[STARMAN 352ND]

I merge it with a poll that i had started ...To save space on the forum.
Since it was basically the same thing.
JP

[FormerViperDriver]

I own at least one of most of the top contenders listed so far.

I voted for GMP P-40.

I'll tell you why I can't vote for the C1 Doras as number one, even though I love mine: I display my planes mainly wheels down on the ground (C1 doesn't give you much of a choice in the matter, unless you want to enginer your own solution: no stand provided), and the way the main gear is fitted in the main wells, although practical, is not very realistic-looking (masks a large portion of the well itself). I know it's only visible from the bottom, I know the reat of the model is outstanding, but that detail in itself MUST exclude these models from the top contender position in an objective assessment. Sorry guys, I don't see how you can argue otherwise (well, maybe, see below)...

The Corgi Gladiator is wonderful and I can see why people would vote for it, but it doesn't have near the "presence" on the big GMPs (nor the engine detail, etc...). And "presence" to me is a big factor in diecast (that's why I don't generally collect 1/72 WW II fighters. There are some exceptions of course...). I don't see how it can not be a factor to anyone (unless you're one of those collectors who keep you models in boxes forever, I guess). A model has "presence" when it is the one that draws immediate attention from visitors to your collection, when displayed amongst the others (again, assuming you display).

The C1 Nieuport is a superb model but loses to GMP mostly on the same "presence" grounds.

The EI Mustangs (I have 3) are also obvious contenders, but I had to take into account the rather crudely-rendered tail wheel, the only obvious blemish in an otherwise fantastic model (although on one of mine, Shangri-la, the ventral radiator piece does not fit as well as it could - and as it does on the other 2 - and so leaves a small but visible gap, close-up anyway).

I think the only way to be objective about this is to establish a matrix with ranking categories and points for each, then grade each plane according to "as-objective-as-possible" criteria. Example:

Overall shape accuracy: max 20 points

Detail (panel lines, rivets, rig lines, etc...): max 10 points

Parts Fit: max 10 points

Paint (quality of finish): max 15 points

Markings (decal, pad print, accuracy, quality): max 10 points

Working parts (control surfaces, canopy, engine covers, gear, etc...): max 5 points

Gear (accuracy, optional position): max 5 points

Armament/fuel tanks (choice, accuracy): max 5 points

Overall heft/solidity: max 5 points

Pilot figure (availability, quality, option): max 3 points

"Presence" (size, visual impact, most likely to attract attention of visitor to your collection): max 12 points

That's a total of 100. High overall score wins.


You can argue the actual points for each category (and I'm sure people will want more weight to this or that), but a system like this is the only way to be objective. I'm sensing people are voting way too much with their hearts on this, not with their heads. My hearts tell me to go for C1 Dora-13 Yellow 10 (I love the long-nose FW), but my head clearly says GMP P-40 Texas Longhorn.

FVD

[Cardinal]

I have to vote for the Carousel 1 FW190Ds as they are virtually perfect in all respects from both a design and QC perspective. The GMP P40s and P51Ds are definitely close contenders as are the EI P51Bs and the Corgi Swordfish, but when it comes to overall score I don't believe the Carousel Doras can be bettered (unless you're factoring in a display stand).

The detailing, especially the engine compartment and cockpit, on the GMP P40 is truly something out of the ordinary though .

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

The Corgi Gladiator is wonderful and I can see why people would vote for it, but it doesn't have near the "presence" on the big GMPs (nor the engine detail, etc...). And "presence" to me is a big factor in diecast (that's why I don't generally collect 1/72 WW II fighters. There are some exceptions of course...). I don't see how it can not be a factor to anyone (unless you're one of those collectors who keep you models in boxes forever, I guess). A model has "presence" when it is the one that draws immediate attention from visitors to your collection, when displayed amongst the others (again, assuming you display).

