Critique of FOV 1:32 Bf109G

[donnieboy]

I agree with Harry Worth (hworth18) and Krieglok that the FOV 1:32 Bf109G leaves much to be desired, but I don't share their violent antipathy. I suspect both of these fine aircraft mavens were put off by the amateurish-looking paint scheme on the Eismeer (S1) Bf109G, but it is accurate. I found pictures of this bird (Red Ten) in two books in my aviation library, and the paint scheme matches the FOV model (although the background paint is darker in the books). This plane flew with IV gruppe of JG 5 out of Petsamo, Finland in the Winter 0f '43-'44. It said in one of the books that the white spots were hastily applied as winter camo in the field-hence the "half-assed" paint job. The odd stripe pattern on the propeller hub is accurate also, according to the pictures I found.
The major problems I have with this bird are mostly those Harry and Krielok pointed out:
Landing gear too far apart, rivets way overdone and exaggerated (the FOV Spitfire is even worse), rudder attached crooked, and aileron mass balances slanting outward rather than vertically.
I e-mailed FOV's tech rep in Hong Kong (the gracious-and ever-perky Candy Dong) and relayed my comments concerning the FOV Bf109G, and called attention to those of Harry and Krieglok.
Hopefully, Unimax will take steps to improve the quality of their 1:32 warbird line!