X1 tie fighter's choice?

I also wonder if the extreme humidity is causing casting issues this year. Painting the Salzo v5 right now not a single issue. I have done test sprays on my nice n models B wing and it too is fine.

:lol
Guys I'm not new to resin. I cleaned it well.

After multiple tries with different primers, the Upol Acid Etch 8 seems to be sticking. You know - after wasting WEEKS.

Yep. Andy (flyscriber) is doing mine and also had to use etch primer.

Voodoocaster said:

Nothing makes it better!
I am not sure if korbanth includes a metal armature rod but that is a must since the wings are heavy.
My version of the C.Kelley tie has wings casted by Mike Salzo(which i think also casts Steve Niesen's x-1,i am not sure)so all the details(diamondplate solar panel) are there and the warpage is minimal.

Click to expand...

As of this date Mike Salzo has not done any of the castings Of the new Nice-n X-1 TIE fighter.
Though I wish he would, I think it would bring an end to some of the problems I am reading about regarding the caliber of the castings.

Voodoocaster said:

Nothing makes it better!
I own a Chris Kelley X1 and it is accurate aside from a few scratch build greeblies,..i even think his tie ball dimensions are more accurate than the niesen version,that is if Steve used his dimensions from his tie-fighters to master the x1.
If that is the case then his tie ball is slightly undersized and the Chris Kelley x1 is more accurate.

Click to expand...

Vooodoocaster,
I am afraid your knowledge/information regarding the Nice-n TIE fighter is a little out of date.
[ Undersatably, the history development of Steven's SS TIE Fighter kit may be a bit confusing.]
The Fuselage, AKA: TIE ball and arms (and related components) were completely re-mastered back in 2015.
The current outside diameter of the "Ball" is 5.25" Inches (5-1/4") This is larger than the older version of the kit.
The Current version of the TIE Wings (WingStar & Hub) were re-mastered back in 2010. dimensions for the new wings taken off an original ANH miniature. (now in a private collection) I think they became available for the kit around 2011-12. (not really sure)
The Nice-n X-1 TIe Fighter also mastered in 2015, also has diameter of 5.25" and has always been that size.

...so enough about the size of Steve's balls.

Regarding the accuracy of Chris Kelly's X-1 TIE kit:
First of all I want to be completely clear; It is a wonderful kit! ...beautifully engineered. It goes together quite nice.
I have the utmost admiration for Chris's work. I still would like to get hold of one of his Blockade Runner kits they are beautiful!
He is a very talented Modeler.
His version of the X-1 kit does however, have a few inaccuracies. Based on the information he had available to him at the time he did an excellent job. The inaccuracies are minor, chiefly, thay have to do with the shape and "character" of the main fuselage, (engineering deck / sail panel area)
Also the dimensions of the wings and the black "solar panel" material.
Given the information he had available to him at the time, I certainly could not have done as wonderful a job on the subject.

In mastering the Nice-n X-1 TIe. The team had direct to ILM assets. They were able to take measurements off the wings etc. ... and a casting/impression of the original light diffuser material used for the solar panel section. In this regard, the Nice-n X-1 Advanced TIE is the more accurate of the two. I may put up a diagram, to try and better explain what I mean regarding the "character" of the fuselage.

I have to say, very valid points and concerns have been raised regarding issues with the quality of the most recent castings of the Nice-n X-1 TIe Fighter kit.
Also, there is the issue of a "not so stellar" track record for timely delivery, once purchase has been made from Nice-n Model Designs.
These are certainly factors decidedly against choosing the Nice-n X-1 Kit.

Hope this information helps.

Hi Greeblie_gremlin. Very interesting notes on the history of the Nice-n kits. I got the X-1 in January 2018 and the TIE in August.

If you compare the two cockpits you can see that they are different.

The following show the two cockpits next to each other, the cockpit window frame of the fighter compared to the X-1 and the X-1 top hatch on the TIE fighter ball.

This evidence and a number of issues that Andy (flyscriber) has had with the cockpit detailing seems to point to a 5” ball on this (4 month old?) TIE fighter.

Given the timeframe my expectation was that I would have the latest kits. Should I be asking Steve for a new cockpit?

Wish I had one of either,
... still waiting still waiting...

Wow! ??
I wonder why Steve is not using the new masters(2015) of the 5.25" TIE ball.
Perhaps some confusion, with the caster who has been tasked with the castings...
that is very odd??

No wonder there has been so much confusion about the kits.
Sorry, VoodooCaster,

In making the Fuselage for the X-1, You could see how the "arms" of Standard TIE fit just beneath the X-1's arms, even the pitch/ angle of the planes/panels. At the time I could even tell what thickness of styrene they used to clad over the arms; though now it escapes me.
Of course you can not draw that correlation with the two different sizes you have.

I do not profess the be an all-knowing expert on all things TIE fighter... on the contrary.
One part of the original build I do know, information referred to me second-hand from an account by one of the original ILM modelers (forget which one at the moment)
They had taken a 5" Plastruct hemisphere, and vacuformed 2 layers styrene over the hemisphere for doing the panels & panel lines.
He could not recollect the thicknesses they used. However 2 layers of .060 would account for a 5.25" size for the ball.
Keep in mind allowing for some minute "added" thickness between layers with solvent/ glue.
This would also bear out as some dimensions taken of TIE fighters filming miniatures made in ESB & Jedi, measured just a tadd under 5.25"
Generational shrinkage and old molds would account for this.