What is the best engine correcting set for Academy A-10C?

[Solo]

As above, what set should I choose?
I know three ones: Aires, DEF and Mini Craft Collection. All looks very nice, but which one is the best?
I see there are three different shapes of fan blades, but which one is proper? Are there any other issues in those sets?

[dustiepal]

Wolfpack Design also have a set. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=628548009078592&set=pb.100057701940921.-2207520000&type=3

 

 

Dave

[Bulldog 09]

There is also an offering from Phase Hanger here. As for which one is the best I am really unsure of that. 

 

Dave Fassett 

[Dave Roof]

In addition to the PHR set above, there is also the Sierra Hotel Resin one :

 

https://sierrahotelresin.net/shop/ols/products/48408-a-10-inletengine-fan--exhaust-set-academy

 

Personally, I would go with either the PHR or SHR sets as the designers for both worked directly with A-10 maintainers for references and measurements. I'd bet money the others based their respective sets off photos taken from the net or books. 

 

[phantomdriver]

Phase Hangar resin

[Solo]

I am asking about those Aires, DEF and MCC because I can buy it directly from the store. I do not trust the quality of PHR or SHR, never had it it my hands, so I would like to choos something from those first three.

[sigtau]

4 hours ago, Solo said:

I am asking about those Aires, DEF and MCC because I can buy it directly from the store. I do not trust the quality of PHR or SHR, never had it it my hands, so I would like to choos something from those first three.

I have the DEF set and the Phase Hanger set.  I prefer the DEF set due to it's simplicity and lower price. 

 

This thread has a build with the Phase Hanger set.  There seems to be an issue with the fit and/or contour of the inlet cowl.  I'll still use my set on one of my builds, but it looks like it will need some rework to correct the contour issue: 

 

In that same thread, it's mentioned the fan blades are shaped wrong on the MCC set. 

[PlasticWeapons]

As mentioned above, the Sierra Hotel Models A-10 resin intakes for the 1/48 Academy kit are nice. The DEF and Wolfpack sets are nice too but the Sierra Hotel ones were designed by modelers who have worked with the aircraft. The print quality is top notch.

 

I also have the PHR set but had issues with the print quality (broken fan blades or short shot prints). 

 

I’d go with either DEF or Wolfpack if that’s what you like but for accuracy and print quality, go for the SHM set if you can afford it. 

Edited January 27, 2024 by PlasticWeapons

[Curt B]

I know that you have written that you prefer one of the 3  manufacturers you mention, but I am building the Academy A-10C myself right now, and I used the Phase Hangar set for the intake and exhaust, and i thought it was perfect.  Perfect printing, perfect fit.  I have not looked into the cowling issue referred to in prior posts, but it's not an issue for me.  I have a second Academy A-10C, and I've already gotten a second Phase Hangar set for it, so you can see how much I thought of the set!  I must say that the SHM set, pictured above, looks great, but no better than the Phase Hangar set, in my humble opinion.  It sounds like there are potential issues with Phase Hangar, but both my sets were perfect. 

 

Let's hope the (soon too be?1?!?) forthcoming GWH A-10C will be perfect out of the box, so no aftermarket stuff will be needed!

[peterburns]

Of the three I'd go with MCC.

[scorvi]

YES  1/48  GWH A-10C  Looks pretty good......

 

https://www.themodellingnews.com/2023/09/preview-great-wall-hobbys-new-tool-48th.html

 

 

This looks like it wont need a an engine set!!! 

 

Steve,

[Solo]

Great, but I have Academy kit and not going to have GWH one. So my question is still valid.

[scorvi]

Understood  Just was saying it looks like this engine depth issue will be resolved in the next offering.  I know it is frustrating with the multiple releases of same scale and subject kits...Which one to buy ...esp. when you want to build a certain type.  I want to do a 1/48 A-10 too but thought to wait.  BUT if I  want to do an early Gulf War version then perhaps the wait is longer since the GWH kit will be a -C release.   OR do I try the older Monogram kit??  I seem to be discouraged about the Italeri kit at all?!?    

 

Well from your post  I would go with the DEF one for fit and ease of construction...since you stated you dont trust the quality of either Sierra Hotel OR Phase Hangar.  I have resin from both and they are good but if you are working off of what you know.....from this thread it seems DEF maybe the way to go.

