F4DPhantomII Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 Out of box? I have some other Kitty hawk kits and have not been impressed with their quality.Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 What are you asking exactly? Which kit is better? The both have their set of accuracy issues and as to build quality and fit Su-35S kit is barely out but seems the HB Su-27 fits with no major issues. Basically it boils down to what plane you want to build more. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dylan Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 cant speak for the KH kit , but the HB Su-27 goes together very well. fit is almost tamiya like. Berkut, what are the accuracy issues with the HB kit? besides the washout in the wings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F4DPhantomII Posted August 3, 2017 Author Share Posted August 3, 2017 Thanks I just wanted to know if the Kitty Hawk kit is better than their other kits in terms of accuracy and quality.We are talking $60 plus kits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Solo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 (edited) Su-35 kit is significantly better kit then KH's previous kits like F-35C, Gripen or Jaguar. This kit it is brand new level of quality and I heard that this quality step forward started with their Su-17/22. I don't know so much about fitting issues, but details and overall quality of kit are really impressive, maybe not just like Su-33 from Kinetic or Tamiya's F-14A, but close. First of all, there is much better surface of parts, really smooth, also panel lines are narrow and not so shallow, details are distinct and crispy. Also the important thing is that hull of aircraft is not divided into dozens of parts: there is only upper and botton parts, fitting really nice, as I checked. Additionally you have really impressive set of weapons (4 big sprues), of really great quality (I bought for this kit Aerobonus Ch-31 missiles and I can say, the kit's missiles are of far better quality then those resin ones), many clear parts. I know nothing about any major issues, but there are few minor: quality of decals (as usually in KH's kits - I hope Begemot will issue set for Su-35), there are almost no stencils for weapons, a little sloppy instruction manual (not so many colours of paints), sometimes panel lines dissapear in some places (but it is really rare situation), there is strange, transverse seam on windshield part. The most important issue for me are straight engine exhausts, but I have just ordered A.M.U.R.resin ones. Also there are not so fine meshes on the sides of air inlets. I can't say anything about accuracy issues of this kit, because I am not familiar with russian jets, but overall this kit looks just like Su-35, so I am very happy to have it. :) If someone knows anything about fitting issues of this kit, it could be great to share this knowledge with us. Edited August 3, 2017 by Solo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 (edited) For me this kit is a flop !! The pieces are beautiful, but .. but ... it is by far a good kit! Compare to others, I start assembling the kit, I can tell you that I sweat !! It took several tweezers to hold the two fuselages, so that it was twisted !! At the end I stop, I put the kit of side, meanwhile may be an next release of another manufacturer Edited August 3, 2017 by ching kuo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Solo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 So strange, my fuselage is absolutely not twisted and both parts fit almost perfect. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 so !! I'm not lucky, they sold me the worst kits !! In addition the canopy is rift !! Tell me solo, the tail of your kit is early Su-35, or late? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
flanker27 Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 whats the early or late tail su-35? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 (edited) new old Edited August 3, 2017 by ching kuo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 New Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 (edited) Old Edited August 3, 2017 by ching kuo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
randypandy831 Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
galfa Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 I agree with Ching Kuo: Kitty Hawk Flanker is a flop. What do we know so far: - Fit is way below today average - Same is true for the decals - Some of the paintning scheme not real - Plenty of weapons but no weapons stencils - Plastic is very brittle - Forward fuselage, including canopy and windshield smaller and shorter than it should be - Quite thick canopy, not really omega shape - Unless your kit is not in fligth, it needs aftermarket exhausts. They are available, but they increase the price of about 50% - Rear fuselage engine shape too bulged - Wrong ECM on the rear fuselage stinger To make it short, the far from perfect 1/48 Hobby Boss Flanker is a much better than the Kitty Hawk Flanker. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 1 hour ago, galfa said: I agree with Ching Kuo: Kitty Hawk Flanker is a flop. What do we know so far: - Fit is way below today average - Same is true for the decals - Some of the paintning scheme not real - Plenty of weapons but no weapons stencils - Plastic is very brittle - Forward fuselage, including canopy and windshield smaller and shorter than it should be - Quite thick canopy, not really omega shape - Unless your kit is not in fligth, it needs aftermarket exhausts. They are available, but they increase the price of about 50% - Rear fuselage engine shape too bulged - Wrong ECM on the rear fuselage stinger To make it short, the far from perfect 1/48 Hobby Boss Flanker is a much better than the Kitty Hawk Flanker. How do you know the forward fuselage is shorter than it should be? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Solo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 18 hours ago, ching kuo said: Tell me solo, the tail of your kit is early Su-35, or late? It is exactly the same tail what is yours. KH didn't manufacture two versions of Su-35, but only one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
