kajnrig]

All I'm trying to do is understand your definition of what a model kit should be. You say that it should be a detailed replica of the actual thing, including articulation and transformation. But the transformations/articulations of these toys/models don't reflect the "actual" transformation mechanics of their various source materials (which we know from various design docs, sketches, sometimes in-show footage, etc.), which would make them NOT detailed replicas of the actual things. I guess I'm puzzled as to what specifically you mean by the word "detailed."

If a detailed VF-1 model kit should transform (and JUST transform, no specifics of the transformation needed), then would a parts-swapping model meet your standards? Why or why not?

Obviously you have to do compromises expecially if you look at the old Kawamori drawings wich are quite ingenuous.
...
About the hasegawa kits: i don't like them. They are full of beatiful details but the proportions are totally wrong. Different proportions of the same parts in the 3 different modes.

The old design sketches of the VF-1 have all sorts of proportion discrepancies, as well. It's not quite as obvious as the M+/M7 designs, but it's enough that the various transforming toys/models don't look quite "right" in at least one of the three forms. The Yamcadia toys favor Battroid mode and make for awkward(ish)-looking fighters, as do the old Toynami toys, and (to my eye) the Bandai kit doesn't look very appealing in any mode.

The Hasegawa kits, being limited to only one mode, are afforded the ability to make that one mode look as good as possible, even if the same part differs from mode to mode. You said as much yourself: they are "full of beautiful details." And going back to your definition of a model kit (ie "a detailed representation"), they should therefore be your standard for VF-1 model kits.

Obviously a real valkyrie could not have those big mickey mouse hands,

I've always wondered about this myself, and, mechanically speaking, one could argue that they're just an Overtech skeleton surrounded by airbags or otherwise cushiony material which inflate in Battroid/Gerwalk mode (maybe to pad anything it grasps?) and deflate for storage. I haven't seen any detailed design sketches of the SDFM hands, so it's as plausible an explanation as any. Rendering it in model kit form would be as simple as providing "storage mode" hands in addition to the regular expanded hands.

Just remember when Yamato made the first YF-19 ?? I suppose then you would have done the same argument to defend that toy wich i always considered ugly in battroid mode saying that they had to sacrifce the battroid look as a "compromise". Well a few years after they released the VF-19 wich is basically the same mech and the proportions were correct!! Still the Arcadia one seems to be based on the old Yamato vf-19, and it's beautiful. So it was possible to do better.

I'm not sure what "argument" I'm supposed to be hypothetically making here.

There is not any mechanism that block the back pack in the battroid mode, so when you mount the super parts the back pack simply fall down. I made a simple fix with a piece of metal to correct this, but again why Bandai did not make this??? There s no reason but sloppiness.

Well, the "real" VF-1 also doesn't have any way to lock the backpack into place in battroid mode. So again, you're wanting them to compromise the detail of the kit in order to ease assembly.

It seems like you never built this kit... am i wrong? Generally this kit have received terrible reviews anywhere ... It seems that the only fans of this kit are here.

1.) I have never built this kit and don't intend to, though I don't know what bearing that has on the discussion.

2.) I don't know where you got the idea that I (or anyone here) am a fan of this kit. Certainly you've done a good job with it, but praising your work is not the same as praising it. By the same token, critiquing your arguments isn't the same thing as defending the kit.

[Big s]

I think what he meant was that the only fans of the kit are fans of macross on this forum and maybe not the gundam fan or aircraft fan. Either way this showcase sure turned into an odd debate.

[cwmodels]

All I'm trying to do is understand your definition of what a model kit should be. You say that it should be a detailed replica of the actual thing, including articulation and transformation. But the transformations/articulations of these toys/models don't reflect the "actual" transformation mechanics of their various source materials (which we know from various design docs, sketches, sometimes in-show footage, etc.), which would make them NOT detailed replicas of the actual things. I guess I'm puzzled as to what specifically you mean by the word "detailed."

I don't think it is necessary to debate over something so trivial in someone's showcase posting of his model kit. It's all personal preference and aesthetics He is entitled to his opinion and you are to yours. Honestly, keep going on like this seems so pointless and tacky.

[kajnrig]

...yeah, I went a bit overboard with the pointed debate. I remember getting into this debate in the past with other Gundam fans who were really into the Bandai modus operandi of

1) overengineering

and

2) making a mix of model kit and toy

and I think the strong feelings from then trickled back into my mind. That's enough of that.

[Gatsu]

...yeah, I went a bit overboard with the pointed debate. I remember getting into this debate in the past with other Gundam fans who were really into the Bandai modus operandi of

1) overengineering

and

2) making a mix of model kit and toy

and I think the strong feelings from then trickled back into my mind. That's enough of that.

You did a kind of phylosophical argument about the exact words i used like the word "detailed" when i suppose you understood perfectly what i meant. Ok forgot the word "detailed" and let s speak only of Macross mechas: for me the desired result when adapting such mechas to a toy/model kit is a compromise of functionality (transformation, posability, accuracy with how they do it in the anime, solidity) , reliability (make the mech looks mechanically coherent and feasible/logical) and how they looks in the original drawings/anime.

I think this is what every Macross fan and every Anime mechas fan want from a toy or a kit. The hasegawa kits lack of reliabilty because each configuration has different proportions, and also i don t know if u ever noticed it but the hasegawa fighter is not even accurate with the kawamori sketches it s a lot more elongated. I find that the Bandai 1/72 is good about proportions, maybe even better than Yamato, but it lacks on the "functionality" side. For sure in fighter mode is more accurate to kawamori drawings than hasegawas.

About yf-19: To me the Arcadia is a perfect compromise for all 3 modes, instead the Yamato was mainly focused on the fighter mode which seemed even more elongated than the kawamori's drawings...

It s not that weird i thought you were defending the bandai kit because all this whole discussion it started as a response to my critique to it.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Gatsu

[Gatsu]

I think what he meant was that the only fans of the kit are fans of macross on this forum and maybe not the gundam fan or aircraft fan. Either way this showcase sure turned into an odd debate.

No no, i ve read only negative comments on this kit right here in this forum in the past, bunch of persons who left it unfinished after some piece broke during assembling... but i decided to buy it anyway. Sincerely i don't know if i ll never buy another one, i'd like to make a Mass production with the vf-1a but that kit has even more problems than this.

[NZEOD]

NO... DONT change the pics. I love this size and scale comparo! And the figures are well done.

Edited August 28, 2016 by NZEOD

[Gatsu]

I corrected the pics with photoshop because i noticed they were too much red, the pics are those but with better colors... But i can t change them