1/72 Italeri F-104G-toC?

[Plumbum]

Hello---I have an old Italeri kit 1223 F-104G. How much do I have to do to

back date it to a C model or is it not possible? Thanks---John

[Wm Blecky]

I think you would be far better off using either the Italeri F-104A/C or the Monogram F-104C.  The G tail is noticeably different from that of a C.  There may be other differences (undercarriage doors, tire width), but that is the one that pops to mind. 

[Plumbum]

Thanks, think you are right. Too much work, just buy Monogram kit.---John

[Giorgio N]

It is possible to cut the tail of the Italeri G to the shape used on the C and earlier, the question is if it's worth as there are kits that already offer the correct tail.

The Italeri G features narrow wheels and the relative "flat" wheel well doors and while the doors are fine for a C the wheels are not. The Italeri A/C has the same wheels unfortunately.

The Monogram/Revell C on the other hand includes the correct wheels and is better in a number of aspects.

None of these kits however represent the slightly different panels of the C.

Another difference is that the pylons on the C are perpendicular to the wings, not to the ground as on the G.. another detail you have to sort yourself 

[RidgeRunner]

On 11/10/2019 at 12:54 AM, Wm Blecky said:

I think you would be far better off using either the Italeri F-104A/C or the Monogram F-104C.  The G tail is noticeably different from that of a C.  There may be other differences (undercarriage doors, tire width), but that is the one that pops to mind. 

If you are going to get another kit go for a Hasegawa F-104G/S kit and convert it. The best option. See below

 

 

Martin

 

Edited November 11, 2019 by RidgeRunner

[Wm Blecky]

Thanks for sharing that post, beautifully done F-104.  For the costs involved going that route, I fell that you'd be better off just running with the Monogram F-104C kit.  It has excellent surface detail and you wouldn't have to scrap 2 kits to make 1.

 

I've seen several of the Monogram kits on eBay lately going for quite reasonable prices.

 

Side question for you, does the Aires C-2 seat come with molded on harness straps or are they photoetch?

Edited November 11, 2019 by Wm Blecky
typo

[Giorgio N]

57 minutes ago, Wm Blecky said:

Thanks for sharing that post, beautifully done F-104.  For the costs involved going that route, I fell that you'd be better off just running with the Monogram F-104C kit.  It has excellent surface detail and you wouldn't have to scrap 2 kits to make 1.

 

I've seen several of the Monogram kits on eBay lately going for quite reasonable prices.

 

Side question for you, does the Aires C-2 seat come with molded on harness straps or are they photoetch?

 

I'm sure Martin will not mind if I comment on this, more so as we discussed F-104 kits a few times, particularly regarding how to best build early F-104 variants...

The Monogram/Revell kit is sure a quicker and cheaper way to get a C, as all the parts are included in one box. Particularly important are the wheels, as this is the only kit that includes proper C wheels (the Esci/Italeri kit has narrow G/J wheels). The Revell kit also includes the fairings for the RWR system antennas used on the Cs during the Vietnam War, however while the two rear ones are correct, the front one is the wrong shape.

Said that, the Revell kit is not as good as the Hasegawa one when it comes to fit, surface detail and some other details. Just to mention one, the exhaust nozzle in the Revell C has not only less detail but also the wrong number of petals while the Hasegawa part is correct. Intakes and canopy are also way better in the Hasegawa kit. The Japanese kit is not perfect at all, but most errors in the Hasegawa kit have been replicated in the Revell one... and then Revell added a few of their own.

Of course the problem is that Hasegawa never issued a C in 1/72 scale, so anyone who want to start from this kit must add parts from another kit, be it Esci or Revell.

Using the "Italesci" kit has one advantage: the wings in this kit are much better than both the Revell and Hasegawa ones, with a nice representation of the boundary layer slots (missing from the others) and accurate panel lines (those in the other kits are simplified). So yes, crosskitting the Hasegawa G with an Esci/italeri kit is a more expensive way to do things, but results in a much more accurate model than just using the Revell kit.. apart from the wheels.

 

Of course here the matter is what a modeller wants to achieve: if it's simply a model of an F-104C then the Revell kit is a reasonable solution straight from the box

Anyone who wants a better F-104C model will feel pushed to change and modify a few things in this kit, starting with the exhaust and modifying the various little inaccurate details in the kit.

Those modellers who will want to build a very good F-104C model will however find the Revell kit frustrating in several aspects and will recognise that converting the Hasegawa kit will lead to a better result in the end.  I should add that while crosskitting is a possibility, it is possible to simply cut the hasegawa tail to the correct profile and I'm sure someone here showed exactly this in a previous post on the F-104C.

Edited November 11, 2019 by Giorgio N

[Wm Blecky]

Thanks Giorgio.  It's interesting to read what you have said about the wings in the ESCI kit, I'd have never known that.  Would it be difficult to cross kit the ESCI wings with the Hasegawa kit?  Who knows, if I ever come across the ESCI kit for cheap, it might be worth giving it a go.  

