Corgi's latest B-17 a big disappointment

[aferguson]

I was pumped to get Corgi's latest B-17F Ye olde pub, which comes with Stigler's 109 but after seeing pics, i'm going to pass.

Aside from an obvious colour mismatch between plastic and painted parts in the nose area, there is no astrodome, pitot tubes are missing and the nose guns don't have receivers; which is pretty obvious in the big clear nose blister.

On top of that the waist gun windows should be open, not glassed in as they are with the Corgi model. I gather they are using the same tooling for B-17G's as well, hence the glassed in waist gun positions.

A lot of glaring errors for a model that retails at $200.

[tmanthegreat]

I wasn't happy with the way this looked, either. I never intended to get it, but it just looks off in the promo pictures. The model appears to have what is essentially a B-17G body (including the Cheyenne tail turret) with the nose slightly modified to make it resemble a B-17F.

I have two Corgi B-17Fs: "Sweet & Lovely" correctly represents a later B-17F with the astrodome, flared forward windows, etc. My "Memphis Belle" model is also correctly done for an earlier B-17F. So its not like Corgi hasn't done those models accurately in the past. I really regret not getting one of the silver B-17Gs...

[dragon53]

I've got "Ye Olde Pub" but it's been in the box due to a lack of space. I got it mainly for the history, but it's unbelievable how long Corgi had to work on it and left the obvious observation blister and pitots off...while the prices keep climbing.

I also have the first "Memphis Belle" and "A Bit O' Lace".
With Corgi, mistakes are part of the game.....and Hobby Master appears to be going that route, too.

[snake]

Valid complaints, Aferg.

The last one or two Corgi B-17's didn't have the receivers on the machine guns, so that was to be expected on this release.

The missing astrodome, pitot tubes, and covered waist gunners, are a bit annoying, but no deal breaker, at least for me. I am most disappointed with the slightly different shade of OD, on the nose, but guess I am just going to have to live with it.

A pretty incredible story behind this, and a unique set from Corgi. I had this on pre order, and even as these issues came up, no way was I going to cancel. And pretty sure other collectors came to the same conclusion. However, think a few pre orders may have been cancelled as well. It is an individual decision.

To end on a positive note, Stigler's 109 is well done, and my first 1/72 single prop fighter.

[cnq]

sorry to hear about the issues with Corgi's B17. This is one of the reasons I start to build my own models besides rising cost. I love the B17 and plan to build the Revell 1:48 B17G/F in future.

[Dauntless]

I got the set too. My first Corgi B-17. I'm not that happy with it either for the price, but I got a $200 Bf-109 in there at least.

I always thought and still believe that accuracy and finer detail can be achieved in plastic. While most collectors want the heft and solidness of a diecast plane, who knows the difference when it's sitting there not handled?

I guess it comes from the old days of collecting 1:18 and 1:32 21st Century Toys and BBI stuff that I'm used to this thinking.
To get to the detail you almost have to build them yourself these days, yet there is a wide open market for less expensive highly accurate pre-painted, partial assembly required models that could be tapped out there.

I'm sure even a company like Easy Models could make a better 1:72 plastic B-17 than Corgi's old diecast B-17 I think.

To think that 21stC actually had a 1:32 B-17 prototype at one time that fit into a 1:18 size box, shows that it is not beyond the realm of possibility for even a larger scale, so why not the 1:72 smaller scale? I don't have the time and patience like some to build the HK 1:32 Flying Fortress or a 1:72 model.

Even the little 1:144 Japanese candy toy pre-painted partial assembly models have accuracy that rivals that of expensive diecast planes of the same type.
Manufacturers just don't get it. We have Hobby Master putting out a 1:32 Hellcat which looks nice, but is way up there in price past $200 beyond the average collectors budget. The same scaled aircraft could be offered in plastic for a quarter of the price with acceptable accuracy and detail. BBI proved that with the Dauntless and Wildcat.

[aferguson]

i totally agree.......i have no idea what the appeal of diecast is. It's clunky heavy, offers less detail, is nearly impossible to customize and expensive. Were these made of plastic they would be cheaper to make, cheaper to ship, offer much finer detail and be easier to make as components that could be altered to make subtle variations of the same plane.

What is need, as you said is 1/72 Easy Model bombers or F Toy like bombers. I think the only reason we haven't seen something like that is because manufacturers are reluctant to make something that isn't diecast, for fear of a poor reception.

