Finished a J a few weeks ago, and had a similar experience at the end with the canopy fit, but overall really enjoyed it, and almost started another just because a few idiosyncrasies were fresh in my head and I didn't want to forget before the next build. Didn't have the wing fit issues front or back, and the intakes went in pretty darn well. Any bad issues were self inflicted. Have almost all the ZM kits and have to say my favorite company bar none. Maybe not for everyone, but I love the attention to detail and assembly and not quite shake and bake like others, and not putty and sand like the rest.
Beautiful model. You did a superb job... And thank you for putting Aim 7s only in aft recesses. People don't know the foward Recesses jesstison were locked out when the center tank was carried. Also you did something that I have always done, that many don't do, you drooped the points of the LGB, again people don't realize those are free swinging, and tilt down under gravity when the plane is at rest. Anyway, Fanstic job on the build. Looks Great!
Beautiful Spook! Glad you went with the aftermarket Turkey feathers, they look much better. I've built their 1/32nd TaH0 and correct the detail is fantastic, the kit is just very tricky to build. I also have a 1/32nd TaH1 and the massive He-219. Not a Tamiya kit, you must provide plenty of talent to build a Zoukei, but there is plenty of detail to build a beauty. Which again you did with your Spook. Congrats!
Yeah their Phantoms are rather less "fussy" with parts overkill than their 1/32 props seem to be. I don't really have a problem with fussiness unless it is to such a degree that it's hard to test-fit and adjust along the way. I've got the Ki-45, and it's going to take some fortitude to take that sucker on.
Looks good! The Phantom is one of my favorites! I have several. Just ran across your channel and subscribed, by the way. I see a couple of the other guys from our community here, too.
As to what’s under the skin of the 335 is your guess as good as mine but I’m sure there’s a lot they don’t put in and just as an example the control lines including the hydraulic lines and actuators but I have both versions and I have a few photos from the period and from what I can say it seems pretty accurate but I think it’s great we have this company that is doing and I don’t see any one else doing this so again I’m happy that we have Zoeki Mura as I’m sure you feel the same,I got another comment saying they should just build everything the same as the F-4 and I tried explaining that the reason for the company was to build the details no one else will and so far it’s great and thanks to Zoeki Mura,can’t wait for the 129 that’s about to be released and I got a letter from the president of the company saying that they are doing a early Mustang (B-C) which I can’t wait for and the 190 D-9 which will be out in the next couple of years,thanks....
I am Building the Early E right Now and it is awesome. Lot of the little issues you have on this build are addressed in that kit. I was comparing my J to the E that I am building and the changes they made really seem more positive. FYI thou. The kit Can Still suck ass. Resin is a must and the spine While it is nice you still need to do your buddies trick with the toothpick (Smart one there. I just took a small bit of Thin Styrene stock Glued it under there and just pressed down until it was at the height.) and once you have it centered you need to fill the end near the tail a bit as you get a gap right there. Killer kit. Sad I missed the EJ pre order. Thou in my defense I didn't even know about the release.
Great to hear about the changes for the better! I understand that they started messing with stuff with the Marines boxing of the F-4J (control surfaces designed to be posed) and glad to see them continuing into the long-noses. I'm just sitting here waiting for a late E and a G.
Aww yeah That would be sweet. Yeah the only part that is still wonky is the Leading edge flaps. I could not bring myself to lower them they looked just dumb in my mock up and if I am honest I couldn't be bothered to Correct the issue. A separate Tail Rudder or whatever its called ( I like the planes still learning the fancy lingo.) Would have been nice But just made due with cutting the bottom edge so you get the separation there. I have the J Navy Boxing up after this so look forward to really comparing the 2. The tail it self was reworked and if you want to repose it that is a Separate 2 pieces all together with 3 options. either like -35, at 0 or +35 something like that you get the point there. Moveable. Shoot the next step should have been to make it just a joint you could move how ever you wanted. Assemble the plane halves then build one side into the joint feed thru and Connect the other. Anyways I am ranting. Love the channel man. the honesty in the review is fucking top notch and I had to watch this before I even considered Puling the Trigger on the E I am building now.
Did a J as VF-114 and simply added belts to the seats and some cockpit photo etch locks on the canopies, and really enjoyed it. I didn't have any issue with the flaperons. Did wish the wing tips fit better, one fit perfect, one slight gap. All over, I'd give it two thumbs up.
