- This topic has 47 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi all,
Hannants is showing a variety of 727/200 in 1/72 scale in their future releases section. The manufacturer is MACH 2….. I just hope the basic shape is there…..
Cheers!
Nick Vukson
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
I’m really interested to see what these kits are like. I built his 1/72nd DC-8 a while back and thoroughly enjoyed it. A challenge in places, yes – but very buildable with a bit of elbow grease.
Tom
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
hate to be the party pooper, but this is by far the worst modelling news of the year.
The VC10 and DC8 are such a shape desaster, i would prefer scratch building it.
I hoped for BPK doing it, but i guess thats now off the table.
Atari
Just have to wait and see I guess. I’m not a huge 1/72 fan so I can just stand by and watch. Wonder how the Mach 2 kit will compare to the KMC kit? The KMC kit definitely got “mixed” reviews and allegedly put the company out of business. Yet the KMC kit still commands good money nowadays. Will wait for the Mach 2 kit to be released and read/hear people’s opinions on it. If I was building a 1/72 727 I think an Authentic Airliners kit would be the direction I’d take. I have no idea if they are still available.
Ken
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Looks like you might need to get another batch going, but still on the site: https://www.authentic-airliners.de/epages/64205758.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/64205758/Categories/MODELLE/%221/72%20KITS%22
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
I’m building a 1/72 Authentic Airliners 727 right now and really like it – the most accurate shapes I have seen. AFAIK Kurt makes the kits as needed, so on his shop page you should click on “notify on availability” to let him know you want one.
-Jeff T
Jeff
Mach 2?
Seriously?
No.
Just…no.
Not for me, anyway.
I know i sound snobbish for saying this, but they just haven’t displayed a progressive improvement in quality over the years. Their mold making prowess is stuck in the stone age. IMHO they have no excuse for not improving their game.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Not usually a 1/72 builder myself, but if the Mach2 offering is any good I would be seriously tempted to build a Delta Airlines -200 using the newly announced 26decal.
72-243 Delta 727-232/Adv laser decal – for Mach 2 1/72 kit (26decals.com)
Great pic. of a real Delta 727 by Richard Parkhouse to inspire you here:
1274715.jpg (1400×807) (airplane-pictures.net)
Northwest and Dan Air 727-200s also now released from 26decals.com in 1/72 scale. Various US 727-200s available already from Vintage Flyer Decals.
Having flown on loads of Iberia 727s in the past, it would be hard to resist a 1/72 version if any manufacturer wants to release one.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Less than 24 hours later and 26Decals have released a 1:72 scale IBERIA 727-200 decal.
72-240 Iberia 727-256/Adv Laser decal – for Mach 2 kit 1/72 (26decals.com)
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Fyi, on Facebook there is a recent photo of a built 1/72 Mach 2 Boeing 727-200 in Air France livery, posted by Ortenbourg Hobbies. It does not reveal too much, but from what I notice the fuselage seems depicted decently, better than KMC in my opinion. I am personally happy this kit will be offered. If it turns out to be like DC-8, with all pluses and minuses, I will be happy. 80 euros does not seem too much these days for a kit of this size…let alone, there really aren’t any good injection based kits larger than 1/144.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
“Good News”. Will have to wait for an out of the box review from someone here. “Funny” how the KMC and Mach 2 boxes are both blue and look similar. I also find it interesting that the KMC kits continue to be pricey due to their rarity even though the quality was far from the best.
Ken
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
The astronomical prices on KMC 727s reflect another case of “only game in town” for a lot of folks who consider the resin and vacuform 727s too boutique, if they know about them at all, or people who just want an example of the kit in their collection and are willing to pay the premium. To me, that’s the only value of the KMC kit, as a curiosity more than anything else. It’s not a kit I recommend building, and I know because I tried.
I know how Mach 2 kits are, and in the tree shots I see some interesting things (the hot section breakdown could be a dilly to work around), but I am hoping the 727 will at least turn out to be workable.