Altaya and Amercom have a good formula i think....diecast fuselages with plastic everything else; so you get some heft and many of the benefits of plastic.

[hworth18]

i totally agree.......i have no idea what the appeal of diecast is. It's clunky heavy, offers less detail, is nearly impossible to customize and expensive. Were these made of plastic they would be cheaper to make, cheaper to ship, offer much finer detail and be easier to make as components that could be altered to make subtle variations of the same plane.

What is need, as you said is 1/72 Easy Model bombers or F Toy like bombers. I think the only reason we haven't seen something like that is because manufacturers are reluctant to make something that isn't diecast, for fear of a poor reception.

Altaya and Amercom have a good formula i think....diecast fuselages with plastic everything else; so you get some heft and many of the benefits of plastic.

Oh god Aferg!! You said the "P" word!!!!
Diecast aficionados would curse you down for insinuating plastic is a better option than zinc. They LOVE the wieght of the heavy metal diecast regardless of the fact that most of these are put on display and never picked up again. I collect plastic along with diecast and I wholeheartedly agree that plastic is so much better with regards to detail and cost. The only problem is that most manufacturers have not come up with an acceptable plastic model yet. Easy model for the most part is junk, which is disappointing considering their experience in making 1/72 planes, and they aren't getting any better.
I'd love to see Dragon start producing 1/72 & 1/48 scale prebuilts of their aircraft models with the same quality and detail of their 1/35 tanks. Those would put anything else on the market to shame, even HobbyMaster.

[aferguson]

well, when i hear 'even Hobby Master' it gives me pause. HM stuff is nice, but it's not great......good, not great. Part of the reason for that, though is because they use diecast and so you get clunky big panel lines and fineness of detail missing.

Corgi too i feel are overrated. They make nice models but they are only marginally better than Altaya, Amercom and Oxford which sell at a fraction of the price.

Corgi-philes are a particularily strange bunch. I've viewed a number of Corgi forums now and it's like Corgi can do no wrong and everybody else's stuff is junk....when that is very often not the case and in fact, it's the exact opposite.

Were i not so lazy and had better eyesight, i would just be building models, as i can do a pretty good job..i just don't enjoy it. But the allure of easy pre-builts keeps me coming back for more.

[snake]

The Corgi-philes are an interesting bunch, Aferg.

While I am a Corgi fan, only for some models, and they have made some big time blunders. Nobody else does heavies in 1/72, and their twins, B-25, Catalina, Wellington, Ju 88, Do-17 are quite well done, especially the B-25, Catalina, and Wellington.

Have a few Corgi jets, but these are nowhere near as good as HM.

The Corgi molds are getting old, and they do make some strange decisions. Very UK based these last few years, and seemingly ignoring the rest of the international market. They used to be basically the premium diecast company, for the most part, and do have some good stuff still. Particularly their 1/32 models, and some of their heavies. Shame the Ye Old Pub had these issues, as it had such promise. Still, I am happy to have it, but could have been better.

HM has basically said that they will not be doing any heavies in 1/72, and the only twin they have done is the A-26, and A-20. So for now, Corgi is the only game in town for these in 1/72.

Just the way it is, and can't see it changing anytime soon. But the frustrating part is when they get something wrong, like Ye Olde Pub, when they have shown they can do better.

[aferguson]

well, on a brighter note, i got one of the Dambuster Lancs off ebay. N Nan, Les Knight's plane that breached the Eder dam. Overall a nice model. But heavy.....too heavy in my view. Makes me wonder about the Stirling i've got coming and the upcoming Vulcan!

Anyway, overall it's a nice piece but the bomb aimer's blister is on crooked, with a big gap on one side. I hope i can pry it off, clean up the edge and reglue it on. Otherwise, it's good. It has the built in little lights on the undeside and i'm very impressed by the fact that they merge when the model is held 10 inches off the floor......10 inches being 60 scale feet, which is the correct distance. Neat touch. The only quibble iwth the lights is that the front one is much brighter than the rear one.

[Dauntless]

The Corgi Lancaster is pretty cool. I've only got one myself so far.

The Short Stirling is pretty nice too. I managed to get one recently. Chose the third Aaron Arthur version. I guess the first two had inaccurate landing gear and dorsal turret i do believe But you can get landing gear replacements from Corgi for the first two. Worth having and not too bad a price compared to other Corgi heavies these days.

