[Phantom Phan1200]

Well I will post some pics of Witty colorfull cat tomorrow if I can.
I think it's a much better model than their first few F-14's.
But you guys are thee F-14 experts so you can tell me what little things are off.

I agree the century is a great model & no one says otherwise.
Im sure it's best F-14 on the market right now.

But what I dont agree with is the trashing of other products in some odd effort to prove this.
I think that takes it a bit too far.
FOV & Witty make a great F-14 & for those who dont want to shell out the big $$$ for the century they are a good choice.

Still the main point of this topic is if the the FOV & Century are based on the same mold, what things make them different & does it warrent the extra cost.

[RJLee]

Neither the FOV nor the Witty F-14s are "crap." Nor, for that matter, are the Dragon F-14s. I have early examples of all three, and within a reasonable margin of tolerance all of them are detailed scale replicas of the Tomcat, with fairly accurate paint schemes and all of the major airframe features. There are some awful diecast models out there, with wildly mismatched coloration, exaggerated airframe features, and other problems that actually cause the model not to look like the airplanes they represent. This just isn't the case with any of these F-14s (as much as I might dislike the Dragon's lack of a nose probe, the early Witty's front windscreen, or the engine shrouds on any of these things).

I believe that a casual collector who simply wants a 1/72 F-14 to fill out his collection, and who has no special liking for the F-14 as opposed to other airplanes, would probably be reasonably satisfied with any of them assuming that he wasn't aware of the Century. For this reason, if you're a small retailer whose customer base is simply looking for "an F-14," maybe it doesn't make sense to carry a large stock of Century models to the exclusion of the cheaper alternatives.

However, if the collector is aware of the Century and either (a) has a special liking for F-14s, or (b) simply appreciates very high-quality diecast, I think that even a casual collector might find the Century to be worth the extra cost. This isn't just about rivet-counting and small details. Here are the big things that impress me about the Century as opposed to the FOV:

1. Color schemes. The FOV VF-154 was the jewel of my collection before the Century models were released. But the color scheme that they chose to do was odd, while the color schemes selected by the other manufacturers were tired and repetitious. Century opened its line with one of the most colorful and striking paint schemes of any military airplane, and continues with some good solid fleet liveries. Put side-by-side, the VF-84 Jolly Rogers airplane simply eclipses the VF-154 "hi-viz gray" scheme. AS far as I can tell, FOV isn't putting out any more F-14s (except for a very hard-to-find hi-viz VF-41). Something as basic as what's on the tail fins resonates with both casual and hardcore buyers, and Century has everyone beat at this point.

2. Paint quality and surface detail. There is rivet-counting for the sake of rivet-counting, and then there are subtle details that affect the overall appearance of the airplane. My Dragon VF-103 has a skull and crossbones on the tail just like my Century VF-84. But the Dragon airplane is greenish-gray and the fuselage looks bleached. The Witty VF-32 airplane has a uniform blueish tint. I don't have to know the exact FS numbers for the paint in question to know that this model doesn't quite look like that airplane I saw at the airshow, and in fact, looks like a mass-produced model airplane. People who know nothing about airplanes take one look at the Century model, especially when placed next to the Witty or the Dragon, and stare. The difference is less obvious with the FOV, but is still there; the reality is that Century paid a great deal of attention to the overall finish while FOV made some different (presumably cost-saving) choices.

3. Scale details. The quickest way to lose the suspension of disbelief when it comes to 1/72 is to have parts that are too large for the scale. This has nothing to do with technical accuracy -- it's craftmanship. If you see huge canopy hinges, ejection handles that are 5x their actual size, poor painting, etc., these all contribute to the overall impression of the model. By themselves you could argue that these are rivet-counting details -- but bunch enough of them together and you have a model that is markedly cruder than its competitor.

