Jump to content

1/48 F-100 comparisons/issues


Brian J

Recommended Posts

Over the past few months I've been reading about the kit comparisons between the old Monogram kit and the newer Trumpeter version. The consensus seems to be that the Monogram version is the more accurate. I have both in hand and thought I'd do some comparisons of my own. For me, the biggest problem is the the nose/intake/canopy area. I plan on doing my build-up in flight so gear wells, air brakes and cockpit detail are not major issues.

After comparing kit parts relative the the aforementioned areas I feel that the Trumpeter kit just doesn't get it right in the upper nose and windscreen area. Too narrow. Interestingly enough when you compare the clear parts for the canopy and windscreen, the Monogram pieces are narrower! In fact the Monogram canopy is too narrow for the Trumpeter kit and the Monogram kit (when closed) as well! In my opinion Trumpeter got it right at very top of the flat part of the windscreen i.e. a narrower, more pointed interpretation, but it fails to get wide enough at the front base. I tried interchanging clear parts but they don't seem to match up.

I'm seriously thinking of cutting off the Monogram front, just behind the rear canopy. The panel line at the rear edge of the nose gear door would be the cutt off point and then I'd rescribe the Monogram nose.

One other observation. I have a AMS Resin intake produced by Harold Offield in the U.S. Originally I thought I'd use it to improve the misshaped Trumpeter kit but I'm afraid I can't live with the Trumpeter nose. I filed down the inner lip of the resin intake (where it fits into the kit fuselage) and with some light filing and sanding it looks like it will fit onto the Monogram nose. By the way, the AMS Resin intake is by far the most accurate interpretation of a F-100 intake. Monogram's intake is not as accurate as we have been led to believe especially when you compare it to photos and the AMS Resin version.

My only concern is that the resin intake is a couple of millimetres longer than the Monogram part. Does anyone have an opinion as to the accurate length of these pieces? That AMS resin sure looks right.

Has anyone else tried kitbashing these two kits? I'd hate to start cutting plastic only to find out I got in over my head!

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave Menard, who besides being a modeler of many decades, was also a USAF F-100 crew chief. To make a very long story short, according to Dave (whose word I consider law on the Hun), the Trumpeter kit is pretty much garbage from stem to stern.

The Monogram kit isn't perfect by any means, but it's a *much* better representation of the Hun than the Trumpeter/HB kits.

I can also tell you for fact that the F-100C vertical fin is completely wrong in every dimension and detail. I've personally done that research.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Brian,

Shape- and accuracy-wise, the Trumpeter kits are an improvement over the ESCI F-100D but can't hold a candle to the Monogram kit. I personally wouldn't waste a good Monogram kit trying to correct a Trumpeter one. Sure, the Trump kit is easier to build, but that and the scribed panel lines we all love, are really the only advantages it has over the Monogram kit.

I've spent many hours trying to fix the majority of the 1/32 kit's ills, but there are some areas that just can't be fixed. At best, with the Trumpeter kits, you'll get a relatively easy build that will look OK from 4 feet. I finally reached that conclusion after ~100 hours and at least that many extra dollars on the 1/32 kit, and the 1/48 & 1/72 kits are the same.

The Trumpter intake has a couple of problems, the most noticeable being the shape of the lower part of the opening. I agree that Monogram's can use a little help in the lower part of the opening. The second problem with Trump's is the panel line for the real jet's one-piece nose is 3mm too far aft (4.5mm on the 1/32 kit). Harold's part is the correct length, and if you make the cut for that part on the panel line, your model's nose will be too short. See the link below for some pics of how I installed Harold's nose ( :lol: ). I've checked, and the Monogram nose piece won't fit the Trump kit. Harold's is a little too narrow for the Monogram kit, IIRC. Also note that because the panel line for the nose is too far aft, the leading edge of the pitot tube mount starts too far aft by 3mm. I also agree that the raised area in front of the windscreen stands too proud on the Trump kits. I was able to sand this down on the 1/32 kit, so it looked a little better.

Trump's cockpit has some dimentional problems, which is why the Monogram parts won't fit. That kink where the deck behind the seat end and the cockpit sill starts to angle downward towards the windscreen is in the wrong place, too. It should be at the aft bulkhead of the cockpit, which is also the forward bulkhead of the ammo bays. Trump has the ammo bay & the kink too far forward or the pit bulkhead too far aft (or both, I can't recall), so that the ammo bays intrude into the cockpit on the 1/32 kit. Fortunately, it's just a panel line on the smaller kits, but the kink is still in the wrong place.

