Is this really necessary?
I read somewhere that regular styrene parts will actuall begin to wilt or even collapse over time, but I’m skepticle. I bought a set of white metal LG for my 1/72 Hasegawa B-24 Liberator, but upon inspection, I thought they were a little soft themselves!
I really would prefer not to spend the extra $$ and just use the kit parts, but I don’t want my planes sitting on their bellies either!
Your thoughts and experiences would be greatly appreciated.
I still have kits that I have build in the late EIGHTIES which are still standing on their styrene landing gear!!! But I must say that the decals have yellowed…
I have used them on a 1/72nd B-29 since I was worried about the weight of the aircraft but generally no, I really don’t see the point.
FWIW, I only use the metal landing gear if it comes in the same box as the kit itself. Trumpeter is pretty good for including these in some of their larger 1/32 kits, so it’s a win-win as the metal is not soft at all.
The metal landing gear casting allows finer details than their plastic counter parts. I have 2 of the Hasegawa Hi-Grade Series 1:48 kits (F-4 and F-15) from the late 1980’s. I really admire the workmanship that went into the landing gear casting.
There are aftermarket metal LG today. But the detail is usually no better than the kit plastic part. Yes, I agree with other posters that the strength alone is no worth the extra money.
The only 1:32 Trumpeter aircraft kit that I have is their M-15. An old cheap kit with no metal part. Can you tell me which Trumpeter kit has the metal LG and the quality of these part.
I bought them for a Monogram B-58 Hustler. Thought they were a waste of money. The seemed to be made with the same molds as the original kit landing gear - flash and all. They ended up in the trash.
There are a few kits out there that are a little less stressing with the metal landing gear. When my a-20 lost its fight with the cat, i couldn’t get the styrene gear workable again to save my life. Had to order the metal ones.
I have yet to have a styrene landing gear strut wilt or collapse on its own over time. My oldest current builds are roughly 25 years old and doing well. Although many have been broken by cats, earthquakes, kids, etc. That being said, there are a few kits that I have build and no longer have that had very fragile struts and I would have certainly preferred metal struts had they been available at the time. Especially for larger heavier kits (1/32 F-4 Phantom and 1/32 Panavia Tornado) But the biggest and heaviest kits Ihave built, Monogram 1/48 B-17, B-24, and C-47, and 1/72 B-52 all had no need of metal replacement parts. The original kit parts were built more than adequetely enough.
I bought some for my airfix lightning and am distinctly unimpressed. i will use the kit ones and only replace them if they wilt.
I’ve never had any problems with the plastic gear collapsing. Heaviest kit I have is the Monogram 1/48 B-29, and it was built nearly 30 years ago. I do have a problem with the Academy 1/32 F-18C kit’s main gear. It’s squashing out, causing the plane to settle. It has a metal wire core, however, it just doesn’t seem strong enough.
Glenn
Generally I’m not a fan.
Recently, however, I’ve found myself purchasing two sets of metal gear struts.
The first was for the HK 1/32 B-25. The thing CAN sit on the styrene gear, but it’s wobbly. And you have to install the nose gear before you close the fuselage. That’s a lot of accidents waiting to happen during the build. I also went for the G-Factor white bronze stuff. The molding is exquisite and the white bronze isn’t soft at all.
The second was a white metal set for the Revellogram B-25. Again, the nose strut has to go in before you close the fuselage. That and this one’s a commission build, and will have to be shipped. I’d rather have the gear bend than snap apart…
But I view these two as very much being exceptions. Usually, no point to it.
I do have several sets in the stash, but only for the bigger kits that I know are going to need some weight to keep them on the gear (48th B-1 for example), or for kits that the kit gear parts are known to be on the fragile side (48th S-3 MLG kit struts and braces will break if you look at them too hard it seems).
Keilau, after checking my stash, these 1/32 Trumpeter kits have metal landing gear in the box:
Additionally, Tamiya adds metal gear on some kits:
Overall, the metal parts are pretty much the same as the styrene parts. At a cursory glance, they all appear to be more or less equal in detail. I haven’t gotten to the Tamiya kits yet, so I can’t say whether the metal is soft or not but Trumpeter’s metal is damned hard and requires a machinist’s file to remove the part lines. I don’t think that they’d ever bend or deform.
Hope that helps.
The Trumpeter and Hobby Boss 1/32 F-105s definately need the metal landing gear legs. Most other models do not.
Darwin, O.F. [aln]
If memory serves, the Monogram F-105 kit really benefits from the metal legs. Built three back in the 80s, all the MLG struts broke at some point.
Im funny about spending lots of money on parts for an already “High Dollar” kit just to make it right or rectify the kits short commings. The normal I will purchase,…PE and such but thats about it these days
Its very easy to go all out on a build and buy replacement parts just to be buying them…Most times the “parts” do enhance the look of the kit…but at possibly 3x the price of the original kit?
Metal LG struts that Ive dealt with were certainly a major let down for me. The latest AC kit I bought them for was a Hasegawa P-40…I tossed them back into the spare parts box.!!!
I have had good results scratching LG with Aluminum tube and the looks to me are more realistic and life-like than the Metal AM parts.
Get some tubing and a Waldron Punch tool set along with various sizes of wire and you will be amazed at what you can turn out.
Besides…isnt that the true “Theme” of model building?..To me it is but thats just my .2 cent opinion.
thanks for the heads up on the Revell B-25 landing gear. I am about to start one so I will look into the metal gear.
The only kit I have that has had any trouble with the plastic gear is the Kinetic Mirage 2000D. The kit struts are just horribly inadequate for the kit, and it’s not big kit. When I built the kit there was no aftermarket available.
Also the IBEX JPATS could use some metal struts for the same reason… With nose weight the kit struts are very borderline.
I have built the Revell 1/32 Eurofighter the kit is quite heavy and it is sitting on the plastic landing gear supplied, it could do with a stronger nose gear but it’s fine and is a few years old and has also been accidentally knocked a few times as well and it has held up fine. The only time I have had any landing gear start to sag was on a 1/48 F/A-18E as the main gear are an awkward shape and I would get it in that instance.
Ditto to both…
Well, there ya go… Nothing looks more like metal like metal itself…
Personally, I’m more concerned with axles breaking under stress, rather than the struts… Of course, some kits are weighted, some not… For instance, I didn’t “weight” my 1/48 B-29, but rather I “trapped” a sheet-metal screw in the right nose-wheel half, then inserted the screw through the hole I drilled in the base, then added the washer/nut… The stress-point then is on the nose strut at the glue-joint in the gear-well, and the model’s entire weight is supported on the mains… This goes for all the “trike-gear” birds I build…
But I look over the axles pretty well, and sometimes it’s just easier to replace the plastic axle with styrene-coated wire during the guild, rather than waiting for it break on it’s own… AMT’s 1/48 Tigercats are one example of a kit that I did that on the nose-wheel…
If I can’t trap a screw in a nose-wheel tire, I drill a hole in the bottom of the “flattend” tire, epxoy in a piece of Evergreen’s styrene-coated wire, then pull it through the base, bending it over to “lock” the rod underneath…
The only white metal I’ve used was on the 1/48 AMT F7F front strut. It’s long and delicate and I figured it would be easier to bend back into shape than it would to repair a break. Outside of that I’ve never used the product and have seen little to no evidence it’s needed. Other than super huge kits I see no need but I’ll admit I’ve not built a kit so big that it may need them.