Last weekend I went to a swapmeet and found a Mach 2 kit of the Atlantique. What I want to know is why everyone slams Mach 2 kits. Is it the quality? Is it the price? They are pricey but most of the time there the only game in town. Is it the build itself? Anyway I paid $10 for the kit and thought it was a bargain.
In my experience, it’s the build itself. Believe them when they say “modeling experience helpful”. They’re definately not Tamiya kits but they are not as bad as everyone one says. They take some time to build mainly because you just can’t slap them together. There is a lot of fitting and sanding and more fitting and more sanding, but isn’t that what this hobby is all about anyways?
Here’s the skinny on Mach 2: almost all of their kits are made from the molds of ancient kits, and I mean by ancient, kits that were from the first generatoin of plastic modeling. For example, their Sea Dart, an airplane I’ve been dying to model in1/48 for as long as I can remember. Since I am no scratchbuilder, I am SOL. I don’t recall the Mach 2 brand Sea Dart’s scale, but I do know the mold is from the 1956 Strombecker kit. And, if you call up their website and click on a certain graphic next to the kti, it will tell you the provenance, or the original mold of the kit. It’s not like they are trying to hide something. They are providing subjects that no one else is kitting, and Mach 2 adds new instructions, better painting directions, and better decals. But, since they are a limited run company, your $10 Atlantique was a real, and I man REAL, bargain.
TOM
They are not suitable for the inexperienced modeler or for the faint of heart. I’d have to really, really want the subject before building another.
Regards, Rick
I have a few and the quality varies a bit. Plan on poor clear parts, rough surface molds, and some real fit issues. Having said that I like the He 114 kit…it looks good, has good details and is an interesting subject. I think its wrong to say “almost all” of their kits are from old molds. None of their WW2 releases over the last couple years have ever even been done in injection plastic until now and my older Amiot 354, Bloch 131 are not great kits but they are not re-done older kits either.
Bottom line, these are kits you buy only when you really want build a particular subject and are up to a bit of a challenge. There won’t be a lot of Bloch 131s or Martin Mariners on the contest tables either, if not because of the work involved, then probably because of the very high price of these kits!
Joe Youngerman
this is more than [2c] worth…but,
i mail order purchased a civilian Falcon 20 for a number of USD…
and the same day it came, i gave it away…
they are major ca ca…[censored]
No, major ca-ca kits are Zehngdefu.
Dean
Hi Sharkskin,
I’ve seen your posts on these kits before and regarding your statement: “Here’s the skinny on Mach 2: almost all of their kits are made from the molds of ancient kits, and I mean by ancient, kits that were from the first generatoin of plastic modeling.” is unfortunately wrong. While these kits are limited run and crude by Tamigawa standards they are all new molds. The link you mention doesn’t show the “provenance” of the molds but actually is showing only the previously released kits of that particular a/c. For example if you click on the link for the X-13 it shows you Aurora’s old 1/48 kit. And the old Strombecker F2Y was something like 1/65, not the 1/72 scale of the Mach 2 kit. The best things you could say about these Mach 2 kits is that 1) They are of previously unavailable a/c, in injection molded 1/72. and 2) Maybe they will inspire a better kit from a mainline manufacturer ala the Revell Atlantic. HTH
Gary
The boxtop of the Rare-plane Detective Kit issue of the F2Y-1 says the scale is 1/60. See Steve Ginter’s excellent monograph on the F2Y in his Naval Fighters Series.
I’ve got it at home, great series, just forgot the scale. He actually reviews both kits seperately in there. thanks for the correction.
Sorry, and I mean this only in the spirit of friendly debate, but until I see real evidence to the contrary, I stand by my story. But, I repeat, I respect your input, and am ready to be proven incorrect, and certainly will admit it when I am proven to be full of caca. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time.
Actually sharksin, I’ve got a better idea. How about you show us the real evidence of yourclaim. I’ve seen Mach2’s website as well and GARRYSCHURR is right. All it shows is previously available 1/48 kits. You said most of their kits are from ancient molds. Tell us which ones. I have a few Mach2 kits and I know they’re not 1/48! To the best of my knowledge, there has never been an AJ Savage in1/72 scale except for a vacform. There has never been a WB-57F except for a vacform conversion. There has never been a Piasecki HUP-2 in 1/72 except for a vacform. At best Mach2 used these previous kits as a basis to scale from and then added detail.[:)]
I really don’t consider this debate critical to the future of the hobby, but I’d at least like to point out that in my one of my other postings on this subject a few weeks ago I said “some” of the kits appeared identical to the original molds of those oldies. It was obvious that not all of their catalogue could be remoldings of old kits, your WB-57F example being real evidence that they do indeed produce some of their own. And I don’t think I should be spoken to like I’m a defendent in a criminal trial. Like I said, I am willing to admit it if I am completely wrong on this, and given a little time, I’ll go back and look at all of the kits in the catalogue, or, mon Dieux!, be a good little reporter and actually E-mail the company and simply ask them.
Ah, and funny you should mention the WB-57F. For those more interested in airplanes than proving somebody might have made a mistake, I have a friend who works fairly high up in NASA Johnson Space Center’s Air Operations Branch at Ellington Field in Houston. It is there, as I’ve described in this space before, that they keep a number of fascinating aircraft, in addition to their 24 T-38s for astronaut flight proficiency and to transport them on their travels all over the country on NASA business. They also still operates the old Super Guppy modification of the old Boeing Stratocruiser, rather than the new jet Beluga. My friend said his current project is converting the C-9 Nightengales (military DC-9s used as hospital planes) for use as zero-G trainers, to replace the old C-135 “Vomit Comet” used since the beginning of the Mercury program. The idea is to save a lot of money, since the spare parts are cheaper and easier to get for the C-9 and it burns a lot less fuel than the early-model, four engine C-135.
But, to the WB-57F. I happened to mention that I hadn’t been down there in ten years, and I thought it was sad that the last two of these magificent, high-flying birds had gone to the boneyard, and I guessed the ER-2 was doing all the high altitude research work for NASA now. Not so, said Dan. It’s the converted U-2s, the ER-2, that’s on it’s way out. The WB-57Fs are getting refurbished, including the additiom of F-15 landing gear (turned inward, instead of outward as on the F-15 and F-117, on which those gear are also used, he said). Dan told me the reason they were doing complete refurbishment to extend the life of the WB-57F is because the difference in operating cost. It costs about $5,000 an hour to fly the modified Canberras with the gigantic wings and two big turbofan engines (plus two more little jet turbines as on the C-123), compared to the $35,000 an hour Lockheed charges the government to rent the ER-2s to NASA. Also, he said, the WB-57F carries six tons more payload than the converted U-2s, and carries a crew of two giving them a systems operator as well as the pilot. The ER-2’s? They are on their way, said Dan, to the Boneyard out at Edwards behind the Dryden Flight Test Center. I’ve seen that boneyard, and it already had a few of the white, single seat U-2s in it as early as 1991.
Tom
PS After I get a long bit of sleep, I’ll check on the Mach 2 debate, and then probably concede defeat to you. I have to watch the way I post things, speaking with words that are more authoritative than the knowledge I actually have at hand. This is the only web forum I’ve ever belonged to, and since it’s all right there in black and white, I shouldn’t treat it like a barroom discussion.
Wow ! Some spirited debate. Sharkskin I have to agree with Garysschurr. All of the Mach2 kits are listed as 1/72. Tailspin turtle, the Rare Planes Detective is the 1/60 Strombecker kit. I remember when it was released and it was advertised that way. Thanks for the info.