Qantas A300's - A Comparison

Abraxas · 02-18-2008, 07:15 AM

I took out a couple models the other day, and thought why not put the Qantas A300's up against each other? So here we have Aeroclassics and Jet-X's A300's facing off...

From my own observations, the Aeroclassics wins for me. Every detail in every way is far better executed. But, as a stand alone model, the Jet-X is passable (in my opinion). The Jet-X also has the benefit of offering more rego's, so more availability for those who still appear to be looking for the AC version.

Let the pics tell the story...

The Aeroclassics model, and my 200th 1:400 diecast plane:

Nose to Nose, Jet-X Vs Aeroclassics:

Side by Side.

The Qantas Four.

Dan

nosegear · 02-18-2008, 07:27 AM

It Both Look Pretty Good,thanks For The Pics Dan

G-ARPR · 02-18-2008, 10:30 AM

Many thanks for the pictures and your review.

These are the type of reviews I like to see, one that is un-biased and which lets the pictures do the talking with the models side by side.

Now I can clearly see that the Jet-X A300 really is crap!!

goldy · 02-18-2008, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nosegear

It Both Look Pretty Good,thanks For The Pics Dan

I admit that I must have no eye for 1:400 scale detail. I thought the same as you, Nose.

Peewee

VNAB777ER · 02-18-2008, 03:13 PM

Have got te Aeroclassics but haven't got the Jet-X version on hand, from Dan pics the Jet-X version look aright, anyway it's always great to Qantas in the collection.

Groover158 · 02-18-2008, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G-ARPR

Many thanks for the pictures and your review.

These are the type of reviews I like to see, one that is un-biased and which lets the pictures do the talking with the models side by side.

Now I can clearly see that the Jet-X A300 really is crap!!

A biased assessment from an unbiased review.

Mystère · 02-18-2008, 04:03 PM

Nose and engines definitely put the JetX/BBX out of competition ! I won't even bother to look at the other details. Always good to see this kind of pics (even when they are blurry...

).

Abraxas · 02-18-2008, 04:28 PM

Sorry about the bad photos. Camera was a HD Video camera and I was using the Photo function lol. Even 'soft focus' can't hide the differences between the two

Dan

Mystère · 02-18-2008, 04:33 PM

No problemo, even a blurry pic is better than no pic at all.

aklein707 · 02-18-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldy

I admit that I must have no eye for 1:400 scale detail. I thought the same as you, Nose.
Peewee

Common Norm, G-ARPR said it best; why argue! A picture is worth many thousands of words; I'll say no more!

I'm glad someone finally did the comparison!

goldy · 02-18-2008, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklein707

Common Norm, G-ARPR said it best; why argue! A picture is worth many thousands of words; I'll say no more!
I'm glad someone finally did the comparison!

If I were to buy one it would be the AC simply based on the overwhelming opinion. What I said was that my eyes are not trained enough to notice the difference. They look the same to me. Right brain left brain. I more enjoy the colors. I like the KD Avia 737 recent from Herpa but someone found fault with the nose. I do not see it. I bought the model just the same.

Peewee

gospodin · 02-18-2008, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklein707

Common Norm, G-ARPR said it best; why argue! A picture is worth many thousands of words; I'll say no more!

I'm glad someone finally did the comparison!

But because you release such ridiculously low numbers, those that missed out on the "superior" AC Qantas A300 will have to settle for the Jet-X, which makes this comparison moot at best. Better to have something a little less perfect than to have nothing at all. My thought: Buy the JX, and if you come across a reasonably priced AC version, sell the JX to another unfortunate who wants a great livery, but can't get the "premium".

JustPlaneCrazy · 02-18-2008, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gospodin

But because you release such ridiculously low numbers, those that missed out on the "superior" AC Qantas A300 will have to settle for the Jet-X, which makes this comparison moot at best. Better to have something a little less perfect than to have nothing at all. My thought: Buy the JX, and if you come across a reasonably priced AC version, sell the JX to another unfortunate who wants a great livery, but can't get the "premium".

I'm curious, how many Jet-X were made?

goldy · 02-18-2008, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gospodin

But because you release such ridiculously low numbers, those that missed out on the "superior" AC Qantas A300 will have to settle for the Jet-X, which makes this comparison moot at best. Better to have something a little less perfect than to have nothing at all. My thought: Buy the JX, and if you come across a reasonably priced AC version, sell the JX to another unfortunate who wants a great livery, but can't get the "premium".

This is a sensible approach. I was thinking the same. Good that if this A300 is so popular that JetX did produce enough for everyone to have one.

Peewee

aklein707 · 02-19-2008, 12:45 AM

As Unicorn would put it, "my annointed" dealer in Australia still has a few pcs in stock, so the whole talk about insufficient quantities is bunch of hoouie!!

