Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) back in 2009 the biggest items in the modelling scene for f-16 and 1/48 scale fans was the almost simultaneous and eventual release of the F-16I sufa by 2 companies, Hasegawa and Kinetic, within a month of each other. Scores have been written about the various pros and cons of each kit, the inaccuracies and plus points etc. Each camp has its supporters, but i doubt anyone has ever decided to build the both of them and park them side by side, just to see the differences.. Well i decided to, and to benefit the endless torrents of words on the armchairs, i got my elbows and fingers deep in paint and plastic. the work in progress of the thread can be found here. The WIP itself was also a comparison, of the ease, difficulties and troubled areas of both kits. I am hoping it is a good reference to further builds by anyone, and not restricted to Sufas alone as the 2 manufacturers have derived many spinoffs from the same mould(with the same probelms). Sufa Showdown WIP The finished kits are labelled with the tag logos of each company, and some detailed areas are presented against the real f-16 sufa, or block 52+ in RSAF parlance - no exterior difference to the israeli's, really. Photos of '662' were taken by me during an Airforce Open house day. Enjoy! -Kevin "Tomcatrio" a good view of the profile - notice the higher archs of the CFT and spine of the kinetic kit. it is significantly bulkier in appearance compared to the hasgeawa a top down view of the spine and CFTs i don't have good shot of the top of the spine from an aerial view though, you could find most of these in f-16.net or airliners, and due to copyright i would not dare to repost them without permission. perhaps some of you could even add to the thread here! Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) more spines... now compare this with the real spine.. and for the precise mesaruements, the kinetic kit measures off at 1+mm taller at the spine than hasegawa Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) a short comparison between RSAF Sufas and Israeli sufas - both kinetic kits. Most Israeli Sufas differ only in the additional spine top radome, again not all IDFAF Sufas have this radome. a measurement of the spine is inprobable given the lack of scale drawing out there, but we can approximately judge the distance between major lumps and bumps on the spines are different in both makers. furthermore, the hasegawa has shown to have a thinner spine than kinetic Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) moving on to the next most distinguishing and varied feature among the 2 brands is the CFT. Kinetic has made the CFT much thicker than the hasegawa, and provides PE parts and more riveting detail. However, when compared to the real deal, it seems hasegawa got it spot on... exact measruements are difficult but you can roughly tell that the kinetic is again 1+mm taller. on the exhaust vent grille, kinetic provided PE parts instead of hasegawa's injection moulded. Kinetic is squarish while hasegawa is distinctly rectangular compare this with the slightly squarish real thing.kinetic is correct in this aspect but then again, the internal grill is closer to hasegawas. Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) next, i conduct a walkaround on the finer details of the aircraft. up is the spine chaff dispenser and small rear facing rwr. i think hasegawa captured the blended in look well, as kinetic seems quite obstrusive. also, note the upward point of the real thing, this is noted by hasegawa only. compare with the real deal dispensers- both got it wrong, empty racks are in silver and black holes, red = armed and ready. And it is square in shape, so kinetic is correct in this aspect both makers did not fail to neglect the little refuelling points for the cft in red. also of note is the blanking plate aft of the chaff dispensers from the pics above. on the starboard side, a very disticnt long plate covers the gap between the panel line and the dispenser boxes. Hasegawa notes this detail whereas kinetic denies its existence. Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) now we get to the forward part of the aircraft. the notable chin and intake ecm/rwr gear first up , the desktop 4 IFFs and nose buldge. comparing the 4 wire cutters, kinetic has a lower profile that is more accurate. also , boy is that nose buldge different. the nose buldge has a distinct multiple-curved and a small protrusion at its tip. both kits caught this very fine detail but i think it was more subtle and nice on the kinetic kit. i will let the pictures explain the real thing Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 next is the intake lip ECM suite. the real thing has a distinct downward sweep at the tail end, a flat front edge and is basically a moulding nightmare. Hasegawa got both, while kinetic captures the latter. also, the positioning and size of the ecms are different. this is relative to the intake itself, but i think it was modeller fault than moulder fault -lol this is the auxillary intake cooling vent. as you can see, hasegawa made the correct one with the jagged edge front. