Who gets the most accurate 77W based on actual measurements?

[KG3036_SS]

Introduction​

Being one of the most popular widebodies in the late 2000s and 2010s, the B777-300ER no doubt has become the flagship or even backbone of many airlines longhaul fleet across the globe with over 830 aircrafts being delivered to almost 50 operators across the globe since 2004. Such numbers means that this type will be having a lot of variety on possible liveries for manufacturers to choose from - which means many business opportunities on the grab.

So, 77W moulds in 1/400 scales has been prevalent, especially in recent years with most newjoiners (AV400 and NG) both owned one of their's. Except Aeroclassics(Due to AK's hate towards 777 family) and Panda(Who lacks funding), every major player at 400 scale owns a set to their own, making it one of the most competitive Boeing widebody jet.

Toolings in today's comparison​

Consider that there are so plentiful options for me to choose from, I shall make it clear on my selection criteria upfront:
1) Only moulds that are still active will be considered (Nope - Dragon Wings will be excluded)
2) Only slot in will be accepted into comparison (I don't think there are any legit reason to manufacture a 777 with cradle seam in mid-2010s - let alone 2023, so no, Gemini's mould will not be included)
3) Usage of the mould shall be steady (Yea I won't include Herpa/Hogan's 777 as they release on 400 scale too infrequently)

First up will be Phoenix offerings - dates from 2007, Phoenix has done plenty updates to keep it up with the heated competition in the 777 market - with the latest update happened in 2018 when Phoenix developed a larger, see-through engines to fix the achilles heel of their 777 with mixed response.

Coming next is JC Wings 2016 offerings - being credited the first 777 to reach the height of counterpart Phoenix offerings, it really shined with cheaper price and a very convincing package that many are pleased - but are they really THAT convincing as many think?

Moving on we have Aviation400's 2019 mould. With no linkage with the previous iteration AV400, the new team utilize their experience on 200 scale and move it to the 400 with various new features which are either love-it-or-hate-it, like marmite.

Finanlly being the newest of the bunch, NG's 2022 mould are generally seemed to be an rushed job which lacks the finesse and attention to detail that NG strives and excel - especially the ground cleareance which just looks like a large baguette moawing grass with the two humongous GE90s - but are these opinions founded?

Measurements​

For all measurements caliper are used - so I can get a reliable results that can reach 0.1mm - with the maximum absolute error stands at 0.05mm.

Comparison​

Engines​

Brand	Length	Width	Height	Height: Ground - Engine top	Ground clearance Ground - Engine bottom
NG	21.1mm	9.9mm	11mm	13mm	2mm
AV400	19.2mm	9.8mm	10.4mm	12.5mm	2.1mm
JCW	20.5mm	9.8mm	11mm	13.3mm	2.3mm
PH	19.2mm	9.3mm	10.4mm	12.8mm	2.4mm
Real	N.A.	3.96m 9.9mm	N.A.	N.A.	73cm - 99cm 1.8mm - 2.475mm

I won't make judgement on the items that didn't have proper figures for me to begin with, but for the two items that data are present - all 4 are within the parameters of an accurate 77W - except PH engines who seems to be narrower. It fits the trend that PH GE90 in general are slightly smaller than their counterparts. AV400s engine went the trend of follwing PH general dimension except width, BUT, they do look okay for me. NG went a more JC-esque approach with a seemingly larger size engines - but they do look a little too big for my taste though. Yet as I said, no figures - no definitive judgement could be made,

P.s. - the dimension figures shown at Wiki (FAA TC) are the ones that exclude engine nacelles - so no usable figures for me

Ground Clearance​

Brand	Height: Ground - Fuselage top	Fuselage	Ground clearance
NG	21.1mm	15.4mm	5.7mm
AV400	21.5mm	15mm	6.5mm
JCW	22.4mm	15.3mm	7.1mm
PH	21.3mm	15.6mm	5.7mm
Real	8.46m - 8.78m 21.15mm - 21.95mm	6.2m 15.5mm	2.26m - 2.58m 5.65mm - 6.45mm

Immediately obvious is the insane height of JC 77W - which is the opposite of many JC mould these days that suffers from awfully short gears. Unlike common beliefs both NG and PH shares the same clearance between the fuselage and ground - which might explain why PH didn't dare to enlarge their engines too much as that would probably destroy the overall visual balance of their 777s given the shorter height in nature.

