1/72 Spitfire XIV kits

[Master Zen]

Seems to be no better moment to be a Griffon Spitfire fan these days thanks to Xtrakit, Admiral and AZ Model filling up the void of quality modern kits of late marque Spits.

I must profess that the Mk. XIV is my favorite of all Spitfire variants but its representation so far in 1/72 is slightly disappointing. The Academy kit is terrible in shape, looks nothing like a XIV which is a shame since the detail and fit is surely superlative (haven't built it). Then there's the classic Fujimi kit which although looks the part in the end, is a pain to build, and has some terribly fitting parts (most notably the nose which is inexplicably designed as a separate piece) and a lot of extra work due to their decision to make all sub-variants out of the same mould. The interior is also horrendously spartan. And then there's the AZ Model kit which looks good but at £18 is way, way too expensive.

So my questions are:

1) Is the AZ Model kit THAT much better than Fujimi's offering? You can nab two Fujimis on ebay for the price of one of these. But I presume it's also a short-run kit... is it?

2) Is there any news on whether Xtrakit would be doing a Mk XIV anytime soon? Seems like a natural progression from their XII and 22. Assuming the same quality and price, it would easily be the definitive XIV kit in the market.

3) What about the Admiral kits, are they short-run too?

4) There's an Ark Models XIV which includes a V1 and at a very decent price. But I haven't seen any reviews. Is it worth it?

And finally, two technical questions:

- Johnny Johnson's bubble canopy XIV had "JEJ" left of the roundel on the port side, was it the same case on the starboard side or was it "JE*J"?

- Regarding the XIVs with no cameras on the sides, was the camera hatch still there? This is so I leave the hatch's panel lines on or fill them in. I have the Osprey Griffon Spit Aces book and

although in the color profiles they are not on, on the diagrams in the end they are.

Edited March 8, 2011 by Master Zen

[Test Graham]

Admiral is a branch of AZ.

Ventura may have also done a Mk.XIV - they certainly did an XVIII. I think however you would have the same complaint about the nose - it is generally moulded separately in order to get a good rendition of the complex curves around the cylinder bulges.

I suspect the Ark model is the Frog.

Perhaps Airfix will do a Mk.XIV from their Mk.XIX - or better still from a fresh start. They are probably your only hope of a cheap one. There are no such thing as cheap imported kits any more.

There was no camera hatch on F Mk.XIVs. I think it safe to presume it was there an all FR Mk.XIVs.

[Master Zen]

Well, £11-13 is cheap nowadays and I certainly don't mind paying that for a good kit.

Frankly I don't trust Airfix to bring out a quality kit of a XIV. Still haven't solved their trench-like panel issues and would gladly put the extra effort for a Fujimi which will look much better in the end.

[stevehnz]

Seems to be no better moment to be a Griffon Spitfire fan these days thanks to Xtrakit, Admiral and AZ Model filling up the void of quality modern kits of late marque Spits.

I must profess that the Mk. XIV is my favorite of all Spitfire variants but its representation so far in 1/72 is slightly disappointing. The Academy kit is terrible in shape, looks nothing like a XIV which is a shame since the detail and fit is surely superlative (haven't built it). Then there's the classic Fujimi kit which although looks the part in the end, is a pain to build, and has some terribly fitting parts (most notably the nose which is inexplicably designed as a separate piece) and a lot of extra work due to their decision to make all sub-variants out of the same mould. The interior is also horrendously spartan. And then there's the AZ Model kit which looks good but at £18 is way, way too expensive.

So my questions are:

1) Is the AZ Model kit THAT much better than Fujimi's offering? You can nab two Fujimis on ebay for the price of one of these. But I presume it's also a short-run kit... is it?

2) Is there any news on whether Xtrakit would be doing a Mk XIV anytime soon? Seems like a natural progression from their XII and 22. Assuming the same quality and price, it would easily be the definitive XIV kit in the market.

3) What about the Admiral kits, are they short-run too?

4) There's an Ark Models XIV which includes a V1 and at a very decent price. But I haven't seen any reviews. Is it worth it?

And finally, two technical questions:

- Johnny Johnson's bubble canopy XIV had "JEJ" left of the roundel on the port side, was it the same case on the starboard side or was it "JE*J"?

- Regarding the XIVs with no cameras on the sides, was the camera hatch still there? This is so I leave the hatch's panel lines on or fill them in. I have the Osprey Griffon Spit Aces book and

although in the color profiles they are not on, on the diagrams in the end they are.

