Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums

Sign in to follow this  
dai phan

Scale Aircraft Conversion Metal Gears. Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

I had bought a 1/48 metal gear to replace the kit parts thinking the quality would be superior and stronger but I was wrong. The resolution was below the kit plastic parts, pain in the butt to clean up and promptly bent under the weight. The metal was so soft beyond my comprehension. I have read some reviews and some are good, and some just tossed in the trash like I did with mine. But yet SCA is coming out strong with new gears and there has to be a demand to sustain production. I lost a gear on my Hasegawa 1/48 F104 gear and need a replacement. Did SCA improve their quality since the last couple years? Thanks Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they're absolute rubbish and offer absolutely nothing that kits parts off (to my eyes the moulds they use are copies of the kits parts). I have also been told some have the same ejector pin marks in them!)

 

I bought loads at one stage for builds where I thought it would be useful to have stronger legs but will be selling all of them on

 

If a company made brass legs I would be much more inclined to buy them even if they were just copies of kit plastic (provided they have been cleaned up properly) - at least then they would offer additional strength

Edited by sheppsea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sheppsea said:

I think they're absolute rubbish and offer absolutely nothing that kits parts off (to my eyes the moulds they use are copies of the kits parts). I have also been told some have the same ejector pin marks in them!)

 

I bought loads at one stage for builds where I thought it would be useful to have stronger legs but will be selling all of them on

 

If a company made brass legs I would be much more inclined to buy them even if they were just copies of kit plastic (provided they have been cleaned up properly) - at least then they would offer additional strength

 

My thoughts exactly. The Mig 17 1/48 gears were so poorly molded look like someone carve them out of wood and soft as soldering wire. WTH? Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, sheppsea said:

I think they're absolute rubbish and offer absolutely nothing that kits parts off (to my eyes the moulds they use are copies of the kits parts). I have also been told some have the same ejector pin marks in them!)

 

I bought loads at one stage for builds where I thought it would be useful to have stronger legs but will be selling all of them on

 

If a company made brass legs I would be much more inclined to buy them even if they were just copies of kit plastic (provided they have been cleaned up properly) - at least then they would offer additional strength

 

I look at the Eduards polished brass metal gears and they look impressive! BTW if SAC puts out rubbish products then why the business keeps going for so long? Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, dai phan said:

 

 BTW if SAC puts out rubbish products then why the business keeps going for so long? Dai 

 

Just now, sheppsea said:

Probably because mugs like me buy loads without realising 🙂

 

 And there are people who will use afermarket cause "it has to be better than kit parts...right". There are loads of time where kit parts are fine but people HAVE to have aftermarket.

 

Personally, I have moved away from aftermarket unless it corrects a glaring issue or its a conversion. From 3 feet away, you can almost never tell which one has a resin cockpit over a kit one.

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, martin_sam_2000 said:

 

 

 And there are people who will use afermarket cause "it has to be better than kit parts...right". There are loads of time where kit parts are fine but people HAVE to have aftermarket.

 

Personally, I have moved away from aftermarket unless it corrects a glaring issue or its a conversion. From 3 feet away, you can almost never tell which one has a resin cockpit over a kit one.

 

Sean

 

For me, when I buy AM, I buy mostly Eduard photo etch cockpit parts. Beat the heck out of painting by hands. At least for me. Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got burned when I ordered something like 3 or 4 sets of 1/32 Phantom legs for my Revell kits.  I was horrified I spent that much money on rubbish I had to throw away.  I refused to return them to Sprue Brothers since I should have read a few HONEST reviews on them before ordering.

If I ever owned a hobby shop or an internet mail order business, I would never offer these products. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cave: SAC stand for Soft & Cr@pp¥ 

 

The ones to use are Aerocraft, Eduard and G-Factor bronze, if they're available.

 

Or Trumpeter steel if they're included in the kit.

 

SAC use some kind of soldering wire mouldings packaged with a bubble so that you can't tell how Soft & Cr@pp¥ they really are.

 

Tony 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SAC’s stuff (despite what you might read on certain reviews) is nothing more that soft, poorly cast copies of the kit part.   No improvements on details, no improvements on strength.  Just garbage.   

Edited by 11bee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been hearing that the Eduard brass landing gear are very nice. All I've seen, though, are 3D CAD images. Anyone know where there are some real photos of the parts? I know they have only done a few sets and mostly, if not all, WWII subjects. Still, maybe they will do more.

As far as other metal gear, totally agree with the consensus here on SAC. I have only bought G-Factor and the Su-34 set offered by Kitty Hawk which I must say was nicer than the G-Factor landing gear I have. Very sharp detailing. Even G-factor's is a little soft in areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Mstor said:

I've been hearing that the Eduard brass landing gear are very nice. All I've seen, though, are 3D CAD images. Anyone know where there are some real photos of the parts? I know they have only done a few sets and mostly, if not all, WWII subjects. Still, maybe they will do more.

