Jump to content

ICM VS RODEN PT-17 Stearman Side-By-Side Comparison


JimRice
 Share

Recommended Posts

Received my ICM Stearman today and did a quick down and dirty side-by-side comparison.  Below is a quick summary and some pictures.  Pardon errors in grammar and spelling as this was a quick effort.

 

While I really like the Roden offering and thought it built up well, I think the ICM is even better.

Initial thoughts...

 

Naturally, the are quite similar in breakdown and general appearance.  Wings match up with exception of curve on rear of upper wing center sections are a bit different, fuselages match up, tail surfaces seem to match.  Aileron are a bit different.  N struts on Roden were a bit longer, while ICM were a bit thicker and looked better.  They also have substantial locating stubs which will fit sockets on the wing.  The ICM lower wing is better engineered and should help with alignment and consequently fit of top wing.  Roden's was a bit of a fight to get mounted in proper alignment and get all struts fitted due to tiny alignment holes/pins.

 

Very similar breakdown and assembly per instructions.

 

Overall, the engineering seems much nicer on the ICM.  The engine has less tiny parts which require assembly, but similar level of detail.

 

ICM landing gear is a bit heavier using a rectangular stub to insert into the fairing, but is still fairly small for the size of the model. The axles are a cone shape which should help with alignment vertically and longitudinally. 

Absolutely no flash found on ICM vs some minor flash on Roden.

Fabric over ribs and stringers more subdued on ICM with no visibible rib stitch bumps or wide flat rib tops of Roden.  Same for fabric on fuselage over stringers. While Roden looked fine when finished, I expect the ICM will look even better.  Neither have over done fabric weave so often seen.

ICM internal fuselage framing is thinner and more scale appearing, though I expect it will be quite fragile.  Detail on interior parts seem more crisp and defined.

ICM clear parts are much more crisp, smooth and crystal clear.

ICM also provides both McCauley steel prop and Sensenich wood props.

ICM does not have the over thick cabane strut X brace wires molded in between front and rear struts on each side of fuselage as does Roden, but it also doesn't have the fuel lines included at all, which are highly visible on a Stearman.

 

I look forward to building this one too and will try to have an in progress post as well once I begin.

 

In photo, Roden is on left/top and ICM is right/bottom in comparison shots.  Hopefully they show sufficient detail for everyone to get an idea.

 

5RX0l5.jpg


dK29gh.jpg


EtM0WU.jpg


Ou9Eg3.jpg

 

r19H8t.jpg


DV4ZEh.jpg

lDjSQu.jpg

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a note, I bought both Roden (2x) and ICM kit from Ukraine.  Both had shipping included.  One ICM kit cost same as I paid for two Roden kits, about $80.  They were possibly premium prices because I ordered them both as soon as I found them, before either was showing officially released anywhere.  It will be interesting to see what actual prices are once initial rush is over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Bradleygolding said:

The ICM does look better in general and detail, but it lacks the very popular Jacobs front ignition type harness seen on may Stearmans. The Roden kit has it and I guess I could scratch one.

 

Steve

 

ICM has a long history of boxing its kits in multiple variants (I’ve lost track of the number of I-16 kits).  Given that all of the Lycoming parts are on a separate sprue, it’s 100% guaranteed they’ll do a Jacobs powered PT-13.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Bradleygolding said:

The ICM does look better in general and detail, but it lacks the very popular Jacobs front ignition type harness seen on may Stearmans. The Roden kit has it and I guess I could scratch one.

 

Steve

 

I didn’t use it on my Roden.  They weren’t used in Military service.  Several modern restorations have them.  They were popular before shielded wires became the norm and a radio was needed.  Now a days, the ignition shielding is inside the wiring harness negating the need for the forward mounted shilling harness.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Jennings Heilig said:

 

ICM has a long history of boxing its kits in multiple variants (I’ve lost track of the number of I-16 kits).  Given that all of the Lycoming parts are on a separate sprue, it’s 100% guaranteed they’ll do a Jacobs powered PT-13.


The PT-13 was Lycoming powered.  The PT-18 was a Jake powered version but was not produced in volume.  The Stearmans flying today with the R-755 are mostly all PT-13/17 or N2S which have been transplanted with Jakes.  Pete Jones Of Air Repair fame obtained the STC IIRC and holds the Type Certificate for the R-755.  
 

FWIW, my dad used a Jake on his Stearman dusters.  While only 25more horsepower, the extra 85 cubic inch displacement is what made the difference and could swing a bigger prop or at least a ground adjustable set to higher pitch.  He wasn’t a big fan of R-985 Stearmans.  They burned too much gas and were too heavy on the controls.  And he had over 10.000 hours in them.  
 

sO5f4d.jpg

 

 

Edited by JimRice
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...