Well it was inevitable. You ask for a couple model airplane kits for X-Mas and you end up getting duplicates. I have two kits of the same plane (Spitfire VIII), one from ICM, and the other from Hasegawa. I only plan on building one of them so I plan to part with the other. I have built a Hasegawa kit before, very nice kits, but never an ICM.
Should I veer portside and venture toward uncertainty? [X-)] ICM
Or stay starboard and inhibit my malevolent aspirations for change?[angel] Hasegawa
…the real question is will my sins be forgiven? I’ll stop there. [;)]
The ICM is OK for the Yak birds ,but the Spit…Hmmm…I dont know…Of course the Hasagawa are great for the Spit.And I really like the Tamiya for the Spit…
So I guess I dont like the ICM. Ive got one for a Yak 9T…The cockpit…Eeeck…
Shoot, build both! That ICM builds up into a nice kit with everything open …
and you can build the Hasegawa closed up. It’s not like you can have too many Spits?!?
I like Swanny’s idea of doing one open. That’ll be new for me since I haven’t built one that open. Just starting to get a handle on detailing now too so I should wait to do it justice. Thanks for the suggestion Swanny. I think I’ll do a USAAF version of yours, someday. Got the B-25 and Avenger to tackle first. Wanna put a good dent in my Pacific fleet before goin’ back to the European theatre.
I think the Hasegawa will go for more $$$ on eBay anyway. [;)]
Hi Quagmyre
It all depends on what you know about Spitfires. If you are satisfied with a model that looks like a Spitfire to you, then the Hasegawa is the easier build. But if you want a Spitfire to scale, then the ICM is much better. The Hasegawa is too short in the fuselage so Hasegawa thought that they would fool everyone and bring it to the correct overall length by making the spinner way oversize. When done, it looks totally ridiculous but some people wouldn’t know the difference. The ICM is a bit more of a challenge to build and initially they had a Quality Control problem with short shots, sink holes etc. That has been pretty well solved now except for a sink mark just forward of the ailerons on the upper wing surfaces.
Here is a photo of the Hasegawa IX nose to nose with the ICM.
Notice the size of the spinner on the Hasegawa on the left. The ICM has the bulged upper cowl and the Hasegawa doesn’t.
As for doing a Spitfire opened up, well the ICM Merlin given in the kit doesn’t look too much like the real thing. It really lacks the intercooler behind the cylinders. ICM has it there but it is very small. I did two build articles on the ICM Spitfires over on HyperScale. The one on the Mk IX was the first one that I built http://www.kitparade.com/features00/spitfireixconstructionrs_1.htm
Later I did a Mk VII which you may find interesting too. In it I walk you right through building an ICM Spitfire. http://www.features02.kitparade.com/spitfireviicbs_1.htm
In the first build I found out that the ICM Merlin will not fit under the cowlings.
Cheers
Bob S.
Oh yeah, The Spitfire was in the Pacific too. In fact it was in all the theaters of WWII.
Hi EasyCo
The ICM is the most accurate 1/48th scale Merlin Spitfire on the market today, and that includes all the Tamiya and Hasegawa kits. For Griffon engined Spits in 1/48th scale it is the Airfix Mk 22/24. The Academy Mk XIV’s are terrible.
Cheers
Bob S.
just keep the ICM it is as Bob said it is the most accurate spitfire dimensionly. And I don’t know if it is true but as far as my information goes it is said that ICM ceased trading in September last year. In my opnion it would be a shame to see another company go
Hi Rob
I have heard lots of rumours about what is happening at ICM. So far I have heard nothing definite. I have e-mailed Michael Lipovich, head of ICM, and got no return. He had big plans on getting established in the western market and had a great line of Me 109’s scheduled for production. I had met Michael at the RCHTA show in Chicago in 2000 and did some consulting with him on the Spitfires, with the differences needed for the various Marks. I also wound up doing two articles in the Moscow based model magazine, “M-Hobby”.
Cheers
Bob S.
I would have to say build them both. I really dont see any reason to get rid of one of them and it dont hurt to try a different kits. If you dont like that one then you know that ICM isnt for you and you can go from there.
This comment is about me and how i think it is right. If you disagree with anything you see here, you are wrong. J/k!!!
ok ICM ALL THE WAY!!! i loved the spit, even though the wing roots wernt all the best. ultimate accuracy. if i had the chance to, and i had the money to, i would buy the icm factory.
Hi Bob,
I surfed to their site and it is not operational anymore. So I searched with Google(search machine) and there I stumbled to a site where it was announced that ICM ceased trading and that would be a warehouse sale on wich one could react by e-mail.
Hi unnamedplayer
Can I ask what was wrong with your wing roots? I find them better than Tamiya. I have a friend who has a special way of doing the ICM Spitfire wing roots although I have never tried it, or had to.
Cheers
Bob S.
Hi unnamed
I find that the areas that you mention are corrected by making sure that the lower wing can come back far enough. I do this by filing the aft part of this piece (the place where it meets the rear fuselage). This allows it to slide back into place better. Keep checking it with the leading edge that is molded with the fuselage. The leading edge of the lower wing should line up perfectly with the leading edge molded with the fuselage. Once this is done properly I found that the only place on the whole model that needs filler is that rear extremity seam between the wing lower part and the fuselage. Real Spits do not have a seam there.
Cheers
Bob S.
Hey Quagmyre;
If I where you I’d walk on the wild side and build the ICM because you nevr built the kit before, and to cure your curouisity just do it, also you may like it better than the Hasegawa’s and I’m that type of person I’d try anything once-or twice if I like it
i love icm