Trumpeter/HB boss kits that are actually good?

[thepureness]

Hi guys, I put this is Modern aircraft, but really this could go across the board.

I recently finished the Hobbyboss Tucano, felt it was a fantastic kit with a great fit, really enjoyed building it.

Now I know trumpy and hobbyboss get tons of stick from modelers for being incorrect shape or big errors, but what are their best kits?, I've heard good things about their Dauntless and me 262 kits, but would love to heard from you all?

[Shar2]

I think the 262 kits are great, having bought all the releases to date. Don't know about the Dauntless though.

[metromanbw]

A-6 Intruder = excellent fit and overall quality, perhaps their best effort yet.

Edited May 16, 2015 by metromanbw

[Troy Smith]

A-6 Intruder = excellent fit and overall quality, perhaps their best effort yet.

I'm presuming the OP is asking about kits that are accurate, because AFAIK most (all?) Trumpeter and Hobby Boss kits are good kits, well engineered and easy to build, their accuracy is variable.

Is the A-6 kit accurate? I had a look on Hyperscale

http://www.network54.com/Forum/149674/thread/1393690193

seems to be.

some good ones

Trumpeter

1/48th Sea Hawk and Wyvern.

1/24th Hurricane, has a few little, fixable faults but overall is very good, though given the scale the recessed rivets are a shame. Why they have not shrunk this down to 1/32nd and 1/48th and 1/72nd is surprising, especially 1/32nd where PCM kit is not easy to find and is quite expensive, and Revell kit is really old.

AFAIK the Mig-15/17/19 kits are good too.

1/48th T-34, based Trumpter's 1/16th kit, so has a full interior, and were amazingly cheap for what is in the box.

The 1/48th Kv-1 and KV-2 don't have the interior but are good.http://www.4bogreen.com/kv-series/plastic-and-resin-kits/1-48-scale/hobby-boss

HTH

[VMA131Marine]

More good ones:

1/200th Scale ships

Trumpeter

HMS Nelson

USS Arizona

Bismarck

USS Missouri/Iowa/New Jersey

1/32nd Scale

Trumpeter

F4F Wildcat

TBM/TBF Avenger

Fairey Swordfish Mk.I and Mk.II (really good)

Me262 series

Douglas A-4 Skyhawk series

Douglas Skyraider series

MiG-23 series

F-14 Tomcat series

F-18E/F Super Hornet series

Vought F-8E/J Crusader series

MiG-3

Lockheed P-38L (curiously, they never released any other variants)

Hobby Boss

IL2 Sturmovick Series

F8F Bearcat

F-84E/G Thunderjet

Northrop P-61B Black Widow (but not the 1/48 kits)

1/48th Scale

Trumpeter

Sukhoi Su9 Fishpot

Douglas A-3 Skywarrior Series

MiG-23 series

Supermarine Attacker

Vickers Wellington series

MiG-3

Messerschmitt Me509

MiG-21F-13

Hobby Boss

North American FJ-4 Fury

McDonnell F3H Demon

Panavia Tornado (F.3 only, the IDS and ECR kits have serious shape accuracy issues and are far surpassed by the recent Revell kit)

Yak-38 Forger (single seater is good, but not the 2-seater U variant)

Vought F4U-4 variants (the -5 and -7 kits have the wrong wings and other problems; for the early -1A and -1D, Tamiya is still best and probably cheaper)

Ta-152C series (much easier to build than the Dragon kits)

F-84F Thunderstreak

Blohm und Voss Bv141 (needs a replacement prop but otherwise light years ahead of the HiPM kit)

1/72nd Scale

Trumpeter

Sukhoi Su27 Series

Vickers Wellington series

Fw200 Condor series

Tupolev Tu22M2/3 Backfire

Tupolev Tu160 Blackjack

Tupolev Tu95/Tu142 Bear

North American F-107A Ultra Sabre

Hobby Boss

MiG-15 UTI

Do335 Pfeil

F-14 series

Hawker Seahawk FGA.6/Mk.100/Mk.101

1/144th Scale

Trumpeter

Tu-160 Blackjack

Tu95MS/Tu142 Bear series

Su-27 series

F-14 series

F-16 series

Kits to avoid:

