Thanks for those pics! Now that's what I call ortho. Here's why I was so interested in the top view of the fuselage proportions:
One of the main differences between the V3 and the X's in my ref is that the V3 cockpit canopy is much less convergent, having a considerably wider front edge - by about 2.5 mm (extrapolated from the ratio between the Saturn V can and canopy on the Red 3 hero model), and possibly a slightly fatter (or shorter) fuselage, expanding around the cockpit area by about 2 or 3 mm or so.
When Mike first posted a while back about the pyro source for the V3 casting, I was puzzled by this discrepancy, as the pyro canopies I was looking at appeared as convergent and as narrow as heroes. However, these pyro photos all turned out to be 'part-pyro' i.e hero (side seam) fuselages with pyro wings (Ging's photos). At the time, Mike suggested that the V3 canopy perhaps gained mm here due to attempts to perfect symmetry.
But perhaps full pyros (top/ bottom seam) do have stubbier, less convergent canopies after all. Below is the one full pyro topshot I do have, alongside the Red 3 hero, your photo, and my V3 ( with faked-up canopy convergence)... To me, the best match for the ILM full pyro is easily your kit; the hero appears narrower or longer than all 3; while the V3, in addition to its canopy anomalies, appears overly 'triangular' in the plane which extends from canopy front edge to nose rear, all 3 others appearing more 'rectangular' in this plane.
(hope you enjoyed this post; it's taken me nearly all afternoon just to get it this coherent!)
