Flyingraptor Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Hey guys! I still have some "gaps" in my 1/72 scale Soviet/Russian jets collection. One of these "gaps" is the Mig-25. Now, I found this larger topic from a couple of years ago on ARC, concerning 1/72 scale Mig-25's and Mig-31's: This topic. But... they only really mention the Condor Mig-25, not the ICM Mig-25. I found that the Condor kit was the first one, and that the ICM looks more or less the same. The Condor kit is cheaper and has a more complete decal sheet. And the Condor kit has a more logic part lay out. But... which one is the kit to go for? Is the ICM kit better? Regards, Jurgen Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SoarinSukhoi Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I found this review of the ICM kit: http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=182304 And this one: http://www.internetmodeler.com/artman/publish/flaviation/ICM_1_72_MiG-25PD.php Quote Link to post Share on other sites
digit Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 The ICM kit is a MiG-25PD, and the Condor kit is a MiG-25P (also the one labeled MiG-25PD). ICM definitely looks better (as in better detailed) on the sprues. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flyingraptor Posted December 22, 2011 Author Share Posted December 22, 2011 Thanks guys! But which kit is the best build-wise? I don't really care if it's a P of PD version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Johnopfor Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 My understanding was that ICM picked up and improved the Condor kit. I have both and and the ICM kit has better panel lines and the molds look crisper than the Condor kit. I haven't built either one yet (the Condor MiG is in my "to do" stack). ICM did the same thing with the Condor MiG-29 "9-13" Fulcrum C kit, but you have to be careful, because ICM did box the original kit early on before they improved the molds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laurent Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I don't know about the ICM but I've started to work on the Condor a long time ago. Fit wasn't very nice. Wing-fuselage seam isn't great end part-fuselage isn't better. Half of a putty tube will go in the build. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
haneto Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Here is my ICM MiG-25PD built FYI. MiG-25PD Foxbat IrAF "US NAVY Hornet Killer" ICM's details are much better than Condor's but you need some more patience and dry fitting work to assemble. The most important point is do NOT obey the instruction sheet procedures. HTH, Yufei Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 (edited) condor does do a mig-25PD (well technically a PDS): which has the sprue for doing the modernised Iraqi/Libyan foxbats: Edited December 23, 2011 by Raymond Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 Here is my ICM MiG-25PD built FYI. the most important point is do NOT obey the instruction sheet procedures. HTH, Yufei got any pointers for assembly? :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cvn76 Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 The price of Condor is 1/3 of ICM on look alike mold, and both need putty dressing,hopes it helps Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Barr Posted December 23, 2011 Share Posted December 23, 2011 I have both the ICM and Condor MiG-25PD kits and I am in the middle of building the ICM. I concur with what other have posted in that the ICM is the better of the two in regards to detail and molding. The only thing the Condor does a bit better is the instructions, they are drawings of the parts and broken down into many steps and also bigger and clearer then the ICM. ICM uses photos of the actual parts but since the photos are very small and not all that sharp it is sometimes hard to figure out exactly where and how the parts fit. As for the build; as other point out this is a case of dry fit, dry fit and more dry fit, and then bring out the putty. The front nose section is not all that bad and the Neomega cockpit fits very nicely with very little tweaking. The center section parts that form the main 'box' also go together without too much of a hassle but then you add the two end panels that have the vertical stabilizers and that is when the real work starts. Next comes the figure 8 exhaust rings and they take a lot of work to blend in and you are dealing with some tight areas that make sanding hard. The fit of the nose section to the fuselage is not too bad after the dry fitting but putty is still required. I have not finished with the engine intakes but so far they are a real pain to get right and will be even more so to mate them to the fuselage. As said before there is a big seam where the wings join the fuselage. That is as far as I have come and while it does take work I have enjoyed it and it is such a cool airplane. Regards Jim Barr Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tim Annear Posted December 24, 2011 Share Posted December 24, 2011 First timer...greetings! I have the Condor kit and it requires a little patience but provides a nice representation. Condor also make the MiG-25U two-seat trainer which I've not yet started but looked good when I opened the box. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Johnopfor Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 Yeah, I just started on it as an OOB build. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
beingthehero Posted December 25, 2011 Share Posted December 25, 2011 (edited) I'm finishing up a build of the Condor MiG-25PD. You do have to do some pretty minor surgery, like sawing off the ends of the wings for the PD-version tips. The fit does leave a little to be desired, but it's not as bad as the Hasegawa kit (nor astronomically soul-destroying like the Hobbycraft knock-off). Still, it looks great once finished. I think the panels lines on the ICM kit are slightly deeper than Condor's. The latter's panel lines are very very faint and shallow. Almost the opposite problem of Hasegawa's fine raised panels lines on their kit. Also, even though the decal sheet looks 'fuller' than ICM's, the instructions do not tell you where to put most of the decals. They only show the locations of the stars and the bort number for the Russian version; there are no directions for the stencils nor for the Libyan markings. This is true of all of Condor's Foxbat kits sans their MiG-25RU, which does (correctly) show where to put the provided stencils. It could be worse; it could be like their Fulcrum kits, which appear to show where to put the markings/stencils...but the number call-outs in the directions do not match those in the instructions. I think there was a communication failure. Edited December 25, 2011 by beingthehero Quote Link to post Share on other sites
haneto Posted December 26, 2011 Share Posted December 26, 2011 got any pointers for assembly? :) If memory saves, I assembled the fuselage("box" shape) from the side parts, try to make the nozzle connection part fit well. And then add on the front fuselage, then inner parts of the intakes, then outer intake parts. I tried many times to dry fit and find this way the best to save sanding works. HTH! Yufei Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Flyingraptor Posted December 27, 2011 Author Share Posted December 27, 2011 Hey guys! I'm still in doubt about the Condor vs. the ICM kit. * The Condor kit can be found for like 9 euro and the ICM kit for a few euros more (or a lot more sometimes) on online model shops. * The Condor kit has (IMO) OOB decent markings and stencils. The ICM kit only markings, no stencils. I know that Begemot and Hi-Decal have an aftermarket decal sheet (+ Begemot an extensive stencil sheet). But... focusing on the kits... * Overall, I found that most people say that the ICM kit has better surface detail and panel lines than the Condor kit. But are these really a lot better? Because I found that the Condor kit has somewhat shallow panel lines, but that this can more or less easily be corrected with some scribing in this panel lines. * I also found that the Condor kit has a better/easier lay-out of parts. So the model builds better than the ICM kit, with less seams and an easier positioning of wings, stabs, etc... Correct? * Are the missiles in the ICM kit much better than the Condor ones? * I saw that the Condor kit does not include engine fans inside the intake ducts. Does the ICM kit include these? Regards, Jurgen Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceR21 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Condor kit is very bad and I don't recommend it. I did one long time ago : http://s362974870.onlinehome.us/forums/air/index.php?showtopic=210893 Now I'm planning to by ICM, much better (nice panel lines, good quality parts) kit with almost the same price. Cheers, Nenad Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 (edited) conder has the benifit of not having to assemble the fuselauge sides; its a tub + top condor dossnt have the engine fans, ICM does.. condor missiles look soft, but fine. If u go for condor grab the PD boxing; its of a higher quality and better plastic than the earlier P :) both kits canopies seem schitty Edited December 28, 2011 by Raymond 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.