Trumpeter 1/24 Spitfire Vb

Trumpeter 1/24 P-51D

Hobby Boss 1/32 Spitfire Vb

Hobby Boss 1/48 Tornado IDS and ECR

Hobby Boss 1/48 P-80 Shooting Star series

Hobby Boss 1/48 Mirage III (I don't think there's much wrong with it in terms of accuracy, but it is a near exact copy of the Eduard kit)

Trumpeter 1/72 English Electric Lightning series (don't get me started)

Trumpeter 1/48 DH Vampire FB.5/9 (sorta looks like a Vampire if you squint really hard)

Edited May 11, 2015 by VMA131Marine

[Troy Smith]

1/48th Scale

Trumpeter

Sukhoi Su9 Fishpot

Douglas A-3 Skywarrior Series

MiG-23 series

Supermarine Attacker

Vickers Wellington series

MiG-3

Messerschmitt Me509

MiG-21F-13

A few points.

I don't know how good the Attacker is, I suspect it has problems as their Spiteful/Seafang do.

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234931418-supermarine-attacker-f1-148-trumpeter/#entry1194548

As most of the recent Trumpeter kits this one is as attractive as easy to build but full of small errors and approximations. A kit that becomes more and more disappointing the closer you look.

The Me509 never existed, so 'accuracy' is hard to judge.

the MiG-21F-13 I think is basically overall well shaped, but full of detail errors according to some MiG-21 enthusiasts.

thanks for the list.

[VMA131Marine]

A few points.

I don't know how good the Attacker is, I suspect it has problems as their Spiteful/Seafang do.

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234931418-supermarine-attacker-f1-148-trumpeter/#entry1194548

The Me509 never existed, so 'accuracy' is hard to judge.

the MiG-21F-13 I think is basically overall well shaped, but full of detail errors according to some MiG-21 enthusiasts.

thanks for the list.

I debated about putting the Attacker on the "good" list. AFAIK, it doesn't share any parts with the Spiteful/Seafang and I don't think it has any gross shape errors like those kits appear to have. However, as the definitive kit of this subject, it was a missed opportunity. I was particularly disappointed by the treatment of the engine intakes, which are shallow and blanked off. The Falcon vacform kit has a much better representation. If you want to see how they could have been done well, look no further than the Airfix Swift, which has a full duct down to the compressor face and all the correct boundary layer diverter plates as well. If Airfix could accomplish that in 1/72, then Trumpeter could have done much better in 1/48.

[warreni]

I reckon all the criticism is a load of bulldust for the most part. Is amazing how a Trumpeter kit gets criticised for one thing, a Tamiya kit comes out a few years later with exactly the same effect and it isn't even mentioned.

Their 1/32 Mig-21UM is awesome to build, as is their 1/32 F-100.. and also their 1/32 P-38.

[Giorgio N]

The 1/32 tomcats suffer from inaccurate intakes, the kit may be well detailed and easy to build but anyone who knows this aircraft will notice these immediately.

The 1/72 tomcats on the other hand are more accurate but are a bit simplified. They are not bad kits but there's much better around

[Jon Bryon]

I debated about putting the Attacker on the "good" list. AFAIK, it doesn't share any parts with the Spiteful/Seafang and I don't think it has any gross shape errors like those kits appear to have. However, as the definitive kit of this subject, it was a missed opportunity. I was particularly disappointed by the treatment of the engine intakes, which are shallow and blanked off. The Falcon vacform kit has a much better representation. If you want to see how they could have been done well, look no further than the Airfix Swift, which has a full duct down to the compressor face and all the correct boundary layer diverter plates as well. If Airfix could accomplish that in 1/72, then Trumpeter could have done much better in 1/48.

The Attacker has the tailplanes in the wrong place and the undercarriage locations are incorrect, too.

The following are also 1/48 Trumpeter kits that have not received much criticism, but that may be because not much has actually been done to compare to the real thing:

Nanchang CJ-6

Antonov An-2

Shenyang J-8 series

Yak-38 (single seater; the twin seater is very wrong)

Chengdu J-10 series

Chengdu JF-17/FC-1

As for being good kits, that's still a mixed bag. In 1/48, the Su-15TM is not only horribly inaccurate, but not a great build either; the MiG-15s are pretty accurate (the main issue being the tail) but take a lot of clean up before you get a reasonable fit, and the HB MiG-17s have a horrible fit.