Ok, I gotta know... why was one pylon black and the others white?? Great build and many thanks for the input. I have one in my stash and I could only hope to build one half as good as you did!
I agree on the first kit but the TA-152 wasn’t bad and the 229 and 219 are great and the details that make up the interior are the reason for the company,literally that’s why the man responsible for the company,to build the details that are under the skin and I get your point but all other companies out their are building kits that are traditional type without the details so I hope they continue and all the others can build the kits we’ve seen and yes I’m glad they are but also glad for these,and yes I agree the first couple weren’t great but not many get it right the first kits out and again I’m doubling down on being happy to have a manufacture which is doing what they are...
I definitely applaud their ambition and obvious passion. I do wish though that they would provide ways to build their kits without going all-out on the interior. Or having them able to be built as separate subassemblies (same way I wish companies would provide a second engine, etc) for external display. A series of cutaway vignettes (cockpit, main gear bay + gun bay, engine and half a cowl, etc) would be really cool sitting next to the fully built subject.
Hello DoogsModel After reading many reviews and builds on the f-4C your post sealed the deal for which kit to buy I will be getting both a C and D version but one at a time one question what company are the nozzles and other replacement parts from from please let me know did you replace the intakes ? thanks for your help lot of useful info on the high and low spots keep up the good work stay the course Bruceii
@@TapChanek yeah, here in California the Academy runs 60-70, and needs some after market to compare in some areas. The ZM is 75 and doesn't "need" to have extras if not wanted. Probably pick up an Academy B ...just so that as soon as I buy it a ZM B will come out of nowhere.😉
BTW Don’t be so hard on your compressor,he works his butt off and he’s always there for you, I would like to see you build a zucchini 32 Maybe the 229 or the 219 and the latest German release will be the 129 which will be out around Christmas but do one Doog.
Just curious about the details you mentioned,in the few 32scale planes I’ve built have been accurate and a few fit issues but nothing serious,just curious what your experiences have been,hope to hear back from you
Not really sure how to answer that. 1/32 is a big swath and, to be honest, most of them aren't known for accuracy. Wingnut Wings, Tamiya's big props, and things kind of run out after that. Most kits have at least some share of shape or detail flubs, and the question is how many fucks it's worth giving about them.
Doogs' Models I want to also point out that most kits these days are based on aircraft which have been restored and because they may be flying examples they could have instrumentation which is meant to bring the aircraft up to date in terms of safety or navigation,you get my drift...
@@edwardweeks1555 ah, gotcha. I'd have to go back specifically, but a lot of the stuff in the wings, etc doesn't really line up with what's actually in the aircraft or maybe approximates it. I believe the Do 335 was one of the worst offenders but for me it's one of those things noted in passing while skimming reviews.
They've already announced an F-4E - and I'm assuming since we've got an S they'll certainly do a slat-wing E. From there it's basically a no-brainer to kit a Wild Weasel - and I'm really hoping for that. Have designs on a Euro I scheme and a battered Desert Storm Hill scheme.
The D-model was purposefully tailored to USAF needs. It had better support for air-to-ground missions with updated avionics. (Ironically, the F-4C was tasked for air-to-ground in Vietnam while F-4Ds took up air-to-air! Go figure!) Airframe-wise, it was virtually identical to the F-4C with the same big nose and "solid wing." The Charlie model was basically a minimal change from the original production B-model for the US Navy/Marine Corps. The USAF wanted to put the the F-4 into service as soon as possible so worked to keep the changes down from the B-model. The big noticeable change on the C-model was that it had larger tires than the B-model. The F-4B entered service with the US Navy in 1961. The F-4C followed for the USAF in 1963. The F-4D started appearing in USAF squadrons in 1965. The F-4C was retired in service with the Air National Guard circa 1988/1989. The F-4D I believe was retired in the early 1990s (1991, 1992?) but I've never read a specific retirement date for US service. The retirement was moved up because of defense budget cuts.
