Mustang Kitbash Musings

[LSP_Kevin]

Some of you will be aware that I'm currently building a Hasegawa Mustang in The Mighty Eighth Over Europe Group Build:

 

The context for that build is that some years ago, forum member Mark (dodgem37) sent me a box full of Mustang parts, which turned out to include most of a Hasegawa kit, a useful assortment of aftermarket sets, and some odds and ends from other kits. Fast-forward to a couple of years ago, and a local friend gifts me another Hasegawa Mustang, this time mostly untouched. So for the Group Build, I decided to combine the second kit with Mark's box of goodies, and see what I could do without going much beyond these two boxes. So far, it's going OK.

 

Now, most of you will know that I love bashing away at these old kits, and have a decent number of old Hasegawa and Revell LSP kits lurking in the stash. In thinking about this today, I realised that Mark had also sent me a box containing a parted-out Revell P-51B, so I dug it out of the stash today, only to find to my immense surprise, that it also contains a nearly-complete Hasegawa P-51D! How could I have forgotten that? Old age, I guess.

 

Since I don't think I really feel like tackling another Hasegawa Mustang any time soon (or perhaps ever), this got me to thinking about ways I could combine it with the Revell kit to make an improved P-51B. I realise this has been done plenty of times before, and if I wasn't so lazy I'd go look up some build threads about it. Instead, I thought it might be more interesting to start a discussion here, and get some ideas, knowledge, and feedback from all the experts on LSP.

 

To kick things off, my fundamental question is this, is it better to hack the Hasegawa nose onto the Revell fuselage, or hack the Revell razorback spine onto the Hasegawa fuselage? I know there's more to it than that, and that each approach has its pros and cons, but I'm curious to hear what you guys think (and I know most of you would start with two different kits, but work with me here!).

 

Kev

 

 

[rigor]

Hey Kevin I would go the Revell spine route to the has fuse but the wing is a different story I believe ironwing on hear did just that 

[denders]

In the Detail and Scale #50, P-51 Mustang Part 1 Prototype through P-51C, last page, Bert makes comments about the Revell P-51B kit. He basically says to use the Hasegawa nose and the lower section of the rear fuselage. If you want, I'll post a scan of it.

 

Note, I'm building the Revell P-51B kit for the GB and I'm not going to do all that work. 

[Chek]

I've got a 3/4 built Hasegawa P-51D converted to a B/C model with a built up spine patterned on the one by Paul Budzik in a 1995 Finescale Modeller.

I've got as far as chopping back the wing leading edges and detailing the main gear bays before taking a break.

Then I found out the Hasegawa fuselage is too wide, so I acquired a second Revell P-51D onto to which I'll now transplant and fettle the hi-back already fabricated.

I just want a P-51, a Malcolm hood P-51B and a P-51D bubbletop. Why does that got to be so hard?

 

[LSP_Kevin]

So, here's another angle: what exactly is wrong, shape-wise, with the Revell P-51B anyway? I've heard stories about the nose, but it doesn't seem that different from the Hasegawa kit to me. The lack of detail and incorrect wheel bays are obvious, but is there a definitive list anywhere of what needs correcting?

 

Kev

[denders]

From Detail and Scale #50, P-51 Mustang, Part 1 Prototype through P-51C. 

 

[LSP_Kevin]

Thanks, Dave!

 

Kev

[cmayer]

Hi Kev -

Some fourteen years ago, Ironwing (Geoff) started a similar project, where he grafted the upper/aft Revell P-51B fuselage onto the Hasegawa kit, and then modified the Hasegawa forward wing roots to blend in with the Revell wing. Here's a link to his build log, with some incredibly helpful photos included, as well:

I think the short version of the usable shapes from the Revell B-model are: generally, the fuselage is workable behind the firewall; but as that Bert Kinzey summary points out, above, the scoop and aft cooler vents aren't as good as the Hasegawa versions, so it's worth it to use most of the Hasegawa fuselage.

 

The main wing outlines are generally accurate, and easier to adapt to the Hasegawa fuselage than it would be to completely rework the Hasegawa D-model leading edge extensions and wheel well outlines to match the smaller B-model wing root areas.

 

But, the Revell wheel wells need significant re-work to look like a real Mustang; mainly the "open" nature of the wheel wells as they are framed by the wing spar and the wing formers and returns. Geoff was in the process of cutting the lower wing open and adding a thick styrene wing spar with an aluminum skin upper wing portion (i.e., the "roof" of the wheel wells). As Bert Kinzey points out, the landing gear and wheels are skinny, weak, and inaccurate: the Hasegawa parts, or after market versions, would be the better choice.

