FighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1336 posts, RR: 24 Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 9511 times:
I'm currently collecting Dragon Wings models and have 4: An AC 767-300ER, Boeing 777-200LR in the Dreamliner livery, Boeing 747 in the Dreamliner livery, and a Boeing 737-900 also in the Dreamliner livery. I'm very impressed with the detail of the Dragon Wings models. My question is, are Gemini and Herpa the same, or is one of these model companies better then the other? I want to expand my collection and have a wider selection, but I do not want the other models to be "sub par" per say.
FlyingNanook From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 830 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9490 times:
All the companies have their strengths and weaknesses. Here's my thoughts.
Dragon has my favorite MD-11 mould, hands down. Also, their wings are more detailed because they're made of plastic, so it's easier to put fine details on them. Dragon's winglets are also better than the all-metal brands because of the plastic wings again. Jet-X uses the same moulds as Dragon Wings, and they produce releases in smaller quantities of more specialized airlines.
Gemini is my favorite all around brand. Some of their moulds are superb, some not so great, but overall, they are very good. They use all metal, so they have a good weight, which I like, but it does lead to some funky looking winglets sometimes. Phoenix usually used the Gemini moulds, just in smaller quantities.
Herpa is very hit or miss in the 400 scale. Their 764 mould is my favorite, and their Concorde is also very good. Some of their models have plastic wings, others are metal.
Aeroclassics has the best quality, in my opinion. They focus on classic airliners, as the name implies, and a lot of their releases don't appeal to everyone. If you like 732's, their mould is my favorite, and they have recently released a ton of Air Canada/Canadian 732's, which may interest you.
As for your list, Both Gemini and Dragon have a Westjet 737-700, Gemini's has winglets and Dragon's doesn't (Dragon did release a 732, but it's horrible, and I don't want to talk about it). I think Dragon is the only company that has released the Dreamliner scheme on all the current Boeing planes. The other companies have issued a couple models with the Dreamliner scheme, but only on a couple planes. Both Dragon and Gemini have a FedEx MD-11. I have the Gemini one and am very happy, but I still think that the Dragon MD-11 mould is better. Gemini is the only company with a UPS MD-11, and they have both the old and new schemes. As for the 320 or 737, all the companies make good models of those (not counting the Dragon 732 mould), so you can't really go wrong with any company. As mentioned above, the winglets do look better on the Dragon/Jet-X mould. And finally, for Air Canada, I think that Gemini matches the new colors best. All companies, I think, have Air Canada models, so you should be able to find anything you're looking for there.
If you want to look at close up pics, I would recommend visiting www.400scalehangar.net , they have a very extensive photo gallery of almost every 400 scale model. Or you can visit www.wings900.com , which has a very extensive searchable database of models in all scales, but with fewer pics.
FighterPilot From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1336 posts, RR: 24 Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9455 times:
Thanks for the info guys! I don't want to be spending too much, I find this hobby quite expensive. I'm probably only going to buy a FX MD-11 and an AC A330. Maybe an AC 777 if they release one, and an AC 787 eventually. I forgot to mention that I have an AC A340-500 on it's way to me.
N231YE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 9453 times:
I personally prefer Dragon Models. All of the others are good, and as stated, have their Pros and Cons. But I have found the Dragon Models to be of super fine detail, all the way down to the engines and landing gear.
Fly_yhm From Canada, joined Dec 2000, 1661 posts, RR: 10 Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 9201 times:
I generally like Gemini the most however dragon are good as well and they give you a plastic stand.
You have a small list of Models you are looking for, just a warning it gets easy to get carried away.
I started abot 8 years ago saying I will only get a few now I have the following
JAL 747-400 n/c JAl 747-300(super resort scheme)
KLM 777-200n/c,MD-11pervious to latest colors
UAL 777-200 and CRJ in n/c A320 in previous to latest colors
Austrian 777-200n/c A330-200 Star Alliance with group stamps as well as A320 in scame scheme
Air New Zealand 777-200
Cathay Pacific 747-200
2x BA 747-400 Wunala Dreaming, Nalanji Dreaming and 767-300 Golden Khokhloma
UA Airways 767-200n/c 757-200 in previous to latest
Westjet 3x737-200 and 2x 737-700 no winglets
South Africa 747-400
China Airlines Cargo 747-200F
Swiss International MD-11
Saudi Airlines MD-11
Lan Chilie 767-300 in Previous to Latest
Air Jamaica 727-200
NW A320-200 in Previous to latest
ATA 757-200 (25th anniversary)
Delta 2x757-200 Widget and 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics 737-800 in Wavy Gravy
Virgin Altantic A340-600 n/c
Frontier 737-400 (cant remember which Tail)
This is what happened
If you have it htere is a group on facebook for this as well
Where will you spend eternity? He,s more real then you think!!!!!
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 18 Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 9153 times:
Quoting FighterPilot (Reply 5): I forgot to mention that I have an AC A340-500 on it's way to me.
Is that the Gemini one? I have that one too, and I think it's great. I have over 100 1:400 models and I prefer Gemini and Dragon Wings. DW models' landing gear sometimes seem too big, but are more detailed than GJ. But like others said, take it case by case, and generally you can't really go wrong with Gemini, Dragon, Phoenix or AeroClassics.