Boeing 737-800 Detailed Mould Comparison
Updated: November 2021
Despite being replaced in production by the 737 MAX it is still the Next Generation 737-800 that is the focus of competition between 400 scale brands with two new moulds appearing in the last few years to contend with the three previously active versions. One of the new moulds replaced the previous version from the same brand (Panda Models) although in this review I'll include both versions. The other new mould is of course from NG Models who debuted their 737-800 well before the rest of the 737NG family and have gone on to use it quite heavily so that it isn't far off being as used as the much older Phoenix and JC/Gemini versions.
The moulds to be compared in this detailed comparison will be the following:
There have been four earlier 737-800s made in this scale by Herpa, Gemini Jets, Dragon Wings and Witty Wings but none are still in use and all date from 2000/2001 (aside from the 2008 Witty).
- Phoenix Models 2008 Mould - China Southern Skyteam & Hainan Airlines
- JC Wings / Gemini Jets 2014 Mould - Kunming Airlines B-1507 & B-1991
- Panda Models 2014 Mould - Air China Expo 2019
- NG Models 2019 Mould - Hainan Airlines (Split Scimitars) & China Southern
- Panda Models 2020 Mould - COPA ConnectMiles (Split Scimitars) & Batik Air
There have been four earlier 737-800s made in this scale by Herpa, Gemini Jets, Dragon Wings and Witty Wings but none are still in use and all date from 2000/2001 (aside from the 2008 Witty).
The review will take the form of a comparison of various areas of each mould to the real aircraft, with a score out of 5 allotted for each mould for each area. Adding the combined scores together gives you the winner.
Scoring
NOSE / NOSEGEAR
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE: Nosegears are regularly poorly fitted to 737NGs and all the moulds above have had fitment issues at times. I have tried to use good examples so have actually swapped out the NG and Panda versions for this part of the review with better examples. There is however considerable variability between models by the same brand.
NOSE: The Phoenix mould rather suffers from comparison with very little of it accurate. The angle of the cockpit isn't steep enough and the upper nose angle gives it a rather duckbeak-like look. It is the weakest of all 5, followed by the JC Wings version which has a rather steep forehead above the cockpit and a quite pointy nosecone. The other three all have good noses but the new Panda and the NG version are I think the best.
NOSEGEAR: The nosegear is an area that has been a problem for most 737 moulds and almost all of these examples don't get it right either. The 737 nosegear should follow the fuselage line and has small curves at its upper edge. It is the wrong shape on all the moulds except the NG. On all the others it is too indented into the fuselage and the bottom is too square. The doors are too large on the JC and first Panda, and way too small on the newer Panda. The Phoenix door isn't too bad but you can see the angles of its edges are too close to the vertical. In terms of the gear leg and tyre the tyre on the JC is too large. The gear leg on the Phoenix ok but often in the wrong position on the models. On the original Panda the tyre is rather simple. This is improved on the newer Panda but the gear leg looks too long. This is mainly an artefact of the too small gear doors. Even so, the rear process of the gear leg is rather large. Once again the NG is the best although sometimes QC issues mean it isn't fitted perfectly.
|
|
ENGINES & PYLONS / MAINGEAR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ENGINES & PYLONS: The shape of the overall engine nacelle on all 5 models is good, however there is variability in other areas especially the exhausts and pylons. The exhaust on the Phoenix is one of the better examples but the pylons hang the entire engine a little too low. From the front the fanblades take up a rather small area of the engine (see below photos). The JC version has an exhaust that doesn't bear much relation to the real thing as it lacks the thin pipe at the rear and the two stage narrowing towards it. The pylons again hang the engine a little low and for some reason on this mould the fanblades are much too far back into the nacelle when viewed from the front. Additionally looking at the photos below the inner fins on the engines are attached too high and are too small. The old Panda mould has a good setup aside from the middle of the exhaust, which is way too thin. The NG and newer Panda capture all the elements the best with the Panda probably shading it from the side view. From front I think the NG has better fanblades with the Panda blades being too far recessed.
