IMHO, the most accurate 1/72 F-14 diecast model is Dragon's.
Actually it is the diecast version of legendary Hasegawa 1/72 F-14 injection model kit with almost same shape and panel lines/rivets.
With some easy modification work, it'll look gorgeous enough.
IMHO, the most accurate 1/72 F-14 diecast model is Dragon's.
Actually it is the diecast version of legendary Hasegawa 1/72 F-14 injection model kit with almost same shape and panel lines/rivets.
With some easy modification work, it'll look gorgeous enough.
Just my 2 cents.
Yufei
That's interesting, if indeed the Dragon model is the Hasegawa mould then it should be the best F-14 model. I am in the main a model builder and currently opinion is divided on whether the Hasegawa or the newer Fine Molds model kit is the best.
IMHO, the most accurate 1/72 F-14 diecast model is Dragon's.
Actually it is the diecast version of legendary Hasegawa 1/72 F-14 injection model kit with almost same shape and panel lines/rivets.
With some easy modification work, it'll look gorgeous enough.
Just my 2 cents.
Yufei
The Dragon F-14 has no Phoenixes, no pallets for them & no attachment points for the pallets. So, unless you are skilled at model building/conversions, it won't be easy to correct this issue. & they're omitted even on models representing schemes that carried them- so it's inaccurate in that respect.
Don't forget FOVs Miss Molly. Besides an extra insignia on the wing it's super great. Paint wise it's one of FOVs best releases.
& you can easily get rid of that- nail varnish remover shrivels tampo prints withot damaging the paint! Wish I'd known about that trick the only time I saw one for sale in the metal.
Dragon doesn't have a nose probe (even an option for one) so that makes it inaccurate for all but the earliest Tomcats. (which they didn't model)
So that, combined with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilkinss77
The Dragon F-14 has no Phoenixes, no pallets for them & no attachment points for the pallets. So, unless you are skilled at model building/conversions, it won't be easy to correct this issue. & they're omitted even on models representing schemes that carried them- so it's inaccurate in that respect.
Not all of them were without pallets. Some had them, some didn't. Some came with Phoenix missiles, some without. Others were Bombcats.
Dragon models were known for being skimpy with the loadout. However, IIRC, the Dragon Sundowners Miss Molly model was one of those that came with a full air-to-air loadout (Phoenix missiles, Sparrows, and Sidewinders).
The Witty Wings Sundowners Miss Molly model is probably the easiest one to acquire. It has its faults but overall it's a good model.
Not all of them were without pallets. Some had them, some didn't. Some came with Phoenix missiles, some without. Others were Bombcats.
Dragon models were known for being skimpy with the loadout. However, IIRC, the Dragon Sundowners Miss Molly model was one of those that came with a full air-to-air loadout (Phoenix missiles, Sparrows, and Sidewinders).
The Sundowners USS Carl Vinson doesn't though- it's the only one I have, & has a very poor loadout- no phoenixes, & no pallets or attachment points- & that's a scheme that had them in real life.
Here is the forward fuselage of a Dragon Miss Molly and these arrows are all the accuracy mistakes. (from left to right)
1. No nose probe.
2. Fictional panel line in the nose cone (this turns up in older model kits, from time to time.)
3. Most recent gun vents
4. ECM bump on the left nose gear door. (a late model Tomcat feature)
5. SJU-17 seats (only F-14D's had these)
6. Exposed hinges on the canopy.
I will say that the nose/ main gear wheels on Dragon Tomcats are my favorite of any manufacturer. If you're looking for something that looks like a Tomcat, a Dragon or Witty will fit the bill. If you want the most accurate, obviously Dragon is not the way to go. (or Witty)
Here is the forward fuselage of a Dragon Miss Molly and these arrows are all the accuracy mistakes. (from left to right)
1. No nose probe.
2. Fictional panel line in the nose cone (this turns up in older model kits, from time to time.)
3. Most recent gun vents
4. ECM bump on the left nose gear door. (a late model Tomcat feature)
5. SJU-17 seats (only F-14D's had these)
6. Exposed hinges on the canopy.
I will say that the nose/ main gear wheels on Dragon Tomcats are my favorite of any manufacturer. If you're looking for something that looks like a Tomcat, a Dragon or Witty will fit the bill. If you want the most accurate, obviously Dragon is not the way to go. (or Witty)
Well, "accurate" means different to different people I think.
Some one thinks color/printing logo is the "accurate" to him.
But to me the outline/shape means "accurate".
Dragon F-14 is obviously the diecast copy of the Hasegawa F-14, with very familiar panel lines/rivets(while panel lines on CW/FOV cats are mostly more fictional beside the too wide/horrible windshield and canopy).
So here is what I'm doing for my DW cats:
1. Replace the seats
2. Add one metal pitot tube
3. Sand off the ECM bump both on gear cover and fuselage edge, repaint the area.
4. Fix the installing angle of the main landing gears.
5. Wash the panels/rivets with dark grey enamel color
Will make the Dragon F-14 the most good-looking 1/72 F-14 diecast model.
I'll share some pictures once finished and you can find my customized CW Sundowners NL200 here:
All very well talking about conversions/corrections/cosmetic surgery as if it's easy to do, if you have good modelling skills- but not all of us do, & in any case if you have to do that it defeats the object of collecting diecast, which is to have as accurate a plane as possible without doing any of the work yourself.