You make a good case, yet I can not help but feel you think that if we don't see things your way, we're not seeing it the right way (Please do not consider this post a flame, but merely the "other side of the fence" perhaps -- it's intended in good spirit.)

If we do take your "presence" factor to be a major point of consideration, we must also allow for the fact that "presence" is extremely subjective, and not everyone is going to own, or even have seen in person, each one of these models (you are one of the lucky ones ). If I dig 1:72 fighters more than 1:35 -- which you yourself say is a weird scale, and I agree -- that doesn't mean I keep 'em in the boxes.... most of my 1:72 models are on display right now, along with plenty of my 1:48, 1:35, etc.

If I, for example, only collected 1:72 fighters because of space reasons, cost, or simply for the fact that 1:72 "floats my boat" then by your definition the Corgi B-17 should probably win, as most people who view my collection would see it first, and it is a very nice model... no?

Also, I really don't care all that much about what model first attracts a visitor's attention, to me, it's all about what I like the most, which is what drives my purchases. Though I think you're mainly referring to what models can truly be considered anchors to a display, which I agree is a factor that makes the GMP's so attractive. However, in a 100% 1:72 collection, one of the heavies could fill the same role...

In fact, using how I interpret your logic, in my display my Lane Spit would probably have to be my choice -- thought others would perhaps laugh at the idea due to the bright yellow spinner, which I frankly couldn't care less about.

Also, I don't think there's been a perfect diecast model in the history of the hobby, nor will there ever be one -- someone will always find something wrong or slightly off...

I we want to get real technical about the selections, the Longhorn ain't perfect either -- mine arrived with the antenna wires broken out of their clip on the tail -- something that plagues these models, as I know this has happened to a few others. And the self-articulating gear doesn't work all that well either. And, come to think of it, the pilot figure's kinda tough to get in and out of the cockpit, and his elbow doesn't quite rest on the fuselage as it should...

I greatly respect your obvious intense and detailed knowledge of aircraft in general, and greatly enjoy your frequent contributions -- we are fortunate to have you in the club for sure. (And you already know I agree with you on the P-40. However, I can easily see why others may select the swordfish or Dora.)

However, I would just raise a hand of caution about getting too technical about all this -- these are models after all, not museum quality show pieces or "exact replicas". Eliminating a model from top dawg contention because of a small blemish that's not even visible when on display is simply not in my "head".
That said, another round of voting with a scoring system might be fun -- but I suspect we may go round for a while on the criterion.

[Captain Eddie]

I do not have the Dora, or any GMP's, so I cannot say on those, but my Carousel Nieuport is SUPERB!!! It may not have presence to some, but it does to me.

I also greatly admire the Matchbox aircraft, especially the Spad XIII. If it had rigging, and a prop like the Nieuport, IT would be tops.

[FormerViperDriver]

Pappy,

I agree with a lot of what you wrote. First and foremost with the fact there would be intense debate about any weighing factors in an "objective" point system. Different collectors look at different things in their models (some like moving parts, others not, some care about the aspect of the landing gear, others not, etc...).

On the "presence" factor, I would say you make a good point. All I can say is that when one evaluates "the ultimate in diecast," or "the very best made," one CANNOT think of one's collection only. The question is NOT what is the very best model in your collection, it is what is the very best made, period. Thus if a 1/72-only collector wants to, he can vote for "what's the best 1/72 model made yet," but excluding larger (or smaller) scale models is not appropriate when making an honest attempt at judging the best out there, irrespective of era, scale, etc... One HAS to try to get outside of one's own little world in this respect. But I'd be all in favor or having separate polls for different scales, in fact that might be better, given that not everyone is like me and collects all scales from 1/144 up.