It is also funny to note that NG would probably be the most accurate mould that showcase properly related dimensions for demonstrating the effect of aircraft weight - as despite within figure limits, AV400 and PH mould have conflicting figures on displaying the weight effect (The fuselage-ground clearance at AV400 seems to showcase a lightly loaded 77W, but the engine-ground clearance at AV400 display a heavily loaded 77W. PH has the opposite situation.)

For fuselage, immediately obvious is AV400 is narrower than other 777s. they do indeed lead to the problem of distorting the proportions of a 77W, which leads to an undesirable side effect that will be displayed below.

 

[KG3036_SS]

Wingspam​

Brand	Wing (Single)	Total wingspam (Wing*2 + Fulselage)
NG	73.1mm	161.6mm
AV400	73mm	161mm
JCW	73.1mm	161.5mm
PH	72.8mm	161.2mm
Real	35.5m 73.25mm	64.8m 162mm

From the wing alone, it seems that the newer trios have a wider wings while Phoenix's wing are slightly narrower. However it is AV400 that comes with a narrower wingspam than PH. (161mm vs 161.2mm) This most likely attribute to the much narrower fuselage of AV400 while Phoenix's are the widest in the group, negating the problem of narrow wings.

However the pair still are slightly narrower than the NG and JC's counterpart, whoms dimensions are eerly similar - though not a bad thing as their dimensions are close to how the real thing would when shrunk to 400 scale.

Rear​

Brand	Horizontal Stab. Width	Tail height (Ground - Vertical Stab. top)
NG	52.1mm	47.8mm
AV400	53.8mm	46.5mm
JCW	55.2mm	46mm
PH	55.2mm	45.9mm
Real	21.5m - 53.75mm	18.5m - 46.3mm

It is obvious that only AV400 get the rear package right for both stablizers, while JC and PH messed up the width of the horizontal stablizers and NG completely screwed up with wrong dimensions for both horizontal and vertical stablizers. My eyes would agree with the observation that NG's tail are wider and shorter than other brands 77W - the problem is not visible when placed alone though, yet it is very noticable when a different 77W are present.

Conclusion​

All the mould here ain't perfect - For Phoenix the smaller engines remain as the achilles heel for the still decent tooling. For JC the height is just too much that it makes JC 777s literally stand out from the sea of 777s - LITERALLY! For AV400 the fuselage alone is enough to cause problems to the visual balance of the aircraft, let alone the also small engines. For NG, the rear is definitely an issue that deserves attention.

Yet, these "imperfections" are not necessarily for the worst - for JC and PH the sacrifice they made ensures the models can provide a better visual balance to collectors. (Unlike NG who did not compensate for it) I also need to mention that in most cases you probably wouldn't notice these errors as I'm literally nitpicking on them to make a comparison. To wrap up, all 4 of them are decent representations of a 77W which I am happy to get any of them should prices be right. Picking whichever one stands out would be a matter of preference - and you are rightly so to have own preferences.

Discussions on these 1/400 77W are welcome - I will see if I could get enough 77Es to do a similar sharing on it someday

 

[mike_charlie_lima]

interesting and thorough measurements.
didnt realize that av400 also got smaller engines, perhaps it's visually compensated by the narrow fuselage.
other than that, i also found the overall fuselage length of PH shorter than jc and av400, standard 777's 73.9m converts to 184.8mm, while PH is somewhat 180mm in length if i recall it correctly. part of it also because PH has a rather simplified and rounded APU.

i took some photo last year doing the measurement, JC's 773(CX) is indeed standing out in terms fof ground clearance. (left: av400)

top view: PH (KLM) vs JC (CX). do note the engine size difference due it's a 777-300 non ER.

 

[keji833]

Very needed and informative post, you've done what I wanted to do for a while

I also suggest looking into the cockpit printing size (as the head is the profile of any aircraft), only recently did I realize that most brands have enormous cockpit printing that is very much oversized, this is easy to verify as it's identifiable by just looking at it head-on. In terms of the 777, only NG gets the cockpit correct, newer phoenix is OK, but AV400, older PH, and JC all have pretty oversized printing.