Interesting But Disappointing? Emhar F94C Starfire (Late) in 1/72 Scale! Model Kit Unboxing Review

[@julianmhall]

TBH Matt I'd baulk at any price in double figures. The £8 you suggested sounded about the maximum I'd pay..

[@ModelMinutes]

Yeah, that RRP is very high

[@animalyze7120]

Still have multiple EMHAR kits in my collection and built both the Mark I tank kits. They are not bad, they are not great, but if you have the time and some good photo etch and 3d printed add-ons these kits usually end up looking really good. These kits do take a lot more time and effort =due to lack of some important details but will build nice standalone. Great Vid!

[@ModelMinutes]

I have heard the tanks are pretty good

[@JesseMcAbee-l4v]

Having been a lad who discovered modeling at about 7 years old in the mid 1960s as a modeler we learned to appreciate companies who did some off beat stuff. Matt, have you ever tried a vacuum formed kit from say, Rareplanes. Back then, short of a complete scratch build vac forms were the way to get an airplane the big manufacturers weren't doing. I do remember a vacuum form of the Starfire. As a professional historian, now basically retired context, context, context. Keep modeling and I enjoy hearing your impressions of some of the old kits you model. Cheers from the PNW of the US.

[@ModelMinutes]

I have considered a vacform kit, but have not yet found one that I fancy doing

[@JesseMcAbee-l4v]

@@ModelMinutes They offer interesting subjects but several I have had for 4 decades that are now injected molding offerings such as two HO-229s one in white plastic and one in green. They are pretty simple and love sand paper. Their are modelers who build them so well you might never know they were vacforms.

[@daneshivers2921]

Nice review... any idea on nose weight to prevent tail sitting? Thanks Dane

[@ModelMinutes]

I imagine it would help, packing those with as much weight as possible to play it safe

[@dunnp12]

There is a cheap resin cockpit and landing gear tires for this kit. I have seen it on the contest table, it builds into a nice model. I just wish someone or company would make 1950/1960s piolets.

[@ModelMinutes]

ooo thanks for letting me know!

[@stevesmodelbuilds5473]

Hi Matt! This is a re-box of a Heller kit tooled in 1984. I haven't done an Emhar kit, but do have a few of their figure sets and they're quite good. From the looks of this, I'll stick with the figures... It was also announced in May '24 they're going to phase out the brand over the next year, so I guess they're dumping as much as they can now... Even with their core business of model trains, you have to be very careful with Bachmann. Locomotives, rolling stock and structure kits are very inconsistent, and their premium stuff is expensive...

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks for letting me know!

[@Ian64003]

It's actually a different mold entirely. Heller's kit was from a few years earlier and offers the -B version. If I remember right that has raised panel lines vs Emhar's recessed panel lines. I think the Russian prop kits in their range like the Yak-3 and MiG-3 were ex-Frog moulds produced just right as they went bust (or possibly from the plans thereof). When you look at the sprues and layouts for those kits they do look like Frog kits. This Starfire is their own mould though. Their Fury kit is similar but sadly has raised panel lines, and I want to say their Demon has the same style of recessed as this F-94. The sprues always reminded me of Matchbox or the likes of early Games Workshop. Very square and blocky. Maybe from the same toolmaker? I have a few Emhar kits and when they were a bit cheaper were decent enough value.

[@stevesmodelbuilds5473]

@@Ian64003 I was going by what Scalemates said. Looks bad enough to be a Heller...

[@russelltaylor535]

As someone else has noted, this is an original Emhar kit and has no relation to the Heller F-94B. It is also the only F-94C in 1/72 scale. There are two different kits of the F-94B: the Heller kit from 1984 and the Sword kit from 2013. The big differences between the C and B versions are the C has swept horizontal stabilisers and the nose armament is different.

[@stevesmodelbuilds5473]

@@russelltaylor535 Either way, it's overpriced 💩.