Jodie Peeler
"In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." - Sayre's Law
My kit has just arrived – I’ve gone for the BA version and thought you might like to see the kit in detail:
Usual Mach 2 boxing:
Contents only just fit!
Main fuselage sprue:
Wings and tail:
Engines, etc.:
Clear sprues – two came with this kit:
Surface detail is delicate and consistent across the model:
Instructions/decals:
All in all not too bad, and on a par with the DC-8 in terms of mold quality. I’ve got a project to finish and then I’ll make a start on this – stay tuned.
Tom
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Thanks for this, Tom. Those shapes actually look pretty good. Even the Boeing nose that so many other kits get wrong looks decent – definitely not a KMC copy!
But those clear sprues….looks like like some polishing is in order (and I wouldn’t be too keen on cleaning up all those individual cabin windows!).
This kit could be the basis for a really nice model assuming parts fit OK.
Jeff
Also, am I seeing things or are those indeed FedEx hushkits I’m seeing as an option?
Jodie Peeler
"In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." - Sayre's Law
Thanks for the photos Tom. Looking forward to seeing a Build report!
Not sure whether to sell my KMC kit and get this instead now 😕
George
AKL NZWhat about the surface of the wings?
At my sample of the DC-8 it was like crumble cake, so gave the model back to the shop.
Uwe
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Also, am I seeing things or are those indeed FedEx hushkits I’m seeing as an option?
Jodie Peeler
That definitely looks like the longer tailpipes of the FedEx Hushkits to me.
Hoping someone with the actual kit can confirm. Anything in the instruction sheets about it?
Thanks,
ahmed
KSFOI just received my copy and it does indeed include a set of FedEx Hushkits. Here is a closeup shot of the nose with the clear cockpit piece in place. Overall, the kit looks good with the normal/typical Mach 2 plastic and pressing quality. I haven’t tried any other fitment of parts as of yet.
Surface of the wings is overall “smooth,” but will definitely require sanding. Wing detail does look good though.
Mike
SMF
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Hello,
I just received my Mach 2 727 today. The attached photo shows bottom views comparing the KMC and Mach 2 kits to a real 727.
Cheers,
Mike M.
[caption id="attachment_184174" align="alignnone" width="800"]
Comparison of KMC and Mach 2 727’s[/caption]
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Aggghhh! The window line is bowed. It looks like a job for window decals.
Cheers,
Mike M.
[caption id="attachment_184180" align="alignnone" width="800"]
Mach 2 727[/caption]
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Well, the fuselage shapes are a ton better than the KMC kit (I remembered the jowly forward fuselage, but had forgotten just how much of a duck butt the KMC fuselage has!). But bowing the window line? sigh.
Jodie Peeler
"In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." - Sayre's Law
It looks like the centre engine intake is too far forward.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
I laid the Mach 2 kit tail over the Boeing drawing of a 727-100. I figure the relative positions of the engines and tail should be identical to a -200. The tail and fuselage contours follow the drawing very precisely. It looks like the problem is not that the centre engine intake is too far forward, but rather that the windows and side engines are positioned too far aft on the kit.
Cheers,
Mike M.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
The size and shape of the cabin windows looks weird, too, which adds to all the other window problems we’ve chronicled.
Were I to build this kit, I’d cut out the window areas and glue in long panels of clear plastic, a little thicker than the fuselage molding. Then I would sand them flush and polish them out, and then mask the cabin windows before painting. It’s a long and tedious process, and you have to be careful to keep the window masks aligned, but it gives you complete control over window configuration and location. I did this about 25 years ago on a 1:72 DC-9 from Aircraft in Miniature and it worked really well.
(And for those who might be tempted to say it, I’ll stipulate that it’s the pits that Mach 2 didn’t get it correct to begin with. I’m more interested in finding ways to fix it, for those who want to try.)