Are any of these "big things" enough to justify a 2x cost? I have no idea what the answer is from a market perspective. My sense is that every retailer should have one or two Centurys in stock because they are so striking from a color/paint perspective. While I doubt that everyone will be willing to shell out the difference, I do think that the popularity of the F-14, the appeal of the Century paint schemes and weapon sets, and the better "feel" of the model will cause these things to sell in pretty good numbers. Whether "pretty good" is worth the trouble is a question for the dealers here who see the sales figures. I'm just an individual, very casual collector, with fewer than 30 airplanes.

For my part, I've just ordered the Century VF-154 NF101 F-14A, despite already having the VF-154 NF100 F-14A from FOV. These are essentially the same airplane, from similar molds, wearing the schemes of the same unit from different years. But I'm spending the money because I really like the wonderfully detailed air-to-ground ordnance, the semi-low-viz scheme of a fleet F-14, and the overall polish of the Century birds. I know that for this price I can almost get two Wittys, but with space at a premium I simply don't want two Wittys.

My two cents,

R.

[Canucklehead]

Great post R. It almost drove me to buying one of the currently available Century Wings Tomcats. After I calmed down I decided I would still wait for a VF-1 bird like I had planned, but for a second there I was very close to picking up one of the Jolly Rogers offerings.

[Phantom Phan1200]

Great reply RJ, thats the kind of info I was looking for, thanks.

[David Hingtgen]

Posted because people asked and I was specifically mentioned by name.

What's wrong with the Witty? 99% similar to the things that are wrong with the Dragon. Basically:

Get a list of the key, distinguishing features of the F-14A, B, and D. The differences between those models.

Now, mix up all those things, and apply randomly to various molds. That's your Witty and Dragon molds. Not A's, not B's, and not D's. D with B parts, A with B parts, etc. None correct.

The thing is---they have 99.9% of the parts required, molded and in production. They're just too stupid to figure out what goes where. They've got A-specific parts on the D's---but not the A's! So the A's missing a part, which they only (for some reason) apply to their D's. Stuff like that.

Biggest/main flaws:

No gun vents on the Witty. Very, very wrong. There are 3 types of gun vents on production F-14's, the 3 styles are key visual clues to what type of F-14 it is.

No canopy frames on the Witty windscreen. Hello, it's not an F-15/16 with a "seamless" forward screen. It should be like an F-4/F-8 with heavy framing on the front.

Paint. Both Dragon and Witty can't seem to count. There are THREE shades of grey (with a few rare exceptions) on low-vis F-14's. Witty and Dragon only ever use 2, combining 2 of the areas/shades together. So depending on how you look at it, either the entire top half, or entire bottom half, or tailfins/nose/sponsons are the wrong color.

Cockpit/seats. A's and B's are identical--yet Dragon and Witty like to use a "D" cockpit for ALL of them. The D's unique cockpit and seats (readily visible from a hundred feet away, they're that distinctinve) is one of the main ways to spot a D-model. So to have them in a A/B model is just "jarring".

If anyone's not bored yet, I could go on and go point-by-point from front to rear, and point out EXACTLY what's wrong with every Witty and Dragon F-14.

But in summary: THEY CAN'T EVEN GET THE BASIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE A, B, and D MODELS RIGHT. Nor the basic paint scheme applied to every low-vis A/B/D out there.

(I could go on for quite a while about the shrouds/fairings issue alone for A vs B/D---suffice it to say---I'm amazed by the amount of effort and money Dragon and Witty have wasting making custom molds, of parts that don't exist, in combinations that don't exist, and then applying them to the wrong plane---when they already have molded the correct parts, but use them on the "other" wrong plane in another wrong combination....)

It's as if---Dragon and Witty have a huge, giant pile of F-14 parts. Nearly every variation of every model that's ever flown. But they have no clue what to use. So you get a mix of A, B, and D parts on every model. And don't expect their "D" to have the most D parts or anything. Dragon's "A" is like 90% D parts. And their D is absolutely 100% identical to their B, for some releases. Witty's the worst though, as the windscreen is entirely wrong for all F-14's ever, and they can't even get the NOZZLES right on some. Even the most casual F-14 fan knows the A has different nozzles than the B/D.