[@stuarttempleton43]

I suspect that it will build up fine, just start with low expectations and go from there. If you want to add a stand (if you happen to have a spare one) I'm sure you can work out where to put the slot. I built their Fury kit a few years back and it came out looking really nice - I think I added a drinking straw for the jet pip and another for the intake trucking if I recall. The decals worked well. EMHAR is your typical cheap manufacturer like PM models, selling cheap/old short run kits - but they're okay with a bit of effort. I think I paid a similar amount to you for my boxing of this kit and I agree - £17-00 is WAAAAY over priced. Superb job on that F-80C - that looking cracking.

[@polygonalmasonary]

Agree 100%. Profiteering 😡🙏🇬🇧♥️

[@ModelMinutes]

It's crazy that is the RRP, it made me wonder if they had put a typo on the Bachmann website

[@BennyCFD]

LOLOLOLOLOLOL............Of course it is. Nobody is forcing anybody to buys this. Business owners should always charge what someone is willing to pay. After all we are not communists.

[@davidcole8268]

It’s available much cheaper from certain online retailers as you suggest. I’d have no problem having fun with this unusual subject provided the kit assembles in a serviceable manner and the transfers function ok.

[@ModelMinutes]

When I get the chance to build this one, I will investigate how well it goes together - I hope it goes together well but I have a feeling that it wont . . .

[@brianartillery]

I think that EMHAR re-box older kits from other manufacturers, a bit like Richard Kohnstam used to in the 1970's and '80s. The first time I ever encountered EMHAR was through their admittedly very nice range of 1/76 scale diecast vehicles, made for model railways - but too cool to resist if you weren't a railway modeller.

[@ModelMinutes]

Whilst I think they do with some models, this one looks like it could be their own design

[@brianartillery]

@@ModelMinutes - It could well be - but I don't think that EMHAR were about in the early 1990's. I certainly don't remember ever seeing that name until about 2007.

[@NickAndrewsFaulkner]

Spot on with the review! Having bought the Airfix Vintage Classic P.1127 for £6.99 yesterday, that is much better value for money. You can see it originates from 1963, but despite that it looks OK. Before building, the only obvious issue is the canopy with some very vague framing.

[@ModelMinutes]

I think I built one of those about 20 years ago

[@bionicgeekgrrl]

With it being a vintage classic you know exactly what vintage you're buying at least.

[@hueyJoe135]

Hi Matt another great video. It looks like a copy of the pld Heller F-94 but don't quote me on it. I'm looking forward to seeing this one getting built. Keep up the great work son

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks!

[@HASEKABA3119]

I always watch your KZbin channel. You have some nostalgic Emhar models. I also have some Emhar models, but in Japan, they are currently being sold for over $100 each. I can't buy them anymore.

[@ModelMinutes]

That is crazy high price!

[@janxspirit6707]

Good solid review, I think Emhar went out of business in 2016-17, originally very limited run injection moulded kits.

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks for the info!

[@bionicgeekgrrl]

Bachmann possibly bought the brand and assets then. Bearing in mind that Bachmann Europe is just a brand of kader industries China.

[@jonpullar3364]

Heavy sprues watch when snipping parts 👍

[@ModelMinutes]

100%

[@brucejack606]

Got a lagg 3 yesterday and its rubbish can't wait ta make it

[@baanibarnes9711]

You sound like one of those modellers who likes to bang their head against a wall - lovely when you stop! My patience has worn a little thin these days, I prefer more of the shake-the-box nicely tooled stuff, I will bend if it's a rare and interesting type though . . .

[@brucejack606]

@@baanibarnes9711I am a painter and decorator i polish turds if i get them,

[@baanibarnes9711]

@@brucejack606 Ha ha! I know, been there - 'I paid money for that, I'm building it anyway even if it is a pile of horse shite!' I don't know if it's pride or stupidity, probably just a bloke thing . . .

[@AdrianGurka-lq6ju]

I love the content 🤩

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks very much!

[@robpowell8633]

Emhar were once a British manufacturer. Now made in China of course. I've never built any of their aircraft but I've done some of their first world war tanks in 1/35 which were nice kits, if a bit clunky by modern standards. Nice, honest review.

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks for the info!

