Jet-x/ Dragon wings 747 mould

1/400collector

Well-known member
Hello everyone, i wanted to know what do you think about Jet-x/ Dragon wings 747 mould. is it good?
because they are old i don't know if they are still good or if they were any good at all.
 
I’m going to be getting a Jet-X 747-400 soon so I’ll be sure to send pics when I get the chance.
 
They where IMO the best available concerning their overall shape and accuracy. Printing and gears were crude though.
 
I don't have any of them at all, so I can't really say without seeing them in hand. I've heard that they are decent, even as old as they are. The only Dragon/JetX model that I have is a Braniff 727-100. The mould is decent...the only thing wrong with it is they used the #2 engine intake from the 727-200, so the inlet is wrong...(round not oval shaped).
 
They are both excellent, the classic and the -400. I'll. second Phantom by saying that the main weakness in my opinion is the landing gear. Keep in mind the HF antennas on the classic are shortened (I suspect this was done on purpose to prevent breaking). Also, they have plastic wings and tails, but look very good.

Here is a Lufthansa one that I photographed recently. I have a KLM 400 also but don't have any close-up pics of it. It is the first one you see there on the shelf.

6cc367_a4fca710239e41b6945ec467b307bf64~mv2.jpg


6cc367_e9e629414cc94774947dc71b5051e496~mv2.jpg



6cc367_092f0a0b0a4049c6a9d8643980ead353~mv2.jpg
 
The fuselage shape is amazing, even for today. Gears are very basic, but removable. Aerials of the -100 and -200 are too short but it's not a dealbreaker for me. Sometimes the window cockpit is printed too small.
 
This is good to hear. I am weighing up buying a Dragon Qantas 747-400 Wunala, and from this feedback, I think I will!
 
For Dragon 747, I would see them as old but solid models that are a bang for the buck should prices are ok. They ain't spectacular and perfect, but are totally decent enough to be a good option on 747s.

Pro:
1) Accurate fuselage shape
Fuselage shape on Dragon 747 is never a problem - in fact the nose shape is still regarded as the better ones when compared to newer moulds such as the Phoenix one (Which is rubbish) or even the new JC ones (Which are decent)
2) One of the two B744 that features all engine options
Unlike the old GJ/BB and even Phoenix that use a mixture of CF6-80 and PW4000 for the two engine types, Dragon is the first manufacturer that produce proper PW4000 for their 744 - a feature that only JC's new 744 mould also has. If you are really going for utmost accuracy on engines, then Dragon is a definite plus. (P.s. Some late BB's are widely believed to be using CF6-50s to pretend as CF6-80s as the casting for CF6-80 are believed to be destroyed)
3) Discreet Wing seam
It has a seam for fitting the wing cradle - but it was located at the bottom of the model and is very small - which makes them looks like a slot-in one when viewed from uptop - An angle that we mostly see our models. Only when you look at the bottom will you realise the presence of the seam.
4) Detailed Control surface
By utilising plastics on wings and stabilizers, Dragon could make deeper grooves on these components for a more detailed look - and they indeed look gorgeous!

Con:
1) Plastic wing and stabilizers
It really is just a matter of preference - The lightweight of plastic allows Dragon to create deeper grooves hence more detailed control surface - but in turn it creates the problem of color change - I have plenty Dragon 747s have their colors on the plastic components covered with a layer of yellowish tone - you might want to have a look on the status of individual models at situation may vary from model to model.
2) Simple landing gears
It is another major painpoint for Dragons in general - but you might still want to have a look at how simple they were compared to their competitors.
3) (744) Wingtip size ain't right
I didn't realise that until recently when I compare my 744s - the Wingtip fence on Dragon 744s seems to be a tad smaller than her competitors and did not reach the full width of the wing - a bit annoying once you notice it - but otherwise still ok as they ain't too small to be annoying.
4) Nose shape inconsistent
The nose shape of Dragons are tend to be hit or miss to me - some in my collection have really sharp nose while some are much rounder - you might want to check the nose shape one by one to confirm the status of the ones you'd like to purchase.
 
4) Nose shape inconsistent
The nose shape of Dragons are tend to be hit or miss to me - some in my collection have really sharp nose while some are much rounder - you might want to check the nose shape one by one to confirm the status of the ones you'd like to purchase.
I have never noticed this issue, do you have an example? As far as I know DW never used someone elses mould for their 747's.
 
I have never noticed this issue, do you have an example? As far as I know DW never used someone elses mould for their 747's.
20221225_194246.JPG
Something like this - notice the top slope of the "Tropical" and the "Wunlala Dreaming" - the slope on the "Tropical were less steep than that on the "Wunlala Dreaming" and the shape just don't look the same on both
 
They look almost identical to me though. Could be because of the colors and pattern of the SA + window cockpit of the Qantas being different.
 
They look almost identical to me though. Could be because of the colors and pattern of the SA + window cockpit of the Qantas being different.
I agree with you, to my eyes it just seems to be the cockpit windows that are making the nose shape look different. If the example models were more simple liveries we might be able to see it more clearly. @KG3036_SS, could you provide another example of inconsistent nose shape with a different set of aircraft, preferably with simpler liveries? Thanks :D
 
I think the nose shape are a bit less annoying and problematic than I first realise it - but notice the top slant which looks slightly different on both unit😞 The transition from tip to bottom slant also shows slight difference.
20221226_222220.JPG
 
This is good to hear. I am weighing up buying a Dragon Qantas 747-400 Wunala, and from this feedback, I think I will!
Only mild criticism I'd chip in is a slightly excessive upper anhedral/flex on the wings of the 744 tooling, often leading to a slightly misaligned wing root join. The infamous plastic gears too, have not aged well. Great looking piece otherwise.
 
I think the nose shape are a bit less annoying and problematic than I first realise it - but notice the top slant which looks slightly different on both unit😞 The transition from tip to bottom slant also shows slight difference.
View attachment 8824
I have noticed slight variations on different units made out of the same mold. I once used three GJ Planet Airways 727-200s to do customs and when removing the original markings and applying decals I noticed one of them had a different nose profile. They might all be from the same mold but are individually sanded down, which leads to different end results.
 
True. You can see this with Aeroclassics 737-200's aswell, some are polished more than others.
 
Top