Ventura used to do a XIVe, I know 'cause I have one but it appears that Jays, who took over the Ventura range didn't pick it up or haven't released it anyway. Maybe too much competition from the Fujimi one. re The JE-J XIVe, the recently published Flypast 75 Anniversary special, has a pick of The Fighter Collections Mk XIV MV268 'G-Spit' painted in these colours & it shows J-EJ on the starboard side. I'd presume they checked their sources to get this right.

Steve.

[Giorgio N]

I'm not sure the AZ kit is much better than the fujimi. It's a short run so it's not going to be a tamigawa style build, however seems to be not too difficult. It looks to be inspired in some way by the Fujimi kit, however may be easier to build as some part that are separate in the fujimi are attached together in the AZ kit. I discussed with a friend a while ago what's the better option between the two, IIRC the AZ has better cockpit detail (really lacking in the fujimi kits), however the main advantage is that it offers an XVIII straight from the box. The price of the AZ and the Fujimi in a shop is pretty much the same, but if you can find the fujimi at half price on the bay, I'd go for it !

The ventura on the other hand was an old school short run, and definitely requires plenty of patience to clean all the parts.

[English Electric]

There is also the Frog XIVc (and V1 natch...) - crude, and lacks the gull wing but with detailing and some fettling of plastic becomes very acceptable. I think the general outline's pretty accurate too, although I'm sure someone will disagree! It's also cheap, easy to find and is one of the (very few) Frog moulds that didn't suffer after going to the USSR.

C

[Giorgio N]

There is also the Frog XIVc (and V1 natch...) - crude, and lacks the gull wing but with detailing and some fettling of plastic becomes very acceptable. I think the general outline's pretty accurate too, although I'm sure someone will disagree! It's also cheap, easy to find and is one of the (very few) Frog moulds that didn't suffer after going to the USSR.

C

The Frog kit not only lacks the gull wing, the whole rear fuselage-wing junction is totally wrong. It requires a lot of work in that area. It also really need a new canopy.

Said that, there was one being modified in the WIP section that was very nice.

[Test Graham]

It also needs the ailerons shortening, but that's no problem. More significantly, it needs the nose extending and the prop line lowering. It's a long time since I did it, but I glued something like an Airfix Tiger wheel to the front, flush with the top but sticking below the bottom, then faired in the lower cowling to suit.

However, if the Fujimi is objected to for a lack of interiors, the empty cockpit and wheel wells of the Frog aren't going to please.

[The wooksta V2.0]

The Ventura kit doesn't look too bad. It only suffers from the limited run nature of the kit. Once cleaned up (albeit with some difficulty as that grey plastic they used was HARD!), assembled and painted it looks the business. I've half a dozen or so of the high back FXIVs they did, some of which are slated for conversion for F21s.

Ventura Spitfires are always worth picking up. Their short run nature means most modellers sell them on at a loss.

[Giorgio N]

The Ventura kit doesn't look too bad. It only suffers from the limited run nature of the kit. Once cleaned up (albeit with some difficulty as that grey plastic they used was HARD!), assembled and painted it looks the business. I've half a dozen or so of the high back FXIVs they did, some of which are slated for conversion for F21s.

Ventura Spitfires are always worth picking up. Their short run nature means most modellers sell them on at a loss.

They sure are ! However they also require a good supply of spare parts, as most have no gun barrels or much in terms of cockpit detail. Some of the smaller parts are also sometimes no useable and need replacing. Not a problem for most Spitfireholics here (me included), but can be for some modellers.

Said that, the first Ventura Spitfire kit I built was the Mk.VII, that is probably the worst of their spitfires, yet with a little care it didn't fit bad at all, better than some airfix kits from the '80s.

[The wooksta V2.0]

Mine was the F.XVIII and was a real eye opener for me. You're quite right though, they do need a good spares box (or moulds if you're into casting).

I redid the XIX I did 20 years ago as a fictional FRXXI.

[Miggers]

Pester Johnaero(John Adams of Aeroclub,he gets on here) to re-release his 1/72nd Griffon fuselage vacform conversions.

They're absolute stonkers.

There was a chap on here a few weeks back that had an Aeroclub XIV fuselage mated to an Airfix Vb's c wing

(the fuselages were made to fit that wing)he'd started a few years ago.

He was debating whether to convert it into a Seafire XV,I think we successfully dissuaded him.

As someone remarked(might have been Jonners),the Aeroclub Griffon fuselages are highly accurate

(the most accurate there is)and as such,certainly aren't candidated for chopping up.

I used one a few years ago to do a Seafire XVII,it was easy to use,comprehensive(came with prop,undercart and canopy)

and when mated to that Airfix Vb c wing and a spare set of tailplanes,the result is excellent.

