[Cruver Collecter]

I have all the Brewster Buffalos that Hobby Master has released, and I am really impressed with the quality and accuracy of these models. The fact that they did differentiate between the US Navy versions and the foreign export variants is quite impressive. This required a separate molding for tail section, canopy (For B339E and B339C variants), propellers and interior cockpit detail. Based on measurements for aircraft dimensions these models, I found that they are pretty spot on for 1/48^th scale. I went over each of the models with a critical eye to see what if any errors I could come across. I am no expert by any means, but I could only find just a couple things that could be considered errors in the first four releases, and only one small error that I could find in the last two releases. After a pretty thorough look at these models, I have to admit that Hobby Master did a superior job on this line of aircraft. On their Saratoga Buffalo I could only find one small hardly noticeable error and one possible error on displaying with gear up (Not so sure on the difference yellow used between this one and the last two). The B-339E had the same barely noticeable error as the Saratoga Buffalo, plus one more kind of middle of the road type error. The B-339C had pretty much the same discrepancies as the Singapore model. The Long Island Buffalo matched up the same as the model had pretty much the same discrepancies as the Saratoga as far as possible errors go. The last two Lexington Buffalos, well I looked long and hard but only one potential error, and that was if displaying with gear retracted on those two planes. Yep no such thing as a perfect die cast model, but HM comes pretty close to it with this line of models.

[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by Cruver Collecter

I have all the Brewster Buffalos that Hobby Master has released,

" the Singapore model. "

The last two Lexington Buffalos - well I looked long and hard but only one potential error.......

and that was if displaying with gear retracted on those two planes.

Hi Cruv' I've only ONE of the Buffalo's & that's the one that you refer to, as the "Singapore" model (?)

Everytime I go to "the shop" I keep seeing this (& others) in the cabinet, thinking... "if I can keep my spending-down, I'll have one of those......."

Well I NEVER DID (keep my spending-down !), so I DID (buy a Buffalo) anyway ..... only last-week !!!!!!!!

The 'Noel-Sharp' RNZAF, basically cause I'd bought the Airfix-model in identical-markings when it was very 1st released as a brand new kit, around '73 0r '74 ?

Every time I saw it in the cabinet, on successive visits, I was impressed how sharp it was - just wishing that SOME die-cast company (pref' Hobbymaster) would produce & offer a more attractive aircraft (Hurricane/P.40/Vultee Vengeance or suchlike) with such a great degree of detail & accuracy ( Wishful-thinking, here !)

OK, "stumpy" little Buffalo it is........I took the one out of the display cab' & bought that !

So, question is ?

How "Limited" are they ("Singapore" Buffalo's) ????????


I also, whilst waiting, had (what I think/believe ?) is "one of the Lexington-F.2's" in my hand ?????

The 'Light-Grey' one (overall) with the Red-Dot in the National-Insignia ????????

Have contemplated buying one of these (at a later date....)


So, finally, how many "Lex' F.2's" produced & WHAT is this "Retracted-Undercarriage" problem you speak of ????????

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by Hornchurch

So, finally, how many "Lex' F.2's" produced & WHAT is this "Retracted-Undercarriage" problem you speak of ????????

The Brewster Buffalo F2A-2 had a retractable tail wheel. The HM model does not have the option of putting the tail wheel in the retracted postion. That was the only thing I found to be off on both the Lexingtion Brewster Buffalos, and those two models may just be one of the more accurate pieces out there. Hobby Master really did an impressive job on the Brewster Buffalo series.

[Cruver Collecter]

Since someone asked about one of the possible errors, here are the other ones I came across. You all noticed that on the last two Lexington Buffalos there is no tall antenna mast. That is because the F2A-2s of VF-2 replaced the tall antenna mast with a short antenna mast bolted to the port wing. They did this to reduce drag and vibration caused by the tall antenna mast. Well, if you look really close to the port wing you will notice that there is mall raised post right were the mast would be. It is easily missed because it is only about 1/32nd of an inch tall, and it is pretty much to scale too. I have to admit I was really impressed that Hobby Master went to some much attention to detail to actually place this feature. This feature is also found on the first four models of the series, but in this case would not have been there, but is just at 1/32nd of an inch high and barely noticeable. So breakdown of each of the models is as follows:

Brewster F2A-2 "Buffalo", 3-F-11, USN VF-3, USS Saratoga
1. The tiny antenna mast on port wing.
2. Non retractable tail wheel for in flight display.

Brewster B339-E "Buffalo" NF-O, W8138 RNZAF 488 Squadron, Singapore, late 1941
1. The tiny antenna mast on port wing.
2. Should have had a reflector gun site.