|
MAINGEAR: There is quite a bit of variability at the maingear. Both the JC and Phoenix seem to have the wheels rather forward of the gear door, while the JC has the flared portion of the door much too high. Both models also tend to have a slight nosehigh attitude, which is not correct. The maingear of the older Panda is a major weakpoint across the board but it is at least the right height. The NG and new Panda again have the best maingear but I think the angle of the flared part of the geardoor is better on the Panda.
|
|
JC Wings / Gemini Jets
Phoenix
Panda Old
NG Models
Panda New
BLENDED & SPLIT SCIMITAR WINGLETS
|
Phoenix
|
JC Wings / Gemini
|
Panda Old
|
NG Models
|
Panda New
|
It is obviously a challenge to get smaller elements like blended winglets the correct shape and none of the moulds are perfect here. Both the JC Wings and Phoenix winglets are too straight on the vertical and have a rather square top. The JC ones are also a little too tall. The others have generally the correct shape but do not accurately carry off the curve at the top and the sharp rear tip.
|
Phoenix don't have working split scimitars for their mould. They did try but the two examples they did had an appalling new wing and they have not reworked it or used it again. The old Panda mould also did not have a split scimitar version.
The other three moulds all have the Split Scimitar winglets available, although I don't own any JC Wings / Gemini Jets versions with them. The images here for that mould are from Gemini official shots.
The other three moulds all have the Split Scimitar winglets available, although I don't own any JC Wings / Gemini Jets versions with them. The images here for that mould are from Gemini official shots.
|
|
The modelled Split Scimitars are surprisingly good here. It is obvious that the Panda lower portion of the scimitar is shorter than the NG version. The longer NG version looks more correct. It is hard to tell for certain with the JC Wings splits but they look a little chunkier and thicker than the others to me.
|
|
Scoring in this category covers both winglet types (with the mould marked down 1 if there are no split scimitar variety available).
TAIL & TAILCONE
|
|
|
|
|
|
TAIL & TAILCONE: The rear fuselage is an area of least concern for all the moulds. They all carry off a convincing tailcone plus vertical and horizontal stabilisers. The only points worth making are that all the stabilisers on the JC mould are plastic not diecast metal. On the Phoenix the tail join to the fuselage doesn't run for the proper length. It is too short making the rudder look too wide. This is a common issue with several Phoenix moulds of this age.
AERIALS
The 737-800 has 5 aerials or drain masts large enough to be able to feature on a 400 scale model. Two of these are under the fuselage just rear of the wingbox and one of them is offset to the left. The newer NG and Panda moulds feature all 5 and they are small and well sized. The JC Wings / Gemini mould sometimes has all five but regularly sticks to the four main ones. The aerials on this mould tend to be oversized. The old Panda mould also has just four but they are better sized. The same is true of the Phoenix, which was one of the first moulds to be fitted with aerials.
NOTE: Below the Phoenix model has been swapped for one with aerials and the JC Wings swapped for one with better fitted wings
Phoenix
JC Wings / Gemini Jets
Panda Models Old
NG Models
Panda Models New
Summary
|
400 Scale has suffered from rather sloppy 737NGs for a long time and the first really decent mould was in my opinion the initial Panda version, which itself was not perfect. Fortunately the new NG Models mould has taken up a lot of this slack and is obviously very good. The updated Panda mould is also decent but not quite as good, especially around the nosegear.
The old Phoenix mould is clearly obsolete and Phoenix additionally have a long history of misprinting the cockpit windows on this mould too. The 2014 JC Wings / Gemini mould also doesn't score very well here and the mould is long overdue a replacement. Fortunately the newer JC Wings / Gemini 737 MAX doesn't share the same issues it does, but that is another review. When it comes to 737-800s the NG Models mould is just ahead of the newer Panda version and the rest trail some distance behind. |
|