General consensus on available 1/72 P-40 kits?

[Chuck1945]

I too have built many of the P-40 kits over the years. However, now at age 76, I no longer want to spend unnecessary time trying to salvage or update/correct a less desirable kit for nostalgia’s sake if a better (read SH here) is readily available and at a reasonable cost

[Giorgio N]

8 hours ago, 72modeler said:

I guess it  might depend on how many other P-40 kits a modeler might already have. Over the years, I think I have bought every 1/72 version of the P-40 from every kit manufacturer. That being said, I think the SH P-40's are the most accurate and the best value for the money, as their detail parts are very nice, and unless a modeler wants to super detail one, a set of etched harnesses is abut all they need. Due to the  number of kits I have, as well as the number of vacform canopies and detail sets I also have collected, I could easily come up with the parts I need to improve  my Hasegawa or Academy kits. Somebody just starting out, who might not have a variety of P-40 kits or a a big spares inventory, might be better served with the SH kits, as they don't require a cockpit  or detail set, or a more accurate canopy. That being said,  there are many modelers more skilled than I who have not been seduced by the Dark Side of the Modeling Force who relish taking a less than perfect kit and making it into a masterpiece. 

 

I remember building so many Frog, Airfix , Heller, and KP kits that ended up being more putty and plasticard than  styrene- they were fun to build, I learned new skills and improved the ones I already had, but like many others, I now find myself whining if a panel line is out of place or the relief tube is the wrong color on the painting guide! From reading your comments over the years, it sounds like you came from  the same beginnings and thrashed the same vintage kits!

Mike

 

Mike, I fully agree that the SH kit is today superior to anything else and really for someone who wants to build a nice model it would be the one to suggest.

When it comes to Hobbyboss easy kits however I generally give them the benefit of being aimed at a very different kind of enthusiasts, be it younger modellers or those who want to focus on painting without bothering with much assembly and want to build many models in different markings without too much expense. In this IMHO they can be a winner, although some are better than others.

At the same time if the cost of such kits gets too close to that of "standard" kits of decent quality, like many from Academy, part of their appeal falls off the way

I have similar views about the Zvezda's easy assembly kits, that are even nicer than HBs (actually much nicer...). As a Spitfire fan I'll always take an Eduard Mk.IX over anything else to build my favourite subjects but if Zvezda issued one similar to their previous kits I'd probably still buy a few to build in half a day to cover the many schemes I'd like to show...at least if the price is right. I'd probably do the same with the P-40 if I were particularly fond of this aircraft.. that in theory I'm not, although since I have 7 in the stash maybe in reality I am a P-40 fan without knowing it...

Edited July 20, 2021 by Giorgio N

[Hook]

2 hours ago, Giorgio N said:

I am a P-40 fan without knowing it...

 

"Hello everyone! Welcome to P-40holics Anonymous,..."

 

Cheers,

 

Andre 

 

 

[AaCee26]

Hi all,

 

Most of the pros and cons of the various kits are already discussed. As long as question is Allison-powered P-40D to N I'd today go to the Special Hobby.

 

Hasegawa, Academy and it clones shares quite off wing incidence as well as too wide pipe cover below the wing center seam. Nowadays not worth to trouble with it - it is quite laborous job to take care. I know what I'm talking about...

 

Sword had also both short and long P-40L IIRC. I haven't them but before the SH kit aomeone who I know to know these things considered the long one as best starting point for P-40M.

 

Tomahawks I have compared with each other. My ranking is 1) Trumpeteer, 2) HobbyBoss and 3) Airfix. Frog/Novo and itäs Academy derivates are better to forgot.

 

Airfix has problems with wing panelling and horizontal tail size, canopy leaving a big step to the rear fuselage and coarser engraving than in the Trump and HB. Both of them needs little fixing here and there but I consider the result versus time spent better than Airfix. HB ibasically lacks the interrior and IIRC landing gear doors. Otherwise it is one of their better kits which is common with this company with Trump if they have a bigger scale model of the same subject. Trumpeteer cockpit is too shallow, maybe it matches for Warhawk? Also there are a few extra rivets to fill. OFC your mileage might vary.

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee

[72modeler]

2 hours ago, AaCee26 said:

Trumpeteer cockpit is too shallow,

Good observations! I had forgotten about the shallow cockpit floor on the Trumpeter kit- thanks for reminding me! I wasn't aware of the horizontal stabilizer issue, so I guess I will check the kit parts against drawings. Shape issue? Elevator incorrect chord? I also think the Airfix P-40B gear struts are too skinny, but to be honest, I'm not building one at the moment, but when I get around to doing RT Smith's Tomahawk, I will refer back to the discussions and compare both kits to drawings. Of course, SH could save us all a lot of crosskitting and make a lot of money if they would do a Tomahawk/P-40B/C!

