MPC Falcon mandible question!

Kyuzo

Active Member
I've been toying with the idea of replacing the MPC-mandibles(which are too big) with some from an 1/72 falcon (which should be just a tad smaller). Like one of the new cheap revells 1/72. I know some of you have multiple Falcons so I'd love some input. Would it work scalewise?

Thanks!
 
Paging Jaitea or Haystack Hair......... This ones for you guys.


Ha,.....yes Kyuzo, that should work,.....but the Revell parts have their own problems.....have you thought of scratch building them, then you'll be able to make them as accurate as you like without having the restrictions of the donor parts

J
 
The easy kit Revell Falcon (called 1/72 but seems to be 1/80) is much smaller than the mpc. MPC is about 18 inches, and that easy kit revell is about 14, I think those mandibles would be too small. Maybe you could just cut the mpc mandibles 1 cm at the tips and reposition the small boxes located at that place. Or maybe just cut the mandibles off and reposition them by sliding them a little under the plates.

For the record: the revell master series (rebox of the fine molds) is stated to be 1/72 too and is about 17 - 17.5 inches long. Bandai PG Falcon is classified as 1/72 too and is about 19" long. With that in mind, we could say the MPC is 1/72 scale too. I think all this inconsistences are generated because there is not an agreement about "the real size" of the Falcon.
 
Last edited:
And by the way, I did not modify the mandibles on my amt-ertl Falcon (same mold as MPC), after all the mods i'm doing to the kit I can live with those mandibles just a little oversized :)

 
Thank you so much for all the answers. Especially that blogpost and those numbers what was I was looking for.

I already completed my MPC, but with the MPC you're never really complete. Now everytime I look at it I just see the flaws. Think scratchbuilding will be the way to go. Or saving up to the bandai. With the accuracy of the 1/144 bandai I think they must have laserscanned the 5-foot or something because it's eerily exact.
 
This thread is more than 6 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top