They can be found on E-bay now and then or in the "under-the-tables"boxes at shows.

Well worth snapping up.

Mark

Edited March 9, 2011 by Miggers

[Giorgio N]

Pester Johnaero(John Adams of Aeroclub,he gets on here) to re-release his 1/72nd Griffon fuselage vacform conversions.

They're absolute stonkers.

Mark

I still have the one for the XIX. I've used the radiators and the white metal bits in the past, but I'm not touching the fuselage ! It looks so good to my eyes that I've used it as a pattern to modify the academy kit and will use it again for the airfix XIX.

[The wooksta V2.0]

Again, I'd agree. An ideal introduction to vacforms and I enjoyed those that I did. You can generally pick them up quite cheaply at shows although not on ebay. They seem to go for silly money.

[-Neu-]

Seems to be no better moment to be a Griffon Spitfire fan these days thanks to Xtrakit, Admiral and AZ Model filling up the void of quality modern kits of late marque Spits.

I must profess that the Mk. XIV is my favorite of all Spitfire variants but its representation so far in 1/72 is slightly disappointing. The Academy kit is terrible in shape, looks nothing like a XIV which is a shame since the detail and fit is surely superlative (haven't built it). Then there's the classic Fujimi kit which although looks the part in the end, is a pain to build, and has some terribly fitting parts (most notably the nose which is inexplicably designed as a separate piece) and a lot of extra work due to their decision to make all sub-variants out of the same mould. The interior is also horrendously spartan. And then there's the AZ Model kit which looks good but at £18 is way, way too expensive.

So my questions are:

1) Is the AZ Model kit THAT much better than Fujimi's offering? You can nab two Fujimis on ebay for the price of one of these. But I presume it's also a short-run kit... is it?

Just for the record, I've built two Fujimi Mk XIVs and an AZ Mk 18 on the bench.

The knock against the Fujimi kit has always been its bad back profile, which looks somewhat "hunched." I didn't find it a terrible problem but there are a couple of annoying issues that puts it on balance with the AZ kit. First is the spartan details for the Fujimi kit... its like Airfix's Mk IX except you get a panel. The biggest issue is the Griffon engine cowling, which is a pig to get on right. You are almost certain to lose all the great surface detail trying to get it on straight. You're paying a premium for the AZ kit, but its up to you whether its worth the time and money to buy it.

[Severus]

I have some fujimi's, pair of AZ's, Academy thrown away, and looking forward to some kitbashing:

Fujimi is crisp, easy to build, but it has certain nasty issues - cowl, radiators, cockpit etc.

Surprisingly, AZ's kit is not worse, nor better, if you keep in mind, that it's short run. It may be better in shape in certain areas, it may be worse to build, but somehow I feel disappointed in lower wing, radiators area, on the other hand, I liked at least basic features of cockpit inside. Really I cannot favour one over the other. But, there's one crucial point - the price.

If someone feels brave enough to do some kitbash, and is hard limited on his pocket, for almost half the price I can get Airfix XIX and IX, and crosskitt to get XIVc, with some milliput I can get even X/XI from the crosskitting waste. Counting the price of kit itself, and, counting even the secondary product of X/XI, easily you can get to quarter of price fujimi or AZ - but, what a amount of work...

BTW, looking into scrapbox on old XVI of heller, and XIX of airfix... What about XIVe...?

[Test Graham]

Using the Airfix Mk.XIX, you don't get an accurate wing, and there is a suspicion that the nose is too short. I don't have one for comparison, so am relying here on other peoples' comments.

[Seahawk]

Fujimi is crisp, easy to build, but it has certain nasty issues - cowl, radiators, cockpit etc.

What's the problem with the radiators, please - beyond a bit of heavy engraving?

[Severus]

What's the problem with the radiators, please - beyond a bit of heavy engraving?

The shape - apart from heavy lines - sides somehow too rounded. Nothing uncurable, but I would have hoped for more from fujimi.

[Miggers]

The shape - apart from heavy lines - sides somehow too rounded. Nothing uncurable, but I would have hoped for more from fujimi.

Cousin Spadegrip did a Fujimi XIX a while ago and echoed your comments.

He also reckons the Airfix one to be a fair stab,but isn't happy with the prop and that the rads haven't quite "got it".

As I've mentioned before,an Airfix "XIV" and "PR.X/XI" is a fairly simple conversion,the main aftermarket

components required is a deeper chin cowling for the Merlin and the later broadchord rudder.

Mark

[Severus]

Cousin Spadegrip did a Fujimi XIX a while ago and echoed your comments.

