Good 1/72 Griffon Spits?

[Adam Poultney]

Just wondering what good 1/72 Griffon spits are available, preferably bubble top. I've got the Airfix PR.XIX in Swedish markings, but I'd quite like a bubble top griffon spit. 

I know there's the Airfix Mk22/24 which I can't seem to find, but are there any others? 

[Beard]

Sword did two boxings of their XIV low back, the AZ/ Admiral/ KP did a XIV low back and an 18, CMK's a resin 22/24. None of which, as far as I am aware, are currently in production. 

[Dave Swindell]

Other alternatives are Fujimi XIV high & low backs or Ventura/Jays XIV, XVIII & 22. Freightdog have reboxed the AZ XIV & XVIII kits

 

[FinnAndersen]

In addition to Beards post, Fujimi did one long ago, but it's not very good shapewise. Also stay away from the old Froc.

My money on the Sword, if you can find one.

 

 

[Cookenbacher]

For bubble top Griffon Spitfires in 1/72, nothing beats the Airfix Mk 22, a very enjoyable build. They're really difficult to find now, but hopefully Airfix re-releases this one sometime soon.

I've also built the Sword and AZ Mk XIV/XVIII and they are short run kits but look nice when complete. It must be noted that the AZ lowback fuselage is very nice while the high back version is noticeably short (just by comparing it to the low back fuselage in the same box!), closer to their Mk IX in length. But you want to build a lowback so it's no problem.

 

I built all three (plus a couple others) in a rambling thread here, if you'd like to see them compared:

 

For the Fujimi Griffon Spitfires, I suggest doing a search for @wellsprop here on Britmodeller, he's built lots of them.

[RJP]

Just to round out the selection, Hawk made a 22 way back in the middle of the last century.  It had issues; well it was the sixties  -  but it was cheap and the canopy was very clear.  And nobody ever did a 22 before that, at least that I was aware of.

 

Frog's high back 14 had some shape issues too but there was a bonus V-1 and a second, open, canopy.  I was able to live with the nose and thick canopy but the odd wing fillet drove me nuts.  To peg the date, it was the first kit on my desk to get the then-new Humbrol Authentics.

 

Academy also had a high back 14, said to be based on the Frog one, but with the fillet shape fixed.

 

At least one iteration of the Fujimi kit came with a sheet of camouflage decals.  You painted the greys and the decals were for the Dark Green sections.  I seem to recall good things having been said of the Fujimi plastic at the time but now in light of the comments above might have to haul out the stash and GA from the file and see what's up.

[Seahawk]

46 minutes ago, FinnAndersen said:

In addition to Beards post, Fujimi did one long ago, but it's not very good shapewise. 

I remember the Fujimi Griffon Spitfires being criticised for lack of cockpit detail and the amount of filling of panel lines you were expected to do for the PR.XIX but never on grounds of shape.  Could you give us more detail of the problems. 

 

The Academy one on the other hand has lovely interior details ("inspired by" the Cooper Details resin interior set) but is grotesquely bloated compared to the real thing.

[Adam Poultney]

So conclusion is I should just look out for Airfix's 1/72 one? Hoping for a reissue then 😂

 

Not the rarest kit I'm after though.... I'd be lucky to ever get my hands on the holy grail of kits that I want, a Frog Vulcan.

[FinnAndersen]

20 minutes ago, Seahawk said:

I remember the Fujimi Griffon Spitfires being criticised for lack of cockpit detail and the amount of filling of panel lines you were expected to do for the PR.XIX but never on grounds of shape.  Could you give us more detail of the problems. 

 

The Academy one on the other hand has lovely interior details ("inspired by" the Cooper Details resin interior set) but is grotesquely bloated compared to the real thing.

Not mine but look here 

 

https://www.google.dk/url?sa=i&url=http%3A%2F%2Fspitfiresite.com%2F2010%2F04%2Ffujimi-spitfire-lf-mk-xiv-in-172-scale.html&psig=AOvVaw0vT7H5_uJ5CpL_i9LRjoS8&ust=1588095205143000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCLiUuuaRiekCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

 

To my eyes, there's a number of odd shapes, the fuselage being too wide the most obvious thing.