As far as other metal gear, totally agree with the consensus here on SAC. I have only bought G-Factor and the Su-34 set offered by Kitty Hawk which I must say was nicer than the G-Factor landing gear I have. Very sharp detailing. Even G-factor's is a little soft in areas.

 

I am not surprised by the comments here about the SAC gears. But some on the Net gave rave reviews on these. I have seen them first hand and they suck. One morning my Mig 17 sat on its belly and the gears completely bent !!! So much for white metal strength. I just don't get it. Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dai phan said:

 

I am not surprised by the comments here about the SAC gears. But some on the Net gave rave reviews on these. I have seen them first hand and they suck. One morning my Mig 17 sat on its belly and the gears completely bent !!! So much for white metal strength. I just don't get it. Dai 

My guess is that for those online reviews you may find SAC as an advertiser on the website as well. 

Edited by 11bee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, 11bee said:

My guess is that for those online “reviews” you will find SAC as an advertiser on the website as well.  Pretty coincidental, right?  

'

Now that I see... Too bad people do things like this among modelers ... 😞 Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

case in point;

 

A SAC F-86 nose gear, a direct copy of the Hasegawa kit part,

 

then what a F-86 gear should actually look like;

 

 

 

metal F86 gear.jpg

Nose gear.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Snowbird3a said:

case in point;

 

A SAC F-86 nose gear, a direct copy of the Hasegawa kit part,

 

then what a F-86 gear should actually look like;

 

 

 

metal F86 gear.jpg

Nose gear.jpg

 

Then what SAC says on their website is wrong. They say their parts are more accurate than the kit parts (if the original is not) but actually nothing more than a poor, soft metal copy of the kit parts. Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, dai phan said:

but actually nothing more than a poor, soft metal copy of the kit parts

 

You hit it on the nail. There is another couple of companies making these soft metal landing gear. I have gotten a few with kits I purchased as package deals with aftermarket parts. Virtually the same quality as SAC. As far as brass/bronze gear, G-Factor is good but availability seems to vary, though it appears they are more available now. I did find a review of one of Eduard's Brassin landing gear sets for the Eduard 1/48 BF-109G6 kit. In the picture of the actual gear, they very good. Crisp detail for cast bronze. A little better than G-Factor. Here's the link:

http://www.internetmodeler.com/scalemodels/nraviation/Eduard-Brassin-1-48-Bf109G-6-undercarriage-legs-BRONZE.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 When GWH came out with their 1/48 TBD-1 Devastator kit they made the landing gear at full extension as if it was in flight. The SAC "upgrade" was a still incorrect copy of the kit gear.

 

 That told me everything I needed to know about SAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say I would agree with all here. Ive been burnt by SAC metal landing gear in the past.
I thought it would be more detailed and stronger, but it was at best just the same as the kit part, took more clean up and stronger is a matter of conjecture to say the least.

 

Ill not be buying metal landing gear again in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing SAC is good for is if you lose the landing gear from a kit, or it you want to replace the kit gear with a SAC set that is from a more detailed kit. One example would be using the SAC gear for Hasegawa's 1/48 F-18 Hornet on the R/M kit. To be honest, I've been building models for 45 years, and I've never had gear legs break from the weight of the model. They've broken when I've dropped them, but never from just sitting there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only one I ever had was an old B-26 marauder. The main gear have that forward lean, and with the nose weight needed to keep it on all three wheels, the mains eventually just folded up into the bays. Cant remember what the manufacturer was , but the main gears were very weak.

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

The only thing SAC is good for is if you lose the landing gear from a kit, or it you want to replace the kit gear with a SAC set that is from a more detailed kit. One example would be using the SAC gear for Hasegawa's 1/48 F-18 Hornet on the R/M kit. To be honest, I've been building models for 45 years, and I've never had gear legs break from the weight of the model. They've broken when I've dropped them, but never from just sitting there.

 

Well if you buy SAC gears thinking they are more accurate and stronger than kit gears, you are mistaken. All the comments here reaffirm my thoughts about the SAC products. I was hoping they improve in the past few years but not the case. Anyone HERE has anything positive to say bout SAC metal gears ??? Dai 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, dai phan said:

Anyone HERE has anything positive to say bout SAC metal gears ??? Dai 

You could ask the owner of this website.  His product articles about most / all of SAC’s products praise their level of detail and added strength compared to the kit parts.    

 

Everyone has their own opinion...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a comparison of the LG from Monogram's 1/48 F-105D. This is the nose gear; it's in two halves, left and right.

LG-Mon0.jpg

Here's the MLG

LG-Mon1.jpg

 

The Monogram main gear actuators

LG-Mon2.jpg

The SAC main gear actuators

LG-SAC1.jpg

 

All of the SAC bits

LG-SAC0.jpg

 

And finally G-Factor. These are white bronze. The actuators, off the to side of each MLG, are very different looking compared to both the Monogram and SAC bits.

LG-GF.jpg

 

Here is the MLG from a walkaround on ARC

18RMainGear3.jpg

 

HTH

-- 

dnl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...