ICM's 1/48 single seat fighters

[Bobby No Mac]

What's the Britmodeller hive mind's opinion of ICM's 1/48 Bf109, Mustang and Spitfires? I know that their He-111, Ju-88 etc are highly thought of, I just wondered what the reputation of the single seat fighters was; especially considering how incredibly cheap they are.

[Werdna]

In terms of the Bf109, it would really depend on which version you were looking to build, and whether you wanted to display it with open panels, closed panels, etc.  The Hobbyboss 109s are similarly priced (maybe slightly more) but probably offer a better fit, with less complexity.  

[socjo1]

33 minutes ago, Bobby No Mac said:

What's the Britmodeller hive mind's opinion of ICM's 1/48 Bf109, Mustang and Spitfires?

 

All these models today have much better options: better detailed and easier assembled. I wouldn't bother with it.

Let's take a look at Spitfire This model has quite good overell dimensions, better than Hasegawa, but today Eduard beats ICM strongly in all aspects. Better details, better fit, decals, and so on. ICM is rather difficult build - its fuselage is quite fragmented and fitting is not best. Many details have sink marks or wrong shapes (propellers spinner, guns and its covers,casing shutes and so on). Poor decals are another ICM's trademark.

Mustang - this model is something like "non-authorisated Tamiya's licence" 😉

Another story are russian fighters. I made Lagg-3 and it was nice building:

https://pwm.org.pl/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=25321

[Spitfires Forever]

The 109 is a nice kit, a little fiddly when it comes to the engine panels but sure looks like an 109 to me. The C/B model Mustangs are as close as you can get to a Tamiya. Many have speculated that the mould is an exact copy. All I know is that it is very accurate dimension wise. The Spits are great looking kits once completed but if you want to include the engine then the panel/upper cowling fit can be less than desired. To build the kit sans Merlin then you will have to do some modification to make it work but it's not difficult. The dimensions are quite good but I suggest that you Future the clear parts because they tend to be a bit foggy on the older fighter kits. Also, the decals are VERY fragile and difficult to work with. A coat of decal film before application will help greatly. After market decals will save you a lot a frustration but the price for them are rediculous these days. I haven't built any of the bombers but hear a lot of good things about them. If you can't get an Eduard Spit then for accuracy the ICM is your best and most affordable kit. Hope this helps.

Cherrs

[neilh]

I've built a few of the Spitfire kits. As Socjo1 said the Eduard kits are easier to build and overall better, but if these are too pricey, the ICM kits are pretty good. Earlier mouldings had some QC issues with short shots and moulding flaws. Later ones were fine.  They are a little fiddly in places, with test fitting and a little sanding needed here and there- examples being the ailerons which are too think as moulded so need thinning down.  The control column has a square grip which should be round. I would leave the engine out and trim the bulkhead a little to improve the fit of the cowling panels.  In its day, Ultracast made some useful replacement parts that avoided some tricky seams but of you bought those now, your outlay would be more than just buying an Eduard kit, especially if you can get a weekend or over trees edition.

[Alex Gordon]

There's nothing really problematic with them that a bit of modelling ability won't sort out.

 

 

 

Pricewise,for a tightwad like wot I am,you can't go wrong.

 

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello

ICM Spitfires have somewhat undernourished fuselages and a few other inacurracies. However, well-built OOB kit looks fine, as Alex Gordon demonstrated in the post above. Mustangs are heavily inspired by Tamiya kits. Plastic is a bit soft, tyres are one-piece parts with flash right across the tread, difficult to remove. All in all, nice kit. I have one, gathering dust on a shelf of doom, waiting for me to muster enough will power for application of top camouflage coat. Cheers

Jure

[alt-92]

Just getting your attention to point out this build of an ICM P-51:

 

 

[Weedlesketch]

This vid highlights some of the pros and cons of the ICM Spit....... complete with kegs...

 

[Sturmovik]

I bought ICM's Mustang kit (reboxed by Revell). In spite of being inspired by the Tamiya kit, the fit was less than stellar, with the cockpit not letting me close the fuselage halves. I ended up completing it though, but I'd go for the Tamiya kit if you want a 48th Mustang.

[Hook]

7 hours ago, Alex Gordon said:

Pricewise,for a tightwad like wot I am,you can't go wrong.

Are you sure you're not secretly Dutch..?   

 

Nice builds, by the way!

 

Cheers,

 

Andre 

[Alex Gordon]

43 minutes ago, Hook said:

Are you sure you're not secretly Dutch..? 

Nope,just terminally short of moolah.Will skin a fart for a tanner   .

[Dogtail2]

I'm building an ICM 1/48 Bf 109F-4 at present.  

This vid gives a good overview of what to expect.   

 

[MDriskill]

With the giant caveat that I'm 90% a 1/72 builder, I agree with socjo1's comments. ICM's newer 1/48 single-seaters - LaGG-3, I-16, I-153 - are of a later design generation than the Mustangs and Spitfires, and VERY nice kits. 

Edited October 6, 2021 by MDriskill