Which is the best 777-300ER in 400 Scale?

[YesterAirlines]

The acquisition of some new AV400 777s has given me the opportunity to overhaul my 2020 comparison of 777-300ER moulds to include the two new 2025 moulds from Aviation400 and NG Models. As usual all have pluses and minuses and arguably I think any of 3 of the 4 could be described as the best depending on your preferences. At the very least this gives you an opportunity to compare the top 4 in 2025:

Boeing 777-300ER 1:400 Scale Detailed Mould Comparison Review

A detailed scoring of the top 4 Boeing 777-300ER moulds in 1:400 scale

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

 

[Jazajia]

The acquisition of some new AV400 777s has given me the opportunity to overhaul my 2020 comparison of 777-300ER moulds to include the two new 2025 moulds from Aviation400 and NG Models. As usual all have pluses and minuses and arguably I think any of 3 of the 4 could be described as the best depending on your preferences. At the very least this gives you an opportunity to compare the top 4 in 2025:

Boeing 777-300ER 1:400 Scale Detailed Mould Comparison Review

A detailed scoring of the top 4 Boeing 777-300ER moulds in 1:400 scale

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

View attachment 54904

Good on NG winning! I didn’t know they had a new casting.

Good comparison. So glad that AV400 didn’t win

 

[YesterAirlines]

Good on NG wining! I didn’t know they had a new casting.

Good comparison. So glad that AV400 didn’t win

To be honest I probably prefer the AV400 myself - sorry!

 

[Jazajia]

JC Wings is nice too. But only when it is in one piece, and when the cockpit windows are in the right place, which unfortunately are not guaranteed occurrences.

 

[planes_on_a_shelf]

Fab comparison as always Richard - and I totally align with your observations and verdict!
This reinforces my own comfort with the 773 mould(s) from NG - and by extension their 772s, I'd say.

Of course in terms of subject matter, NG is slow burn (which I'm okay with - I'd wait patiently rather, and have no hurry as such), but that's where Av400 and especially PHX score with the wider collectorate looking for topical subjects as well as affordability - and especially for PHX - ensuring the enduring popularity of their product. In Asia, mostly, Av400 & PHX retail lower than JC which in turn retails lower than NG.

 

[Critical Aviator]

To be honest, I like all four moulds in this comparison. Which one I'll buy will depend on the subject matter, which ones are available and whether I like how the model turned out or not. In some cases there is no choice at all.

 

[777-300ER]

The acquisition of some new AV400 777s has given me the opportunity to overhaul my 2020 comparison of 777-300ER moulds to include the two new 2025 moulds from Aviation400 and NG Models. As usual all have pluses and minuses and arguably I think any of 3 of the 4 could be described as the best depending on your preferences. At the very least this gives you an opportunity to compare the top 4 in 2025:

Boeing 777-300ER 1:400 Scale Detailed Mould Comparison Review

A detailed scoring of the top 4 Boeing 777-300ER moulds in 1:400 scale

www.yesterdaysairlines.com

View attachment 54904

99% agree with the review (in an objective way). I’m surprised AV400 and JC arrive at the same place (I found the AV400 significantly superior). Regarding NG, this Air China (which is yet the best NG 777 release) indeed deserves the 1st place but, if it was one of their latest disappointing 777 with over-polished nose shape and sad cockpit windows, I would have personally rank this one behind its competitors (even Phoenix). But this is subjective (as I value cockpit/nose region more than the rest).

If I had to rank these 4 models with my subjective criteria, the AV400 would come at first place. The cockpit windows on AV400 may be the best in term of shape but the angle keeps it from being perfect. Also, considering the fact you know what to get when preordering, which is not the case with NG and their random accuracy…

 

[YesterAirlines]

99% agree with the review (in an objective way). I’m surprised AV400 and JC arrive at the same place (I found the AV400 significantly superior). Regarding NG, this Air China (which is yet the best NG 777 release) indeed deserves the 1st place but, if it was one of their latest disappointing 777 with over-polished nose shape and sad cockpit windows, I would have personally rank this one behind its competitors (even Phoenix). But this is subjective (as I value cockpit/nose region more than the rest).