Can you post links to your reference about this particular Phantom? I’m not familiar with a black bottom scheme and heavy load out like that. The position of the ailerons like that is also different because the inner panels are the flaps and would normally be drooped in stead of the ailerons. They did have the ability to droop the ailerons and the flaps at the same time but limited to a certain degree as a landing configuration. Nice build overall
Here's the best shot I've been able to run down of a Night Owl packing 4 GBU-10s doogsmodels.smugmug.com/Inspiration-and-Reference/Modern-Jets/F4-Phantom/i-V6758Kt
As for deflected outer flaperons/ailerons, about half of the references I have with deflected surfaces are in this configuration. Here's an F-4S as one example doogsmodels.smugmug.com/Inspiration-and-Reference/Modern-Jets/F4-Phantom/i-z5DqCSs
Thanks for the follow up. I looked through the photos and I do the same thing collecting lots of photos. The ailerons hydro system must bleed down allowing them to droop when sitting for a period of time. Looking forward to the 3 new builds you have scheduled. @@DoogsModels
Finished a J a few weeks ago, and had a similar experience at the end with the canopy fit, but overall really enjoyed it, and almost started another just because a few idiosyncrasies were fresh in my head and I didn't want to forget before the next build. Didn't have the wing fit issues front or back, and the intakes went in pretty darn well. Any bad issues were self inflicted. Have almost all the ZM kits and have to say my favorite company bar none. Maybe not for everyone, but I love the attention to detail and assembly and not quite shake and bake like others, and not putty and sand like the rest.
Beautiful model. You did a superb job... And thank you for putting Aim 7s only in aft recesses. People don't know the foward Recesses jesstison were locked out when the center tank was carried. Also you did something that I have always done, that many don't do, you drooped the points of the LGB, again people don't realize those are free swinging, and tilt down under gravity when the plane is at rest. Anyway, Fanstic job on the build. Looks Great!
Great build, interesting kit discussion. I like how they avoided the centre line seam.
Love these expressions, "survivor bias" and "extremely engaging kit".....!! Thanks for the informative vid.
Beautiful Spook! Glad you went with the aftermarket Turkey feathers, they look much better. I've built their 1/32nd TaH0 and correct the detail is fantastic, the kit is just very tricky to build. I also have a 1/32nd TaH1 and the massive He-219. Not a Tamiya kit, you must provide plenty of talent to build a Zoukei, but there is plenty of detail to build a beauty. Which again you did with your Spook. Congrats!
Yeah their Phantoms are rather less "fussy" with parts overkill than their 1/32 props seem to be. I don't really have a problem with fussiness unless it is to such a degree that it's hard to test-fit and adjust along the way. I've got the Ki-45, and it's going to take some fortitude to take that sucker on.
You have some of the best reviews out there. I appreciate the shit out of your honesty about the goods and bads...do more!
I really appreciate your honest opinion of this build, Matt. I'll be keeping your video in mind when I tackle the Z-M F-4S I've got in the build pile.
The "build pile" is always growing!
Really top job and great review. 👍🏻 I particularly loved the bomb mounting you did. Fabulous. 😃
Eduard decals :)
Doog, you make some great models. Your reviews are some of the best. May your chickens always have eggs!
Looks good! The Phantom is one of my favorites! I have several. Just ran across your channel and subscribed, by the way. I see a couple of the other guys from our community here, too.
Wow, I dig your weathering! It's realistic, not over-the-top as so often seen..
As to what’s under the skin of the 335 is your guess as good as mine but I’m sure there’s a lot they don’t put in and just as an example the control lines including the hydraulic lines and actuators but I have both versions and I have a few photos from the period and from what I can say it seems pretty accurate but I think it’s great we have this company that is doing and I don’t see any one else doing this so again I’m happy that we have Zoeki Mura as I’m sure you feel the same,I got another comment saying they should just build everything the same as the F-4 and I tried explaining that the reason for the company was to build the details no one else will and so far it’s great and thanks to Zoeki Mura,can’t wait for the 129 that’s about to be released and I got a letter from the president of the company saying that they are doing a early Mustang (B-C) which I can’t wait for and the 190 D-9 which will be out in the next couple of years,thanks....
I am Building the Early E right Now and it is awesome. Lot of the little issues you have on this build are addressed in that kit. I was comparing my J to the E that I am building and the changes they made really seem more positive. FYI thou. The kit Can Still suck ass. Resin is a must and the spine While it is nice you still need to do your buddies trick with the toothpick (Smart one there. I just took a small bit of Thin Styrene stock Glued it under there and just pressed down until it was at the height.) and once you have it centered you need to fill the end near the tail a bit as you get a gap right there.
Killer kit. Sad I missed the EJ pre order. Thou in my defense I didn't even know about the release.