foxmulder_ms Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 7 hours ago, galfa said: I agree with Ching Kuo: Kitty Hawk Flanker is a flop. What do we know so far: - Fit is way below today average - Same is true for the decals - Some of the paintning scheme not real - Plenty of weapons but no weapons stencils - Plastic is very brittle - Forward fuselage, including canopy and windshield smaller and shorter than it should be - Quite thick canopy, not really omega shape - Unless your kit is not in fligth, it needs aftermarket exhausts. They are available, but they increase the price of about 50% - Rear fuselage engine shape too bulged - Wrong ECM on the rear fuselage stinger To make it short, the far from perfect 1/48 Hobby Boss Flanker is a much better than the Kitty Hawk Flanker. You sound like you have the kit and built it. Did you? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 1 hour ago, Solo said: It is exactly the same tail what is yours. KH didn't manufacture two versions of Su-35, but only one. On the pictures that Kitty hawk posted on facebook of the first build, the tail is those of the news Su-35 !! But in the kit it's those of the old su-35, that's why I ask the question! And why kitty hawk has posted photo of the build with the new tail, while they sell the kit with the old tail ?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 The tail, first build that kitty hawk posted on facebook, you have a reply? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Solo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 (edited) I know that, but I don't think that KH could put into boxes of Su-35 randomly parts. Maybe author of this Su-35 from FB made this tail from scratch, I don't know. Edited August 4, 2017 by Solo Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 Thank's Solo, I have my answer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
F4DPhantomII Posted August 4, 2017 Author Share Posted August 4, 2017 (edited) Guess I'll have to go with the Hobby Boss Su 27.Thanks . Edited August 4, 2017 by F4DPhantomII Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Berkut Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 On 3.8.2017 at 3:44 PM, dylan said: cant speak for the KH kit , but the HB Su-27 goes together very well. fit is almost tamiya like. Berkut, what are the accuracy issues with the HB kit? besides the washout in the wings. Issues, from top of my head are; 1; Spine. It has very smooth sides that connect to the fuselage while on the real thing the transition is much sharper. 2; Angled wheelbays. Again, for millionth time from HB/Trumpeter. 3; LERX is odd and looks off but it is hard to nail what exactly is off with it. 4; IRST is tiiiiiny. Possibly issues with windshield/canopy but not 100% sure on that. Overall, scroll through lengthy discussion here. 22 hours ago, Solo said: So strange, my fuselage is absolutely not twisted and both parts fit almost perfect. I understand that is a dry fit, but that hardly looks "almost perfect" to me. Will deff need some cleaning. 15 hours ago, randypandy831 said: *Su-35S video* *Su-27 video* They are fine overview videos but i would hardly consider them "reviews", ie one should choose a kit solely based on those videos imho. 8 hours ago, galfa said: I agree with Ching Kuo: Kitty Hawk Flanker is a flop. What do we know so far: - Fit is way below today average - Same is true for the decals - Some of the paintning scheme not real - Plenty of weapons but no weapons stencils - Plastic is very brittle - Forward fuselage, including canopy and windshield smaller and shorter than it should be - Quite thick canopy, not really omega shape - Unless your kit is not in fligth, it needs aftermarket exhausts. They are available, but they increase the price of about 50% - Rear fuselage engine shape too bulged - Wrong ECM on the rear fuselage stinger To make it short, the far from perfect 1/48 Hobby Boss Flanker is a much better than the Kitty Hawk Flanker. I dont remember anything significant about forward fuselage/windshield/canopy being too short. Care to remind me? It is not ECM on the stinger, but flairs. And they are not "wrong" per say, because early frames had them like that. Personally, despite the exhaust i would consider the KH kit being a bit more accurate (based on what i have seen) than the HB Su-27 kit. Fit wise however, it appears HB is better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Solo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 4 minutes ago, Berkut said: I understand that is a dry fit, but that hardly looks "almost perfect" to me. Will deff need some cleaning. Certainly this is dry fit, with no remains of sprues removed (you can see those plastic tabs on the picture). Despite this I can say the fit is really, really good, and there is no need to bend two edges with brutal force to match them to be glued. I made not so long ago KH's Jaguar and I know what mean the old KH's models fitting issues. :) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ching kuo Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 (edited) I am not as expert as Berkut in the real Russian aircraft, but I have an Question for Berkut: what do you think of the Academy kit ? Is it accurate? If it is "yes", well the kit KH is very good, because it has practically the same dimensions including the fuselage "diameter and length" and the canopy. I had to start a Su-35 with the kit academy a few years ago with conversions parts , I compare my two kits "my Su-35 academy vs Su-35 KH, it's practically the same, And in final I successfully completed my kit Su-35 academy !! Edited August 4, 2017 by ching kuo 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.