Jon

[VMA131Marine]

I reckon all the criticism is a load of bulldust for the most part. Is amazing how a Trumpeter kit gets criticised for one thing, a Tamiya kit comes out a few years later with exactly the same effect and it isn't even mentioned.

Their 1/32 Mig-21UM is awesome to build, as is their 1/32 F-100.. and also their 1/32 P-38.

I think you'll be hard pressed to name a Tamiya aircraft kit that is both the same subject as a Trumpeter kit and released after it. The two that come to mind are the F4U-1/1A and the P-51D in 1/32. In both cases, the Tamiya is hands down more accurate and more detailed. Trumpeter (and Hobby Boss) get criticised because they have a history of releasing kits (particularly aircraft) with entirely avoidable errors... or worse.

The 1/48 DH Vampire is just ... wrong. I'm not sure there is a single accurate shape on that kit and it is not like there isn't a lot of reference material for that subject either.

The Trumpeter 1/24 Spitfire and the Hobby Boss 1/32 clone have serious issues: prop spinner and blades, fabric covering effect on horizontal stabilizer, incorrect windscreen with internal armour for the 1/32 Vb trop version, spurious cockpit details and a non-prototypical seat.

Hobby Boss: 1/48 F4U-5 and -7 have fabric covered outer wing panels only applicable to the -4 and earlier and the cowlings are messed up as well

Trumpeter and Hobby Boss: 1/32, 1/48, and 1/72 A-7 Corsair II's all have the squashed intake profiles

Trumpeter: 1/48 DH Hornet - numerous shape and detail errors that could have been avoided with better research and a review of the other available kits

Trumpeter: 1/24 and 1/32 P-51D major shape problems that should have been avoided given how many of these aircraft survive and how much reference material there is.

No doubt, Trumpeter and Hobby Boss have also made some gems but I don't think the factually based criticism is undeserved.

[VMA131Marine]

The 1/32 tomcats suffer from inaccurate intakes, the kit may be well detailed and easy to build but anyone who knows this aircraft will notice these immediately.

The 1/72 tomcats on the other hand are more accurate but are a bit simplified. They are not bad kits but there's much better around

I'm aware of the intake problem on the 1/32 kit, but it's still a much better starting point than the Tamiya or Revell F-14 kits. There is also a correction available: http://www.zactomodels.com/html/F-14/F14_intakes.htm

[VMA131Marine]

The Attacker has the tailplanes in the wrong place and the undercarriage locations are incorrect, too.

As for being good kits, that's still a mixed bag. In 1/48, the Su-15TM is not only horribly inaccurate, but not a great build either; the MiG-15s are pretty accurate (the main issue being the tail) but take a lot of clean up before you get a reasonable fit, and the HB MiG-17s have a horrible fit.

Jon

Tragically, the tailplanes are in the correct location on the boxart (for the F.1 anyway).

I'm working on the 1/48 Su-15TM right now and concur it is not an easy kit to build. The most egregious error on the kit is the angle and length of the nose. There are a couple of correction sets available (or you can perform the surgery yourself) that make the model look much better if still not entirely accurate.

[exdraken]

hi,

I have several of them (1/48), but only every build the J-10 (Trumpeter) Mirage III (Hobbyboss, but was used to convert it to a Swiss RS with Aconcagua resin and lots of scratch.... ) and I am now doing the MiG-17PF (Hobbyboss)

all those are said to be quite acurate on among the best on the market respectively

my MiG-17 had no fit issues, but very tight fit instead! nose construction is a bit complicated,....ok

I can only add to that that I enjoyed building them a lot, fit and detail is good, sometimes a bit exagerated (rivets) and too complicated (full engines that disapear in the fuselage wihout providing a possibility of external display...)