 

"I am asking about those Aires, DEF and MCC because I can buy it directly from the store. I do not trust the quality of PHR or SHR, never had it it my hands, so I would like to choos something from those first three".

 

Steve

[Collin]

5 hours ago, scorvi said:

Understood  Just was saying it looks like this engine depth issue will be resolved in the next offering.  I know it is frustrating with the multiple releases of same scale and subject kits...Which one to buy ...esp. when you want to build a certain type.  I want to do a 1/48 A-10 too but thought to wait.  BUT if I  want to do an early Gulf War version then perhaps the wait is longer since the GWH kit will be a -C release.   OR do I try the older Monogram kit??  I seem to be discouraged about the Italeri kit at all?!?    

 

Well from your post  I would go with the DEF one for fit and ease of construction...since you stated you dont trust the quality of either Sierra Hotel OR Phase Hangar.  I have resin from both and they are good but if you are working off of what you know.....from this thread it seems DEF maybe the way to go.

 

"I am asking about those Aires, DEF and MCC because I can buy it directly from the store. I do not trust the quality of PHR or SHR, never had it it my hands, so I would like to choos something from those first three".

 

Steve

I'm going to do an in-flight late 80's A-10A....taking the 1/48 HobbyBoss kit and backdating it (removing the GPS puck/warts on the bottom of the tails)...boom, you have an early A.

 

Cheers

Collin

[A-10 LOADER]

1 hour ago, Collin said:

I'm going to do an in-flight late 80's A-10A....taking the 1/48 HobbyBoss kit and backdating it (removing the GPS puck/warts on the bottom of the tails)...boom, you have an early A.

 

Cheers

Collin

You know I'll be following this one.

Steve

[potez]

On 2/8/2024 at 3:21 PM, Solo said:

Great, but I have Academy kit and not going to have GWH one. So my question is still valid.

Sierra looks as the best MCC looks good enough if you'll keep engine covers shut. Look at the exhaust pipe rim: it should be pipe in pipe ie double walls with a small gap between. Sierra and MCC did their homework.

[Studneru]

Itd be interesting to have all three compared next to each other. If not, I'd go with MCC. I've seen pretty much everything they produce and it all looks brilliant. I don't know much about DEF so can't tell. They might be great, or not so.. as for Aires, unless I hear a continuous praise from many sources, I would avoid their products. I'd like to think about aftermarket as a way to improve, save money or time, and Aires is often just a headache that ends up in a bin- either pain to install, or just shrunk and is a few mils smaller... 

[is it windy yet?]

I just received my academy a-10c, with a gwh a-10a on the way. Is the problem with the academy kit engines just that the engine faces are too close to the intake lip?  I was thinking I could just make some spacers on a lathe. 
 

 

[Alternative 4]

At twice the price of the Academy kit the GWH kit better be accurate, fit well and have amazing decails

[sigtau]

10 hours ago, Alternative 4 said:

At twice the price of the Academy kit the GWH kit better be accurate, fit well and have amazing decails

The Academy kit is none of those things, so yes the GWH kit is worth it. 

 

There's no amount of aftermarket upgrades that can fix all the issues the Academy kit has.  Academy clearly rushed this kit out the door to beat GWH to market.

 

The worst part of the Academy kit is the fit.  The vast majority of the major fuselage assembly requires extensive fitment tweaking to achieve even a mediocre fit.  The entire forward fuselage fit was off.  It's too wide on the aft joint with the slide molded rear fuselage by ~0.5mm.  Even the engine pod fit to the aft slide molded fuselage part was off and required carving away plastic to get it to set right.  The forward nose components and nose gear bay also require heavy fitment work to avoid steps in the joints.

[habu2]

How does the HobbyBoss kit compare to the GWH kit?

[Niels]

51 minutes ago, Illu said:

 

‘74 Gremlin vs. ‘24 Lexus

So glad I have 2 in the stash then 😝

[Curt B]

22 hours ago, sigtau said:

The Academy kit is none of those things, so yes the GWH kit is worth it. 

 

There's no amount of aftermarket upgrades that can fix all the issues the Academy kit has.  Academy clearly rushed this kit out the door to beat GWH to market.