Mike

[AaCee26]

Hello Mike,

 

As I'm away from most of my lofts (they don't fit into one...) Tomahawk should have H75A tail surfaces while Airfix have a Warhawk one - wider from leading edge. Someone has mentioned it also in some discussion here.

 

BTW I have also an AML one. Best of the time it was new with clear margin to Focademy but now supersed by the others. And after building their Fiat I'm not interested to try it.

 

If SH would do the TOmahawk-family with similar quality than the Warhawk/Kittyhawks I would be happy!

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee

[Terry McGrady]

6 hours ago, AaCee26 said:

Hi all,

 

Most of the pros and cons of the various kits are already discussed. As long as question is Allison-powered P-40D to N I'd today go to the Special Hobby.

 

Hasegawa, Academy and it clones shares quite off wing incidence as well as too wide pipe cover below the wing center seam. Nowadays not worth to trouble with it - it is quite laborous job to take care. I know what I'm talking about...

 

Sword had also both short and long P-40L IIRC. I haven't them but before the SH kit aomeone who I know to know these things considered the long one as best starting point for P-40M.

 

Tomahawks I have compared with each other. My ranking is 1) Trumpeteer, 2) HobbyBoss and 3) Airfix. Frog/Novo and itäs Academy derivates are better to forgot.

 

Airfix has problems with wing panelling and horizontal tail size, canopy leaving a big step to the rear fuselage and coarser engraving than in the Trump and HB. Both of them needs little fixing here and there but I consider the result versus time spent better than Airfix. HB ibasically lacks the interrior and IIRC landing gear doors. Otherwise it is one of their better kits which is common with this company with Trump if they have a bigger scale model of the same subject. Trumpeteer cockpit is too shallow, maybe it matches for Warhawk? Also there are a few extra rivets to fill. OFC your mileage might vary.

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee

Sword did the P40K1/5 in a dual boxing Also the The P40K10/15 as the Kittyhawk III . It was Special Hobby who produced The F and L and a dual boxing of The P40 F/L as Kittyhawk MKII/IIA  SH have now realeased the P40M so like I've posted before SH produce kits of all P40 Warhawks/ Kittyhawks apart from P40D in 72nd scale 

 

Cheers 

Terry

[AaCee26]

22 hours ago, Terry McGrady said:

Sword did the P40K1/5 in a dual boxing Also the The P40K10/15 as the Kittyhawk III . It was Special Hobby who produced The F and L and a dual boxing of The P40 F/L as Kittyhawk MKII/IIA  SH have now realeased the P40M so like I've posted before SH produce kits of all P40 Warhawks/ Kittyhawks apart from P40D in 72nd scale 

 

Cheers 

Terry

Terry,

 

Thank you for correcting me! I clearly don't remember later models of the P-40 by hearth

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee

[Terry McGrady]

1 hour ago, AaCee26 said:

Terry,

 

Thank you for correcting me! I clearly don't remember later models of the P-40 by hearth

 

Cheers,

 

AaCee

First P40 I ever made was the Pld Aurora Kit back in Early 60]s That Shark mouth Decal made it the envy of all my mates . We are so fortunate today to have such a wide range of Kits  and Decals I must have a dozen getting dusty 0n shelves  shelves Though my preferences are for Kittyhawks rather than Tomahawks in 72nd scale SH are definately amomg the best 

[72modeler]

2 hours ago, Terry McGrady said:

First P40 I ever made was the Pld Aurora Kit back in Early 60]s

Those were the days! Loved the old 1/48 Aurora WW2 fighters- no matter the nationality, they came with six bombs to put under the wings. We have indeed come a long way since then, but they were a lot more fun to build and paint.

Mike

[steh2o]

I do not know if this has been mentioned or discussed before anyway I would like to hear your point of view:

 

I have the Special Hobby boxing SH72372 for P-40K-1/5 "short fuselage"

 

I checked the fuselage parts against Jumpei Tenma's plans and well -as promised on the box- I've got a "short fuselage", it is short by  about 2mm!!

The  trouble area seems just behind the cockpit (the quarter windows seem short too) and could origin  from an error evaluating the length between cockpit and rudder post. Wingspan, shapes, everything else seems quite nice but this fuselage matter is striking.

Does anybody here have a "long fuselage" example (N,M) and can verify if the issue is repeated even in that case?

Stefano