I try not the buy the ones with bigger shape issues: Su-9 with Eduard seat for the Su-7, will need new decals though, as kit ones (soviet stars) are not really representativ.... MiG-19 two seater,(will need a seat, maybe a cockpit upgrade), MIG-15UTI (actually I have lots of PE (Part) Ciro cockpit and Cold War Studio tail, but I don't think this is absulutely necessary! the MiG-17PF is nice with hardly any upgrades ) J-8 MiG-21 on steroids , JF-17

Mirage IIIC: as being kind of a Eduard "copy" would be moralically to be avaoided (as the F/A-18 and Rafale) but are a good basis for Mirage conversions, as wings and fuselage center parts a re very nice. they are availoable quite cheaply from time to time, so perfect for cut-up maybe not dneeded anyloner with the new Kinetic Mirage series!

but have waiting to be build one day with shape and detail issues

Su-24 (with lots of resin from Komplekt Zip) ,

MiG-23M (MF) (lots of resin and PE (Eduard exhaust, Aires/ Quickboost aerials, gun nozzle; Neomega cockpit, Ciro intakes, closed airbrakes and canopy, Dream Model Pe and pitot),

Su-15 with some resin, but not too sure if enough.... the kit is said to be quite wrong

Vigilante (same as Su-15 above)

I have the YF-23, but only because it is such a nice looking plane... would need quite some changes!

I would definitely not buy any of their Tornados as they are too wrong compared to the old Italeri and Airfix kits shapewise, and of couse to the new Revell one as well,

I sold a Rafale kit again, because the Revell version which ist is "loosely" based on is that much better,

I plan to do an Academy F-111, not the Hobbbyboss version (which I have nver seen personally)

T-38 - go for the wolfapck-d one

hope this hslps a bit!

generally Trumpeter/ Hobbyboss are a bit hit and miss imho!

cheers, Werner

Edited May 11, 2015 by exdraken

[fingers]

I'm part way through a hobby boss 1/48 TBM3 Avenger and to me, so far, it seems to have both good fit and a nice levels of details.

Ticks the boxes for this modeller without doubt.

[andym]

More good ones:

MiG-23 series

MiG-21F-13

[

These both have their fair share of errors which are obvious to those interested in these aircraft, the Mig-23 MLD nose for instance, but the Mig-21 isthe worse of the two. I'm still trying to gather details on the Su-9, I can say however that the cockpit is woeful and it needs new mainwheels. Also it is based on an early version so be careful about what markings you use.

HTH

Andy

[Flankerman]

I can only speak for those I have built.....

The Hobby Boss 1/72 scale Mi-8/17 kits are the only ones in that scale to accurately depict the prolific Hip.

The Trumpeter 1/72 scale Flanker series has some minor issues - but are the best out there (apart from the awesome Zvezda Su-27SM - but that is only a single version).

The Trumpeter 1/72 scale Russian bombers (Tu-160, Tu-22M2/3, Tu-95MS, Tu-16) all have minor problems but are the best available.

Ken

[Skids]

I have the YF-23, but only because it is such a nice looking plane... would need quite some changes!

The YF-23 is a great kit, big and goes together nicely, shape issues are bad, I made a few easy changes but left many more.

I have also built the HB A-7K which has a few shape issues but fits nice.

The real question is do HB and Trumpy take a bashing because we expect them to make mistakes so bash them the moment they announce a kit (because we know they are more interested in money than accuracy). Whereas the likes of Tamiya are renowned for great kits but we never criticise them. Surely there are mistakes on Tamiya kits? I have never heard of the perfect kit that is exactly correct in all ways. Plus the AM guys would be stuffed if people made perfect kits!

Simon

[Greg B]

It depends as ever on how much you know the subject and what your standard of acceptable accuracy is. There are some really wide of the mark kits, but some are very nearly there and by far the best option in that scale and usually the only option. Unfortunately for Trumpeter, with some modellers, the benefit of the doubt is long gone because of past howlers. But there does seem to be a lot of amnesia in regards to some of the howlers in the Tamiya/Hasegawa/Academy/Revell/Airfix back catalogues.

I've built the 32 F-100 and loved it (minor accuracy issues), 1/2 way through the A-7 with help from Zacto and think it's a great kit apart from the nose. Waiting for time are some MiG-23s, SU-25s, F-8 Crusader and a Skyraider. All lovely kits that although not in the same league as Tamiya are not bad at all.