 

The Revell canopy looks good, until you reach the windscreen. The angle of the front/center windscreen pane is too flat with respect to the fuselage, which forces the side and upper plexiglass panes to be too small and squished. If you can source a vacuformed or AM clear resin version, it would be a huge visual improvement as well (I think Ali release a resin canopy earlier this year?). I'd also mention the vertical tail: I think both the Revell and Hasegawa profiles are "too flat" on the top section. The real Mustang tails had a distinct crown-like taper from forward to aft; and I think both of those kits portray that profile as straight across/horizontal.

Which leaves the real elephant in the room: the nose and prop. As Geoff/Ironwing, JayW, and Peter Castle/Airscale have wonderfully shown in their respective 1/18 Mustang build logs, the *real* Mustang nose can be an enigma, wrapped in a riddle...taken from just a casual sideview glance, the Hasegawa D-model nose profile looks good enough, and the propeller spinner and prop blades look large enough in profile to pass as a decent representation. On the other hand, the Revell B-model nose, even in straight-side profile, looks too small, and tapers too sharply into a too-narrow and too-small spinner (as Bert Kinzey also points out in his article, above)...

 

But from a quartering-front angle or forward vantage point looking aft on either Mustang type (B or D), comes the enigma of the upper cowling shape: similar to the Spitfire (which go-figure, had the same basic engine type), the upper cowling actually has a more square cross section, to accommodate the large piston arrays underneath; and that squared cross section tapers to a fully circular cross section moving forward to the propeller mount in less than 12 scale inches. Neither the Revell nor the Hasegawa kit capture this dramatic profile shift (although the Tamiya P-51D does so very well, and the new Revell D-model represents that shape as well).

 

All that to say, that since you already have the base-kit in the Hasegawa D-model, I think you can pretty easily adapt Ironwing's blueprint and build a very respectable looking B-model.

 

I think the two main defining shapes to the Mustang (B- or D-model) are the big air scoop under the main wing, and the imposing prop spinner and broad-nose. From any forward vantage point, the Mustang looks like a wild beast, and the Revell B-model looks wimpy and small...but the respective parts from the Hasegawa model have passed the test of time to be credible. I think you could have a fun build with a great result.

 

Good Hunting!

Chris

 

[LSP_Kevin]

Awesome summary, Chris! Many thanks for posting it. I do have the Eduard interior set for the Revell kit, so at least some of the details will be taken care of. I actually think the biggest challenge will be the wheel wells. Time to start planning, I think...

 

Kev

[D Bellis]

Most of those old kit-bash builds & write-ups miss one essential fact:  Both the Revell and Hasegawa fuselages are about 3/16" (5mm) too wide, which throws off the shapes of the nose, canopy and fuselage in general no matter what anyone tries to do with those kits. 

 

Yeah, one can get closer to a P-51B by bashing those two kits together than using the thing Trumpeter tooled, but it still misses the mark by a wide margin. 

 

HTH,

D

[Woody V]

On 4/26/2022 at 6:48 PM, Chek said:

I just want a P-51, a Malcolm hood P-51B. Why does that got to be so hard?

 

I've asked myself the same question for 30 years, but all we seem to be getting is yet another 109.

Edited April 28, 2022 by Archer Fine Transfers

[MikeMaben]

18 hours ago, D Bellis said:

      ...  Both the Revell and Hasegawa fuselages are about 3/16" (5mm) too wide,

Hey Darin, I've looked at the Hasegawa kit and it appears to be wide only in the cockpit area.

What reference are you using ?

[D Bellis]

10 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

Hey Darin, I've looked at the Hasegawa kit and it appears to be wide only in the cockpit area.

Published dimensions have the max width of the P-51D fuselage at 34", which translates to 1 1/16" in 1/32 scale. IIRC, the width did not change between the B/C and D/K variants. 

 

My Hasegawa P-51D kit's fuselage measures out to just under 1 1/4" at max width. Yes, that's around the cockpit area, which throws off the lines of the forward and aft fuselage, too. I don't have a Revell P-51B anymore, but that kit's fuselage is widely reported to be similar in width to the Hasegawa P-51D (thus making the B/D kitbash possible).

 

Feel free to measure your own kits against the full-size width of 34" and draw your own conclusions. 

 

HTH,

D

[Pete Fleischmann]

On 4/28/2022 at 3:37 AM, Archer Fine Transfers said:

 

I've asked myself the same question for 30 years, but all we seem to be getting is yet another 109.

Preach it Woody!

 

P

[MikeMaben]

Thanks Darin, I have compare the width of the Hasegawa and the Revell and

like I said they were pretty close except for the cockpit area.