dai phan Posted February 12, 2020 Author Share Posted February 12, 2020 5 hours ago, dnl42 said: 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. Here's the MLG The Monogram main gear actuators The SAC main gear actuators All of the SAC bits 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. Here is the MLG from a walkaround on ARC HTH -- dnl The G factor gears are worth buying. Same for bronze Eduards gear. SAC is a poor copy of the original. If you lose a kit gear, better to buy a whole new kit then shelling out 20 bucks for some poor weak SAC copy of the originals. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 (edited) As Darren pointed out, I have used SAC undercarriage sets for missing gear from kits, or for my vacuum formed kits (where available). I received a Monogram 1/48 F-106A kit missing its front L/G, so spending $13 for a set of SAC u/c legs was reasonable and necessary. Also, I purchased the SAC 1/144 DC-8 double set (for Minicraft kits) to replace the grossly inaccurate u/c legs on my two Revell DC-8 kits. However, for my large vacuum formed kits: Airways VAC 1/72 HS Nimrod MR.2P, Airmodel 1/72 C-124 Globemaster, NOVA 1/72 KC-135A and Execuform 1/72 CC-109 Cosmopolitan, I used SAC versus scratching my own u/c legs (I know that SAC does not make a 1/72 CV-340 gear leg, so I purchased a P-3C set & will modify it. Same with P-3C props.) However, SAC did modify the Monogram 1/48 F-8E Crusader main u/c legs to raise the stance of the kit, which is a great improvement. HTH, Dutch Edited February 12, 2020 by Dutch Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 12, 2020 Author Share Posted February 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Dutch said: As Darren pointed out, I have used SAC undercarriage sets for missing gear from kits, or for my vacuum formed kits (where available). I received a Monogram 1/48 F-106A kit missing its front L/G, so spending $13 for a set of SAC u/c legs was reasonable and necessary. Also, I purchased the SAC 1/144 DC-8 double set (for Minicraft kits) to replace the grossly inaccurate u/c legs on my two Revell DC-8 kits. However, for my large vacuum formed kits: Airways VAC 1/72 HS Nimrod MR.2P, Airmodel 1/72 C-124 Globemaster, NOVA 1/72 KC-135A and Execuform 1/72 CC-109 Cosmopolitan, I used SAC versus scratching my own u/c legs (I know that SAC does not make a 1/72 CV-340 gear leg, so I purchased a P-3C set & will modify it. Same with P-3C props.) However, SAC did modify the Monogram 1/48 F-8E Crusader main u/c legs to raise the stance of the kit, which is a great improvement. HTH, Dutch Then SAC can't be as bad as I thought. I am waiting for the SAC F104 gear and I will let you all know of my verdict. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tony.t Posted February 12, 2020 Share Posted February 12, 2020 The SAC soft & cr@pp¥ stuff really is awful, and completely useless in 1/32, or 1/48 cantilever or splayed u/c legs. I have bought a lot. I would rate Aerocraft, G-Factor and Brassin as worth buying. How much have I bought? Legs for 3 x Bf 109Gs, one Fw 190, two Meteors, one F-8J, two Spitfires, one I-16, one Eurofighter all in 1/32 and worth every penny. The SAC stuff, by comparison, is pure crap and not even heavy enough to relegate as a nose weight. Don't waste your money. How SAC have survived this long bewilders me. I'm guessing people just buy and stash, and don't realise it's inferior to the kit parts. Tony Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 12, 2020 Author Share Posted February 12, 2020 (edited) 56 minutes ago, tony.t said: The SAC soft & cr@pp¥ stuff really is awful, and completely useless in 1/32, or 1/48 cantilever or splayed u/c legs. I have bought a lot. I would rate Aerocraft, G-Factor and Brassin as worth buying. How much have I bought? Legs for 3 x Bf 109Gs, one Fw 190, two Meteors, one F-8J, two Spitfires, one I-16, one Eurofighter all in 1/32 and worth every penny. The SAC stuff, by comparison, is pure crap and not even heavy enough to relegate as a nose weight. Don't waste your money. How SAC have survived this long bewilders me. I'm guessing people just buy and stash, and don't realise it's inferior to the kit parts. Tony It is hard to imagine SAC is still putting out gears after gears... I don't get it. I will let you know my verdict of the F104 gears when I get them. Dai Edited February 12, 2020 by dai phan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 14, 2020 Author Share Posted February 14, 2020 On 2/12/2020 at 1:38 PM, tony.t said: The SAC soft & cr@pp¥ stuff really is awful, and completely useless in 1/32, or 1/48 cantilever or splayed u/c legs. I have bought a lot. I would rate Aerocraft, G-Factor and Brassin as worth buying. How much have I bought? Legs for 3 x Bf 109Gs, one Fw 190, two Meteors, one F-8J, two Spitfires, one I-16, one Eurofighter all in 1/32 and worth every penny. The SAC stuff, by comparison, is pure crap and not even heavy enough to relegate as a nose weight. Don't waste your money. How SAC have survived this long bewilders me. I'm guessing people just buy and stash, and don't realise it's inferior to the kit parts. Tony I got the F104 gears today. SAC offering is just a copy of the original parts without any added details. The metal seems stronger than the SAC Mig 17 gears that collapsed on their own. So if you lost a gear and need a replacement ( IF the new kit is way more than the SAC), then it is a viable option. If you think you NEED stronger gear ( and you don't really- I have 45 years experience ) or more details/corrections then you are not gaining anything. SAC is more of a replacement option rather than enhancement. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mstor Posted February 14, 2020 Share Posted February 14, 2020 Those F-105 gears from G-Factor look really nice. They even managed to cast the thin hydraulic lines. How they do that is beyond me. Some kind of centrifugal casting to force liquid metal into the fine details? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
