jester292 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 I’ve never built any of either model. Do they go together well? I ask because I see they have so many versions of each. Weapons? Shape? Are certain versions better than others? I’m lost when it come to Kinetic. Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chriss7607 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 I am building both the Hasegawa and Kinetic Hornets and Hasegawa's is much nicer. The fit is pretty much perfect. Kinetic's is over engineered and fits poorly, particularly around the nose and intakes. There are also shape and dimensional differences between the two. Kinetic's cockpit coaming is noticeably longer than Hasegawa's and the speed brake is also wider. Hasegawa provides better detailing in the main gear wells. The strong point of the Kinetic kit is that the cockpit is overall better but both have disappointing ejection seats. For doing a Blue Angels jet, out of the box Hasegawa's is better. A separate part is included for the blanked off gun opening and the line for the smoke system is also provided. That's my opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
airmechaja Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 The Kinetic F-16 has a strange looking nose area and it is much harder to build than Tamiya or Hasegawa. But it has great ordnance and many Block options. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bikerider Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 2 hours ago, Chriss7607 said: I am building both the Hasegawa and Kinetic Hornets and Hasegawa's is much nicer. The fit is pretty much perfect. Kinetic's is over engineered and fits poorly, particularly around the nose and intakes. There are also shape and dimensional differences between the two. Kinetic's cockpit coaming is noticeably longer than Hasegawa's and the speed brake is also wider. Hasegawa provides better detailing in the main gear wells. The strong point of the Kinetic kit is that the cockpit is overall better but both have disappointing ejection seats. For doing a Blue Angels jet, out of the box Hasegawa's is better. A separate part is included for the blanked off gun opening and the line for the smoke system is also provided. That's my opinion. I’ve done two Kinetic Hornets and agree with all above. They look like Hornets when they’re done, but the Hasegawa kits just look a touch better and less finicky to build. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jester292 Posted September 13, 2018 Author Share Posted September 13, 2018 Thanks everyone. I’ll stick with my Hasegawa kits. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 (edited) Well the nose area is a little bit tricky but it is because we offer a lot of option Hasegawa does not offer. The hasegawa kit cannot represents a late C with different Louvre on the bottom. The hasegawa nose also requies some skill to align. As for the shape the hasegawa spine and vertical tail is off. But many people ‘believe’ they are more accurate. At last the detail on the MLG has more detail than the hasegawa, not to mention the full intake truck and optional fold wing. In view of the option provided different customer has different preference. Edited September 13, 2018 by Raymond Chung Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gunfighter 124 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Hey Raymond, Quick question if you don't mind, how was the Kinetic F/A-18 Hornet developed? Curious to know, thanks! Sorry for the thread being hijacked. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
racerman Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 I have to agree with Chris 7607 on this. The cockpit coaming on the Kinetic kit is way to long as is the dimensionall erros on the speed brake. The nose is a real bad girl to build...check out Doogs models build. He gives a great build sequence for it. The vertical stabs on both kits are identical. There're alot of great options with the kit, and it does look like a Hornet when done but for ease of build and a more accurate shape I'd stick with Hasegawa. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 (edited) 6 hours ago, Gunfighter 124 said: Hey Raymond, Quick question if you don't mind, how was the Kinetic F/A-18 Hornet developed? Curious to know, thanks! Sorry for the thread being hijacked. We develope the kit with the support and reference from Cold Lake air base. During the development we discovered the spine on Monogram Hornet match the cross section profile from McDonald Douglas blue print also the the vertical tail of hasegawa is longer in 2mm in 1/48 scale. but as I said hasegawa hornet has been recognised as the standard for years, so most of the consumer will compare it and think they are accurate. In fact it is not. About assembly fit I think most people overlook our one pc lower hull. As we evaluate, one of trouble in hasegawa hornet is to assembly the intake left right sidee wall some alignment error between intake lips side wall would need some putty work and sanding. While we offer one pc hull to hold the structure to easy the core frame construction. Anyway it is up to individual to take whatever best for them. Edited September 14, 2018 by Raymond Chung Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, racerman said: I have to agree with Chris 7607 on this. The cockpit coaming on the Kinetic kit is way to long as is the dimensionall erros on the speed brake. The nose is a real bad girl to build...check out Doogs models build. He gives a great build sequence for it. The vertical stabs on both kits are identical. There're alot of great options with the kit, and it does look like a Hornet when done but for ease of build and a more accurate shape I'd stick with Hasegawa. The hasegawa vertical tail is longer by 2mm than Kinetic and it has been proofed corrected by Dave Roof with his measurement. but anyway that is individual personal choice, if anyone prefer the hasegawa then keep it that way, I just want to stay a more complete comparsion between two kits. As for the nose installation since we have optional Louvre, IFR probe the assembly would be more parts to aligned. Therefor if those ‘accuracy’ in the detail is not your concern, the hasegawa 2 pc nose would be easier to align then 5 pcs of Kinetic. Edited September 14, 2018 by Raymond Chung Quote Link to post Share on other sites