 

 

Edited April 27, 2020 by FinnAndersen

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Duplicate

Edited April 28, 2020 by Corsairfoxfouruncle

[Graham Boak]

If you do get an Airfix Mk.22, get the Freightdog set with the correct wheels and larger prop.  Also check the cannon sizes for your subject.  The Airfix is indeed a lovely kit but has these curious shortfalls.

 

I hadn't noticed that the Fujimi fuselage was too fat, although the separate top to the fuselage for the highback is certainly narrower than where it fits.  Or doesn't.  Most of the recent Czech offerings have been a little short in the span, but this is less noticeable than Airfix's excessive chord on their Mk.IX and XIX.

[Corsairfoxfouruncle]

Multiple abailable here in the States at Sprue Brothers. XIVe, 21, 22, & 24. Sword 14 Special Hobby 21-22-24. Prices run $18 -$26 U.S. Not sure if it helps but maybe you can order ? 

[72modeler]

2 hours ago, Beard said:

CMK's a resin 22/24. None of which, as far as I am aware, are currently in production. 

CMR did a very nice 1/72 resin Mk 18, but as you stated, it has been OOP for a long time. A few years back, I corresponded with the owner about the possibility of either a re-issue or a  new-tool Mk 18, as the original molds/master were worn out, and he informed me that there were no immediate plans for such, but in the event he was going to do another Spitfire, that would most likely be the one, as he had received requests from other modelers. Keeping my fingers crossed, but not holding my breath!

Mike

[Giorgio N]

I have a couplw of Fujimi kits, I'll check them to see if the fuselage is actually too fat or what. I remember checking their length when the Airfix Mk.19 was issued and found them better than the Airfix kit, but that was a few years ago.

The Fujimi bubbletop is IMHO not that hard to find, they pop from time to time on Ebay and preowned kits dealers.

Nobody has mentioned the Special Hobby Mk.22 and 24 (also boxed by Xtrakit). They are not as accurate as the Airfix kit and are harder to build, being short run kits, but are easily available and currently in SH catalogue.

[John Thompson]

4 hours ago, Seahawk said:

The Academy one on the other hand has lovely interior details

 

As it happens, I'm in the middle of slogging away on several Ventura Spitfires (XIV, Seafire XV, maybe a 22), cannibalizing the cockpits and landing gear from Academy Mk XIVs. For anyone who might build a Spitfire, I suggest grabbing the Academy kit any time you see it just as a parts donor - I know I will!

 

John

[fightersweep]

Recently built a couple of the Fujimi low back XIVs, and to be honest, I really enjoyed building them. No great issues, except for lack of detail in the cockpit. I did start out with two Sword XIVs, but I found them a bit of a pain in places and reverted back to the Fujimi kits. In fact, I robbed the Sword kits of the cockpit detail and they fitted perfectly into the Fujimi kits. Shape wise, they look like XIVs to me and I can't say I noticed any glaring shape issues. I'll post a couple of photos of the finished kits if it helps.

 

Steve

[Rafwaffe]

To put my 2c in. The Airfix kits are lovely (I've built the PR XIX and the 22 as the last 24 (VN496) using the freightdog conversion). 

Don't forget the Xtrakit XII in 1/72 if you can find it for an early Griffon spit.

Was a lovely little kit to build (a built fiddly, but looks the part) .

[Ed Russell]

I haven't built the Airfix kit but it looks nice in the box. The CMR and Ventura kits can be built into something quite decent if you find one.

 

[Giorgio N]

So I grabbed one of my fujimi kits from the stash and compared it to pictures and to the kit that is today considered the best in terms of shape, that is the Eduard Mk.IX. And the results are interesting...

First let's talk fuselage: is the Fujimi fuselage too fat ? Yes and no... The Fujimi fuselage is fine up to the rear cockpit bulkhead. After this it follows a line that is more curved than it should be, with the result that it tapers less sharply than on the real aicraft. The sections are therefore wider for most of the rear fuselage, until at the tail break point the Fujimi fuselage is actually slighlty thinner than it should be.

Unfortunately it may not be easy to correct this error.. maybe removing some plastic from the fuselage halves join lines could help but I'm not sure it will be easy.