Hawaiian717 · 02-19-2008, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JustPlaneCrazy

I'm curious, how many Jet-X were made?

Too many....piece of crap!

nosegear · 02-19-2008, 04:19 AM

did someone mention AEROCLASSIC QANTAS A300??????????

Abraxas · 02-19-2008, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklein707

Common Norm, G-ARPR said it best; why argue! A picture is worth many thousands of words; I'll say no more!

I'm glad someone finally did the comparison!

Hey Andrew, somewhat off topic, but who's writing is on the numbered cards for these? Is it yours by chance?

Glad the comparison has provided to be useful. If Aeroclassics does decide some time in the future to release another Qantas registration, I will buy it in a heartbeat. But for the moment I am happy to have THE Aeroclassics offering, and complimented (for lack of a better word) by the remaining three Jet-X versions.

Nosegear, sounds like you might still be in with a chance of getting an AC version. Hope you find one soon!

Dan

N. Eberhard · 02-19-2008, 02:09 PM

Hugo...you have been grinding that axe for quite some time now. Don't you think it is sharp enough already?

hugo · 02-19-2008, 06:57 PM

Hi Nick - that's really a bit like the pot calling the kettle black - if you read the previous comment in this thread the criticisms were basically just calling a model cr*p which is hardly productive - and I draw your attention to the continual attacks being made on every manufacturer other than Aeroclassics (and for some odd reason Dragon Wings) - I want facts not lies and insults and I also detest censorship which is so rampant on 400Hanger as to make that forum useless. If we all just stick to discussion and not to vituperation life would be a lot more pleasant.

hugo · 02-19-2008, 07:19 PM

What a high level of repartee, I am really impressed, one word even had two syllables!

ba777-236 · 02-19-2008, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hugo

and I draw your attention to the continual attacks being made on every manufacturer other than Aeroclassics (and for some odd reason Dragon Wings)

Pardon me? The 400SH moderators have no issues with Gemini Jets, Dragon Wings, Herpa or Phoenix! What exactly are you talking about Hugo? There is no "attacks" towards any legitmate brands in our hobby, this includes Jet-X as well. Andrew has personal issues with BBX and AV400 as you already know, and we support him with those issues as they involve piracy, copying etc etc.

Quote:

If we all just stick to discussion and not to vituperation life would be a lot more pleasant.

Yeah, and wars wouldn't happen too, right?

Really Hugo, you need to put these model forums into perspective. If nothing else in life is peaceful, why should model collecting be?

Hawaiian717 · 02-20-2008, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hugo

Hi Nick - that's really a bit like the pot calling the kettle black - if you read the previous comment in this thread the criticisms were basically just calling a model cr*p which is hardly productive - and I draw your attention to the continual attacks being made on every manufacturer other than Aeroclassics (and for some odd reason Dragon Wings) - I want facts not lies and insults and I also detest censorship which is so rampant on 400Hanger as to make that forum useless. If we all just stick to discussion and not to vituperation life would be a lot more pleasant.

Hmmm ok Hugo..where should I start? I'm assuming that you didint like my comment about the model being "crap". well let me change my word....umm how about garbage. it's a pretty productive comment, specially since were discussing the comparison of the two models. im in no way connected to Andrew Klein, except for the fact that I have bought a handfull of his models. Let's see...I have examples from GJ, DW, Phoenix, and Aeroclassics, so if you're saying I'm a puppet of AK....sorry bro, wrong! I buy whatever fits my collection, and whatever moulds are as acurate and available.

QFA388 · 02-20-2008, 03:35 AM

My observation of the models are this.
Both have good printing.
BBX (whatever) engine pylons are too short and cut off too far away from the front of the engine.
The flat stance of the BBx compared to the real nose down attitude an a real A300 is incorrect. BUT so is the Dragon version of the a300.

Therefore, in my eyes I can live with the engine pylon issue and as there are no AC vesions available without mortgaging the State of Alabama, I will happily have the BBx version to complete a set of QF A300s which sit in a display case.

02-18-2008, 07:15 AM	#1
Abraxas Master Collector Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Age: 25 Posts: 572	Qantas A300's - A Comparison I took out a couple models the other day, and thought why not put the Qantas A300's up against each other? So here we have Aeroclassics and Jet-X's A300's facing off... From my own observations, the Aeroclassics wins for me. Every detail in every way is far better executed. But, as a stand alone model, the Jet-X is passable (in my opinion). The Jet-X also has the benefit of offering more rego's, so more availability for those who still appear to be looking for the AC version. Let the pics tell the story... The Aeroclassics model, and my 200th 1:400 diecast plane: Nose to Nose, Jet-X Vs Aeroclassics: Side by Side. The Qantas Four. Dan __________________ Reaching for the Skies... Upcoming Flights 02/10/08 EY451-EY011 SYD-AUH-LHR A345-A346 \| 24/10/08 EY038-EY450 CDG-AUH-SYD A332-A345 01/11/08 QF575 SYD-PER A332 \| 03/11/08 QF582 PER-SYD B743 COLLECTION \| TRADE

