Jump to content
Gazzas

Hasegawa 109 Accuracy: is it?

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

   With HLJ having a sale, the big scale Hasegawa 109's are calling me.  Seems I've been bitten by the large scale bug while my 1/48 get less interesting.  I've built their smaller scale versions without being disappointed. 

 

I've read reviews online, but they're not picture heavy and don't say anything negative.

 

How do you guys that have built em feel?

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

Gaz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm no expert. I've only built the F-4 version so far and found it an enjoyable build. No tail insert, thats a plus. theres some filling to do on the cowl and and sides, just some panel lines that shouldn't be there and its called out in the instructions. Some ejection pin marks in the radiator flaps need eradication but thats not a major job. I'm not sure if the spinner is correct where the G was off. I have a couple of G-6's in the stash with lots of add ons, new spinners and whatnot. I dont think the F version needs anything per say but im an addict to theres stuff ready to throw in the kit boxes when the kit's arrive (ordered 2 F-4 versions last week). I am tempted to get the Buchon conversion for one of the G-6's and see if Pastor John is still going ahead with his G-5 bits and use the other G-6 for that. We shall see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not perfect, but they're very nice models, easy to build, and look nice once you're done.  My biggest problem with them is the lack of wheel well accurate detail.  Why kit manufacturers seem incapable of replicating the correct canvas liners, bulges, stiffeners, etc, is beyond me.  Eduard nailed them in 1/48.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not super detailed ... but accurate enough in outline and restrained external detail.

There's enough there for the average modeller ...

... Plenty of AM going around to fill in any extra detail if you would like to go further.

 

As long as it's NOT the Bf.109E kit of nightmares you should be good to go.

 

Rog :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LSP_K2 said:

I reviewed the G-6 (here), and while perhaps not as photo heavy as some reviews might be, certainly seems to cover the majority of the bases, I think.

 

That's a very helpful in-box review!  Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jennings Heilig said:

They're not perfect, but they're very nice models, easy to build, and look nice once you're done.  My biggest problem with them is the lack of wheel well accurate detail.  Why kit manufacturers seem incapable of replicating the correct canvas liners, bulges, stiffeners, etc, is beyond me.  Eduard nailed them in 1/48.

 

 

I understand how you feel.  But It's rarely an area I worry about because nobody, including me will ever look there once it's built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Artful69 said:

Not super detailed ... but accurate enough in outline and restrained external detail.

There's enough there for the average modeller ...

... Plenty of AM going around to fill in any extra detail if you would like to go further.

 

As long as it's NOT the Bf.109E kit of nightmares you should be good to go.

 

Rog :)

At a show once I saw a model of an E that had a really disturbing looking area right in front of the rudder...  the horizontal stab?...  is it the Hase E?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ade rowlands said:

Well I'm no expert. I've only built the F-4 version so far and found it an enjoyable build. No tail insert, thats a plus. theres some filling to do on the cowl and and sides, just some panel lines that shouldn't be there and its called out in the instructions. Some ejection pin marks in the radiator flaps need eradication but thats not a major job. I'm not sure if the spinner is correct where the G was off. I have a couple of G-6's in the stash with lots of add ons, new spinners and whatnot. I dont think the F version needs anything per say but im an addict to theres stuff ready to throw in the kit boxes when the kit's arrive (ordered 2 F-4 versions last week). I am tempted to get the Buchon conversion for one of the G-6's and see if Pastor John is still going ahead with his G-5 bits and use the other G-6 for that. We shall see. 

 It's amazing how man spinner variations there are in all kinds of kits.  Even WNW's Albatros is cursed with it.  I'm not above backfilling and then sanding.  I wish I had a lathe I could stick it in then spin off the shape difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gaz,

being a 109 guy I have built all of them and for the F/G/K models I much prefer Hasegawa.  Probably more AM available for this kit than any other ever made. Still looks like a 109 without any of it though. Very simple build..

Jay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy to build, some great aftermarket generally pretty accurate with niggles only serious 109 guys will notice.

Nice kit even 16 or 17 years after release just dont expect a hyper detailed beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, tucohoward said:

Almost forgot about accuracy. It’s not too bad. Per Lynn Ritter the only accurate 109 in 1/32 is the Dragon E-4.

 Jay

 

What does "accurate" even mean?  The "only" "accurate" 109 is the Dragon E-4?  By what standard?  Are the stitches in the rudder rib tapes precisely the same scale size as the original 1/1 scale ones?  If not, then it's not "accurate".  Is the radio compartment hatch 0.0000002 mm too wide?  If so, then it's not "accurate".  


Perhaps you could say that subjectively speaking, the Dragon E-4 is the best *looking* 109, but you can't say it's the most "accurate" without a whole lot more information.

 

We toss "accurate" around a lot (I do as well), but it's inaccurate to use that term when we're talking about artistic sculptures of airplanes here.  And that's what we're talking about.  These are not miniature aircraft.  They are sculptures.  They are art.  Art is not perfect (save for some works by Mozart and Beethoven).

Edited by Jennings Heilig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...

 

Let's not fight about terminology.  No kit is perfectly accurate.  I've just heard about kits where the gun troughs are too close together... too far apart...  nose is too pointy...  spinner is way off...  Prop blades too thin...  stuff like that.   Some little things are easily fixed, and those I don't mind.

 

But big things where it looks like your 109 is digesting a water buffalo and you have to rework the entire area between the cockpit and empennage...  those are deal killers.

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...