Jodie Peeler
"In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." - Sayre's Law
Good suggestion for the windows Jodie, something along the lines of the BPK 737. Also, Flightpath makes a photo-etch window strip for the 707, which could be easily adapted to a 727. As for me, I’m going the route of window decals. The photos below show my progress to date. I started by filling-in all the windows. Next, I built up an s-duct. Although Mach 2 provides a blanking plate for the centre engine intake, I figured that 1/72 demanded better.
Cheers,
Mike M.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Great work Mike, really good technique, thanks for the know-how. My kit arrived today, yay. But I have promised myself not to start building it just yet. I have several kits on the go to get finished.
George
AKL NZHi everyone,
While looking at one of my BPK 72nd 737 kits the other day I noticed that it came with two clear parts for the forward glass. One encompasses the entire forward fuselage section, except the nose cone, and is the one that you’re supposed to use. The second one represents only the upper half, and is the one that I believe comes with their 737-800/P-8A kits. Knowing that the glass on the Mach 2 727 is pretty bad, I wondered if the glass between the 727 and 737 was the same. After looking a numerous sources, it sure looks the same to me. I haven’t tried it yet, but after taping the 727 fuselage halves together, it looks like the BPK part will fit without too much work, and just a bit of cutting. This would go a long way towards fixing one of the worst parts of the Mach 2 kit. If you don’t have a BPK kit, or one with the extra glass, you can get one directly from BPK for a mere $5.
So a question for the experts: Is the glass between the 727 and 737 the same or close enough? Thanks, Fred K.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
I think it would work, I was thinking same and will order a part from BPK. Provided one is happy with it being close enough perhaps?
One thing I noticed is the top of the fuselage seems to slope down some way back. I only noticed it when I was looking over the plastic in the kit. No idea if this is right or wrong.
George
AKL NZHi everyone,
While looking at one of my BPK 72nd 737 kits the other day I noticed that it came with two clear parts for the forward glass. One encompasses the entire forward fuselage section, except the nose cone, and is the one that you’re supposed to use. The second one represents only the upper half, and is the one that I believe comes with their 737-800/P-8A kits. Knowing that the glass on the Mach 2 727 is pretty bad, I wondered if the glass between the 727 and 737 was the same. After looking a numerous sources, it sure looks the same to me. I haven’t tried it yet, but after taping the 727 fuselage halves together, it looks like the BPK part will fit without too much work, and just a bit of cutting. This would go a long way towards fixing one of the worst parts of the Mach 2 kit. If you don’t have a BPK kit, or one with the extra glass, you can get one directly from BPK for a mere $5.
So a question for the experts: Is the glass between the 727 and 737 the same or close enough? Thanks, Fred K.
Fred: AFAIK not only do the 727 and 737 share the same cockpit windows but the forward fuselages are externally the same. So I would think using BPK clear parts would be a
great idea, though there might be some puttying and sanding involved.
I did something similar with my Authentic Airliners 1/72 727. A Heller 707 supplied the cockpit area and “canopy”, which let me detail the inside a little better. Seemed to work OK. Still
not finished, but happy with how it’s turning out.
finished
.
Jeff
Hi everyone,
While looking at one of my BPK 72nd 737 kits the other day I noticed that it came with two clear parts for the forward glass. One encompasses the entire forward fuselage section, except the nose cone, and is the one that you’re supposed to use. The second one represents only the upper half, and is the one that I believe comes with their 737-800/P-8A kits. Knowing that the glass on the Mach 2 727 is pretty bad, I wondered if the glass between the 727 and 737 was the same. After looking a numerous sources, it sure looks the same to me. I haven’t tried it yet, but after taping the 727 fuselage halves together, it looks like the BPK part will fit without too much work, and just a bit of cutting. This would go a long way towards fixing one of the worst parts of the Mach 2 kit. If you don’t have a BPK kit, or one with the extra glass, you can get one directly from BPK for a mere $5.