I could go on and on, but I'll just give you the link to my review, including photos: http://www.zone-five.net/showthread.php?t=14940

BTW, you can cure a lot of the Monogram kit's fit probelms with the fuselage if you build the fuselage without the wings, then split the 1-piece wing assemble and add the wings individually. The gap between the wings is too narrow, which pulls the upper fuselage sides in. The fuselage actually fits together pretty well without the wings. Also, removing the stabs makes cleaning up the seams on the aft fuselage much easier.

Cheers!

Ben

Edited by Ben Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to thank the above two gentlemen for their informative responses. I read them with keen interest and took out the two kits again for another look. With respect for their comments I would like to add more from my perspective. I have had the pleasure of speaking with Dave Menard several times over the years and hold his opinions on Super Sabres in the highest regard. He is 'Mr. Super Sabre.' First off I want to say that as I indicated in my initial posting I plan on building my build-up in flight on a stand, so anything to do with the detail of the cockpit (which if I kit bash the Monogram foreward fuselage and cockpit to the Trumpeter rear fuselage makes the Trumpeter cockpit irrelevant), the gear wells/landing gear and air brake well are also irrelevant to my build-up. I have fitted the 1/48 resin AMS intake to the Monogram kit and it does fit with a little sanding/filing to its outer edges. I failed to mention that I also have the Aires exhaust for the Trumpeter kit.

I made a comparison of the wings, vertical and horizontal tail, and fuselage and except that the Trumpeter 1/48 F-100D wing may be thinner than the Monogram kit they appear to favourably compare in size, shape and detail to the Monogram kit. I am left with the impression that Ben was using the 1/32 Trumpeter kit as a starting point and not the 1/48 version.

I totally agree that the Trumpeter kit is wanting in the foreward fuselage/intake area. I guess what my question is, from anyones experience is it possible/reasonable to kitbash the foreward Monogram fuselage to the Trumpeter version. The reason I find it hard to let this go is that I built the Monogram kit over 30 years ago and it recieved many favourable comments over the years. I don't know if I have it in me to put that much work (total scribing, many hours of polishing and highly scatch built detailing) into another one and so am looking for an easier way to complete a model of one of my favourite airplanes from the '50's. Please understand I accept the above responses with gratitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Brian,

I've built the 1/32 kit, have a couple of the 1/48 kits, and have had a look at the 1/72 kits as well. They're CAD-designed, so pretty much any problems you find on one kit can be applied to the other two scales as well. The same goes for the Trumpeter/Hobby Boss F-105s.

You're right in that building your model gear-up will solve the problems with the, cockpit, too-thin wings, & too-large wheels. Not sure if combining sections of the fuselage is do-able, since the cross-section shapes of the two kits might be slightly different, but it will be interesting to see. Keep us posted on your progress! :thumbsup2: Feel free to give me a shout if you need any reference help. I'm sort of an F-100 reference pack rat.

Cheers!

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ben

Thanks for the invitation. I will take you up on that! The other night I taped the Monogram fuselage and the Trumpeter fuselage together and spent a couple of hours looking at photos from all angles comparing them to the two kits. As I mentioned earlier, I find the flying/control surfaces quite close between the two, in fact the Trumpeter kit is more detailed in many respects. I plan on sanding them down, then rubbing down those scribed surfaces...kinda think they'll look pretty nice but a little heavy for a natural metal finish. I can understand if some are offended by the rivets. Several years ago I took a 1/48 Trumpeter A-5 Vigilante and filled in ALL of the rivets (one at a time) with Mr. Surfacer, sanded them down, primed the surfaces, then painted them with Tamiya lacquer. They came out great! At certain angles you could still see the very slight dimples, just like on the real thing. I highly recommend trying that on things like the white wings of Hasagawa's F-104s and other kits with heavy riveting.

Back to those fuselage comparisons. Ben, you are quite correct. In regards to the fuselage they are incompatable. I think Dave Menard's criticism has to do mostly with the fuselage. From intake to the exhaust it curves too much...not slab-sided enough, especially towards to afterburner area. I don't think the Monogram kit is perfect either, but much better than the Trumpeter version. So it's the Monogram fuselage, canopy and cockpit and the Trumpeter kit for other parts.

Yesterday I spent several hours with saw and files. The AMS resin intake fits the Monogram fuselage (needs a little sanding around the edges) as does the Aires exhaust. The Trumpeter vertical tail should fit with a little work with the rear bottom. I will have to glue all of the various doors, fill them in, then rescribe the entire Monogram fuselage.