In terms of length the Fujimi kit looks fine, maybe less than a mm too short.. maybe. What however does not corrispond well with the Eduard kit is the location of the wing relative to the fuselage ! And we could start a very long thread on this aspect of the Spitfire, as different manufacturers seem to have had very different ideas about this. The Fujiimi wing is located slightly behind the Eduard one. It's not noticeable when the model is built and in any case sorting this would require some surgery...

The wing is slightly shorter in span, but I couldn't compare two assembled wings (both kits have separate wingtips). In any case I believe that when assembled with standard tips the Fujimi kit would be shorter by 1-1.5 mm per side. Not sure I'd worry too much about this.

Chord is the same at the root but the Fujimi wing tapers more so that at the tip attachment point the chord is short by around 1 mm. Again, not sure if it's worth correcting

 

[Giorgio N]

And with the Fujiimi kit measured, now some more general thought on the matter of 1/72 Griffon engined Spitfires... from someone who maybe suffers from a too high level of expectations due to the having seen some really great kits in the last few years....

 

Personally I would say that there isn't any very good kit of these variants in 1/72 scale ! For very good kit I mean something that is accurate, detailed, well moulded and with good engineering and fit. All the kits on the market are lacking in one or more of these aspects. So in case anyone would complain the day someone issues a new Mk.XIV or 24, yes, there is place for another kit of a Griffon engined Spitfire variant !

In no particular order...

 

Airfix XIX: it's more a toy than a model, detail is scarce (open wheel wells in a 21st Century kit ??) and soft, accuracy not great. Fits decently.

Airfix 22: very accurate in shapes, fit is decent but as usual with Airfix kits from the era two identical kits may show different fit... Detail is very good but most parts are chunky. Mould quality is IMHO not great, both my kits have scars in the plastic and there's no finesse. Great decals.

AZ kits: accuracy could be better, detail is good but they are short runs and not always easy to build. Mould finesse is good for a short run but of course not on par with mainstream kits

Sword XIV: accuracy again could maybe be better, It's still a short run but IMHO easier than the AZ kits. I'd rate this as the best of the short runs in every aspect.

Fujimi kits: Accuracy seems to be not great while mould finesse is very good. Fit however is not the best as the desire of having different variants from the same mould led to some design features that do not result in good fit. Detail is generally good, apart from the totally bare cockpit. Canopies are also not great

Academy XIV: a well known accuracy disaster (although I wonder how many would have noticed if the matter had not been discussed in forums like this...). Detail is pretty good and mould quality is excellent. Fit is also very good... it may sound strange, but this is a kit that I would recommend to all modellers who want an easy to build Spitfire, as long as they don't care how much the completed model resembles the real aircraft. Decals are however generally rubbish

Ventura kits: I don't have them all but have several, and in any case they all share their old school short-run nature. Only for modellers who don't mind spending time on carefully preparting all parts. Fit can actually be much better than expected, as long as the parts are properly prepared. At the same time there's no detail in wheel wells and little in the cockpit, some don't even have cannon barrels. Recommended only for those with spare parts avalaible. Accuracy ? They were often described as very accurate but when I compared their Seafire 47 to the Airfix kit I found a lot of differences, with the Ventura kit being shorter and with shorter wings among other things. So I believe they are not as accurate as we once thought.

Special Hobby: don't have them so can't comment on all aspects. However a friend compared the shapes to the AZ kits and from the pictures I'd say that AZ is much better, so I wouldn't rate them as particularly accurate. Watching the sprues they seem to be better moulded than the AZ kits so I'd expect a better fit.. but not having built any I can't say.

Frog XIV and Russian copies: the shape of the rear wing-fuselage joint is so wrong that I don't think it's worth discussing any other aspect.

 

So where does all this leave us ? As said before, there's no really good kit but there are kits that can satisfy one or more of the things we look for in a kit.

Want an easy build with well moulded plastic ? Go Academy. You don't mind having to do some more work but want accuracy and good detail ? Go for the Airfix 22. You don't mind short runs and want a XIV ? Go Sword or, if you can't find it, AZ. You can't stand blobby plastic but don't mind using filler ? Go Fujimi. Want a really good modern kit ? Wait for someone like Eduard or Arma to issue a new kit...

