Opinions on the Monogram Classics F6F Hellcat?

I built the classic Corsair and Avenger.... overall, they are OK-- the only thing I really dislike about them is that they came already in the color blue....I imagine to save on paint. That in itself wasn't big (in fact it is probably a good idea)-- but in my amateur stupidity, I actually didn't paint them and they are my least favorite finished models-- so again my own fault.

The Avenger parts for the folding wings are VERY fragile though-- they broke just upon taking them off the sprue. But the gear folds in and out, and the tailhook goes in and out....and the Avenger torpedo bay opens to adroppable torp.

Quality-qise, they are probably better suited for kids....unless you like adding in a lot of aftermarket detail...but OOTB, they are so-so...

Yes, I have built it many moons ago, and as for aftermarket for the ole' Mono Hellcat is definitely yes. It would greatly enhance the aircraft. Now just to deal with the panel lines.

LT

I built it years ago. It is sitting in the corner in a few pieces. The wing fold hinge looks like a piece of sprue trapped between the wings. Wings folded, you can look into the wheel bay, because there isn't one. The tires are way too thin, so they fit in the wing when folded. Cockpit is a decal instrument panel and a pilot molded to the seat. Tail wheel retracts and extends when you move the arrestor hook. Windscreen is flat like the-5. Haven't checked it for overall accuracy. Depends on how much work and money you want to put in, how it will look in the end.

Actually I have all 8 Navy birds still sitting on my shelf. Circa 1980. They're just cheap kits but a with a little effort they look ok.
The worst I thought was the devestator. Lousy wing fold.
The Hellcat still looks good.

Oh, man. . .
I'm having flashbacks - I build that when I was 12 or 13 years old (circa 1971)
Lots of fun. Wings and landing gear are operable but quite fragile. I can still see it parked next to my Monogram SBD and Avenger. . .

Thanks, guys. It sounds like it could build into a good model with some care and maybe some after market parts.

Does anyone else think that the moving parts are pretty cool, at least in concept? I know the general opinion seems to be that those are childish or toy-like features. I kinda think that since the wings folded on the real plane, it's neat to see that replicated in scale.

Regards,

-Drew

Yes I do-- that's why I picked up the Avenger and Corsair ;) Just wish they weren't so fragile....but then again- I am a glutton for punishment as I just picked up the Devastator in the series....*sigh*-- I am building it for my wife's grandfather. He wasn't in the war-- but he has always appreciated what I do :)

Plus-- that kit has a free Bert Kinzey book LOL

Built 'em all, loved 'em all.
Still got 'em all, after all these years.

Oh yes I built that series back in the early 70's. Along with the song "Your so Vain" from Carly Simon. I actually have the Hellcat on an off again and on again project. Funny when I was 11 that I can build it in a day. Now it takes months. I have the True Details cockpit set installed just cut the locating tabs inside the fuselage some test fitting and wallah..an updated cockpit. Yep love them ole' Monogram classics...

Fly Navy, Cleared Hot !

I grew up on them - them and the Beatles. Those were the days!!! I've purcheased just about all of those reissue kits from Revell & Monogram. Now I'll just dig out my old Beatles 45's and start building....

I think that the moving parts concept is great for young modelers who care more about action than accuracy.
I remember how much I loved my Monogram Helldiver and Corsair with all their many operating features. Back in the late 60's Revell [I believe] came out with a 1/72nd scale F-111A with retractable landing gear. Talk about intricate and fragile! To the best of my recollection it didn't look half bad.
Now of course that was back in the days when I would build them in 2 hours and then unashamedly take my masterpieces in hand and "fly" them through the house, letting my mouth supply all the necessary sound affects, landing and taking off on the kitchen table.
Now that I'm older and more mature I have to wait until my wife and kids go to bed before I do any of that stuff.

QUOTE: Now that I'm older and more mature I have to wait until my wife and kids go to bed before I do any of that stuff.

Oh, I've been strafing and buzzing my wife with the models.


Regards,

-Drew

I've built several of the old Monogram Hellcats, and they're not up to today's standard of moldings. Overall, the detailing is poor and the ouline is only generally correct. Several years ago I got another and built it with the skills that I have now and it took a lot of work to get it to look acceptable. Most of it has Hasegawa parts! Although I'll get another to build It's only for the memories. If you want a Hellcat with folding wings I would say get a Hasegawa kit and a Dangerboy wingfold for it. The results would be much better.

All,

For those that notice such things, how do you guys notice problems in outline and accuracy? I know sometimes when something just doesn't look quite right,but often it's hard to put my finger on it. In the case of the Monogram Hellcat, I realize that the wing fold area is lacking a ton of detail, but the overall shape in the article I read (see the link in the first post) seemed pretty good compared to the real plane I spent most of the weekend looking at June 6-8.

I'd like to think I've got a pretty good eye, but nothing in the kit review really jumped out at me as a huge error in shape.

Where are the problems with the kit?

Regards,

-Drew

Drew
Didn't want to seem like I was bashing, so I didn't mention the one item I forgot in my earlier post. Because the gear retracts, there isn't any retraction linkage, the oleo are missing scissors, and the gear is at full extension, as if the bird was airborne. That may make the wheel covers too long, and of course the plane sits too high parked on your carrier deck. All that said, I have one on my shelf waiting to be built. there won't be a ruler under it, or a planform behind it, so I won't know just how accurate it is. If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck to me.

Wayne,

I didn't think you were bashing, and my reply may have seemed a bit snippy. I just get frustrated from time to time when I read general statements like, "this kit has inaccurate outlines." Detail like you just provided is helpful when considering purchasing a kit. General statements aren't as helpful because I don't know if the kit is horribly off, or just lacking detail.

Anyway, one of my dreams is to do a 1/48 scale Enterprise (CV-6) with Hellcats, Avengers, etc. just like the 1/72 scale modern Enterprise featured in FSM a few years ago. It'll probably never happen because of the overwhelming amount of detail needed at that scale. The ship model would be a bit over 17 feet long! If I were to do it, however, cheap Monogram airplane kits would be a good way to go.

1/72 scale might be a bit more managable: that would be an 11 foot model. There are plenty of planes in that scale, but I'm not sure how many have folding wing kits available.

Regards,

-Drew

I tried one a couple of years ago and someone broke the folding wings at a local show. The moldings are a little old but I sanded and re-scribed and it came out pretty nice. The cockpit begs for some serious work and with some attention looks great. Like it was mentioned earlier the True Details cockpit set is nice. Just watch the fragile parts and all will be good.
Regards

hey lufbery,
An 11 foot Enterprise would be a dream come true. I'd love to work on something like that. It would definitley be an undertaking, but what an awesome sight on the finished product.