Mistercraft Kits.

[Giorgio N]

Whats that you say? Cheap nasty kits? Awful raised details? Decrepid old mouldings?

Ding dong! I'm in!

Actually most Mistercraft kits I've seen are not exactly like this...

Cheap and nasty ? Absolutely !

Awful raised details ? No, most have trenches, often not even straight.

Decrepit old mouldings ? Not really, they are modern bad quality clones. Sometimes of very old mouldings...

The average Mistercraft kit involves soapy plastic, trenches, misshapen parts and almost no detail, with the added benefit of an awful fit. Some are better than others for sure and some will like their style. Personally after having struggled with another clone recently I'm not sure, especially as some of the cloned kits can be bought for only very little more. Case in point, their F-16 is a terrible quality clone of the Italeri kit, a kit that in its basic form costs little more than the Mistercraft offering. Why bother with the clone at this point ?

The problem I have with these short run kits is that they are just not good value for money. I am confused as to why people are quick to find faults with new Airfix and Revell products but yet are happy to pay twice the price for short run kits that have many more problems. To put it in a nutshell if Airfix would never get away with selling an Azur standard kit for Azur prices, then why should Azur be allowed to?

If you look through the build threads on here they are full of examples of expensive short run kits that cost 2 or 3 times the price of say Airfix but fit together worse than a cat and a horse.

I know short run manufacturers are the only source of kit for certain types of model which is why on rare occasions I buy them.

Short run kits for their very same nature are unlikely to build as easily as those from mainstream manufacturers. The use of a different moulding technology means that tamigawa quality is almost impossible to achieve. At the same time, the same moulding technology means that a company can afford to issue kits that only have a limited market. The same kit would never be issued by Airfix or Revell as the numbers would not justify the investment in a standard tool. Not sure what it's like now, but in the past most of these kits had clearly written warnings like "aimed at experienced modellers", and while today some companies are producing brilliant short runs (so good that can actually fit better than several kits from Airfix), the warning should still stand. A short run is meant for a different kind of modeller

Short runs may be expensive, but we should look at what things were like before the advent of this tooling technology: back then the only option for the subjects made by people like Azur today were vacforms ! Now how well did those fit ?

[old thumper]

Noted. I was going to get the PZL 24 for my Greek fighter collection. I'm not sure if there are other options, but at least I'll be forewarned.

The PZL 24 is not a lousy kit it is just way to much money for what it is, I would have been happy with it for £7-£8, unfortunately Azur want about £15 or more and they just can't justify that price. However if you need it to complete your collection what choice do you have, there is nothing worse than a collection with the most important piece missing.

[old thumper]

Thanks for that. The Heller Potez has grossly deep nose, with an Aztec-step canopy, which is why I never bought it at any time. I've been tempted by the P.633 because of its Romanian option, but didn't succumb.

I do have the Azur P-24, and P-11f, but have not yet started them. They look fine in the box - which is easily said, of course. There was an earlier Polish kit of a P-24, available later in the Encore range with a lovely set of transfers, but if you are put off by the Azur kit then you won't like the earlier one at all.

Surely the main reason for seeing more comment on the Airfix kits is simply that so many more people buy them than buy the short-run alternatives. For that reason, more people are likely to be interested in reading about them. Plus, I suspect, a large proportion of those who buy Airfix kits rush to make them, or at least dry-assemble, whereas many of the shorter-run exotics are bought because "I always wanted one of those" but are then put on the shelf for a later day. They are only rarely given the same concentrated attention when new.

Speaking for myself, I buy short run kits at their higher prices because of the subject matter: not the over-familiar subjects repeated time and again but interesting and unusual aircraft. Not that this stops me buying the more familiar subjects too. I have not found Azur/MPM/Special Hobby/RS kits to be anywhere near as difficult or problematical as some make out. Yes, they need more preparation (some more than others), in particular the sanding down of the wing joins, but there are many mass-market injection-tooled kits with trailing edges just as thick.

The two last new Airfix kits I've been working on were the Hurricane and Blenheim, and neither of these were any less work. The Hurricane needed major sanding of the upper wing to match the size of the lower, and the work involved in bringing the Blenheim wings and fuselage halves together with at least an externally neat appearance has been infuriating. Lovely kits both of them, in the box and when finished, but simpler and easier than an AZ kit - not very.

It is mostly the price I am not happy with. I get the same feeling when I'm forced to buy food and drink at airports and festivals where what they are offering is mostly over priced and not very good, but you know it's all your going to get, so your forced to buy it.

[sroubos]

I'm not sure, especially as some of the cloned kits can be bought for only very little more. Case in point, their F-16 is a terrible quality clone of the Italeri kit, a kit that in its basic form costs little more than the Mistercraft offering. Why bother with the clone at this point ?

I won't defend MisterCraft here, but this is not quite correct. As a matter of fact the F-16 is the only MasterCraft kit I ever bought; I got it because I had been building the Italeri F-16 and the decals were useless. Instead of getting a third-party sheet, I decided to spend 5 euros on a MasterCraft kit - much cheaper and while the decals weren't stellar, they were good enough to finish the kit satisfactorily. The Italeri kit still costs 12 pounds at Hannants, and around 15 euros on the continent - three times as much as the MasterCraft kit!