 

The worst part of the Academy kit is the fit.  The vast majority of the major fuselage assembly requires extensive fitment tweaking to achieve even a mediocre fit.  The entire forward fuselage fit was off.  It's too wide on the aft joint with the slide molded rear fuselage by ~0.5mm.  Even the engine pod fit to the aft slide molded fuselage part was off and required carving away plastic to get it to set right.  The forward nose components and nose gear bay also require heavy fitment work to avoid steps in the joints.

While I can’t speak on the subject of accuracy to reality, your experience with your Academy A-10 is completely different than mine.  Perhaps Academy’s moldings are degrading, but I encountered none of the issues that you had; mine went together almost perfectly.   I have both of the GWH A-10A and 10C kits also, but haven’t built them yet. I hope the builds go as easily as my Academy build went.  

Edited January 10 by Curt B

[sigtau]

On 1/10/2025 at 5:59 AM, Curt B said:

While I can’t speak on the subject of accuracy to reality, your experience with your Academy A-10 is completely different than mine.  Perhaps Academy’s moldings are degrading, but I encountered none of the issues that you had; mine went together almost perfectly.   I have both of the GWH A-10A and 10C kits also, but haven’t built them yet. I hope the builds go as easily as my Academy build went.  

 

It's possible I got a bad kit.  I had issues with the Kinetic Gold F-16C retooled kit and there were definitely manufacturing problems with my copy (confirmed by the owner on this forum).

 

While there were across the board fit issues I encountered with the Academy kit, the major issues were the joints between the fuselage sections.  The slide molded aft fuselage was far to narrow to match up to the nose section.  There's a bulkhead piece used to join the two, and it fit fine into the tail but the nose halves were to wide.  To solve this issue, I removed material from the top joint just behind the cockpit.  I also had to remove material from the bottom nose panel to get the bottom edges to align with the tail section.  A similar issue occurred with the slide molded nose cone.  I opted to reshape the outside surface of the cockpit section to blend into the nose cone.  Even though I didn't change the geometry of the windscreen joints to the cockpit section, it's still too wide and will need to be blended into the sides.

 

Everyone is going to have a different standard as to what makes a good fitting kit.  I think this kit was overengineered with too much slide molding.  It reminds me of the AMK F-14D kit.  It looks good sitting in the box, but the over-engineered design makes assembly difficult.  It's also worth noting that all of the slide molded parts on my kit had really pronounced steps where the mold sections came together.  This made the clean-up process very tedious in the areas around the rivet details.

 

I haven't built my GWH A-10 kits yet, but their sectioned approach seems like it would avoid some of these issues with the slide molding steps. 

[Curt B]

8 hours ago, sigtau said:

 

It's possible I got a bad kit.  I had issues with the Kinetic Gold F-16C retooled kit and there were definitely manufacturing problems with my copy (confirmed by the owner on this forum).

 

While there were across the board fit issues I encountered with the Academy kit, the major issues were the joints between the fuselage sections.  The slide molded aft fuselage was far to narrow to match up to the nose section.  There's a bulkhead piece used to join the two, and it fit fine into the tail but the nose halves were to wide.  To solve this issue, I removed material from the top joint just behind the cockpit.  I also had to remove material from the bottom nose panel to get the bottom edges to align with the tail section.  A similar issue occurred with the slide molded nose cone.  I opted to reshape the outside surface of the cockpit section to blend into the nose cone.  Even though I didn't change the geometry of the windscreen joints to the cockpit section, it's still too wide and will need to be blended into the sides.

 

Everyone is going to have a different standard as to what makes a good fitting kit.  I think this kit was overengineered with too much slide molding.  It reminds me of the AMK F-14D kit.  It looks good sitting in the box, but the over-engineered design makes assembly difficult.  It's also worth noting that all of the slide molded parts on my kit had really pronounced steps where the mold sections came together.  This made the clean-up process very tedious in the areas around the rivet details.

 

I haven't built my GWH A-10 kits yet, but their sectioned approach seems like it would avoid some of these issues with the slide molding steps. 

Truly sorry for all your difficulties. It does make me wonder if there might be good and bad days when manufacturers may have optimum conditions for molding their kits, and perhaps days when things kind of fall apart.  And maybe it’s not even something they can observe when the sprues are pulled out of the molds.  I agree it seems odd that there is such a difference in the quality of ostensibly the same kit.  I hope your future builds go better for you!

Edited January 12 by Curt B