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 next we are goin under the aircraft's tail, where another group of bumps await. this is between the 2 ventral stabs. as you can tell, the kinetic kit depicts almost everything, right down to the extra small antenna. also note the additional chaff/flare slots on the kinetic kit and the real thing. this is the limitation of hasegawa using their old mould, i wouldn;t drill out the plastic.. the discussion over kinetic's riveted detail proves that it has better captured more panels and rivets than the older hasegawa kit as shown here. and a shot of the liteningII pod and pylon. kinetic gives a better pod than hasegawa which asks you to get one from their weapon set - i'm on a budget so i used the academy ra'ams. i missed out the silver metal clips for the hasegawa, whcih is provided in decal form by kinetic, but it doesn't fit the panel markings. sigh. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 the flir on the port side is next - again hasegawa does not provide, so i made a copy from the kinetic this set compares the position of the port chine intake - both kits give differing positions but i think hasegawa got it correct canopy actuating hydraulics -i think kinetic has a better detailed represtnation of this region - again i have no pics, but there are plenty on the net to search. top of the wing details and rivetting - kinetic has far more rivets, and hasegawa is more subtle - it is up to preference really, as the real deal has subtle rivets but is closer to the kinetic - i wish for a tamiya kind of surface on this 2 kits! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 the tail of the kinetic is better at capturing the minor details of the sufa, such as the little blips on the flat end. also, varying depictions of the tail light between the 2 brands - i would think that hasegawa got it nicer although it is a non-clear part one of my greatest gripes was the narrow gap between the nozzle and tail fin of the kinetic- this is proven upon measurement. somehow the kinetic didn't feel right as i thought the gap is wider on the real thing, shapewise too, i think hasgeawa is more correct in the 'sweeping' curve Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 (edited) now i go to the exhaust nozzle- hasegawa, as everyone knows, is a 1 piece moulded outdated chunk. kinetic adds life with its very detailed interior side of the nozzle, although the seprated pieces 'flare' out when joined together. and how about a full frontal shot to compare the curve of the cfts now? Edited September 20, 2010 by Tomcat RIO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GreyGhost Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Really nice comparison builds, Kevin ... Great photos of all the subjects, both kits and the real deal ... This should really help others in what to expect from either kit ... Gregg Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mario krijan Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Great work!!! Thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 20, 2010 Author Share Posted September 20, 2010 thanks guys! anyway here are more pics! the starboard forward fuselage of the sufa has a grill exhaust vent that only kinetic represents last photo courtesy of Gareth my friend on another forum. and here is the nose profile - the corrected kinetic nose which quietened some dissent a comparison of the weapon pylons, kinetic is far and ahead with riveted details etc found on the real thing.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cbear Posted September 20, 2010 Share Posted September 20, 2010 Excellent post! Thanks for your work in providing this much needed resource. Chuck Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jinxter13 Posted September 22, 2010 Share Posted September 22, 2010 Very informative thread and great builds, the loadouts, weathering, construction are outstanding....Thanx for the info. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FAR148 Posted September 25, 2010 Share Posted September 25, 2010 Tomcat RIO, Which kit was easier to built? The one with the least no# of headaches. Just curious, Steven L Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tomcat RIO Posted September 26, 2010 Author Share Posted September 26, 2010 i would say its the hasegawa, no fiddly bits, bad gaps, ejector pins at visible or essential flat surfaces etc compare to kinetic where everything can be found. but it's also a fact that since it is so easy to build, hasegawa omits some new parts for the sufa.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
POMPEO Posted September 27, 2010 Share Posted September 27, 2010 excelent post my friend i had two kinetic Viper's and i think that are excelent kits but need a great expirience to bem builded cheers Pompeo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quarar44 Posted October 1, 2010 Share Posted October 1, 2010 so what is the conclusion? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.