Some of them aren't too bad at all, like the RB-57F, but still need some work to get the bits to fit. Some are terrible though...............

And they ALL have rubbish, minimalist 'instructions'. 

The Valiant was a bit of a chore, but a better fit than the Matchbox Victor.

Quote from: Mossie on November 26, 2022, 11:33:14 AMI know a guy who's a firm believer in Mach 2, willing to put in the effort for something unusual.

I believe in them! . So far, I've built three including the recent A W Argosy. It actually goes together quite well. I've also got the Martin Seamaster to build and, hope to obtain the Douglas EC-24. I know Mach 2 kits get a lot of stick  but, it's been my experience they are perfectly buildable if one is willing to put in the effort. I am! If I recall correctly, Mach 2 is pretty much a one person operation so, rather than condemnation which seems to be the norm, perhaps Mach 2 should be commended for being willing to tackle such an esoteric range of subjects? Ultimately, we all pretty much know what we're getting and, nobody is compelled to buy them

It's the high prices I don't get on the secondhand market.
The SeaMaster is one of the better kits which goes together very well, the interior cockpit, wingtip floats and the T-tail need a bit of work.
The Sud Caravelle goes together reasonably well, so does the WB-57F although I have yet to complete the Argosy as it works well with parts from the C-119 Flying Boxcar.
My attempts at various Br.1150 Atlantics has led to the turbofan concepts,  not compatible with the Revell kit.
The Britainnia went straight in the bin as I struggled with the wings. In hindsight I should have kept it.

Quote from: Beermonster58 on December 26, 2022, 01:08:03 AMIf I recall correctly, Mach 2 is pretty much a one person operation so,

And a very chatty and friendly one as well 

Quote from: Beermonster58 on December 26, 2022, 01:08:03 AMperhaps Mach 2 should be commended for being willing to tackle such an esoteric range of subjects? Ultimately, we all pretty much know what we're getting and, nobody is compelled to buy them

Totally agree 

I have more in my Stash^TM than I've built, but the RB-57F I'm currently (if slowly and intermittently) converting to a British Canberra actually builds fairly well. The AMT/Ertl/Italeri B-52 is MUCH worse!

I bought the Comet C.4 when it came out, but haven't yet gotten round to do anything with it. But it is there, it's one of the prettiest jetliners ever build and I will most likely enjoy it once I get to it. And I will be ever grateful to Monsieur MACH2 for bringing it to the market.

I've always wanted to build the de Havilland  Comet C.4 with the wings and landing gear from the Airfix BAe Nimrod MR.1 kit.
I tried this with the Caravelle but found the fuselage to be too narrow.

Mach2 has released their version of the 1/72 scale DC-9 30 series with various decals of airliners and military users.
There's scope for the shorter and stretched fuselage versions,  engine changes, cargo or airliner. It's not a cheap kit to buy, retaining around the mid £80s.
I'm sure that an experienced whiffer could convert this model into one of the similar looking airliners in the same category.
AEW and maritime surveillance are alternatives that have been considered in the RW, they would make great subjects to build.

A DC9-30? Magic, THE best version to pick, just as Airfix did in 1/144 as you can build almost any version of the DC9 range from a -30, and I've done just that in the smaller scale. 



Only the black Playboy one is an actual -30 though.

Quote from: PR19_Kit on November 19, 2023, 02:24:00 AMA DC9-30? Magic, THE best version to pick, just as Airfix did in 1/144 as you can build almost any version of the DC9 range from a -30, and I've done just that in the smaller scale. 



Only the black Playboy one is an actual -30 though.

Looks like a set of Babushka Dolls...