Great to hear about the changes for the better! I understand that they started messing with stuff with the Marines boxing of the F-4J (control surfaces designed to be posed) and glad to see them continuing into the long-noses. I'm just sitting here waiting for a late E and a G.
Aww yeah That would be sweet. Yeah the only part that is still wonky is the Leading edge flaps. I could not bring myself to lower them they looked just dumb in my mock up and if I am honest I couldn't be bothered to Correct the issue. A separate Tail Rudder or whatever its called ( I like the planes still learning the fancy lingo.) Would have been nice But just made due with cutting the bottom edge so you get the separation there. I have the J Navy Boxing up after this so look forward to really comparing the 2.
The tail it self was reworked and if you want to repose it that is a Separate 2 pieces all together with 3 options. either like -35, at 0 or +35 something like that you get the point there. Moveable. Shoot the next step should have been to make it just a joint you could move how ever you wanted. Assemble the plane halves then build one side into the joint feed thru and Connect the other.
Anyways I am ranting. Love the channel man. the honesty in the review is fucking top notch and I had to watch this before I even considered Puling the Trigger on the E I am building now.
Perfect timing, I just bought this kit for $22 yesterday!
Flok May I ask how? It seems you can’t find one under $60
@@405chiraq cost finland here 65 euros........22?
Did a J as VF-114 and simply added belts to the seats and some cockpit photo etch locks on the canopies, and really enjoyed it. I didn't have any issue with the flaperons. Did wish the wing tips fit better, one fit perfect, one slight gap. All over, I'd give it two thumbs up.
"Academy is like 'haha; Fuck you."
That sums up a few of their kits perfectly.
I was quite disappointed with Academy's F-4s and was looking forward to get Zoukeimura's F-4. Thanks for the review.
Ok, I gotta know... why was one pylon black and the others white?? Great build and many thanks for the input. I have one in my stash and I could only hope to build one half as good as you did!
Because references show light gray pylons - possibly replacements or removed for painting the underside
I agree on the first kit but the TA-152 wasn’t bad and the 229 and 219 are great and the details that make up the interior are the reason for the company,literally that’s why the
man responsible for the company,to build the details that are under the skin and I get your point but all other companies out their are building kits that are traditional type without the details so I hope they continue and all the others can build the kits we’ve seen and yes I’m glad they are but also glad for these,and yes I agree the first couple weren’t great but not many get it right the first kits out and again I’m doubling down on being happy to have a manufacture which is doing what they are...
I definitely applaud their ambition and obvious passion. I do wish though that they would provide ways to build their kits without going all-out on the interior. Or having them able to be built as separate subassemblies (same way I wish companies would provide a second engine, etc) for external display. A series of cutaway vignettes (cockpit, main gear bay + gun bay, engine and half a cowl, etc) would be really cool sitting next to the fully built subject.
A very nice review.
Hello DoogsModel After reading many reviews and builds on the f-4C your post sealed the deal for which kit to buy I will be getting both a C and D version but one at a time one question what company are the nozzles and other replacement parts from from please let me know did you replace the intakes ? thanks for your help lot of useful info on the high and low spots keep up the good work stay the course Bruceii
Exhausts are GT Resin. Not my favorite, but the only option really for the C/D (J/S have a few alternatives).
Nice job im about to build it myself anything i should be aware of in this kit
Really a detailed great job!!
Stunning work Matt really beautiful piece.
Can I ask how and where you display all of your work.
😉👍❤
I've got two massive display cabinets that my wife scored from a local Hallmark store when they remodeled - they're ratty but huge.
OOOH you lucky fella any chance of a nose through them one day? 😉👍❤
Very nice! Do you recommend it over Academy?
Very much so.
No comparison, especially with price. ZM is in another league compared to Academy. ZM builds out of box a superior model.
@@jprules2578 Depends on location, in EU you can get Academy F-4 for €45, while ZM is around €85.
@@TapChanek yeah, here in California the Academy runs 60-70, and needs some after market to compare in some areas. The ZM is 75 and doesn't "need" to have extras if not wanted. Probably pick up an Academy B ...just so that as soon as I buy it a ZM B will come out of nowhere.😉
Nice job! 👍👏
Always a dilemma what's the best Phantom. The Hasegawa one is old but it's a third of the price
Good review
BTW
Don’t be so hard on your compressor,he works his butt off and he’s always there for you, I would like to see you build a zucchini 32
Maybe the 229 or the 219 and the latest German release will be the 129 which will be out around Christmas but do one Doog.