I do have one question for Ben or anyone else in the know. I plan on doing F-100D FW-879 'Schatze II' from the 21st TFW as found on Aeromaster sheet 48-790. I am aware of only one photo of this aircraft as found at the top of page 6 in 'Fighting Colors, F-100 Super Sabre in Color' by Squadron Signal Pub. My question is would this aircraft be in natural metal or an aluminum lacquer finish. I believe the F-100 fleet began being painted in lacquer finish in the early '60's, about the same time that photo would have been taken. Any opinions? For that matter would most of the F-100s in the 18th TFW (PACAF) and the 21st TFW (PACAF) be in a lacquer finish at that time?

I too consider myself to be a F-100 reference pack rat...but there's still so much I don't know!

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave sent me a large photo of 879 as "Little John", and I swear he included at least one shot of "Shatze", but I can't find it. Here's a link to 879 as "Little John": http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36967601/F-100-51-...ve%20Menard.jpg I'll leave it up for a couple of days. It looks like it was painted silver, since the only fasteners you can see are the removable ones for access panels, but I could be wrong. Its definitely not polished natural metal. I have an old British modeling magazine with a walk around of the famous "Triple Zilch" taken in 1957, and its painted.

Cheers!

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi again, Ben

I was hoping you might have new evidence of what I wanted to hear. The truth...I can't handle the truth! Almost all of the photos of F-100Ds from after 1960-61 seem to have a more uniform, semi-gloss (at best) finish which, at least to me, suggests an aluminum lacquer finish. I find that less attractive than the natural metal finish but it is what it is. My computer skills are wanting, so I can't share, but there is a two page large colour photo from the April 2005 Flight Journal of FW-051 in vanilla TAC markings with the aluminum lacquer finish. What is interesting is that even though it is overall aluminum paint you can still distinguish different shades of aluminum on various panels, especially the port ammo bay door and the panel in front of the windscreen.

That British magazine you referred to is, I believe, the January 1884 issue of Scale Models International in which there are at least six colour photos of 'Triple Zilch.' Interestingly enough, for anyone who cares, when comparing these photos and several b&w photos in the old Profile Publications No. 30, it appears that 'Triple Zilch' with minor changes carried at least four paint schemes. It makes me wonder how often some aircraft went in for such things.

Thanks for your input. I feel I can proceed with much more confidence then when I started. I've probabley done as much talking to myself as I have with you!

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Yesser, listen to Ben.

He has the HUN down pat.

I tried to do a proper 'pit set for the 1/32 F-100D. The proportions are so far off, I couldn't get everything to fit as they should. I have a lot of work on it done, but I am still not happy with it. So, it sits in a "to finish someday" box. The 1/48 version is a tiny bit more forgiving, due to the size I guess.

However, the Mono kit is still the best so far. Maybe some new company will make an attempt to do their plastic a bit closer to the real thing. Panda anyone?

Harold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 years later...

I am getting close to a rather long build of the Monogram F-100. It is a lovely kit but has fought me a few times. I have a couple of questions as i am getting to the end of the fuselage

 

1. Can the Aires Exhaust set (4455) fit the Monogram kit as it is a much better representation than the kit or the Eduard etched version that looks like it is for the F-102 nozzle version?

2. I would prefer to finish the kit with the canopy closed. I note the kit canopy is too narrow and the Squadron replacement is in two parts has anyone managed to crack this area. Am thinking of trying to joint the squadron canopy to the Mono windscreen.

 

Any help would be much appreciated

 

Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scimitar,

 

If the canopy of the Monogram kit is only a little too narrow, and you have the capability, you could fill the inside of the kit canopy with plaster or modeling clay (plasticene?) and use it as a master to plunge mold or vacform over it- that would increase the width of the canopy. I don't have the 1/48 kit to see how narrow the kit canopy is. perhaps you have a modeling mate who could do this for you?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW it's worth, I'll enclose a link to the Trumpeter F-100C build that did, and how I addresses many of these issues.  While mine was in 1/72 scale, I believe the kit  issues are the same.....  There is another  F-100D build later on, also on the site.

 

2v298vaTGxfzdhW.jpg

 

Link Is Here:

 

 

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the Aires exhaust for the Monogram kit. I haven’t done any test fitting but it looks great in the box! A friend (ex-F-100 pilot) has used it and spoke highly of it. 

 

Sorry I can’t help with the closed canopy. I haven’t tried to build the kit with the canopy closed. 72modeler’s suggestion sounds like a good plan.

 

If you guys keep talking F-100s, I might be tempted to drag one of my Monogram kits out and dive in! I haven’t wanted to even look at an F-100 since the 1/32 Trumpeter kit almost beat me a few years ago. 😥

 

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...