[Giorgio N]

It's not difficult to use the Esci wings on the Hasegawa kit and Martin IIRC did exactly this on his F-104A.

 

I've taken a couple of pictures to show the difference between the two wings on a couple of models I have in various build stages. The model in grey primer is an Esci kit (actually an F-104C...) while the model with white and grey wing is a Hasegawa J

Top of the wings:

 

 

Notice how the Esci kit (here on the left) includes the slots for the boundary layer control system, absent from the Hasegawa wing. The panels are represented differently, IMHO Esci is more accurate. The flaps line also differ, again Esci is better.

And now the bottom:

 

 

Again Esci is the winner, with many small panels that exist on the real aircraft represented, while Hasegawa simply disregarded them

There is also a difference in span between the two kits, due to the different ways the two kits have for the attachment of the various loads on the wing tips.

Both kits have slots for the pylons, they have however been filled on the Hasegawa kit shown here. The Esci pylon is however incorrect in shape and in the C they don't tell to attach this perpendicular to the wing. On my model I will use a spare Hasegawa pylon modified to sit in the correct position.

 

I'm aware that differences of this kind only matter to the true F-104 enthusiasts and many modellers will not care, however it's worth pointing them out for those who may care. I have not added the Revell kit as my two (a C and a G) are in the stash, I may take one of the two and do the same comparison. Anyway they are almost identical to the Hasegawa ones.

I may add that the Esci kit wins over the Hasegawa and Revell offering in another area: the representation of the lines of vents present in the lower fuselage, that are nicely scribed in the Esci kit and totally absent in the Hasegawa and Revell kits. There are also a few panels that are more correct in the Esci kit.

Now it would seem that for a number of reasons I prefer the Esci kit to the other two, unfortunately this suffers from an incorrect canopy, with an excessively wide windscreen that IMHO ruins the beautiful lines of the Starfighter. The cockpit in the Esci kit is also incorrect in several aspects but this is fixable, the canopy unfortunately isn't.

Edited November 12, 2019 by Giorgio N

[Rob de Bie]

For your information, here's the combination of the Hasegawa 1/72 F-104G fuselage with the Esci/Italeri F-104C tail section added. I made the glue joint 1 mm aft of the FS614 rear fuselage break, in order to save that panel line. I hate panel lines coinciding with glue joints with a passion! The second photo shows the model with paint.

 

 

 

Rob

Edited November 12, 2019 by Rob de Bie

[gingerbob]

You can fix a seam that's only 1mm away from a panel line?  I'm impressed!  I, too, am suspicious of join lines on, well, actual join lines, because if the plastic bits don't fit exactly right, then it's still not going to look right.

[CT7567]

Personally I'm on the Revell/Monogram side as the preferred route to an early-model Starfighter, as their kit meets my standards for acuracy and detail straight from the box (and even the vaunted Hasegawa kit is not flawless, most notably featuring 'rivet' detail over the aft fuselage that is not present or at least not nearly so pronounced on the genuine article).

 

A note for anyone who might want to try cross-kitting the Hasegawa and ESCI/Italeri as discussed above: there is an AMT boxing of the ESCI tooling labeled as an "F-104C/G" that includes both the early and late-model tail sections. This combined with a Hasegawa kit would give you the ability to build two complete models without any "waste."

[RidgeRunner]

9 hours ago, CT7567 said:

A note for anyone who might want to try cross-kitting the Hasegawa and ESCI/Italeri as discussed above: there is an AMT boxing of the ESCI tooling labeled as an "F-104C/G" that includes both the early and late-model tail sections. This combined with a Hasegawa kit would give you the ability to build two complete models without any "waste.

That’s sounds like a good solution. It will mean, of course, that you will have two Starfighters sat side by side with one looking pretty accurate around the canopy and the other a little overblown. That is, of course, offset by the better detail in some areas on the Esci. It is still better than a Revell option, though, in my view. Of course, in the end, if you’re happy that’s all that matters :).

 

Martin

[Giorgio N]

The Hasegawa kit is not flawless but the matter of the excessively deep rivets on the tail is IMHO overinflated. They are annoying of course, but they can be sorted with filler. Even without this they are also not as visible as I often read in threads. This on the 1/72 kit, the 1/48 ones are worse.

More serious are IMHO other errors and omissions, like the lack of vents for the gun bay or the wrong shape of some very visible panels and other details.

Said that, the Revell kit not only features all the errors and omissions of the Hasegawa kit (that someone at Revell probably used as a model for their own.. ) but they also added a few more errors. Worst of them is the canopy, that is not correct in shape with an escessively short windscreen. The windscreen also lacks the fairing for the IR sensors. Then there's the matter of fit, that is way better on the Hasegawa kit and is less than stellar on the Revell offering.

We all have our favourites and we all prefer certain aspects in a kit, personally I prefer to have overly heavy rivets that I can sort easily rather than having wrongly shaped clear parts that I can't sort.

Unfortunately, with Hasegaws not offering a C OOB the Revell/Monogram and the Esci kit are the only choices for those who want to build this variant without much work, and of the two the Revell kit is sure the better