Building X-Wing 1/24 : Help!!

Check these out... http://www.homepurchaseprogram.com/readpage.html

Seems like most of the R/C Bandai German tanks have jacks that are similar, but not identical to, the Hummel jack. Look at this one in particular:

image004.jpg


The Sturmgeschütz IV. It's really dificult to make out at that resolution, under the camo, but I can almost see that being our part, with the extra detail that's missing from the Hummel part.
 
Good find. If not the Hummel, I wonder if the "right" kit will also have all the other "Hummel" parts ID'ed on the Y-Wing, etc.

As for me, considering the cost, I'm just gonna stick with the Hummel I already have.
icon_smile.gif
 
hey guys I tryed my bandai kits king tiger and panther not a match there either just to letyou know the hummel is very close I am going with that

take care
 
The Hummel jack IS the part used. The re-issue has not been re-tooled. I have the original release.
As with MANY donor parts on these models you have to "think outside the box". The small box deal has been shaved down etc. You also have several layers of paint on the models that distort the details. Parts and panels combined into assembly's etc.
 
ViewImage.dll


ViewImage.dll


ViewImage.dll


ViewImage.dll


The hummel jack scan isn't angled properly, nor is the part modified. But you get the idea.
The rear is obvious.
The 1/15 STUG jack (last picture) is completely wrong.

Either state facts around here, that is PROVE without a doubt your information is 100% correct or keep the amateurish speculation to yourself. Guessing doesn't cut it. At least post pictures that merrit a discussion or an investigation.
 
A StuG:

DeadStug4.jpg


Your "StuG" jack looks more like the Tiger jack (I think it was the Tiger - I'm not really interested in memorizing what the wrong parts look like). It certainly seems to be mounted on a StuG, in the same position as the fuel can in the above image. Whether it's mounted on a Bandai StuG or not is a different matter; the Bandai box art has a jack like my picture. Checking out websites devoted to R/C tanks, it seems that the Bandai kits have been heavily reworked over time, apparently. Perhaps your jack is from a StuG kit, but not from the one that ILM used. Alternatively, perhaps the jack ILM used is from a Hummel, but you were the one that claimed that the Hummel part hadn't been retooled. Notice how the two smaller circular bits on the Hummel jack appear to be a little too close together compared to the part on the X-wing, and notice how the bits in the StuG picture above appear to be slightly further apart.

Another StuG jack, this time mounted the other way around:

022402%20003a.jpg


Notice the thicker wall and the extra details. Again, it's hard to tell from the low resolution of the image, but it looks as though the extra details are holes. Look at the Red One image I posted, and it's easy to imagine that the details on there are laid over holes. There's no evidence of any holes in the Red 2 picture that you posted (thanks for that, by the way, I wish you'd post more like it) but I think that the hole is for stowing the jack handle. The detail on the Red 2 part might be the jack handle. Notice also on your Red 2 picture that the large hole with the teeth doesn't have any lip around it - the hole goes right to the edge of the wall. The Hummel part has a lip.

"Either state facts around here, that is PROVE without a doubt your information is 100% correct or keep the amateurish speculation to yourself. Guessing doesn't cut it. At least post pictures that merrit a discussion or an investigation."

Everything I've stated is a fact, based on careful observation of the images that I've found. Your claims ("extra layers of paint make the part look that way" for example) seems more like "guessing" to me. There's really never been any need for your unfriendly tone.

I could easily be wrong - the StuG models that I've posted pictures of could have been accurized. Maybe the actual kit part isn't the right one. So, I'll say it again. How about a gamble: The price of the kit? If I'm wrong, you make several hundred dollars. If I'm right, you get the right parts for the X-wing, and just maybe some more parts for your Y-wing. How can you lose?
 
You make some fine good points, Ray. I think it's a valuable thing to re-examine even the most accepted "facts" from time to time--sometimes new discoveries can result.