I've got the Ki-45 but I'm on a serious US kick at the moment
Accuracy wise from a scale of 1 to 10?
Just curious about the details you mentioned,in the few 32scale planes I’ve built have been accurate and a few fit issues but nothing serious,just curious what your experiences have been,hope to hear back from you
Not really sure how to answer that. 1/32 is a big swath and, to be honest, most of them aren't known for accuracy. Wingnut Wings, Tamiya's big props, and things kind of run out after that. Most kits have at least some share of shape or detail flubs, and the question is how many fucks it's worth giving about them.
Doogs' Models
Sorry I meant Zoeki Mura in particular,when you mentioned details that were fictitious...
Doogs' Models I want to also point out that most kits these days are based on aircraft which have been restored and because they may be flying examples they could have instrumentation which is meant to bring the aircraft up to date in terms of safety or navigation,you get my drift...
@@edwardweeks1555 ah, gotcha. I'd have to go back specifically, but a lot of the stuff in the wings, etc doesn't really line up with what's actually in the aircraft or maybe approximates it. I believe the Do 335 was one of the worst offenders but for me it's one of those things noted in passing while skimming reviews.
Hi! Are you considering having a look to any AMK kits? Mig-31 or F-14?
MiG-31 just doesn't really interest me. As for the F-14, maybe one day. Not in much of a mood for 1/48 jets at the moment.
@@DoogsModels Sure, I understand.. I wonder about your take on AMK F-14 after 250 pages of bickering at ARC forums, lol..
What do you use to paint the blue armored center glass on the windscreen ?
Tamiya clear blue and clear green mixed with X-22
Thank you..
Doog thank you again. I did what you said and got the exact results I wanted..
Do you predict a wild weasel or a gun nose king coming?
They've already announced an F-4E - and I'm assuming since we've got an S they'll certainly do a slat-wing E. From there it's basically a no-brainer to kit a Wild Weasel - and I'm really hoping for that. Have designs on a Euro I scheme and a battered Desert Storm Hill scheme.
You said you had fun! Are you sick?
How do you mean
Dear Zoukei-Mura,
Please do a U.S.N/Marines F-4B/N carrier Phantom version............... make it happen!!!
What’s the difference between the F-4C and the F-4D
The D-model was purposefully tailored to USAF needs. It had better support for air-to-ground missions with updated avionics. (Ironically, the F-4C was tasked for air-to-ground in Vietnam while F-4Ds took up air-to-air! Go figure!) Airframe-wise, it was virtually identical to the F-4C with the same big nose and "solid wing."
The Charlie model was basically a minimal change from the original production B-model for the US Navy/Marine Corps. The USAF wanted to put the the F-4 into service as soon as possible so worked to keep the changes down from the B-model. The big noticeable change on the C-model was that it had larger tires than the B-model.
The F-4B entered service with the US Navy in 1961. The F-4C followed for the USAF in 1963. The F-4D started appearing in USAF squadrons in 1965.
The F-4C was retired in service with the Air National Guard circa 1988/1989.
The F-4D I believe was retired in the early 1990s (1991, 1992?) but I've never read a specific retirement date for US service. The retirement was moved up because of defense budget cuts.
Can you post links to your reference about this particular Phantom?
I’m not familiar with a black bottom scheme and heavy load out like that.
The position of the ailerons like that is also different because the inner panels are the flaps and would normally be drooped in stead of the ailerons. They did have the ability to droop the ailerons and the flaps at the same time but limited to a certain degree as a landing configuration.
Nice build overall
Here's the best shot I've been able to run down of a Night Owl packing 4 GBU-10s doogsmodels.smugmug.com/Inspiration-and-Reference/Modern-Jets/F4-Phantom/i-V6758Kt
Links to the online info I found seem to be 404ing this morning - but googling around for Blind Bay C-130 should help you find the breadcrumbs.
As for deflected outer flaperons/ailerons, about half of the references I have with deflected surfaces are in this configuration. Here's an F-4S as one example doogsmodels.smugmug.com/Inspiration-and-Reference/Modern-Jets/F4-Phantom/i-z5DqCSs
Thanks for the follow up. I looked through the photos and I do the same thing collecting lots of photos. The ailerons hydro system must bleed down allowing them to droop when sitting for a period of time.
Looking forward to the 3 new builds you have scheduled.
@@DoogsModels
Magnets...........great idea!
Some call them volks