Apart from that, the plastic is terrible as you say; I binned it immediately. The Italeri kit itself wasn't too good to begin with...

Edited May 7, 2015 by sroubos

[Giorgio N]

It is mostly the price I am not happy with. I get the same feeling when I'm forced to buy food and drink at airports and festivals where what they are offering is mostly over priced and not very good, but you know it's all your going to get, so your forced to buy it.

Even if the cost of short run tools is lower, this is still spread over a small number of kits, all kits from smaller producer have always been expensive compared to mainstream products. Brands like Pegasus or Merlin some 30 years ago made kits that costed easily 2-3 times as much as kits of comparable aircrafts from Airfix or Revell. And those were very, very crude kits compared to what the short run manufacturers give us today. I recently built the RS Re.2005 and fit was comparable to some recent Airfix kits

I won't defend MisterCraft here, but this is not quite correct. As a matter of fact the F-16 is the only MasterCraft kit I ever bought; I got it because I had been building the Italeri F-16 and the decals were useless. Instead of getting a third-party sheet, I decided to spend 5 euros on a MasterCraft kit - much cheaper and while the decals weren't stellar, they were good enough to finish the kit satisfactorily. The Italeri kit still costs 12 pounds at Hannants, and around 15 euros on the continent - three times as much as the MasterCraft kit!

Apart from that, the plastic is terrible as you say; I binned it immediately. The Italeri kit itself wasn't too good to begin with...

The basic Italeri F-16C kit can still be found for €10-12. The latest rebox is unfortunately more expensive. Yes, it's twice the price of the Mistercraft kit, but it's only € more..

The decals in my Mistecraft F-16 (the Venezuelan boxing) are unfortunately useless, the tail art is heavily pixelated, the insignia are terrible and there are no stencils. Pity as I got the box mainly for the decals

[sroubos]

Only s more is exactly the amount of s more I wasn't willing to shell out for aftermarket decals

I only needed the stencils, they were fine.

The fact remains these kits have very limited appeal, still they are sold in many places, makes you wonder who buys them.

Edited May 7, 2015 by sroubos

[old thumper]

Perhaps these Mistercraft kits are just not reassuringly expensive enough?

[JWM]

Regarding Azur P24 - on Polish modeller forum there is a WIP post on construction - text is in Polish, but photos are very informative:

http://pwm.org.pl/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=20473.

BTW I've seen a photo recently which show that roundels (for Greek P24G) from bottom were painted closer to the fuselage and were larger than in instruction in box.

Besides P24 from the box the P24 is basicly doable from any P11c kit if you like - the difference is GR 14 cyl. engine with 3 blades prop (instead of Bristol engine with two blads prop), closed cockpit, armament only in wings (details depend on version) and firings on wheels (sometimes removed on field. Not really a big deal....

Cheers

J-W

[MilneBay]

I can't remember who made the 1/72 PZL P24 kit I built some 20 odd years ago. I found it a demanding build but it did come out quite nicely. I did it in Turkish markings. I have a soft spot for things Turkish - spent time there working.

[Steve190]

I can't remember who made the 1/72 PZL P24 kit I built some 20 odd years ago. I found it a demanding build but it did come out quite nicely. I did it in Turkish markings. I have a soft spot for things Turkish - spent time there working.

Could this have been the 1/72 SKALA P 24 kit also which has been released by Encore with different decals? The original Skala kit had Turkish & Greek decals.

Also, Encore (Squadron) also released a PZL 11c by Heller, I believe in 1/72 with a beautiful set of decals of three Polish unit aircraft.

Steve

[JWM]

There is a exellent monography on PZL P 24:

http://misc.kitreview.com/bookreviews/pzl24bookreviewse_1.htm

with some decals iside:

http://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/ref/kag/book_kag_p24.shtml

For PZL P11, P7, P23 and P37 there are sets of decals by Techmod

J-W

[MilneBay]

Could this have been the 1/72 SKALA P 24 kit also which has been released by Encore with different decals? The original Skala kit had Turkish & Greek decals.

IIRC it had light blue plastic - but that's all the brain cells can summon.

[AaCee26]

Hi folks,just noticed one of my local LMS,s have a good stock of masterkit models in including a few P-11 Polish fighter versions

which I would love to have in my collection,am I right in assuming these are Heller re-pop,s as the whole range seems to be

similar to Hellers original releases and for a fiver seem reasonable,am I in for a shock if I purchase? The p70 bomber looks

interesting any feedback on this one?

Good information about these kits in this threat but nothing is said about the decals. I have bought several of these kits just to get them as they are propably the very best part of these kits.

Cheers,

AaCee

[Graham Boak]

See Giorgio's comment #30

[AaCee26]

See Giorgio's comment #30

Interesting! My experience is based on some Yaks, a FW 190 and Bf 109Gs.

Cheers,

AaCee

[sroubos]

See Giorgio's comment #30

Just to make it complicated, I found the decals to be fine and indeed the best part of the kit. Certainly not perfect but I've had many 'A-list' kits with worse decals.

Edited May 9, 2015 by sroubos