New Zvezda Star Destroyer Model kit

Will definitely have to get this kit! A dream for certain!

My only slight beef with the shots above is that it seems the garbage chute on the lower stem of the conning tower on the back is missing. Perhaps they are still tooling that.

Other than that - this is a must have.
 
Will definitely have to get this kit! A dream for certain!

My only slight beef with the shots above is that it seems the garbage chute on the lower stem of the conning tower on the back is missing. Perhaps they are still tooling that.

Other than that - this is a must have.

Although, even if it is closed, the area is nicely defined so easy to open up, and I don't think there's much detail aside from a little box that you'd have to scratch back there.
 
A must have for me! Would love to be building this over Christmas break.

Hoping for more capital ships from Zvezda. Blockade Runner, Frigate, Mon Calomari cruiser.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
How could Zvezda so BADLY screw this up??? They completely botched the star destroyer's landing gear! They just "invented" two "X" shaped structures on the bottom hull that make no sense at all! Look at the proper landing gear on the Revell kit and compare. Of course we know the landing gear on the Revell are correct and canon because they boast that they used ILM's original files -- so you know they got the details RIGHT!
 
How could Zvezda so BADLY screw this up??? They completely botched the star destroyer's landing gear! They just "invented" two "X" shaped structures on the bottom hull that make no sense at all! Look at the proper landing gear on the Revell kit and compare. Of course we know the landing gear on the Revell are correct and canon because they boast that they used ILM's original files -- so you know they got the details RIGHT!

And the exhaust vent slots on the bottom as well!!!!!!!!!!
 
There will still be modellers buying Revell's toys rather than this one. And Revell will never learn, because they have success. Circle closed.
 
I've seen some people on other boards claiming the bridge module is oversized in proportions. Any star destroyer experts care to comment on that? I don't know the studio models well enough to say.
 
I've seen some people on other boards claiming the bridge module is oversized in proportions. Any star destroyer experts care to comment on that? I don't know the studio models well enough to say.

Now that you mention it, it does look a little large when compared to:

SD.jpg

TazMan2000
 
Although, even if it is closed, the area is nicely defined so easy to open up, and I don't think there's much detail aside from a little box that you'd have to scratch back there.


What is amazing is that Revell actually got the back stem detail with the garbage bay correct on their toy/model kit they just released. The detail on this Z-kit is astounding in comparison though. A small price to pay in scratch accuracy for a decent model we have waited decades for.

Bandai? Yer about to miss the boat on this one.
 
I've seen some people on other boards claiming the bridge module is oversized in proportions. Any star destroyer experts care to comment on that? I don't know the studio models well enough to say.

Let´s bring in some mathematics... ;) Someone will chime in and say the lens distortion is different and so on, but that´s the best I can do. I hope the calculation is correct. Interestingly, I believe I found the same oversize-percentage for the Revell kit´s bridge some weeks ago.

ISD_comparison.jpg

Also note the bridge has about the same width as the top superstructure "terrace" on the studio model, in the kit the bridge is noticeably wider. Maybe the kit´s proportions are a closer match to the Devastator´s?

I definately don´t want to bad-mouth this kit, I just like doing calculations. I´m very much looking forward to it and if I can afford it I´ll get three of them. :)
 
If anyone has a problem with dimensions of their kit, I will surely take them off your hands for you.

I might even waive my usual disposal fee for the greater good of the Empire!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Interestingly, I believe I found the same oversize-percentage for the Revell kit´s bridge some weeks ago.

Someone on a Facebook model group mentioned that the Star Wars Battlefront CG model also has an oversized bridge module, and that if Disney gave Revell and Zvezda the CG asset from Battlefront, that could be the culprit behind the inaccurate proportions.
 
Hull angles look good, but the superstructure is not tall enough and the bridge is too big. I don't think anyone has ever really gotten the SD exactly right. Still, this is probably closer than any other (small scale) attempt out there. Overall, it looks like a pretty nice model. :)
 
Eh, I'm good with the bridge, considering the next closest alternative to something this size and detailed would set you back about $500, I can live with 9.6 percent at $88!
 
Let´s bring in some mathematics... ;) Someone will chime in and say the lens distortion is different and so on, but that´s the best I can do.
...

Is that a pic of an SD that you own? If so, you can try and compensate for lens distortion by stepping away from the model as far as possible and then zoom in, increasing the focal length. The lower SD image looks like its been taken with a long focal length.
 
Eh, I'm good with the bridge, considering the next closest alternative to something this size and detailed would set you back about $500, I can live with 9.6 percent at $88!

If it bothers someone that much, there are several choices:

1) Don't buy the kit
2) Scratch build a new bridge
3) Tell Tony and Shapeways to "Shut up and take my money!"
 
This thread is more than 5 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