So bottom line to me is that to judge "presence" as objectively as humanly possible (a difficult thing), I would modify what I wrote initially like this: one would have to imagine the particular model as part of one's own collection, even if one does not own it. I guarantee that if I stick an GMP P-40 in the middle of someone's 1/72 WW II fighter collection, the thing will stand out big time (among 1/48, it's already not so evident...). And if one is trying to evaluate diecast "at large," it IS an appropriate way to look at it. Otherwise, if you're not willing to go with that little exercise ("thought experiment"), then you should honestly say so and confine yourself to voting for "best 1/72 model" versus "best model period." Am I making sense here? By the way, "presence" is not based on size alone, although it would seem like a significant factor. For example, I have a 21st Century 1/32 P-47, and while it is big, I don't think its "presence" is that great when I sit it next to some of my real diecast models. There's something about the plastic look, and the really skinny gear, that takes away from the "presence" factor.

Another way to put it is that to exclude a model of contention for "best of the best" just because one does not own it oneself is kind of unfair, and clearly does not demonstrate any attempt at objectivity. It's hard to be fully objective, but at least one can try. I know I try. I know it's hard to evaluate a model if you don't own it, but maybe you can go look at it in a store in person, or at pictures/descriptions/ratings on such excellent sites as Diecast Ace (right?), Flying Mule, or Tricatus, etc...

Also, I would dissagree, as a general rule, about counting accidental defects, such as broken wires, in the criteria, unless it is something that happens to the majority (or at least a very high percentage) of that type of model. I think we have to assume a model built to standard and not damaged in the post (or even at the factory). I would say if a type of model has a consistent history of defects, though, that might be a factor. I know my 3 GMPs came in perfect, but I also know of the problems you mention. I guess it's a matter of how often this occurs. Even then, since GMP apparently has great customer service, I would assume one could get a replacement model so I'm not sure where to draw the line.

In any event, I would say that even an "objective" point system might not come up with a clear winner between the C1 Doras, EI Mustangs, Corgi Swordfish, and GMP P-40s (and others). It would depend on the weights assigned to each category. So I'm not going to argue with anyone who says they thing the Doras are the best, or the Nieuport, etc... At that level of quality, it's difficult to say one is right or wrong. I WILL argue with someone who argues the FM P-51D is the best, though...

The point of my post was more to nudge voting collectors towards widening their horizons and not vote with blinders on. Difficult, yes, but not impossible. Yet I'll be the first one to say that removing all trace of subjectivity in this is doomed to failure.

FVD

[STARMAN 352ND]

Just look at her she is one fine special fighter plane.
She got my vote and i don't have many German fighters in my collection
in 1:48...Everyone knows am a Mustang Collector and i really love my Eagles
P-51B's as well...But this Dora just barely beats it with the detail.

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by FormerViperDriver

Pappy,

I agree with a lot of what you wrote. First and foremost with the fact there would be intense debate about any weighing factors in an "objective" point system. Different collectors look at different things in their models (some like moving parts, others not, some care about the aspect of the landing gear, others not, etc...).

On the "presence" factor, I would say you make a good point. All I can say is that when one evaluates "the ultimate in diecast," or "the very best made," one CANNOT think of one's collection only. The question is NOT what is the very best model in your collection, it is what is the very best made, period. Thus if a 1/72-only collector wants to, he can vote for "what's the best 1/72 model made yet," but excluding larger (or smaller) scale models is not appropriate when making an honest attempt at judging the best out there, irrespective of era, scale, etc... One HAS to try to get outside of one's own little world in this respect. But I'd be all in favor or having separate polls for different scales, in fact that might be better, given that not everyone is like me and collects all scales from 1/144 up.

So bottom line to me is that to judge "presence" as objectively as humanly possible (a difficult thing), I would modify what I wrote initially like this: one would have to imagine the particular model as part of one's own collection, even if one does not own it. I guarantee that if I stick an GMP P-40 in the middle of someone's 1/72 WW II fighter collection, the thing will stand out big time (among 1/48, it's already not so evident...). And if one is trying to evaluate diecast "at large," it IS an appropriate way to look at it. Otherwise, if you're not willing to go with that little exercise ("thought experiment"), then you should honestly say so and confine yourself to voting for "best 1/72 model" versus "best model period." Am I making sense here? By the way, "presence" is not based on size alone, although it would seem like a significant factor. For example, I have a 21st Century 1/32 P-47, and while it is big, I don't think its "presence" is that great when I sit it next to some of my real diecast models. There's something about the plastic look, and the really skinny gear, that takes away from the "presence" factor.