[warreni]

I think you'll be hard pressed to name a Tamiya aircraft kit that is both the same subject as a Trumpeter kit and released after it. The two that come to mind are the F4U-1/1A and the P-51D in 1/32. In both cases, the Tamiya is hands down more accurate and more detailed. Trumpeter (and Hobby Boss) get criticised because they have a history of releasing kits (particularly aircraft) with entirely avoidable errors... or worse.

The 1/48 DH Vampire is just ... wrong. I'm not sure there is a single accurate shape on that kit and it is not like there isn't a lot of reference material for that subject either.

The Trumpeter 1/24 Spitfire and the Hobby Boss 1/32 clone have serious issues: prop spinner and blades, fabric covering effect on horizontal stabilizer, incorrect windscreen with internal armour for the 1/32 Vb trop version, spurious cockpit details and a non-prototypical seat.

Hobby Boss: 1/48 F4U-5 and -7 have fabric covered outer wing panels only applicable to the -4 and earlier and the cowlings are messed up as well

Trumpeter and Hobby Boss: 1/32, 1/48, and 1/72 A-7 Corsair II's all have the squashed intake profiles

Trumpeter: 1/48 DH Hornet - numerous shape and detail errors that could have been avoided with better research and a review of the other available kits

Trumpeter: 1/24 and 1/32 P-51D major shape problems that should have been avoided given how many of these aircraft survive and how much reference material there is.

No doubt, Trumpeter and Hobby Boss have also made some gems but I don't think the factually based criticism is undeserved.

The P-51 is the one. Both have rivet detail on the wings but the Trumpeter kit was slammed as they shouldn't be there and all this other tripe.. They may have come from the factory for a while like that, but on the first repaint all that lovely filler went.

But anyway, I am not a rivet counter and as long as it looks like the subject I am happy.

Cheers!

Warren

[Graham Boak]

There certainly are some Tamiya kits with errors, though I'd disagree that they never get mentioned there does seem to be many posters who neglect this, and others who complain about all Chinese-origin kits regardless of individual differences. Life's like that...

The only Trumpeter kits I have are 1/700 ships:

the Fletcher class destroyer "The Sullivans" which is ok but less than great and there are better around

the Liberty ship which is pretty good.

Of Hobbyboss I have only ones from their simplified 1/72 range, having used the internet to avoid the poorer ones. If you like a detailed cockpit ignore these.

The MiG 3 is very good in outline. Still the best that is readily available.

The T-6G Texan is very good in outline. It appears to have been based on the Academy, which in turn was based on the Heller. Which you prefer is a matter of taste/price.

The Typhoon needs a new canopy (and the usual 4-blade prop/small tailplane problem) but is pretty good in outline. It suffers from some of the minor flaws of the Academy kit it appears to have been based on. The new Airfix is worth the higher price especially if you add in the cost of canopy and possibly tailplane.

I've seen it said that some of the others are worth considering but I don't recall which - the F4U?

[VMA131Marine]

The P-51 is the one. Both have rivet detail on the wings but the Trumpeter kit was slammed as they shouldn't be there and all this other tripe.. They may have come from the factory for a while like that, but on the first repaint all that lovely filler went.

But anyway, I am not a rivet counter and as long as it looks like the subject I am happy.

Cheers!

Warren

The Trumpeter P-51D has far more problems than just the rivets on the wings, including the shape of the nose, chin intake and canopy. Personally, I wouldn't make a big deal about the rivets on the wings. The rivets were puttied and the wings painted silver from the factory, but these coatings would start to come off after a while in service and, in some cases the ground crew would strip the wings back to bare metal and not repaint to reduce maintenance. In those cases, the rivets would certainly be visible, as they are on a lot of surviving warbirds. This would be a case of check references for the specific aircraft being modeled and fill the rivets if necessary. It's a lot easier to fill and sand than to add rivets where there are none.

[VMA131Marine]

The YF-23 is a great kit, big and goes together nicely, shape issues are bad, I made a few easy changes but left many more.

I have also built the HB A-7K which has a few shape issues but fits nice.

The real question is do HB and Trumpy take a bashing because we expect them to make mistakes so bash them the moment they announce a kit (because we know they are more interested in money than accuracy). Whereas the likes of Tamiya are renowned for great kits but we never criticise them. Surely there are mistakes on Tamiya kits? I have never heard of the perfect kit that is exactly correct in all ways. Plus the AM guys would be stuffed if people made perfect kits!