delide Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 (edited) Sorry Raymond, I love your recent kits, but here the Hasegawa still wins for me, because of the better shaped canopy. The canopy cross section on the Kinetic kit is omega shaped no doubt, but it's a bit less pronounced as it should be unfortunately. Despite the fact that the wind shield will still need to be push wide about 1mm in the photo here, the frame is still close to U shaped. Hasegawa looks much better: On the main canopy it's much less pronounced, but still noticeable to me. There is also other small issue with the wind shield which should be fixable. I'd love to have full length intake and more correct spine, but the canopy is always very important to me and that break the deal for me. It's noticeable from many angles, directly frontal for example(again kit on the left): Edited September 14, 2018 by delide add more pic Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 Dear Delide, Yes, I know what you mean. Unluckily, the old tooling shop who tool the windshield does not follow the CAD file, they short cut the canopy in the pre-production copy. We revised it before the 1st production run. However, the omega shape does not prononuced enough also the during modification, it makes the canopy part ticker than the original CAD parameter. That is the one of the reason we totally leave the old factory back in 2016. And now, we are looking for a chance to fix the windshield somedays. (the pictures you show is the windshield from the test shot build up, the production copy has been modified, the oemga shape is wider. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
delide Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 16 minutes ago, Raymond Chung said: Dear Delide, Yes, I know what you mean. Unluckily, the old tooling shop who tool the windshield does not follow the CAD file, they short cut the canopy in the pre-production copy. We revised it before the 1st production run. However, the omega shape does not prononuced enough also the during modification, it makes the canopy part ticker than the original CAD parameter. That is the one of the reason we totally leave the old factory back in 2016. And now, we are looking for a chance to fix the windshield somedays. (the pictures you show is the windshield from the test shot build up, the production copy has been modified, the oemga shape is wider. Hi Raymond, Wow, thanks for the quick response and the information(isn't it passed midnight in Hongkong?). Hmmm, now I'm undecided, it will need to spent more time to have a closer look, just saw a build up of the newer CF-188B, which looks much better indeed. If you find a chance to further improve it, do find a way to let us know too :-) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erik_g Posted September 17, 2018 Share Posted September 17, 2018 I am in the process of building the Kinetic Hornet right now and yes, the nose IS tricky, and so are the intakes. It is not a drop fit. But with some care and force applied to the right spots it goes together quite well, with little or no filler required. As already mentioned, the cockpit is quite nice out of the box. The seat is ok - seen worse, seen better, but I have a Quick Boost seat that will spice up things a notch. The weapon sprues from the old F-16 kits are not in the same class as the rest of the kits unfortunately, but then again, there aren´t many weapons in the Hasegawa box either. I´ll use a pair of Brassin bombs and a Brassin Litening on mine (BTW the instructions tells you there is a litening pod in the box, but I could not find any in mine). I bought the first boxing, and the tips of the fins are apparently slightly off in shape, that is corrected on later boxings AFAIK. On the up side, there are several nice decal options in the box, of which I am building one of the blandest, the finnish one. A lot of Hornet in my life right now as I am also learning how to fly and fight the Hornet in DCS 🙂 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jester292 Posted September 17, 2018 Author Share Posted September 17, 2018 The tops of the vertical stabilizers were retooled to add the subtle curve on the top (F/A-18)? That’s what mostly spoiled the look for me, but if I can find a boxing that has those fixed I’d give it a shot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raymond Chung Posted September 18, 2018 Share Posted September 18, 2018 All boxing has been updated the new tail. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Thomas Posted September 18, 2018 Share Posted September 18, 2018 What about the too short pylons? If the drawing in the Daco book is correct, there are a few mm missing towards the rear and the forward shape is a bit off, too. Thomas Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jelliott523 Posted September 18, 2018 Share Posted September 18, 2018 I'm also building the Kinetic Hornet kit right now. Some things in the kit are nice and have been mentioned above. I ended up cutting the nose section from the top of the fuselage and attached it to the nose section and then mated the two parts together, this did help in the fit of the parts a little better from what others had described; however, an issue that I've run into is with the IP coaming and the fit of the front windscreen. I have a massive step where the windscreen meets the nose, I think I'm going to have to do some sanding and filling to blend them together. As others have said, the intakes are tricky and I think I'm going to make F.O.D. covers for them to cover them up. For the seat I used an aftermarket one from Aries i believe, and it looks much better. I've not built the Hasegawa kit, but I think, if I were to build another Hornet, Hasegawa would be my choice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Matt Foley Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 On 9/14/2018 at 12:48 PM, delide said: Hi Raymond, Wow, thanks for the quick response and the information(isn't it passed midnight in Hongkong?). This is something I need to point out to everyone. Mr. Chung is heavily invested in customer service and keeping modellers happy. To relate to what I just said, back in 2007 I had a problem with an order from Lucky Model. I was pissed off about something (that I no longer recall) and posted about it online. Raymond called me at home to talk about it and make things right. It was afternoon here in Wisconsin and he had gotten out of bed at 4:30 AM to call me. I have never had another vendor do this before or after. I will always remember that phone call. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dustiepal Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 I have dealt with Raymond a few times concerning issues and he has always been a stand-up guy. He is creating a first rate business for us and I will always support that. His kits continue to improve and he listens to us which very few companies do. Also he keeps bringing out topics no one else will do (E-2C Hawkeye) and I really like that. Dave Quote Link to post Share on other sites
B.Sin Posted September 23, 2018 Share Posted September 23, 2018 On 9/13/2018 at 9:12 AM, Chriss7607 said: I am building both the Hasegawa and Kinetic Hornets and Hasegawa's is much nicer. The fit is pretty much perfect. Kinetic's is over engineered and fits poorly, particularly around the nose and intakes. There are also shape and dimensional differences between the two. Kinetic's cockpit coaming is noticeably longer than Hasegawa's and the speed brake is also wider. Hasegawa provides better detailing in the main gear wells. The strong point of the Kinetic kit is that the cockpit is overall better but both have disappointing ejection seats. For doing a Blue Angels jet, out of the box Hasegawa's is better. A separate part is included for the blanked off gun opening and the line for the smoke system is also provided. That's my opinion. How do you know that the with of the Hasegawa's speed brake is correct ? 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.