Well, "accurate" means different to different people I think.
Some one thinks color/printing logo is the "accurate" to him.
But to me the outline/shape means "accurate".
Dragon F-14 is obviously the diecast copy of the Hasegawa F-14, with very familiar panel lines/rivets(while panel lines on CW/FOV cats are mostly more fictional beside the too wide/horrible windshield and canopy).
So here is what I'm doing for my DW cats:
1. Replace the seats
2. Add one metal pitot tube
3. Sand off the ECM bump both on gear cover and fuselage edge, repaint the area.
4. Fix the installing angle of the main landing gears.
5. Wash the panels/rivets with dark grey enamel color
Will make the Dragon F-14 the most good-looking 1/72 F-14 diecast model.
I'll share some pictures once finished and you can find my customized CW Sundowners NL200 here:
Well, I'm in no way defending Dragon, I don't even collect their models, but using a strict Dictionary definition of accurate is a little sketchy in my opinion. The recurring theme for most including Webster's is "Free from errors", "Exact", "Perfect", "Correct in all details" and a few others that don't leave much if any latitude in the meaning of accurate. If you apply that criteria literally it pretty much excludes every diecast model ever made by man, just sayin'.
Great comparison photos there haneto. Any chance you could add the Witty too?
Hey, you're right, the Dragon F-14 does have the best shaping.
I suppose, "accuracy" in this case can be pretty subjective. Personally, I feel that there's nothing wrong with purchasing the Dragon, Witty, CW, or HM Tomcat models.
Great comparison photos there haneto. Any chance you could add the Witty too?.......
......I suppose, "accuracy" in this case can be pretty subjective. Personally, I feel that there's nothing wrong with purchasing the Dragon, Witty, CW, or HM Tomcat models.
My thoughts exactly. A couple pics of the Witty, not the greatest, sorry, it's the best I could do on short notice.
arclight is right... there's no accurate tomcat model out there. period. they all suffer from some deficiency in one way or another. it boils down to what you can live with and what are personal no no's. end of day, buy what you like and like what you buy. there's no right or wrong... it's your choice. and guys... let's start the new year with just putting forward your views and leave it at that. we can all agree to disagree. doesn't make your views any less significant but just goes to show how diverse the collectorate is. happy new year, everyone!
I hate to admit this because it might make some collectors feel angry but the dragon F-14 is showing more accuracy on the top side of the nose cone. Always felt CW's F-14 noses were a bit too bulky. But the canopy, especially the back side of dragon looks very off. So far all molds gave inaccurate tail slant except some of CW's. Nose cones apparently are hard to replicate, I think the most accurate one I saw so far if HM F-16, it replicates the real jet to a 100%. I never liked the nose cone of any F-4B either regardless of the brand.
I hate to admit this because it might make some collectors feel angry but the dragon F-14 is showing more accuracy on the top side of the nose cone. Always felt CW's F-14 noses were a bit too bulky. But the canopy, especially the back side of dragon looks very off. So far all molds gave inaccurate tail slant except some of CW's. Nose cones apparently are hard to replicate, I think the most accurate one I saw so far if HM F-16, it replicates the real jet to a 100%. I never liked the nose cone of any F-4B either regardless of the brand.
Agreed. Except I wish the made the gun port more distinctive on the F-16. To a complete layman, it might just look like a budge lol.
I suppose, "accuracy" in this case can be pretty subjective. Personally, I feel that there's nothing wrong with purchasing the Dragon, Witty, CW, or HM Tomcat models.
Yes certainly down to the collector's personal opinion on what they can live with. Quite sure there are people happy with their Witty legacy Hornets and in contrast nothing wrong with wanting errors corrected or improvements.
Take HM's F-16 two seater for instance. Initial releases had a slanted centre canopy frame and was then corrected on newer models.
Just a question...is the FoV Miss Molly more accurate than the Witty Miss Molly as a whole? I looked at TFM photos and it looks like FoVs Miss Molly herself/nose painting is more intricately detailed.
seeing as to how hm and calibre wings are churning out crowd pleasers, i wouldn't be surprised if the sundowners, freelancers and bounty hunters are already under consideration. unless cw intends to rerelease a sundowners, i don't see why anyone would wanna pay ridiculous prices for the past cw releases.
then again if one could get a witty/fov, i suppose why not. i got the witty sundowners and it looks good... but many have said that the fov version is better. the only fov i have is the swordsmen... and my model sucks big time. it may have been the sharing the same mould with cw but the finish is certainly oceans apart.
Does anyone have a FoV Miss Molly they might want to sell? Preferably new, but used is ok as long as it has everything. Please PM if you do.
(Posted this here cause sellers section is mainly civvies)
you could always post in the sts: military model sub forum... i think that's where the traders will be. but yeah... you may catch one or two collectors in here who may not have thought of selling theirs but since there's an interest...
I have the FoV Miss Molly and love it. It's very nice painting and finished especially for the price. Thanks to the guy who posted about using nail remover stuff to take out the extra star on FoV model.
I used the nail polish remover stuff to try to remove the extra star but that did not work and created a mess; So I ended up painted over that area. I did my best to match up the original paint. It came out OK and I think I can live with it .
F-14A Sundowners Witty vs Century Wings
Wish I'd known about that trick the only time I saw one for sale in the metal.
Be careful making a mirror image as people might mistake it and refer to imaginary panel lines.
Your Privacy Choices