[@bionicgeekgrrl]

Bachmann Europe is effectively the Chinese factory selling direct rather than making for another company. That Chinese factory being kader industries

[@yorkshiremanmodels]

cracking and honest review not worth the 17 quid thats for sure but the kits that are harder to get seem to atract a few buyers personally i look at the kit sprue style and instructions plus the box without bags ect and it reminds me of kits from the 80s early 90s at best and yea the airfix is better and cheaper thats for sure

[@ModelMinutes]

Yes, it does feel very dated

[@baanibarnes9711]

Not a good idea to go by the box art alone! I am sure you have found this out through bitter experience - some old, more challenging kits have been re-boxed, sometimes bought in from other manufacturers (Revell, you know who I'm talking about!) and they splash out on a nice box art to entice the unweary into parting with their hard earned on what looks like a nice new kit. You have commented and I agree that Airfix have a very good, honest approach where they print the tool date on the packaging so the buyer has that info and can make their choice accordingly. They also have the great idea of putting their older tools (some going back to the sixties! As old as I am . . .) in the original box artwork, a nice touch as the artist really knew their stuff and produced very evocative art (the B25 Mitchell, Avro Lancaster and B17G come to mind - not great kits by todays standards but stunning box art). I am pretty sure I have built one of Emhars F94s, My one was the one with the odd looking nose radar mounted in line with the cockpit, gives it a very distinctive 'snooty' look, a bit like it has it's nose in the air! It wasn't fantastic quality but built into a nice little model with a bit of work. These days I generally can't be bothered rescuing naff tooled models unless it is a rare and not before modelled type, give me a nice Eduard or new tool Airfix kit any day!

[@ModelMinutes]

Thanks for sharing 😊

[@sonosoloio]

disappointing? why? it is an original subject and simple in construction and if the price is similar it is more than welcome. many years ago I built the hobbycraft one and I have good memories of that one too.

[@ModelMinutes]

I explain why it’s disappointing in the video… Old tooling Questionable detail Black and white instructions Massive sprue gates Loose in box All for a crazy RRP which is more than newer tooled kits of a similar size from other companies. Yes, it was a bit disappointing

[@stephenwhelan2515]

Brrrr -this kit gave me the willies something awful. I picked up mine in a sale about 2 years ago and building it was not a nice experience. It did manage to do some useful duty as a paint mule. Having said all that, at the time i was only back in the hobby 8 months after a 30 year gap, so a more experienced modeller might find it a pleasant challenge.

[@ModelMinutes]

I think using it as a paint mule might be the way to go

[@michaelkeogh8454]

I've got the Emhar FJ Fury, but I can't bring myself to build it.

[@VFCproductions]

"Interesting but disappointing" - you sound like my wife...

[@ModelMinutes]

lol mine too

[@bionicgeekgrrl]

Everything says 1970s or cheap 80s kits about this model. Not a 90s kit let alone 2010s.

[@ModelMinutes]

lol i know, crazy

[@jaws848]

I NEVER liked this company... mqybe its the name,mqybe its the box presentation but to me there is something off about them.

[@ModelMinutes]

I think it is just that they don't seem to be trying, but charging premium prices for budget kits

[@jaws848]

@@ModelMinutes that could be it Mat....btw how are you today?.👍👍

[@randytaylor1258]

Their first kits were W.W.I tanks at a time when they were the first. Of course, we now have numerous kits from various makers including a motorized one from Tamiya. There's no excuse, however, for no plastic bag for clear parts, though a minimum should also include a bag for the rest of the trees, too. I noticed that there were no decals for the instrument panels -- boo! The one-piece lower wing is great -- yay! And the thinness of the parts is good but do the sprues really need to be so chunky? All in all, it's a nice little kit for a (short) weekend, but it's low on detail and huge on price. But once again, it's not like Hasegawa has a lineup and True Details does make a cockpit. Verdict: How much do you really want a 1:72 F-94C Starfire?

[@andrewgrave]

I always thought it was German but apparently it's a contraction of Emily and Harold.(Founders' children's middle names apparently.)

[@Ken-kl4ym]

Way too expensive for what you get in the box.

[@JohnSmith-sl1my]

I'd say it's a 5 pound kit . Not worth anymore.

[@Ausjon61]

Matt, it's an Emhar kit through and through. First tooled in 1993.

[@ModelMinutes]

I thought so!