1:400 vs 1:600 - Modern Twins

[rstretton]

From one extreme to the other here we compare the overlap in modern Boeing and Airbus twinjets and my 1:400 classics.

Starting with the Airbus A320. This was never a great mould but some of the changes Schabak made did improve it a bit and then ruined it by mucking up the nose. Herpa's mould is much much better. In 1:400 this is a model that shouldn't be in my collection but I couldn't resist it and it is rather nice (made by Aeroclassics (Baby Bus Models)).

We also have the A300 - again not one of Schabak's best moulds but sometimes they looked ok. I personally preferred the Type 2 mould with the long gear legs and small wheels but that is the rarest of the Schabak moulds. Again the Eastern and Pan Am 1:400s are Aeroclassics.

[rstretton]

While Schabak's Airbus moulds are a bit rubbish their Boeings are much better. The 757 is one of my favourite and most beautiful airliners and Schabaks old -200 mould is great (though their -300 is awful).

For comparison here we have the Gemini Jets American and Eastern 757s.

[rstretton]

Likewise they did a fine job with the 767-200 too and here we have the Gemini Jets Delta and Dragon Wings Delta compared to their attractive Schabak variants.

[Flight fan]

Another great comparison.

[charlie_papa]

I agree with you the 757-200 mould is good, I like the turboprops too. I don´t like the 727 mould the nose is not a boeing nose.