Bristol F.2b Fighter in 1/48 scale...Roden or Eduard

[boom.boom]

Good day dear friends,
I have been interested for a long time in getting a Bristol F.2B Fighter in 1/48 scale and as far as I can see the options are Roden and Eduard. Both models look very good and detailed {but with great deal of reservation when it comes to Roden's decals}.
I am interested in your opinion about these two models. Which manufacturer would you prefer and why?
Greetings Bojan

Edited February 20 by boom.boom

[hendie]

I built both the Roden and the Eduard versions.

Both builds are in this thread.

 

I never finished the Roden kit but that was because if my own inexperience and cack handedness.

The Roden kit is a more challenging build, but the quality of the molding is much better imo. And I think, slightly more accurate.  The other downside to the Roden is that the engine (wonderfully detailed) doesn't fit inside the cowling unless you cut off a few bits. 

If I was doing it again, I'd still go for the Roden version.

[boom.boom]

Thank you for your reply and your very detailed posts. It really seems that Roden is more detailed and that there are no some special difficulties during construction. But what i do like more on Eduard's F.2B are the wings and their representation of ribs. 

[Paul Thompson]

I've built several of the Eduard, Roden, Blue Max and Aeroclub kits over the years. For wing rib tape representation, I think Blue Max was the best, but also probably the hardest kit to build, being the most limited run of those here. And if you were unlucky you might get a kit with the infamous wing ripple, the eradication of which required much restoration work. Aeroclub wings are nice but need the trailing edges thinning a lot. The Eduard is the crispest of the lot but over exagerrated IMO, especially the plank moulded around the rim which is just a return of the PC10 paint on the underside of the real things. The actual surface of the Roden kit is fine, and there are ribs there, but no tape, which looks odd. So you can either score a tape in at each location with two scalpel blades glued together or use decal strip before the paintwork, in which case about half the width of what Eduard do is fine.

 

Ideally, the fine details can be taken from the Eduard kit and incorporated into the Roden one, but it'll hurt the wallet. The Eduard kit is the easiest to build, but only offers one engine configuration, whereas Roden offer boxings with several different engine/cowling permutations. Personally I prefer the Roden kits with some simple detail scratch building additions, but the Eduard kit also looks okay, and as I said is much easier (but don't use the PE harnesses provided. The kit hails from a period where Eduard supplied Sutton harnesses for most of their Allied kits, whereas most of the real aeroplanes would have had simple lap belts. The Eduard Scarff ring is rather nice though, much better than the Roden styrene attempt).

 

 

 

Left to right, Eduard, Roden, Blue Max and Aeroclub.

 

 

Paul

[boom.boom]

As far as I understand both of you, you are telling me that I just NEED both kits, and Eduard and Roden ? 
Eduard is the easiest to built {and i do not have experience with The Great War models} and Roden is little bit detailed and has F.2B Sunbeam Arab version {just found photo from Red Army during Russian Civil War}.

If I had to choose only one model, I would probably go with Edward because of the wings and buildability... But how not to make one from The Red Army and RCW, it is somehow bizarre? 

Edited February 21 by boom.boom

[Paul Thompson]

13 hours ago, boom.boom said:

As far as I understand both of you, you are telling me that I just NEED both kits, and Eduard and Roden ? 
Eduard is the easiest to built {and i do not have experience with The Great War models} and Roden is little bit detailed and has F.2B Sunbeam Arab version {just found photo from Red Army during Russian Civil War}.

If I had to choose only one model, I would probably go with Edward because of the wings and buildability... But how not to make one from The Red Army and RCW, it is somehow bizarre? 

If biplanes in particular are new to you, then the Eduard kit will be a bit easier due to better quality moulding and more precise moulding technology. But!  A Bristol Fighter is a fairly hard beast to start with due to two bay wings (8 interplane struts) and the lower wing also being held below the fuselage by 4 very short struts, with the undercarriage passing through it and notching into the leading edge. Both kits need the location holes drilling a bit deeper to make securing the struts a little easier, since they don't have the level of foolproofness found in a Wingnuts kit. They're not terrible once you're used to this sort of thing, but if not then you may want to practise with a cheaper, single bay scout type like a Sopwith Camel or an Albatros first. I suggest a really good look around the internet at online builds (including those of the other two brands I mentioned) so you know the subject as well as you can before commiting to building it. I'd also seek out the Wingnut Wings website and download the instruction manual for their F2b, which although the kit is completely different shows many relevant details of hard to see parts of the real thing, including quite faithfull colour callouts for the interior (which both Eduard and Roden are only approximate about).

 

If you go ahead with whichever kit and then have doubts or get stuck, feel free to PM me and I'll try to help out.

 

Paul.

[boom.boom]

Thank you Paul on yours very kind and detailed reply. 
I am definitely considering to start with some WW2 biplanes or SCW {CR.42, I-153 or I-15} just to get better insights into biplanes. But F2b is very appealing to me and i am more and more getting interested in The Great War and Russian Civil War...
If i stuck during the built i will have a freedom to answer yours kind call.