Man, am I disappointed! Having progressed with my Hasegawa 1/48 P-40E, let me warn you about this kit. (Photos pending)

For those of you who are not familiar with this model, base-ace Hasegawa issued a state-of-the-art model of the P-40. In terms of detail and molding and accuracy, this is a great model. Their failure is that they want to put out several versions without cutting new tooling for each, a' la AMT/ERTL's family. So the fuselage is modular, the rear canopy fuselage is seperate, as is the tail.

OK, perhaps the problem is my building but I doubt that is all of it. The parts do not match up. You can see some of this at my initial review of the kit: First Look . Well, these small mismatches are glaring once the paint goes on. The fit is not at all what I expected from Hasegawa, nowhere near as good as my fillerless Tamiya P-51 :Tamiya P-51 You can expect to do quite a bit of filling and sanding. Not a problem is you don't mind threatening the wonderful detail These parts for the canopy, the curvature is not as convex as the fuselage. The tail part is about a scale 3" bigger than the diameter of the fore fuselage.

Hasegawa did not engineer these plugs to fit along panel lines, either. Another horrible flaw is on the cowling just fore of the exhausts. On later P-40s there is a rectangular vent here. Not on the E. There are several panels that make the cowling. Hasegawa could have invested in 50% more plastic and made the plugs to fit along the cowl panel lines. Instead, they just make the vents, which cut across all lines! And they do not fit well!

This is a beautifully detailed model. Unfortunately, the engineering is not what I expected from a leader like Hasegawa. Especially not for $36 retail! In my opinion, you are better off buying an AMT or Pro Modeler P-40 for less than half the price :AMT & (pre) Pro Modeler P-40s and buying aftermarket parts. You'll still probably save enough for a second kit.

Otherwise, I suggest patience with this kit. Dry-fit everything over and over, and still keep filler handy. And be prepared to sand and rescribe.

Hi Fred!

I have this kit in my stash! Now everytime I see it, It says "don't build me! don't build me! don't build me!" :-)

Jean-Luc!

Progressing, frustrating.

The guns are seperate plugs, no doubt a four-gunned D and N are in the future? Anyway, the plugs fit OK, but bad enought that you have seams all the way around. Even after filling, and sanding down to plastic (wing) against plastic (plug), a seam is noticeable.







Note just ahead of the exhaust, the square vent/cowl plug and how it is not hidden in the cowl lines.

I think it is time to consider how much these kits would cost if they were separately tooled. I would think much more. From the photos provided, I don't see anything that mid level modeling skills cannot overcome.
As to some of the "scale" issues that you describe, I guess we should get some measurement data to validate those belly aches.

If your preference is for a Tamiya "shake and bake" modeling experience, then you probably should not have bought the kit. It has it's faults, but so do all kits.
The expectation that tolerances can be held to thousanths between these low cost styrene molds is unrealistic - unless you want the price of the kit to skyrocket. To acheive the level of detail mimicking the actual aircraft, and designing the build protocol of a multi versioned kit is an engineering challenge that requires compromise. The development and tooling costs cannot price the particular model out of its own market.


Steve

Hi Steve!

What you say is right, but that don't explain why the plugs on the kit are too small or too big! I did experience the same problems with a Hasegawa Typhoon! You have to build carefully without following the instructions and have to add systematicaly plastic to fill the gaps! Ok! The fun about modelling is to find the solution to problems but for that the short run kits are perfect! From Tamigawa I just expect a relaxing, easy build without too much challenge after the struggling battle with a Classic Airframes, HiPM, Fonderie Miniatures, MPM etc... kit!
By listing all the flaws of the kit, I think Fred is just doing what we expect from other modelers on this site! Give some good advices to the others! Because I will surely build this kit one day, despite the negative comments! But I will be warned!

Jean-Luc

Hi Jean-Luc,

Thank you, you hit the nail on the head.




Steve, how does one know if the kit is not "shake and bake" if one does not build it? I would rather build than read about others' buildings, and what others have written about 'some filling and sanding required' does not bother me. But what I am convaying is that for a Hasegawa kit, the fit and engineering is lousey. The gun plugs, the engine cowl vent plugs, these could easily been made to fit along natural breaks. The fuselage/tail I can forgive, but the gross mismatch of the canopy/fuselage plug is ridiculous. Even accepting that matching compound curve to compound curve is difficult, Hasegawa could have at least engineered it so that the sanding/filling could be along lines and/or far enough away from the beautiful detail around the rear canopy.

So far, I judge this kit as a major company mass-produced product of limited-run, cottage industry quality.

I intend to so warn those who desire this kit to understand that if it is "Hasemiya" quality they seek and need, save their money and buy an almost-as-good kit for less.

Gentlemen,

Your points are well taken and are valid, simply from the matter of perspective. What I was alluding to was simply that I really have never encountered a "trouble free Hasegawa kit, and that most modern Tamiya releases are designed to make average builders look better than average. I think these statements are fact.

I just wanted to share with the group some knowledge of injection molding and the complexities of producing model kits ( I work in injection molding) as an engineer. I have never worked in the plastic model industry but the dynamics are the same.

All that being said, I am happy that we have the quality level that todays manufacturers (for the most part) are producing. I personally don't want a "fall together" model, just my cup of tea. After 30 years of modelling, I am thankful for what we have today, and appreciate the great efforts that are put into these kits.


Cheers to all,

Steve

Hi Steve!

I have actually build the Aichi Val, the Macchi Veltro, The Nakajima Kate, The Me 109 G6 from Hasegawa and... they were "trouble free"! Compared to the P-40E and Typhoon kits they don't have inserts for different versions!
I looked at the n.46 issue of "Wing Masters" (a French magazine) build review of the kit and they were as negative about the additional parts as Fred and complained about the non-matching panel lines etc... Final conclusion was: "This is without contest a very beautiful model, like expected, but wich required more work than we thought, the adjustments representing half the time to build the kit. But when you love, you don't count!" HALF THE TIME FOR ADJUSTMENTS! you better be warned!
Let me ask a question: If someone would like to go in the hobby, would you recommend this kit for a first build? Surely not!
I'm not saying that Hasegawa is a bad manufacturer and I'm the first to be happy of today's kit quality improvement, but they still have to make progress with their inserts and I think (I might be naive) that they will do better next time after reading the negative articles in magazines, web pages and forums!

Jean-Luc

P.S. Steve, I don't want to have a fight with you! Your arguments are valid and I think mine too! It's just fun to have "slightly" different opinions and talk about that! I think Armorama is the right place for such things! Don't take this too seriously! I'm not! After all, we are talking about "little kiddy plastic toys"! :-) :-) :-)

Jean Luc,

You have made some valid points in your post. It seems that this particular model is frustrating more that just Fred!

It is too bad that a popular (and long awaited) subject such as the P-40 would be released with substandard build engineering. Although I am in agreement that the "problems" with the kit are unfortunate, I understand why that these issues are prevelant. Strictly from an engineering/cost viewpoint, compromise must be part of the equation.

Don't worry about offending me my friend! We all have opinions and we can all discuss them as gentlemen.

Regards,

Steve