Hi every one!
For several months now I've been going through dozens of online kit reviews to try and find which kits out there are the best.
Unfortunately it seems that according to at least one reviewer of any given kit there is a problem, usually involving the dimensions of the said kit. The 'experts' amongst us get out their scale drawings and show us the photographic evidence, just to make sure we fully understand the 'scale' :-) of the problem.
I for one am very concerned that reviews of the same kit differ so much especially on the subject of dimension.
Take the Italeri 1-48 Spitfire XVI. As a lot of people are no doubt aware this aircraft used to be sold as an Oxidental kit. Which again as some will know, got absolutely slated for having a very odd nose profile.(which I have to admit when placed next to other kits didn't look good)
Now according to some sources this problem was fixed in later Oxidental
kits. Some say it wasn't. Some sources also say that Italeri have cured the problem once and for all. Others have gotten their trusty drawings out and proven otherwise.
WHO THE HELL DO YOU BELIEVE!!!!
It seems to me that the only answer is that there are a lot of drawings out there that are not as accurate as we think.
I personally had two Spitfire modelling books for Christmas, both of which are amazing. But having measured up some of the scale drawings of the MkIX(Plan and side elevation) I discovered that they were slightly different in length between the rear of the cockpit and base the of the tail. Only nit picking I know but it concerns me that if there are differences in the same publication...........

Now a question for all you Spitfire experts out there.
Does any one know whether the rear ends of the MkV & IX are the same?
I know that the first IX's were converted V's but did the later IX's retain the same rear fuselage shape, size etc? Appart from those with MkVIII rudders and the bubble tops.

Thanks for listening.

Mark

Hi Mark, welcome to Armorama

I never trust plans and I consider an "experts" opinion, then make up my own mind.




As I am not an expert maybe I shouldn't attempt to answer your question but for what it's worth I believe they were, esentially, the same, maybe just missing the head rest.
Mal

Thanks for that Mal, wise words indeed.
By the way the reason I asked about the rear fuselage is because the plans I have for Merlin Powered Spits seem to show the MkV's are shorter in the rear than the IX. Strangely enough the Hasegawa based Revell Mk IX kits rear matches almost perfectly with the V's drawing and not the IX's. The drawing I am talking about is often quoted by reviewers when telling the great unwashed how inaccurate some Mk IX kits are.
I may of course be way off in my observasions, and if anyone can put me right then please do.

Mark

Like I say, I never trust plans and I'm less likely to listen to someone who recons such and such aplan is accurate. Plans may be accurate when they are first drawn, but if they are reproduced then errors can start to creap in. I'm not saying that anyone is wrong about how accurate a particular Spitfire model is, but they just might come to a different conclusion if they relied on a different set of plans. My opinion is that It depends what you are looking for in a model, but if you want total accuracy you will have a lot of plastic to thin If you want a totally accurate outline, well fine, nowt wrong with that, but, again my opinion, if you are after a totally perfect outline surley you require totally perfect surface detail? Me I just want a model to look good, yes I'd prefer an accurate outline but I ain't gonna lose sleep over it. If it can be corrected easily, I'll do it, if there is a reasonably priced correction set and I think it worth the difference, I'll buy it. If the kit is a couple of millimetres short, well does that make a deal of difference? I could say I've shortened it who will ever know I have built Academy's Spitfire Mk XIV and it looks good but there are a few things wrong with it. I will buy the available correction set and build another, because I want to. I have Hasegawa's Spitfire Mk IX, which I will not worry about. If Airfix's Spitfire Mk IX turns out to be as accurate as I hope, that will become my source for Mk IX's but I will still build the Hasegawa Mk IX.
Just my opinion. I know some "modellers" who never get past opening the box and checking the parts against plans. They never build anything because this or that bump is to big or small or in slightly the wrong place. It's a hobby, enjoy it Sorry didn't meen to bang on, I'm done. anyone out there feel free to take shots
Mal

I was given an Airfix Vc-SeafireIII kit for Christmas by my youngest daughter Which I'm very pleased with. So much so I've now purchased a TrueDetails resin cockpit to enhance it. (my first voyage into addons)
If this kit is anything to go by, and if Airfix's F22 and seafire47 are as good as I've heard, we could be in for a real treat when their MkIX is released.
When is that likely to happen?

Mark

I don't know when the Airfix Spitfire MkIX is due, soon I hope. I saw the test shots at Telford last November, It looks really good. I too have the Airfix Seafire MkIII, it was also a presant. The Original Airfix Spitfire Mk V kit was know to be pretty accurate in outline, so you can't go wrong there. This new boxing, with the new wings etc is a good kit, but I will re-scribe the fuselage when building it, although the raised lines are quite delicate I much prefer etched lines, due to my weathering process.
I have built the Airfix F22/24 and I have the Seafire 47 on the go

Mal

Hi Mark:

I believe that the Mk V and Mk IX have the same rear ends and they difer in length in the forward part from the windscreen to the nose.

The lengthof the Mk IX is 9,55 mts and the Mk V is 9,12 mts.

I think that the best Mk Vb kit in 1/48, in shape, dimensions and ease to build out there is the Tamiya, and the most accurate Mk IX is the ICM, but it´s also a difuclt build. Reviewers says that Hasegawa Mk IX is a bit short in length, but I think it´s not noticeable and is a very nice kit. The thing you have to do if you want to build a Hasegawa WW2 Mk IX is to delete the bumps over the wheel wells in the upper wings.

I don´t believe very much in all the reviews I read.

Nice 22 Mal. I can see I'll need a lot of practice to get any where near that standard.
Thanks for your comments too Carlos. It does look like I was right to be wary of those drawings in the back of the modellers datafile book. A shame really because the rest of it is very helpful.

Mark