[Epapazian]

I have many of Witty's WW II planes and a few jets. So far the Sea Fury and the Zero are probably the best while the P-38 looks like it was rushed to market and has many QC issues. Overall, my biggest problem with Witty is the lack of depth in their panel lines. While this may be accurate in terms of scale, it makes these planes difficult to weather, which is the way I like them. If Witty expects to compete with Dragon, Corgi and Hobby Master in the diecast field, it needs to develop a more coherent production and marketing strategy that focuses on planes that have not been done to death, or, failing that, on outstanding quality.

[Elmer]

I also like the jets (F-15, F-16 and Su-27; I can't comment on the others). I love the attention to detail given to these models (some of the best at 1:72 I have seen). Folks complaining about the new P-38 should bear in mind that Witty has only released one model so far; I suspect that the P-38 liveries / colors / finish will get much better as new releases come out. I think the important question is: how does Witty's P-38 mold (shape, fit, and detail) compare / contrast with Corgi's? From the abundant pictures I have seen of Corgi's P-38s, I am not at all impressed with fit and detail.

[flyXwire]

Originally Posted by Elmer

I also like the jets (F-15, F-16 and Su-27; I can't comment on the others). I love the attention to detail given to these models (some of the best at 1:72 I have seen). Folks complaining about the new P-38 should bear in mind that Witty has only released one model so far; I suspect that the P-38 liveries / colors / finish will get much better as new releases come out. I think the important question is: how does Witty's P-38 mold (shape, fit, and detail) compare / contrast with Corgi's? From the abundant pictures I have seen of Corgi's P-38s, I am not at all impressed with fit and detail.

I agree with you on that statement alone, Elmer.

Probably not the kind of information you're looking for, Elmer...but the two links below might somehow give you some starting point to compare the
Witty P-38 to the Corgi P-38 to each other if you open both links together and view them side-by-side? It's a pain, but it works for me though.

http://themodelhangar.com/forum/show...30&postcount=1
http://www.tricatus.co.uk/aa36608.htm

[F-104 Paul]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

I have many of Witty's WW II planes and a few jets. So far the Sea Fury and the Zero are probably the best while the P-38 looks like it was rushed to market and has many QC issues. Overall, my biggest problem with Witty is the lack of depth in their panel lines. While this may be accurate in terms of scale, it makes these planes difficult to weather, which is the way I like them. If Witty expects to compete with Dragon, Corgi and Hobby Master in the diecast field, it needs to develop a more coherent production and marketing strategy that focuses on planes that have not been done to death, or, failing that, on outstanding quality.

To be honest the lack of panel lines on the F-104's is the least of its defects.

[b-huj]

My humble opinion, and I am no expert on WWII warplanes really, but I think Dragon used to do a great job with WWII warplanes in terms of panel lines, paintjob, shape, heft, but that if you can bear with the fiddly bits and the "assembly process" required. Corgi is a big name (and they paint the German planes with "full details" if u know what I mean), but I just don't like how deep and wide their panel lines on 1/72 look. Witty has the more subtle and IMO best to scale panel lines, but their modern jets have a collective cockpit shape problem (except maybe the F-16, the twin-seat F-15 is a joke). Witty also seems to be dropping details with every new release and that is quite disturbing...models start to look unfinished or half-painted.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Epapazian

I have many of Witty's WW II planes and a few jets. So far the Sea Fury and the Zero are probably the best while the P-38 looks like it was rushed to market and has many QC issues. Overall, my biggest problem with Witty is the lack of depth in their panel lines. While this may be accurate in terms of scale, it makes these planes difficult to weather, which is the way I like them. If Witty expects to compete with Dragon, Corgi and Hobby Master in the diecast field, it needs to develop a more coherent production and marketing strategy that focuses on planes that have not been done to death, or, failing that, on outstanding quality.

Wow, you think their Zero is good? I presonally find Dragon's zero much better looking than Witty's. So far, I don't like their spitifres, their 109s, or their mustangs. Anyone see any GOOD points about them(excluding liveries) that I might have missed? To me, it seems their canopies and shapes are wrong.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Wow, you think their Zero is good? I presonally find Dragon's zero much better looking than Witty's. So far, I don't like their spitifres, their 109s, or their mustangs. Anyone see any GOOD points about them(excluding liveries) that I might have missed? To me, it seems their canopies and shapes are wrong.

I didn't say that. I referred to the Zero and Fury only in a Witty Context. I consider Dragon's Zeros not only to be far superior to those put out by Witty, FOV, Matchbox or Corgi, but in my opinion, to be among the finest diecast renditions of any plane made to date.

[Celtic]

IMHO, the fit and finish on all the Dragon A6M2's is horrible. The Zero is one of Dragon's early models, so it doesn't have as many fiddly parts, but those moving or to-be-attached parts the '2 Zeros do have are a problem: the canopies don't fit, the wheel-well covers are poorly painted and fall out, and the aerials are too-long and don't fit into the canopies and/or fuselage. Again, IMHO, I like the Witty version of the Zero very much, but recognize it has flaws (the canopy size being one). Maybe a fair statement would be that no one has yet made a great version of the Zero.

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by Celtic

IMHO, the fit and finish on all the Dragon A6M2's is horrible. The Zero is one of Dragon's early models, so it doesn't have as many fiddly parts, but those moving or to-be-attached parts the '2 Zeros do have are a problem: the canopies don't fit, the wheel-well covers are poorly painted and fall out, and the aerials are too-long and don't fit into the canopies and/or fuselage. Again, IMHO, I like the Witty version of the Zero very much, but recognize it has flaws (the canopy size being one). Maybe a fair statement would be that no one has yet made a great version of the Zero.

When I saw your pictures I went back and looked at my Dragon Zeros. On one the canopy does, indeed ,fit poorly, on another its so so and on a third I apparently" fixed it" by reshaping the rear part slightly, then displaying the plane in a wheels-down mode with the canopy open. All in all your point is well taken. Let's all hope that someone produces a perfect Zero, but don't hold your breath waiting.

[Andrew]

Isn't the gap supposed to be so that it will look good with the canopy open?