USN Brewster F2-A2 Buffalo VS-201 USS Long Island (AVG-1) 1941
1. The tiny antenna mast on port wing.
2. Non retractable tail wheel for in flight display.

Brewster B339C, 2-VLG-V, Netherlands East Indies Army Air Corps (ML-KNIL), Batavia Java Island, 1942, Lt. Deibel.
1. The tiny antenna mast on port wing.
2. Should have had either a reflector gun site or ring and bead site (If depicted as freshly delivered from the United States, not an error).

Brewster Buffalo, USN F2A-2 , VF-2, 2-F-16, USS Lexington, 1940
1. Non retractable tail wheel for in flight display.

Brewster Buffalo, USN F2A-2 , VF-2, 2-F-1, USS Lexington, 1940
1. Non retractable tail wheel for in flight display.

I looked real hard at these models to see what errors might turn up, but the list was minute considering that this was HM first run at 1/48th scale aircraft model. There may be no such thing as a perfect model, but the folks at HM definitely were coming pretty close with this one. Just the fact that they had separate moldings between US Navy version and export versions is quite impressive. Some of the more expert rivet counters may be able to turn up more, but this was all I was able to find. Fine looking models and I am happy to have all four and I highly recommend HM Brewster Buffalos. Now if folks at HM can only be convinced to put out the Finnish variant,,,,,

[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by Cruver Collecter

Now if folks at HM can only be convinced to put out the Finnish variant......

NOW we are talking.......!!!!!!!!!

If they did, I'd buy several - that Green/Black camouflage is 'Lush' !!!!!!

Make a Fokker D.21 just as good, & I'll buy a boxload !!!!!!!!!

Seriously - A "Finnish" Buffalo (I reckon) will sell like 'Hot-Cakes' worldwide !

[Ara1]

Great thread Cruves and HC.

On my 2 Lexington Buffs, the wing gun holes are missing (but the shell ejector ports are intact). Both wing gun holes are present on my other Buffalos.

Also, there's the issue of the yellow paint wrap around missing on 2-F-16 and 3-F-11.

[Hornchurch]

Originally Posted by Ara1

Great thread Cruves and HC.

On my 2 Lexington Buffs, the wing gun holes are missing (but the shell ejector ports are intact). Both wing gun holes are present on my other Buffalos.

Also, there's the issue of the yellow paint wrap around missing on 2-F-16 and 3-F-11.

So what, Ara ?

You think YOU'VE got problems ?


This guy took 'extreme'-measures, taking HIS ONE back to the toyshop !!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't blame him, I guess.......

Missing-Canopy (plus a few bullet-holes thrown in )


personally, I'd have asked for a Refund , LOL !


p.s. Is it me, or is that nose-attitude just WAY-TOO-HIGH ???????????

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by Ara1

Great thread Cruves and HC.

On my 2 Lexington Buffs, the wing gun holes are missing (but the shell ejector ports are intact). Both wing gun holes are present on my other Buffalos.

Also, there's the issue of the yellow paint wrap around missing on 2-F-16 and 3-F-11.

Hello Ara,
As far as the wing gun ports go, I am not so sure that this is an error. In Squadrons Buffalos F2A in Action there are a few pictures that show some Buffalos with covered over wing gun armament. Could this have been pre war configuration that had the guns faired over or taped over. Page 16 and 17 has two Buffalos this way and one of them is a Lexington Buffalo. My guess is the gun port one is not an error. The yellow paint wrap I am still digging around on that one. It really does seem that HM folks really did there homework when putting these gems out.

[Cruver Collecter]

Originally Posted by Hornchurch

NOW we are talking.......!!!!!!!!!

If they did, I'd buy several - that Green/Black camouflage is 'Lush' !!!!!!

Make a Fokker D.21 just as good, & I'll buy a boxload !!!!!!!!!

Seriously - A "Finnish" Buffalo (I reckon) will sell like 'Hot-Cakes' worldwide !

Finnsh Buffalo would be a real fantastic choice. I can think of two paint schemes right of the get go. Captain Han Henrik Wind with 39 victories in a Buffalo and Finlands top scoring ace Warrant officer Ieno Ilmari Juutilainen with 34 victories in a Buffalo. The Fokker D.XXI would one of my number one picks. Fantastic selection of paint schemes too. Shoot both the previously mentioned Finnish pilots also had victories in this type aircraft. Some folks question these lesser known aircraft, but the Buffalo did seem to sell quite well.

[ZS-VAN]

Great thread guys, most insightful. I can't say that I'm particularly partial to the Buffalo but it consistantly receives great reviews. There's just so much new molds out there you have to be choosy. Which one would you rate as the best one out there. From previous threads my impression was that the Dutch East Indies one was very popular. A Finnish one would be nice, could go with the smaller scale Gladiator.