[STARMAN 352ND]

Originally Posted by flaps

Can someone list the issues with the Witty? I would like to know where it is in-accurate?

Flaps

I look at the front windscreen area (this has since be corrected to a point)
engine area,no gun vents and the nose area (you can see the cone lines).
They need to get their A,B & D models in order as well.
One thing you have to remember too is this is Witty's first F-14 (Swordsmen).
Now the latest ones such as Witty Sky Guardians WTW72009-04
F-14B Tomcat USN NSAWC, NAS Fallon, NV is the best one they have made so far.
I think as time goes on Witty will keep trying making them better.
To a person who does not know what a real F-14 looks like they won't see much difference but to those who do know how they look will see the difference in the F-14's.
Witty after all has the best F-15 Eagle on the market IMHO.
JP

[Phantom Phan1200]

In guess on my end what it boils down to is having the right models for my customers & not getting stuck with a buch of high price models that have fallen out of fashion in a week.

We are not big online retailers who can foot the bill for tons of stock from everybrand & then sit on or dump it at cost when nobody wants it.
We run a small shop which is basically a booth inside a larger collectibles & antiques store.
Allthough we are the only walk in store in central FL that deals in the stuff, I still live & die by every sale.
I got bills rent & taxes to cover as well.

I try to stock as much as I can, whats hot & what people are asking for mainly.
But I run this thing part time shoe string budget all while working full time.
It been my dream to have my own business that deals in a hobby I have a great passion for.
So trust me I want to buy everything for the shop, but I also have to be smart about things.

I have made the mistake in the past of buying too many high end models becasue the hype on the forums about them was so great.
Only later to be stuck with dust collectors that took up the funds that could have been used on other models my customers were actually buying.

Right now I have Witty, Dragon & Hobby Master & Corgi jets comming out my ears.
To take on another modern jet brand will be pushing things.
So if I do, it better be a pretty damn good model.
But there is alot of comp in that segment, even if these things are that good, will they be good enough?

I guess the best thing to do is order a very very small amount just to see for myself.

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by SKUNKY

I would much rather put out the extra bread for one Century Tomcat than to have two or even a dozen FOVs...JP's comparison pics leave nothing further to be considered as far as I'm concerned...Even Stevie Wonder could plainly see the differences between the two are more than just trivial.....

I've made the mistake before of settling for 2nd best just to save myself a few bucks, and in almost every case I ended up eventually getting the better one because it just drove me nuts to know a better example existed out there. So in the long run it ended up costing me more than if I just would have gotten the best to begin with...Well...I guess that's about all I've got to say about that.

Ouch, should have read this thread BEFORE I jumped on a recent Witty sale, as this sounds like my logic. I bought a Witty Cat cuz I got it for $25 delivered, and I am not that knowledgeable about it to really notice the gaffs. I just wanted a Tomcat to round out my modest collection of modern stuff. But now I've read this thread -- thanks a lot guys!

And I'm sure that after I get the Witty and photograph and review it, I'll be digging around in the couch cushins for $ to fund a Century....

But that said, for the purposes of comparisons and the fact that I like brand diversity in my collection, I'm sure I won't regret the witty... too much. In fact, I'm sort of glad it's one of the early Witty tomcats...

I just can't seem to say no to a good sale

Though I am a big fan of the Witty F-16s and F-15s I have so far... I really dig the Israeli F-15, even with the paint gaff on the underside...

[Phantom Phan1200]

I shot a few quick pics of Witty's colorful cat F-14A.
Yeah it's not a century but I would hardly call it junk either.
Please note I did not install the pitot tube in these photos.
OK let the flames begin

[RJLee]

The Witty TOPGUN airplane looks nice (if a little weird -- but that's the original paint scheme and not the model). Glad to see that they fixed the front windscreen and stopped painting the missiles white.

One of the nice things about the Witty F-14s is that they have an operable tailhook.