02-18-2008, 07:27 AM	#2
nosegear Senior Collector Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: sydney Age: 37 Posts: 336	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison It Both Look Pretty Good,thanks For The Pics Dan __________________ view my collection http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/...tion-4370.html

02-18-2008, 10:30 AM	#3
G-ARPR Senior Collector Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Colchester Posts: 180	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Many thanks for the pictures and your review. These are the type of reviews I like to see, one that is un-biased and which lets the pictures do the talking with the models side by side. Now I can clearly see that the Jet-X A300 really is crap!!

02-18-2008, 03:13 PM	#5
VNAB777ER Collector Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Age: 30 Posts: 126	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Have got te Aeroclassics but haven't got the Jet-X version on hand, from Dan pics the Jet-X version look aright, anyway it's always great to Qantas in the collection.

02-18-2008, 04:03 PM	#7
Mystère SO.30P Bretagne Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Midway between Omaha Beach and Paris. Age: 38 Posts: 1,111	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Nose and engines definitely put the JetX/BBX out of competition ! I won't even bother to look at the other details. Always good to see this kind of pics (even when they are blurry...). __________________

02-18-2008, 04:28 PM	#8
Abraxas Master Collector Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Age: 25 Posts: 572	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Sorry about the bad photos. Camera was a HD Video camera and I was using the Photo function lol. Even 'soft focus' can't hide the differences between the two Dan __________________ Reaching for the Skies... Upcoming Flights 02/10/08 EY451-EY011 SYD-AUH-LHR A345-A346 \| 24/10/08 EY038-EY450 CDG-AUH-SYD A332-A345 01/11/08 QF575 SYD-PER A332 \| 03/11/08 QF582 PER-SYD B743 COLLECTION \| TRADE

02-18-2008, 04:33 PM	#9
Mystère SO.30P Bretagne Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Midway between Omaha Beach and Paris. Age: 38 Posts: 1,111	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison No problemo, even a blurry pic is better than no pic at all. __________________

02-19-2008, 12:45 AM	#15
aklein707 Complete Wacko! Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: Sanya, Hainan, People's Republic of China Posts: 3,641	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison As Unicorn would put it, "my annointed" dealer in Australia still has a few pcs in stock, so the whole talk about insufficient quantities is bunch of hoouie!! __________________ Enjoying aviation from a "TSA-free Zone"!! Take the money-grab & deceit out of our hobby, and bring back ethics and quality!! Just say NO to BluBucks/Nutz Models/JC Models/Junk-X/First Choice/C&C/IF400/AV400/Magic/Blue Angle/5stars & any BigBirds (real or fake)

02-19-2008, 04:19 AM	#17
nosegear Senior Collector Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: sydney Age: 37 Posts: 336	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison did someone mention AEROCLASSIC QANTAS A300?????????? __________________ view my collection http://www.diecastaircraftforum.com/...tion-4370.html

02-19-2008, 02:09 PM	#19
N. Eberhard Dr. Diecast I presume? Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Spokane, WA Age: 44 Posts: 3,362	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Hugo...you have been grinding that axe for quite some time now. Don't you think it is sharp enough already?

02-19-2008, 06:57 PM	#20
hugo Master Collector Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Channel Islands Posts: 911	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison Hi Nick - that's really a bit like the pot calling the kettle black - if you read the previous comment in this thread the criticisms were basically just calling a model cr*p which is hardly productive - and I draw your attention to the continual attacks being made on every manufacturer other than Aeroclassics (and for some odd reason Dragon Wings) - I want facts not lies and insults and I also detest censorship which is so rampant on 400Hanger as to make that forum useless. If we all just stick to discussion and not to vituperation life would be a lot more pleasant.

02-19-2008, 07:19 PM	#21
hugo Master Collector Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Channel Islands Posts: 911	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison What a high level of repartee, I am really impressed, one word even had two syllables!

02-20-2008, 03:35 AM	#24
QFA388 Insane Collector Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,196	Re: Qantas A300's - A Comparison My observation of the models are this. Both have good printing. BBX (whatever) engine pylons are too short and cut off too far away from the front of the engine. The flat stance of the BBx compared to the real nose down attitude an a real A300 is incorrect. BUT so is the Dragon version of the a300. Therefore, in my eyes I can live with the engine pylon issue and as there are no AC vesions available without mortgaging the State of Alabama, I will happily have the BBx version to complete a set of QF A300s which sit in a display case.