If I had to rank these 4 models with my subjective criteria, the AV400 would come at first place. The cockpit windows on AV400 may be the best in term of shape but the angle keeps it from being perfect. Also, considering the fact you know what to get when preordering, which is not the case with NG and their random accuracy…

Yeah agree about some of the recent NGs. When the ranking is this close it rather loses its value and you could plausibly claim any of those 3 are the 'best'. Compared to the JC the AV400 has the mag gear, more detailed nosegear and a slightly better vert stab join, but I'd argue the JC has marginally better maingear and the flaps down option. It shares some of the issues with the JC in terms of nosegear door and leg, engine fans etc.

The NG has better parts but I agree I'm not sold on the nose/cockpit fully myself.

 

[planes_on_a_shelf]

None of the 4 really nail ALL aspects of the front - which includes forehead, cockpit contours & cockpit printing, nose profile, nlg, - and for me, other than NG's rendition of the engines, the rest really don't fly (pun intended).

Additionally, is the fact that NG's is the only one that accurately portrays the nose down posture of the 777s (did you miss this aspect in the comparison? idr)

While I agree with the ranking - NG's as 1, and JC & Av400 as joint runners up - of course it's a matter of subjectivity how much the gap between 1 & 2 should have been.

JC's front sections are bothersome and weak QC prone, while Av400 did mess up with some of the cockpit printing - thankfully the TAAG reviewed doesn't seem to be as afflicted.

Net-net, NG's models are crisp and exceedingly well finished - and I guess for me, it is that attention to detail and fineness that matters.
Which is why NG's whole is way greater than the sum of its (in any case exceedingly high quality) parts - of course this is IMHO..
And thus I dont mind paying the 10-15pc extra for it, so that at least it doesn't bother me when I look at them.

 

[Jazajia]

To be honest I probably prefer the AV400 myself - sorry!

From what I can see, it looks like AV400 has also modified its wing-to-fuselage joint. If so, that is a very welcome improvement.

I like how you point out that none of them have accurate fuselage widths.

I have come to realize that die-cast aircraft are representations of real aircraft, but none is an actual 100% precise replica. So it comes down to which model looks better, regardless of accuracy, although they tend to go hand in hand.

Since the 777 is a chubby airplane, my eyes prefer a wider fuselage. I swear, when I had my AV400 United 77W, it did look like a 764, next to my NG example. It was aggravating to see so many collectors praising it, just because it had jewels…

I do agree that recent efforts somehow look better.

 

[YesterAirlines]

From what I can see, it looks like AV400 has also modified its wing-to-fuselage joint. If so, that is a very welcome improvement.

Yes I didn't see any major differences between the wing to fuselage joins, which is why I didn't bother scoring them

I like how you point out that none of them have accurate fuselage widths.

I even went out and got some digital calipers to keep @Phantom happy! The difference between all of them is less than a mm so we're talking a tiny difference even in 400 scale sizes.

 

[Battlecry]

The new NG 777 mould is too wide at the cockpit area from the top view; this looks like a mould issue and not a print issue. This ruins it for me, as the cockpit and nose shape significantly impacts a model's appeal.

 

[YesterAirlines]

The new NG 777 mould is too wide at the cockpit area from the top view; this looks like a mould issue and not a print issue. This ruins it for me, as the cockpit and nose shape significantly impacts a model's appeal.

Is it - or is it just the cockpit printing? This photo suggests it is a lot more accurate than their old mould was:

 

[777-300ER]

Is it - or is it just the cockpit printing? This photo suggests it is a lot more accurate than their old mould was:

View attachment 54991

It is definitely the printing! If only NG find a way to always print a correct cockpit windows and to not over-polish the nose lower part, there will be no issue. This Air China model is already great but imagine what it would be with perfect cockpit windows printing

 

[Phantom]

Is it - or is it just the cockpit printing?

My usual counter question on this topic:
Does it look good side on?
If the answer is yes, then the answer for mould correctness is: no.

Or the other way round: "fix" the printing artwork and it will look wrong side on.

 

[YesterAirlines]

My usual counter question on this topic:
Does it look good side on?
If the answer is yes, then the answer for mould correctness is: no.

Or the other way round: "fix" the printing artwork and it will look wrong side on.

Well it depends. Some have looked dreadful side on. However it is reasonably clear that all of them have oversized cockpit windows when you look from above