[Denford]

Special Hobby I would call 'acceptable' except for the outer wings which taper (mainly the trailing edge) far too much and look very noticeable alongside the correct size.   Also re-issued by Xtrakit.

 

I'll also mention Xtrakit Spitfire Xll: after all it is Griffon.  Again 'acceptable' if the rather narrow rear fuselage is overlooked, and don' t fit the overwing bulges (for the undercarriage) as the instructions advise.

[wellsprop]

On 4/27/2020 at 5:56 PM, Cookenbacher said:

For the Fujimi Griffon Spitfires, I suggest doing a search for @wellsprop here on Britmodeller, he's built lots of them.

 

Ah, someone mentioned me, wasn't me!

 

Yep, I built a fair few 1/72 Fujimi XIV's, from what I can remember (it was about 6 years ago I built them - oh my gosh, where does time go?!);

• Cockpit is pretty sparse, even for 1/72 - that never really bothered me that much (though I used resin kits for some of my models),
• It includes the air intake on the left cowl, which has to be removed unless doing an XIX (late),
• The upper cowl is a bit of a pain, lots of people complain that it needs loads of filler (it doesn't, it just needs a huge amount of care and a little bending),
• If you are doing the high back, the shape of the high back insert is wrong,
• The canopy is a bit bulky maybe?
• The exhausts aren't great

This WiP I did shows a full build, with the addition of some cockpit bits from my spares box.

 

I built the AZ Spitfire XIV, my review - don't bother. Limited run, tricky fit, vague details, thick, blurry canopy.

 

I never built the Sword Spitfire, I was delighted when it was announced, but I had taken a break from modelling at the time due to final year of uni...

 

I also posted this thread a while back where Spitfire XIV's in 1/72 were discussed.

 

 

And since I've got back into it, I'm building 1/48 - fyi, the 1/48 Spitfire XIV is very good in my mind  

 

To go through the other kits I've done;

• Airfix XIX - easy, fun, simple. Reasonably accurate, looks good with a few extras.
• Special Hobby 24 - Pretty good overall, don't remember struggling on this build too much.
• Sword Seafire XVII - Typical Sword build, reasonably limited run, but pretty good.
• Xtrakit XII - A bit vague detail and fit, but not overly difficult.

I think that's all the XIV kits I've done.

[72modeler]

On 4/27/2020 at 2:18 PM, Giorgio N said:

I have a couplw of Fujimi kits, I'll check them to see if the fuselage is actually too fat or what. I remember checking their length when the Airfix Mk.19 was issued and found them better than the Airfix kit, but that was a few years ago.

The Fujimi bubbletop is IMHO not that hard to find, they pop from time to time on Ebay and preowned kits dealers.

Nobody has mentioned the Special Hobby Mk.22 and 24 (also boxed by Xtrakit). They are not as accurate as the Airfix kit and are harder to build, being short run kits, but are easily available and currently in SH catalogue.

I agree, for what it's worth. Other than a simplified cockpit, the only real issue I have with the Fujimi bubble canopy and highback kits is the fairings over the cylinder head valve covers are too short ahead of the exhausts, but can be extended or replaced with the ones from the Academy XIV, which IIRC, are the right length.The upper contour of the fuselage aft of the canopy on the highback kits is also off, but IIRC the Quickboost resin replacement is better, being straighter, if memory serves.  I also have two vacform Aeroclub Griffon Spitfire conversions, (Mk XII and XVIII) and I can use the rocker arm fairings from them, or use one kit's fairings  to make a master to either cast or vacuform replacements.

Mike

Edited April 29, 2020 by 72modeler
added text

[Denford]

Another 'failing' of the Fujimi kit (series) is that the radiator flap is missing!

However Quickboost offer replacements.  QB72167 to be precise, though temporarily out of stock at H.

Quickboost also offer a number of other Improvement Parts such as Exhausts , Upper Cowling etc..

 

[Jazzie]

From someone who considers himself as an assembler rather than a modeller, i am currently building the Sword low back XIV and have had no issues whatsoever. Not even had to use much filler. Although 100% accuracy does not matter to me, i have never even considered the Fujimi and Academy kits as they just dont look the part when finished, but the Sword for me is on the money.

Stay safe,

Geoff.