Hello all,
From all the past discussions of the 1:144 707 plastic kits out there I've been holding out with my purchases although I have several liveries I'd want to make from them. It is still my hope that Minicraft, flush with the success of their DC-8 kit, again scores a hit and makes a "new" Boeing 707 kit. If not and probably so, how bad is their current kit? Aside from the nose, which there is a resin replacement for, can you still get a decent 300, 400, and VC-173 series from them? Are the wings at least correct for the respective types? Does anyone have a insider's secret of a new tooling kit out in the next year that promises to get this well deserved airliner a respectable plastic model that more folks will appreciate than denigrate? It's a shame to spend more money just to get it right when details at the front end would have been easier. Thank you.
Roman

Thank you for once again confirming what I had read before. I suppose, other than Kurt's nice offering, Welsh is the only other better example? Cost conscious that I am I'll have to save up for either.
Roman

Roman, the Welsh kit was hailed when it came out in 1995, but the world was a more naive place then, and Welsh kits cost half in 1995 money than their cost today. It certainly does not offer that much more than other kits for the price differential and has a number of issues of its own. The Authentic Airliners model is much preferable to the Welsh one if you want to simply put a 707 kit together and have it look entirely right in all particulars. Despite what was said above, I still think you can get teh Minicraft to win a contest -- given some time and love.

Quote

---

Roman :
Despite what was said above, I still think you can get the Minicraft to win a contest -- given some time and love.

---

The last IPMS I entered was Replicon 09 or 10 here in NY and they awarded the gold to a built " out of the box" MC TWA B707 lousy nose and all. It did have aftermarket engines and it was beautifully constructed, flawless craftwork but it was quite obvious that the judge couldn't tell the difference between a 707 and an ashtray.

BTW, I have been looking for a good 1/144 707, I have the Airfix, Revell, Minicraft and some Russian model that I can't remember the name and I am not very keen on any of them. I am open to suggestions.

Hi Roman,

Aside from all of the aforementioned issues with the Minicraft kit, I feel that a very decent 707 model can be represented- provided of course that your box contains the correct wings and engines. I recently built a TWA -331B using the resin cockpit part, but everything else is right out of the box. The key for me was looking at pictures of the actual aircraft I was building. I for sure had to work with the engine pylons to keep them from angling upwards too much- but if you look at photos of real 707's they do in fact point up a little.
Of course it is all up to personal discretion...it can be as fun (or agonizing!) as one makes it!

IPMS is not a good indicator. IPMS judges do not judge on accuracy, only on the quality of the actual build by the modeler. You could build a 707 biplane with CAAK markings, and if it were built really well, you could get a first place with it.

The MC kit *can* certainly be built. But the fact is that the shapes of many parts of the kit simply do not accurately reflect the shape of the actual 707. The vertical fin, for example, is wrong in every way. The leading edge sweep, trailing edge sweep, chord, and height are all incorrect (Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?)

Your TWA bird is gorgeous!

J

Just to throw a curve ball here, have you tried a 1/100 707, a little pricey but well worth it!! just my opinion!

Quote

---

That is a beautiful looking 707, did you just putty/sand the nose or you used a resin conversion?

---

Thanks Steven and Jennings! Steven and Skyking918, I used the resin replacement cockpit made specifically for the Minicraft 707s. It is made by Contrails Models and fits perfectly inside the cut out section of the nose. I also used my own cockpit windshield decal, which helps define the shape much better than the goofy decal provided in the MC kits.

The Contrails part:

Does this help?

Die Vorderkante Winkel, Hinterkante Winkel, Akkord, und Höhe sind alle falsch

Hi Roman,

Thanks for the compliment!

I have heard about people opening up their kits and finding that the wing/ engine combo does not match whats on the box. For example, one may have purchased the TWA 707 331 model that should have the early style JT4 engines and wing with the rounded "fillet" flap at the base but instead what is in the box are wings and turbofan engines for a 707 331B. It hasn't happened to me, but I have heard of people encountering this problem.

There's a great article here on the site that I used for reference for my 707 build, I found it to be an invaluable resource. Here is the link:

http://www.airlinercafe.com/page.php?id=72

The Nitto/Entex/Otaki 1/100 707 is far and away (by a loooooooong shot) the best kit of the 707 ever done. It's dead-on accurate in almost every respect.

Quote

---

Jennings :
The MC 707 is an abomination from nose to tail, and wing tip to wing tip.

---

Don't sugarcoat it.....give it to us straight!

Anyone started to build Kurt's 707 kit yet and if so how about some build pics?

Quote

---

gavmh :
Guys, check this link, and y`ll see build pics. You will also realize that there is a correct and beautiful 707 kit available.
http://www.airlinercafe.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=6704

Kurt

---

I have this one on order with PAA decals by Two-Six. Figure if I'm going to build a 707 may as well do it right. Never worked with photo-etch parts before, hope it's not going to be a problem.

Quote

---

Roman :
That is a beautiful representation baby9. I'd be happy if mine turned out as well. What do you mean by the kits not containing the correct wing? Are certain MC 707 kits more common to have this issue or just any at random?
Roman

---

There are several versions of wings. I'm impressed that no one has just copied the URL to the Ultimate Boeing 707 Guide from airlinercafe. The guide is accurate and complete but is a complex document. And despite being a fan of the plane and aware of the multiple versions of the plane, it took me a long time to comprehend all portions of the ultimate guide.

To answer the question, the MC 707-320B kits should have a relatively "accurate" wing in it. But some kits marketed as 707-420 or -320 have a semi-accurate wing. MC took the 320B wing, and reshaped the trailing edge to replicate the rounded fillet and the flap segment "kink" (see previously mentioned guide). And the trailing edge (actually all of them on the model) is way too thick, but correcting that will require some very deft surgery and/or sanding skills that do not remove the recessed line details. BUT, this pseudo 320 (no bl**dy B) wing still has the 320B leading edge dogtooth, and IIRC still has the 320B wing tip flare. Worse yet, some 420 & 320 kits occasionally have 320B wings in them.

And I agree about the nacelle pylons. The JT3D pylons are ridiculous. Huge gaps and the pylon does not blend into the upper wing bulge. I discovered that if you scribe a line 1mm down from the original kit pylon and cut/sand that excess away, you get a pylon that not only mates up with the wing with a minimal gap, you'll find that the pylon blends into the upper wing. The RR Conway (420 kits) pylons actually fit nicely, so I cut away the excess leading edge outboard of the inside engine (outboard of engines #2 and #3), and reshaped the wing tip of the pseudo 320 wings.

As for fixing the nose. The best solution is to buy the complete nose replacement. My construction was too far along, so I opted for several solutions. One solution was to graft the Revell E3A/707-100/KC-135 kit nose onto the MC fuselage. Another involved using the resin cockpit replacement. The third was brute force. A little plastic shim, superglue, lots of sanding. But in all three of my solutions something was still not quite right. So I printed overhead and side views of the 707 at 1/144, then cut out the plane leaving a paper template of theoretically the correct profile. I discovered some deft sanding of the radome was in order, both to match the side profile, and from overhead.

Hope this helps.