He also reckons the Airfix one to be a fair stab,but isn't happy with the prop and that the rads haven't quite "got it".

As I've mentioned before,an Airfix "XIV" and "PR.X/XI" is a fairly simple conversion,the main aftermarket

components required is a deeper chin cowling for the Merlin and the later broadchord rudder.

Mark

Deeper chin cowling isn't uncurable with some miliput (or even with some polyester automotive putty) in such scale. And, of course, there are shortcomings, as prop, no detail in cockpit, early rudder (BTW, there were even XI's with early rudder). I wrote my statements above from the point of someone, who has really limited cash. I think, too frequently I hear / read such cries "this kit is faulty" or "they didn't get it right", instead of "fill in", "move some mm's forward/backward/up/down" etc..

From other basket - I have handfull of cheaply bought old Vb/Ia from airfix, and, looking at price tag at Sword's Vc's, I decided to buy some cheaper Xtrakits XII to replace the nose for merlin's one from those old Airfix.

Even if I can afford relativly pricy kits as F-111's of hasegawa, if I want Spit IX in 1/32, and can get Vb/VI hasegawa for sixth or eigth part of shining Tamiya, I don't see the point to throw avay those old kits, if it takes just little toying with sheet styrene, some putty, some butchery (some surgery, when knife cuts skin instead of styrene ), and plenty of good modelling time.

Aftermarket I use as the last choice. Imagine the feeling of making two stage merlin mosquito from Tamiya's IV with just sheet styrene and the cheapest nasty automotive putty! Or, making tempest VI from old heller with just sheet styrene and cyanoacrylate...

[Severus]

Using the Airfix Mk.XIX, you don't get an accurate wing, and there is a suspicion that the nose is too short. I don't have one for comparison, so am relying here on other peoples' comments.

Looking on the XIX, I get just the right feeling of spitfire. Never put it on drawing, as it is somehow uncomfortable to put on if it's assembled.

[Miggers]

Deeper chin cowling isn't uncurable with some miliput (or even with some polyester automotive putty) in such scale. And, of course, there are shortcomings, as prop, no detail in cockpit, early rudder (BTW, there were even XI's with early rudder). I wrote my statements above from the point of someone, who has really limited cash. I think, too frequently I hear / read such cries "this kit is faulty" or "they didn't get it right", instead of "fill in", "move some mm's forward/backward/up/down" etc..

From other basket - I have handfull of cheaply bought old Vb/Ia from airfix, and, looking at price tag at Sword's Vc's, I decided to buy some cheaper Xtrakits XII to replace the nose for merlin's one from those old Airfix.

Even if I can afford relativly pricy kits as F-111's of hasegawa, if I want Spit IX in 1/32, and can get Vb/VI hasegawa for sixth or eigth part of shining Tamiya, I don't see the point to throw avay those old kits, if it takes just little toying with sheet styrene, some putty, some butchery (some surgery, when knife cuts skin instead of styrene ), and plenty of good modelling time.

Aftermarket I use as the last choice. Imagine the feeling of making two stage merlin mosquito from Tamiya's IV with just sheet styrene and the cheapest nasty automotive putty! Or, making tempest VI from old heller with just sheet styrene and cyanoacrylate...

A jolly gent on here cast me up a couple of big chins for Merlin engined PR's with a mould

taken from a 1/72nd PR.X/XI kit(just can't remember the name of the kit off hand)in resin,

they've done the trick easily,the rudder came from the spares boxes of some of the

superb bods on here when I made the call for spare parts.

I didn't go to town with the 'pit on the "PR" or the "XIV" but I did with the BBMF IXe that I've done.

Mark

[Giorgio N]

Looking on the XIX, I get just the right feeling of spitfire. Never put it on drawing, as it is somehow uncomfortable to put on if it's assembled.

Right it might look, but comparing it with measurements showed the kit to be quite short. It doesn't look bad on its own, but looking at it beside Airfix's own Mk.IX, it looks weird, as it's the same length of the merlin engined one.

A kitbash of a IX and a XIX is possible and I've contemplated this myself. But some of the parts are not great, to bring it to the same level of the AZ kit a detail set would be needed and this would lift the price to the same level of the AZ.

[Severus]

Right it might look, but comparing it with measurements showed the kit to be quite short. It doesn't look bad on its own, but looking at it beside Airfix's own Mk.IX, it looks weird, as it's the same length of the merlin engined one.

A kitbash of a IX and a XIX is possible and I've contemplated this myself. But some of the parts are not great, to bring it to the same level of the AZ kit a detail set would be needed and this would lift the price to the same level of the AZ.

Spend extra on Fujimi, if you have the taste or convert AZ.