So a question for the experts: Is the glass between the 727 and 737 the same or close enough? Thanks, Fred K.
Fred: AFAIK not only do the 727 and 737 share the same cockpit windows but the forward fuselages are externally the same. So I would think using BPK clear parts would be a
great idea, though there might be some puttying and sanding involved.
I did something similar with my Authentic Airliners 1/72 727. A Heller 707 supplied the cockpit area and “canopy”, which let me detail the inside a little better. Seemed to work OK. Still
not finished, but happy with how it’s turning out.
finished
.That looks great Jeff! My idea is pretty much the same thing, and after looking at it more, I’m pretty sure that it will work. The only area that looks like it might need some adjusting is by the nose. Now to get up the nerve to give it a go.
And lets face it….. one doesn’t tackle a Mach 2 kit if they’re afraid of a lot of filing, puttying, sanding, ect… ! Thanks for the input, Fred.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
I think it would work, I was thinking same and will order a part from BPK. Provided one is happy with it being close enough perhaps?
One thing I noticed is the top of the fuselage seems to slope down some way back. I only noticed it when I was looking over the plastic in the kit. No idea if this is right or wrong.
I see what you mean about that slope George. I hadn’t noticed it before. Hopefully it won’t be a problem. Thanks, Fred.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Well I couldn’t stop myself, and took the plunge and started cutting! To answer my own question…. yes, the BPK 737 glass fits the Mach 2 727 kit decently. The BPK glass part is a little wide at the nose, and a little narrow at the rear. However, it’s nothing that a little shimming won’t fix. I’d post some pics, but I don’t know how to do that on this site. Regards, Fred.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
Hello,
Here’s a progress photo with primer applied. The overall lines of the kit corresponded very well with the 727 drawings I had, and to my aged eye, it looks very much like a 727. My own effort is basically out-of-box. To overcome the bowed window line problem, I filled in the cabin windows and will be using decal windows. I filled in the rear cabin doors, and will be moving them forward along with the side engines, as discussed in my earlier post.
Cheers,
Mike M.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
@jeff
“I did something similar with my Authentic Airliners 1/72 727. A Heller 707 supplied the cockpit area and “canopy”, which let me detail the inside a little better. Seemed to work OK. Still
not finished, but happy with how it’s turning out.”One qustion:
Who is the producer of the pilots? Or Scatch? Or….?
Looks really niceUwe
Berlin-
This reply was modified 2 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 2 months ago by .
-
This reply was modified 2 months ago by .
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
@jeff
“I did something similar with my Authentic Airliners 1/72 727. A Heller 707 supplied the cockpit area and “canopy”, which let me detail the inside a little better. Seemed to work OK. Still
not finished, but happy with how it’s turning out.”One qustion:
Who is the producer of the pilots? Or Scatch? Or….?
Looks really niceUwe
Uwe….Preiser makes the figures for aircrew in 1/72. Their legs had to be modified slightly to fit the seats.
Jeff
This is very good progress, Mike. I love seeing how other modelers overcome challenges and make kits look better. It gives me ideas on how to improve my own craft. I’m looking forward to what you do next with this project.
Jodie Peeler
"In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." - Sayre's Law
Hello,
Based on my earlier experiences, I made a point of checking the kit for asymmetries.
When you insert the fin into the slot provided at the top of the fuselage, the fin sits a bit off to one side. To correct the problem, just file the side of the slot until the fin is able to sit correctly centred on the fuselage.
There is also some wing asymmetry (see photo below), also easily correctable with a bit of filing.
Cheers,
Mike M.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
The following image shows a few of the details I added to the kit in the way of air scoops and lights.
…ready for inspection.
Cheers,
Mike M.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
It looks great Mike! A real purse out of a sows ear! Thanks for sharing, Fred K.
Edit your Profile to get a forum signature.
-
This reply was modified 2 months ago by
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.