That simply isn't true. The Aeroclassics A321 is decent but it isn't the same.
There are three other good A321s about from Panda, HYJLwings and NG Models. None of them are exact clones of the Aeroclassics A321 or each other. Panda's A321 was made years after the alleged cloning took place of his A320. The new NG models mould is certainly different in several details.
Let's look at some of the differences:
- The Aeroclassics A321 with Sharklets has the wrong wing on it. They just reuse the A320 wing. All of the other moulds have the proper wing with double-slotted flaps
- Aeroclassics don't have a mould for the CFM LEAP engines. They just have one generic NEO engine. Everyone else has both forms.
- The position of the standhole is different on the Panda mould
- The shape of the Sharklets is different on the Panda mould
- Everyone else has superior undercarriage with proper tyre hubs
- Everyone else has added aerials
- The NG Models current A321 is very distinct from the AC version in many details. Not least the form of the vertical stabiliser and the maingear belly doors, wing leading edge etc etc etc.
I suggest you actually start looking at the models more closely.
Disclaimer: This is not to dis on NG's A321s and that I'd point out that everyone should avoid AC NEO series, the wing is bent, so let's forget about that.
While some of your comments are valid, please address the following two points:
1. Cockpit window is too small on Panda/NG
2. Front gear too big -- take a look at the real photo, the A320 series' front gear has roughly the same height as the cockpit window itself.
I have around 15 NG A321s so I've taken very close looks at them. Now to some of your points:
1. I only noticed PH has that problem, it doesn't occur on my AC ones.
2. NEO so true
3. mostly NEO so true
4. Those tyre hubs look good but there are oversized.
5. Aerials are not a feature I particularly care
6. Of course they have differences, but they have the same ancestors.
I bought a lot of NG A321s recently, and a lot of AC A321s around 10 years ago, when I compare them now the ACs look more realistic.
I understand we all have different tastes when it comes to models, so it's natural we look at them differently. Personally what I look for is the "real feel", which means, nose shape, wing shape (e.g. PH 787), gear size, window size (e.g. JC 747, AC 330), what I DO NOT CARE AT ALL are 1) livery correctness, 2) stabilizer correctness (e.g. difference between A332 and A333), 3) features such as aerials, or like you said the "double-slotted" wing, etc.
BUT, some people def care, so I would suggest everyone just go with your own preferences.