Some opinion's on Special Hobby/MPM

[stevej60]

Evening folk's, Thinking ahead for later this year I'd like to slow down the pace and do a few 1/48 aircraft that have long been favourite's, being the Skua,

Barracuda,Firefly and Fulmar,Special Hobby/MPM  seem to cater for most and although a bit pricier than I prefer not an issue if the quality is there,I have to say I loved

the build of Revell's Seafire re-box and picked up their 1/32 Airacobra which I've started  again very nicely done on the sprue,just wondered what the opinion's

 fellow BM'ers have on these or any alternative option's? 

[stevej60]

Sorry folk's the post's gone in twice hopefully the Mods will remove one,

[Bruce Archer]

Hi!

   I have found Special Hobby to be a Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde company. Their Maryland and Firefly 4/5 are very good, and easily the best limited run kits I have built. But their Spitfire/Seafire kits are not very good ( they have dimensional errors and be a beast to build).  As far as the other FAA kits from the Czech Republic here are some opinions:

Fulmar: Not bad, but can be a bear. The resin appears to have been designed by someone who did not talk to the mold makers

Skua: Not bad, has some details which were missed and can be fiddly. You do need some references to add the missing details

Roc; do not know, have not acquired one yet

Barracuda: Needs work. Nothing really fits and this kit is a classic "limited run" kit. Fit, three times before assembly and be prepared to scratch build items. But it is  the only game in town.

Firefly 4/5: Nice kit. Every thing fits and required very little filler

Maryland: Nice kit. Everything fits and it required very little filler. If you are going to do a French "Martin"or a RAF Maryland I you need Curtiss Cuffed props.

Seafires: All suffer from detail misses, but the worst mistake is the rear fuselage is about 8mm too short from the rear of the wing to the rudder post. Plus they can be diffacult to build.

I have started a Albacore, but the lower wings are very warped and I had to stop working on it.

 

These are the kits I know of. And all are just about the only game in town.

 

Bruce

 

 

Edited April 23, 2018 by Bruce Archer

[stevej60]

Thank's again guy's I,m just tonight starting Roden's Gladiator which I believe has a lot of similar traits to SH kit's so I'll see how I get on !

[Troy Smith]

8 hours ago, Bruce Archer said:

Seafires: All suffer from detail misses, but the worst mistake is the rear fuselage is about 8mm too short from the rear of the wing to the rudder post.

 

Bruce you keep posting this and it's WRONG.  You also never respond to the information I post to counter this, let alone provide any proof of your assertion.

 

Again, here is a Special Hobby Seafire III fuselage corrected to match the Airfix Vb,  which is considered to be very accurate (I also checked against rated plans and the known dimension of firewall to rudder post, which is the same)

please note I lined this up carefully on a cutting mat, and everything lines up

it's no more than 3.5 mm too short,  as can be seen by the splices, one in the fuel tank, one before tail, and to trim the same amount as the fuel tank splice off the rear trailing edge of the fuselage fillet.

the platci strip is to show the position of the cockpit and rear of the fuselage fillet lines up as well

 

for the non Spitfire obsessive,  it's a not an issue, and easy enough to correct with some modelling skill.

 

For some reason there are a coterie of internet pundits who always bang on about the SH Spitfire/Seafire problem, yet don't seem as bothered by other Spitfire kits which have a load more problems... eg the Airfix Seafire XVII or Spitfire XII, which have nearly all the same faults the Academy Spitfire XIV is damned for....

 

be interested to know what the detail misses are too, as I have not spotted any major ones.    

There is one possibility, that some early SH Seafire kits were as wrong as you say, and were retooled,  but I've never heard this from any source.

My Seafire III and Spitfire Vc are the same.