The thicker border is rather convincing to me. It doesn't look like it's the result of paint or casting mushiness. Fairly crisp on that X-Wing pic--if recasting/painting had built it up THAT much, it would be much more rounded and there wouldn't be much detail left on the teeth in the hole. Plus, the border in Jamie's ref pic is butted up to the outer edge of the hole, which is not the case on the Hummel.
 
you guys are really duken it out here wow
the stug was on the ilm kit racks I can't show you pics of the rack as they are not in my possesion but I can tell you the kit as well as quite a few large scale bandai kits
example
m60 a1
king tiger
panther
1/24 scale
the stug
the hummel
kettenkrad
bmw r 75
the list goes on amd on
I have made it one of my chares to gather any and all info about the ilm kit racks I have some good ref pics but will not post them sorry butI have workedhard for this info
if anyone wants a peak at them email me
I am not saying the stug isthe right kit here but just verifing it was on the kit racks at one time

over and out
 
Thanks for posting the better pictures Ray. Your arguement NOW has me intrigued. I just don't have the time for guessing.... that means to me, not showing good enough evidence to back up what one says. Looks like you just did that.
I suppose there is only one way to find out for sure now.
 
Figured you'd already know, beaz. Where the devil have you been, anyway? How are you getting along with the non-kit parts of the X-wing? I got some stuff to show, if you want to see it...

Jamie, the reason I didn't post those pictures straight away was to make a bit of a point. There is a difference between idle speculation and well-reasoned conjecture. I knew the Hummel part wasn't the same as the part in the Chronicles Red One picture. I posted here with a general enquiry, just in case anybody was willing to volunteer the information that the kit had been retooled (this was what I initially thought was the most likely explanation). Nothing much came of that, so then I went scouting for pictures of the other Bandai jacks. I already had the pictures I posted when I offered you the wager. The reason I offered you the wager was the same reason that I'm building my X-wing. For FUN. That's why we're all doing it, isn't it? Friends?
 
Ray,

I'm a hot-head what can I say
icon_mad.gif
Sorry I didn't mean to offended you. I just get sick of all the "idle speculation" that goes on around here. Which to me, sounded like your initial intentions. Good find BTW.

Friends? Of course
icon_cheers.gif


Jamie
 
that part on the back of the wing that has the sherman boagy inlaid well as I said it is from a lomg tome kit but I wasn't sure of the manufacturer or scale I surfed fro a while adn found this the auroura kit scale is 1/40 ? email me for pic it is the part we are looking for I hope god I hope

take it easy

andrsnhaus@earthlink.net
 
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>Miniaturizer Ray wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Figured you'd already know, beaz. Where the devil have you been, anyway? How are you getting along with the non-kit parts of the X-wing? I got some stuff to show, if you want to see it...</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>

Hey, Ray,

O master of the mesh, I wanna see, I wanna see...beazuhma@mindspring.com
icon6.gif


As for me I've been really busy, tho not so busy that I haven't worked on my X-Wing here and there. Hoping to have more free time this winter to do some modeling. Just finished remodeling my office/shop space in the attic of the house we moved into last year, so now I have some space.
 
Thanks, beaz. You always have the answers!

Thanks, too, boatbuilder1, for the Abrams info. It supposedly is on CC's list. I wonder what he used it for.
 
</SPAN><TABLE BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH=85%><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>Treadwell wrote:<HR></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS=$row_color>
Thanks, beaz. You always have the answers!</TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><SPAN CLASS=$row_color>
Can't claim any credit on this one - was told about the StuG by someone else.
 
boatbuilder, I don't think the Aurora Long Tom is the right kit, I'm afraid. I came across this webpage which makes it look like a good candidate: The spades in the picture look as if they could be trimmed to look like the X-Wing detail, and the Long Tom (308) is apparently identical to the 8" Howitzer (307) apart from the longer barrel, and the 8 incher was also available in a set with the M8, which we know was used. Seemed promising enough. I got the 8" kit today, but the spades are too small. The kit instructions are for the 8" or the 155mm, so I'm pretty sure that the two kits are identical apart from the barrel.

There's some talk about six hundred odd posts into this thread about Howitzers: beaz says that the Italieri 155mm and 105mm kits aren't right. There can't be that many more to eliminate. Of course, there's no guarantee that the part actually is a Howitzer spade. Personally, I'm not going to worry too much about this part: it's an easy scratch, and the Sherman part pretty much sets the dimensions.
 
actually there are quite a few manufacturers of the howitzer all of which were not around them
but I will kepp looking

take care I am waiting until after christmas to order rtv and mold my fuzzy until then work proceeds on the wings and buying kits
too much into space 1999 and the eagle right now too many ships to build not enough time or money

tut tut
 
Hi guys I am starting a 1/6th scale X-Wing model ( from scratch ) and just wanted to know if there are any plans or good diagrams out there on how to scratch build one, thanks for the help
clonetrooper_yellow.gif
 
This thread is more than 12 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top