Sword Models

[f mercik]

Hello has anyone ever built a Sword or AML model. If so can you please tell me how they built. I'm looking at the Sword 1/72 Grumman FM-2 Wildcat; Nakajima Ki-44 II; and Curtiss P-40K Warhawk. Also the AML Nakajima Ki-43 II. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[agboak]

But for the lack of location pins, Sword kits build as well as any other injection-tooled kit of this vintage. Surface detail is very fine and will need care to avoid destroying it when tidying up joins.

I haven't made an AML. I understand them to be of a lesser quality than Sword but still nothing to be concerned about.

Edited July 4, 2013 by agboak

[Dakota Roo]

But for the lack of location pins, Sword kits build as well as any other injection-tooled kit of this vintage. Surface detail is very fine and will need care to avoid destroying it when tidying up joins.

I haven't made an AML. I understand them to be of a lesser quality than Sword but still nothing to be concerned about.

Hmmm...I'm building an Amodel Li-2NB and it has no location pins. A first for me. Thanks for the heads up on Sword.

[agboak]

Amodel are improved from what they were but still some way below Sword. An Li2 is quite a big model to venture into the "no pins" world, but once you're past the initial stress at the idea then there's no real problem - at least for the smaller models I make! With older models, there were some where you had to remove the pins anyway so that parts aligned properly.

As some guide, I'd claim that the Sword Spitfires were the finest available bar none - the new hard-tool AZ Mk.IX may have topped them but that's one 1/72 Spitfire I don't have. Thinking about it, I do have one of the AML Oscars (but unmade, so my original comment stands) and confirm that they aren't as good. I've a feeling that the somewhat older FM-2 has some accuracy problems, as with other FM-2 kits, but the Ki.44 is getting very good comments.

The point about all these manufacturers: Sword, AZ, AML, Amodel or others, is that the latest ones are certainly up to a good commercial standard at the least. But even those that fall below the highest standards are still no great problem. A bit of attention to detail, a bit of cleaning up, and they'll shine.

[Dakota Roo]

Amodel are improved from what they were but still some way below Sword. An Li2 is quite a big model to venture into the "no pins" world, but once you're past the initial stress at the idea then there's no real problem - at least for the smaller models I make! With older models, there were some where you had to remove the pins anyway so that parts aligned properly.

As some guide, I'd claim that the Sword Spitfires were the finest available bar none - the new hard-tool AZ Mk.IX may have topped them but that's one 1/72 Spitfire I don't have. Thinking about it, I do have one of the AML Oscars (but unmade, so my original comment stands) and confirm that they aren't as good. I've a feeling that the somewhat older FM-2 has some accuracy problems, as with other FM-2 kits, but the Ki.44 is getting very good comments.

The point about all these manufacturers: Sword, AZ, AML, Amodel or others, is that the latest ones are certainly up to a good commercial standard at the least. But even those that fall below the highest standards are still no great problem. A bit of attention to detail, a bit of cleaning up, and they'll shine.

So, AZ, too? I've only one Sword kit, the T-33. But I have a decent, if small, collection of AZ kits, including the MiG-17 which is next in my queue. After running into fit problems with the Amodel kit, I took out the Revell FW-200 kit and the AZ MiG-17 kit, and checked them out...I practically swooned at the look of the Condor kit. With the AZ kit, I did not open the factory-sealed inner bag, so I didn't notice the lack of location pins....but it sure looks nicely detailed.

Can you give me an insight on the PM kits? They are always priced very low, compared to their competition, so I have assumed that the quality is quite low...either that or they were vastly over-produced at one point and they are attempting to clear the market. Set me straight, if you can.

[agboak]

The older AZ kits are not as good as Sword, but pretty good. OK, some of them are ex-Sword kits anyway, nowadays with some tweaking. They are also reworking (completely new tooling) the ex-Pavla range. There was some kind of campaign against them in the Czech Republic, which seems to have died down now, but criticism was severely overdone if not completely invented. The owner pays regular visits to both Britmodeller and 72nd Scale Modeller, to announce new releases and discuss points raised. He has only recently ventured into hard tooling, and is quite proud of it. There's a super-detailing build of the new Tiger Moth on Britmodeller, which is showing up a few problems on a very welcome little subject.

PM were cheap because they were produced in Turkey. Their standard kits included apparent reworks of the old Frog Spitfire Mk.I/V, little improved if any. Ditto a Fokker D.21. The overall level was of that kind of late-50s/early 60s Frog. I had two variants of their Spitfires, one in the mistaken hope of improvement, and also a couple of their AT-11s because no-one else does. These are very basic and really need new engine cowlings anyway. I also bought one of their Ta154s just before Hasegawa released theirs - big mistake. I might use the outer wing on Luft'46 Arado Ar440 development.

If you are interested in trying one of the newer short-run production companies, then I'd recommend RS. Their latest stuff is very nice indeed - I'm looking forward to the P-51H. They do include small amounts of etched brass for the smaller details: more than I bother using.

[Dakota Roo]

I've an RS Airspeed Envoy on my wish list. I also hear they are the "go-to" for P-38s, but they don't shake my tree.

So, when you talk of 'early Frog', you're saying they are simplistic, and possibly of low detail? Or, some other characteristics? I don't know whether it's valid any more or not, but that's how I view Lindberg kits.

I also get the impression that Heller is the French version of Airfix. Are they connected at the Humbrol?

[rustywelder]

I also get the impression that Heller is the French version of Airfix. Are they connected at the Humbrol?

I'm not 100% positive but as I undestand it Heller and airfix began a seprate companies. They were booth aquired by humbrol at some point and would then share moulds between the two.And now a days AFAIK they are both no longer owned by Humbrol ( I am positive about Airfix, they are now part of Hornby) and have no conection to each other at all.

[agboak]

Heller was only briefly connected with Airfix, as in owned by Humbrol, and sharing some kits in each other's ranges. There was a small amount of co-design and production, most notably their Su 27 and MiG 29, plus 1/72 GMC truck and Jeep kits. Before this, Heller had a long and generally first-class history as an independent company.

re "early Frog": spot on.

[Dakota Roo]

Heller was only briefly connected with Airfix, as in owned by Humbrol, and sharing some kits in each other's ranges. There was a small amount of co-design and production, most notably their Su 27 and MiG 29, plus 1/72 GMC truck and Jeep kits. Before this, Heller had a long and generally first-class history as an independent company.

re "early Frog": spot on.

Thanks. Thirty five years away from the diversion and things change. I appreciate the insights.

I'm twenty kits into building, after restarting over a year ago, and I've enjoyed the Heller, Italeri, ESCI, and Revell kits I've built. I'm practically drooling to start my Revell FW-200 Condor kit.

[mawz]

For Sword, it does depend on the vintage. They're all nice, but their older SB2C is nowhere near as easy a build as their new stuff like the Spits and IIRC the P-40. I do believe all the Sword kits you are looking at are recent, so they should build up quite nicely.