Simon

The Tamiya 1/48 Spitfire Mk.I and Vb are slightly underscale (about 1/50th) and the wing planform is not quite right. The 1/48 Fw190D has the same enclosed wheel well as their Fw190A and F kits. Tamiya does not have a perfect record by any stretch of the imagination, but they seem to try harder to get things right (how many stories have there been about Tamiya staff visiting a museum to measure a particular aircraft, of which the 1/32 Mosquito is the most recent) while Trumpeter seems content to work off plans and photographs without regard to provenance when there is no China based example of the full sized article.

[Dave Fleming]

Trumpeter 1/72 Wyvern is good, as is the Hobbyboss Mil-17 (Notwithstanding the shape of the starboard heat exchanger/fuel tank)

[dfqweofekwpeweiop4]

We should of course be highlighting the positives of Trumpeter and Hobby Boss as well as the negatives.

In my experience, on the whole I've found Trumpeter and Hobby Boss kits to be generally well engineered and well detailed, they build up nicely and make good looking models. A lot of them are also reasonably priced compared to the alternatives and in some cases almost as good as the best - take for example the Hobby Boss Me262's, they are considered to be quite good by just about anyone who's built one and they are a decent amount cheaper than the Tamiya kit, plus they do loads of variants.

As people have mentioned, the big problem with the 2 company's in question is accuracy issues with which they appear to be hit or miss. They either get it mostly right or mostly wrong if you listen to the experts. As modellers we each need to decide how bothered we are about accuracy. I would advise anyone who's concerned about accuracy to try and look up any Hobby Boss or Trumpeter kits they might be interested in and read the reviews and try to find built up examples (preferably OOB) and decide for yourselves if the model looks enough like a 'whatever subject' it depicts. I guarantee you can display an inaccurate model at a model show and no one will come up to you and complain about it, unless it's a blindingly obvious error!

My example is the much maligned and beaten to death, fatally flawed, unbuildable Trumpeter 1/72 Lightning F.3. I built one added some Eduard etch instrument panels and seatbelts but otherwise it's OOB. I stuck it on the club table at the Huddersfield show when I was in the Cheshire Modellers and people liked it a lot. One of the club members, used to be ground crew on Lightnings and he said it didn't look as bad as the so called experts say it is. I even had one person come up and ask me if it was the new Airfix kit! It just proves that despite being inaccurate, if it looks enough like the subject no one will notice the flaws, only a handful of accuracy obsessed people might notice.

So, like I said make sure you judge for yourself, don't listen to the accuracy obsessed ranters but try to find more objective reviews that highlight the plus points (if any!) and bad points of a model

I want to give a Special mention to the Hobby Boss easy build kits. If anyone has kids and want's to introduce them to modelling, get a load of Hobby Boss easy build kits, they do anything from WW2 aircraft to modern fast jets. They're a bit simplified to build but that's perfect for kids and novices to get going with. In that respect you'd be better off with them rather than horrible old Airfix (and other makes) kits or the more complicated new Airfix kits. Some of the Easy Build kits, as people have mentioned make reasonable kits in their own right - the Do335 is nice for example.

Here's a list of Trumpeter and Hobby Boss kits I've actually built.

Trumpeter 1/700 - HMS Eskimo, Vittorio Veneto (just putting etch railings on now), HMS Renown (just needs rigging), USS South Dakota, Prinz Eugen, USS New Orleans, USS Hornet

Trumpeter 1/72 Lightning F.3

Hobby Boss 1/350 Surcouf

Hobby Boss 1/48 KV-2, Ta152C-0

Hobby Boss 1/72 - lots of Easy Build kits! Lynx HAS.2, Hoplite, Hoplite URN, Eurocopter TIger, SH-60 Oceanhawk, F9F-2 Panther, F9F-3 Panther.

Just a quick disclaimer - not everybody who's a stickler for accuracy is bad, it's good that there are people who can point out errors so we can decide to buy or not to buy, I'm just referring to those who really rant and rave about how bad something is and give an unbalanced view on some subjects. I'm sure most people here know what I mean!

thanks

Mike