What Snake said on the good ones Corgi has made. It pays to find out from others who have bought them the good ones and the not so good ones. We used to have a thread on this which helped me immensely when I started down the 1:72 path not too long ago.

Many of the so called die cast models have plastic parts anyways. Some more than others. It really doesn't make that much difference to me either way as long as I get nice detail and accuracy.
You'd think with a plastic nose section that Corgi could at least rework that part of the mold with better lines and detail before sending it out to the masses. I think they rest on their laurels too much. Because of the short supply and high demand for the Corgi B-17 they took advantage of that fact.

They have been known to improve a few molds slightly like the Spitfire and Hurricane recently, and the Bf-109G is a totally new tooling at least. With the B-17 such a popular subject, it needs updating, even if just a few parts, and at least the nose section.

[aferguson]

i got the Stirling III as well....but simply because i got the best deal on it. Any of the 3 would have been fine. The u/c problems of the first two didn't bother me as i display all my planes in flight (as they were meant to be).

The turret on the early Corgi Stirlings is correct, it's just that a different style was used on the Stirling I......similar to what was on the Short Sunderland....a tall, thin egg shape, as opposed to the later mushroom shaped one on the Stirling III

[Dauntless]

I'd seen those turrets on other aircraft too, but wasn't sure.

Yeah in flight looks cool sometimes, but I find the Corgi stands, and some of the Hobby Master stands as well that cradle the aircraft kinda ruin the lines, but I like both.

Haven't started doing it yet, but there are some 1:72 armor and vehicle pieces you can get to make a nice diorama.
It would be cool to have a refueling truck, bomb dollies and figures on an airfield. 1:72 seems to have more choices in this area. At least with four engine bombers and such.

[aferguson]

i dont use display stands either, because i find all of them too cumbersome and distracting. I hang my planes on the wall....that way anytime i can easily pick one up and play.....er, interact with it. Also has the bonus advantage of keeping them virtually dust free.

[tmanthegreat]

I wouldn't hang my Corgi planes on the wall... Almost too heavy and too tiny for my large walls. I do have some 1:18 aircraft hanging on the walls in a couple rooms in my house and like the look

Not to change the subject too much, but I finally picked up a Franklin Mint 1:48 B-25 the other day. Its a good tooling, its big, and its heavy, but my little Corgi version of the same type of aircraft in many ways has the better quality. Corgi at least includes crew figures, movable guns, landing gear pieces to display the model on the ground or in flight, and screw covers on the underside. Corgi's paint also seems to have the more accurate shades. I do not regret my Franklin Mint purchase, but Corgi (at least traditionally) has the better quality.

[aferguson]

since we're straying ot, i opened my first Easy Model 1/72 aircraft today. USMC UH-34D Seahorse. I have to say i was pretty impressed with it. Nice detailing, well finished, virtually no flaws at all. It comes with an M2 mounted in the door, along with the pintle mounted m60, but the M2's were just experimented with and not used, so i flicked it out of the doorway.....it was an odd detail for them to add.

That aside, it's a great little model. After handling a bunch of diecasts it feels like it weighs nothing but that doesn't bother me in the least. It cost me $14 shipped (from China) and is easily as good in quality as some of the most expensive diecasts i have.

[Dauntless]

That's a lot less money than the Corgi Choctaw it looks like a copy of.

Speaking of helicopters, I still haven't gotten my Amercom Sea Dragon from Amazon yet.

I'd have to see that wall hanging technique with a heavy diecast plane. Unlike my plastic 21stC 1:32 and even 1:18 planes, I've always been shy about hanging anything made of metal.

[aferguson]

i haven't got my Sea Dragon either. I have a tracking number for it.......still says 'en route to Canada'....was shipped Nov 6 from Poland. I assume it's coming surface mail which can take a long time....8 weeks. I'm in no rush for it but i'm afraid it's going to be pulverized after all this time.....it's already a very fragile model.

Wall hanging is easy. I just drive a couple of nails into the wall and set the wings on them. Nails are very strong, so unless you have crumbly plaster walls it's no problem. I've hung much heavier 1/18 planes from a single nail on the wall (using a small loop of fishing line to hook the plane) and it has been no problem.