Another way to put it is that to exclude a model of contention for "best of the best" just because one does not own it oneself is kind of unfair, and clearly does not demonstrate any attempt at objectivity. It's hard to be fully objective, but at least one can try. I know I try. I know it's hard to evaluate a model if you don't own it, but maybe you can go look at it in a store in person, or at pictures/descriptions/ratings on such excellent sites as Diecast Ace (right?), Flying Mule, or Tricatus, etc...

Also, I would dissagree, as a general rule, about counting accidental defects, such as broken wires, in the criteria, unless it is something that happens to the majority (or at least a very high percentage) of that type of model. I think we have to assume a model built to standard and not damaged in the post (or even at the factory). I would say if a type of model has a consistent history of defects, though, that might be a factor. I know my 3 GMPs came in perfect, but I also know of the problems you mention. I guess it's a matter of how often this occurs. Even then, since GMP apparently has great customer service, I would assume one could get a replacement model so I'm not sure where to draw the line.

In any event, I would say that even an "objective" point system might not come up with a clear winner between the C1 Doras, EI Mustangs, Corgi Swordfish, and GMP P-40s (and others). It would depend on the weights assigned to each category. So I'm not going to argue with anyone who says they thing the Doras are the best, or the Nieuport, etc... At that level of quality, it's difficult to say one is right or wrong. I WILL argue with someone who argues the FM P-51D is the best, though...

The point of my post was more to nudge voting collectors towards widening their horizons and not vote with blinders on. Difficult, yes, but not impossible. Yet I'll be the first one to say that removing all trace of subjectivity in this is doomed to failure.

FVD

I see where you're coming from FVD, thanks for the clarification. (I was cruising the board late last night due to an accidental ingestion of a full octaine cup of coffee at 8 pm.... ) However the original post did ask what was the best model in our collections, not what was the best model out there.... to do what you're suggesting I think we'd need a new thread, poll, and scoring system, which I'll be happy to participate in, too. (Though I think it would be real tough to have people consider models they've only seen pictures of, too.) Now, off to Mom's day dinner with me I go!

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by PappyB

I see where you're coming from FVD, thanks for the clarification. (I was cruising the board late last night due to an accidental ingestion of a full octaine cup of coffee at 8 pm.... ) However the original post did ask what was the best model in our collections, not what was the best model out there.... to do what you're suggesting I think we'd need a new thread, poll, and scoring system, which I'll be happy to participate in, too. (Though I think it would be real tough to have people consider models they've only seen pictures of, too.) Now, off to Mom's day dinner with me I go!

OK, I see Louie's original post did say "your collection." I guess I got confused by the merging of threads and the title "the Very Best Yet Made." So OK, I stand corrected.

Just as you said, though, it's interesting to speculate as to the overall best out there, though difficult.

I find it interesting that I own one or more of all the listed candidates in the poll, except the Witty Su-27 (this may change because they offer some cool liveries, but I still won't consider it the best in any event due to the shape of the canopy, at the very least).

FVD

[Cardinal]

I have to admit that I like FVD's idea of using a template for rating models (especially on websites that list models). Sure, they'll never be perfect, and criteria will be different, but they would limit the natural human tendency towards subjectivity .

I would use similar but simpler criteria though e.g.

• 'Presence' = 15 points
• Design and 'moving parts' = 20 points
• Detailing and accuracy = 20 points
• Fit and finish (including paintwork) = 20 points
• Durability and 'heft' = 15 points
• 'Extras' (e.g. pilots and stands) = 10 points