Hasegawa Lancaster

[Adam Poultney]

I noticed the hasegawa Lancaster is significantly more expensive than the Airfix and Revell kits. Given that it's the oldest of the three modern 1/72 Lancaster toolings, is there any advantage to the kit that makes it worth the extra cost?

[elger]

Main issues as far as I'm concerned:

 

Compared to Airfix, the surface detail of the Hasegawa kit is much, much nicer. The Hasegawa kit is easier to build with much better fitting parts than Airfix.

Compared to Revell, the Hasegawa shape is more accurate - especially the nacelles, the curve at the rear and the front intakes. The Revell's air intakes are approprate for late-war and post-war versions. The wheels of the Hasegawa kit are much better. The Revell kit's dihedral is not exactly right - Hasegawa is better than Revell here.

 

The Hasegawa has the least amount of interior detail of all three kits. There is a minor inaccuracy with the position of the escape hatch in the main canopy.

[Wm Blecky]

4 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

I noticed the hasegawa Lancaster is significantly more expensive than the Airfix and Revell kits. Given that it's the oldest of the three modern 1/72 Lancaster toolings, is there any advantage to the kit that makes it worth the extra cost?

In one word, no.  One of the most difficult, if not impossible to correct errors on the Hasegawa kit, is the cockpit canopy escape hatch.   It is in the wrong position.  That's an error that should not have happened.  Truth be told, the Hasegawa kit has several issues, a quick search should turn them up for you.  There are some good reviews out there that will point out the problems.

 

As for the Revell kit, personally speaking, nice looking as the Revell kit may be, it's another that I've ruled out.  The wing issue dihedral aside, there are others.  The wings are short in width as is the fuselage, it is short in length.

 

I have gone with the Airfix Lancaster kits, both the 1979/80 release as well as the new one.  I like the old release because of the rivets.  Both new and old can be fitted with the CMK resin sets to improve the cockpits and other areas.  There is an eBay seller who has been parting the Airfix Lanc out, so I picked up several of the sprues to enhance my older 1979/80 releases (the canopy sprue in particular was a bonus to get from him).

 

This having been said, the Hasegawa Lancs do have some uses.  The Post War ones have some bits that are worth pilfering to use on the Airfix kits.  Even after removing those bits, the Hasegawa kit can still be built as a War time Lancaster, so no real loss if you want to resell it.

[Wm Blecky]

24 minutes ago, elger said:

Main issues as far as I'm concerned:

 

... The Revell's air intakes are approprate for late-war and post-war versions.

elger, that is something I have not read or come across in discussions regarding the Revell kit.  Could you elaborate a little more on this?

[Work In Progress]

4 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

I noticed the hasegawa Lancaster is significantly more expensive than the Airfix and Revell kits. Given that it's the oldest of the three modern 1/72 Lancaster toolings, is there any advantage to the kit that makes it worth the extra cost?

No

[alt-92]

45 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:

No

Well. Maybe the Special boxings.

(Weird, no current aftermarket sets for Tallboy conversions)

[Work In Progress]

If those were what the OP wanted, then he wouldn;t have asked about the kit in the context of the Airfix and Revell ones, though

[Adam Poultney]

2 hours ago, alt-92 said:

Well. Maybe the Special boxings.

(Weird, no current aftermarket sets for Tallboy conversions)

 

2 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

If those were what the OP wanted, then he wouldn;t have asked about the kit in the context of the Airfix and Revell ones, though

Well, if I were to buy one I'd want the Bi Special with the huge bomb 

[Adam Poultney]

So I take it all that all I'd need to do to get a good model from it is get a vacuform canopy that's a bit more correct

But other than the variants offered by that kit, it's not worth buying over the Airfix one? 

[elger]

7 hours ago, Wm Blecky said:

elger, that is something I have not read or come across in discussions regarding the Revell kit.  Could you elaborate a little more on this?

 

You can tell in one of the photos in Mark Davies' thorough comparison of the three modern Lancaster kits on Hyperscale: http://216.187.79.26/2013/reviews/kits/airfixa09007reviewmd_1.htm

 

The comparison of the engine air intakes of the three is towards the end (together with the main wheels) and you can clearly tell that Revell's are much wider and more square than the other two. Similar to the issue with the 1/32 HK Models, discussed here for example.

Quote

the size of the kit intakes are more like those used on planes in tropical climates or later marks and were likely based on measurements from restored aircraft which, whilst looking like BI or BIII they were actually later models

 https://forum.largescalemodeller.com/topic/6104-hk-models-132-lancaster-hints-tweaks-and-tips/page/5/

[Wm Blecky]

5 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

So I take it all that all I'd need to do to get a good model from it is get a vacuform canopy that's a bit more correct

But other than the variants offered by that kit, it's not worth buying over the Airfix one? 

Adam, go with the one you want.  At the end of the day, each of the kits look good as they are.  Some of us are just a little more particular/fussy when it comes to our choices/preferences for kits.  Buts as I said, each of the Lancaster kits mentioned do look good right from the box with no additional changes or add-ons.  I do not feel that you need to blow a wad of cash on these kits.

 

That being said, if you do want to go with some "enhancements", unfortunately there is no vac form canopy set for the Hasegawa kit at the present time.  I went with the Airfix kits out of personal preference as they looked good to my eye and that's the same reason I choose to not use the Revell or Hasegawa kits, each, for various reasons, did not appeal to me.  But again, that's personal preference.

 

Overall, if your preference is the Hasegawa kit, I think that it is fine.  CMK does make a cockpit set if you feel the need for that detail.  The other options are Eduard's photoetch sets and CMK's resin seats set.  Again, it comes down to what will make you happy with the kit.

 

FWIW, I have tried cross fitting the other manufacturer's canopies to the Hasegawa kit.  Airfix's might be the best option if you can get your hands on a set of the clear parts sprue.  Falcon does makes a vac form canopy set for the 1979/80 Airfix Lancaster release.  I am unsure as to how well it will fit.

 

I hope this helps.

Edited September 14, 2020 by Wm Blecky

[72modeler]

14 hours ago, Adam Poultney said:

is there any advantage to the kit that makes it worth the extra cost?

Adam,

 

You might find the link to Brett Green's article on building the Airfix, Hasegawa, and Revell 1/72 Lancaster kits helpful.

Mike

 

http://www.hyperscale.com/lancaster_guide.pdf

[woody37]

On 9/14/2020 at 7:19 AM, elger said:

Main issues as far as I'm concerned:

 

Compared to Airfix, the surface detail of the Hasegawa kit is much, much nicer. The Hasegawa kit is easier to build with much better fitting parts than Airfix.

Compared to Revell, the Hasegawa shape is more accurate - especially the nacelles, the curve at the rear and the front intakes. The Revell's air intakes are approprate for late-war and post-war versions. The wheels of the Hasegawa kit are much better. The Revell kit's dihedral is not exactly right - Hasegawa is better than Revell here.

 

The Hasegawa has the least amount of interior detail of all three kits. There is a minor inaccuracy with the position of the escape hatch in the main canopy.

Elger sums it up well although IIRC, the tail wheel is significantly oversized in the Hasegawa kit so needs replacing. That and the escape hatch being in the wrong place on the canopy, it is my preferred kit although I've tended to stock up on Airfix kits due to price.

 

Revell has lots of things wrong, intakes are poorly shaped, main wheels oversize, wing dihedral too flat but easily fixed. Goes together nicely though

 

Airfix is the most accurate although panel lines a bit deep and some tend to have warped fuselages