skyhawk174 Posted February 14, 2020 Share Posted February 14, 2020 I can probably count the amount of sets of SAC gear that I have. I think 3 sets. I never bit the buy it bug as they seemed not great based on the review pictures I saw. One set that is an improvement is the nose gear for the 1/32nd Trumpeter A-4E Skyhawk. When Trumpeter released their kit they were basically "inspired" by Hasegawa's 1/48th release. Hasegawa in their infinite wisdom moulded the nose wheel to the nose gear strut. SAC separated the wheel from the gear. Details did not blow me away and I may even change that wheel if I can find something or use what came in the 1/32nd Hasegawa kti which I also have. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dnl42 Posted February 14, 2020 Share Posted February 14, 2020 18 minutes ago, Mstor said: Those F-105 gears from G-Factor look really nice. They even managed to cast the thin hydraulic lines. How they do that is beyond me. Some kind of centrifugal casting to force liquid metal into the fine details? I agree, they're quite nice and worth the cost. If anybody wants those SAC gear I showed, PM me... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mstor Posted February 14, 2020 Share Posted February 14, 2020 4 hours ago, dnl42 said: If anybody wants those SAC gear I showed, PM me... Sorry, couldn't help myself Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dnl42 Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 23 minutes ago, Mstor said: Sorry, couldn't help myself Oh, I understand--notice I didn't even say you'd need to pay postage! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 7 hours ago, dnl42 said: I agree, they're quite nice and worth the cost. If anybody wants those SAC gear I showed, PM me... I wouldnt take em as a gift. I think metal gear really is pointless Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mstor Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 29 minutes ago, ElectroSoldier said: I think metal gear really is pointless Yes, if it is like the SAC stuff, poor copies of the kit gear. But if it is like G-Factor and is more accurate and/or more detailed than the kit gear, then I think it might be worth it. Like the G-Factor F-105 gear, with very nice looking hydraulic lines cast on the main gear. I'm going to be looking for a set of those. I think they would be worth it as my fingers don't have the dexterity needed to add those lines myself anymore. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ElectroSoldier Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 4 hours ago, Mstor said: Yes, if it is like the SAC stuff, poor copies of the kit gear. But if it is like G-Factor and is more accurate and/or more detailed than the kit gear, then I think it might be worth it. Like the G-Factor F-105 gear, with very nice looking hydraulic lines cast on the main gear. I'm going to be looking for a set of those. I think they would be worth it as my fingers don't have the dexterity needed to add those lines myself anymore. About that I really couldnt say either way, Ive never actually seen G-Factor parts, not gonna lie, so yeah Ill have to say I havent a clue about them but SAC metal landing gear Ive tried and it was a waste of money. The B-1B set is pointless for instance. I think the F-100D Monogram kit was the same and a couple of others, Ive only used them 3-4 times and decided after the last one to never bother again. G-Factor I cant comment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Geoff M Posted February 15, 2020 Share Posted February 15, 2020 I got a set of G-Factor for a 105. My only complaint is that the metal is so hard I could not cut it using ordinary hobby tools. Nicely detailed tho. Geoff M Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 15, 2020 Author Share Posted February 15, 2020 15 hours ago, ElectroSoldier said: I wouldnt take em as a gift. I think metal gear really is pointless Unless the metal gears offer substantial detail enhancement, they are useless and pointless. SAC is just an average copy of the kit's parts. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tony.t Posted February 20, 2020 Share Posted February 20, 2020 On 14 February 2020 at 12:27 AM, dai phan said: If you think you NEED stronger gear ( and you don't really- I have 45 years experience ) or more details/corrections then you are not gaining anything. SAC is more of a replacement option rather than enhancement. Dai I've been building kits since 1965 and certain ones stand out as needing metal replacements, of a quality type such as Aeroclub, Aerocraft, Brassin & G-Factor, The Monogram 1/48 F-105 used to do a hula dance every time I came into the room, until it failed — I started buying hard, solid, properly cast gear when I got the 1/32 Trumpeter F-105G seventeen years ago and buy them for all larger scale kits if the U/C is splayed (e.g. Bf109, Spitfire), stalky (F-105, Fw 190) or cantilever (Meteor, F/A-18) or a combination (F-8). But SAC castings, by comparison, are utterly unfit for purpose. Tony Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 25, 2020 Author Share Posted February 25, 2020 There is a new name for SAC gears. It is called Upwind. It uses the same SAC gears. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 11 hours ago, Sturm said: I don’t think so. I have the upwind gear and they are fantastic in quality I look at Upwind gears and they look identical to SAC. Maybe some are different? I will post the photos here later. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 These are the gears from Upwind (silver background) and SAC (blue background) for the Hasegawa F104 1/48. What do you think? Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted February 27, 2020 Author Share Posted February 27, 2020 Upwind gears have all the sink marks of the kit original parts. Dai Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dai phan Posted March 19, 2020 Author Share Posted March 19, 2020 Hello all I just got the 1/48 Upwind F104 gears and I compared them to the SAC ones. Virtually identical and the metal on the UW is even softer than the SAC. Absolutely NO improvements over the kit parts or over each other. If you have to get a replacement then get the SAC because the metal is harder. Dai 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.