These were the first aircraft that I examined. My review sample was configuration E, which is the stowed version with folded wingtips and a mounted Type 91 aerial torpedo. These were molded in a translucent white resin. (Note: Afterwards, I also received a few of the Kates in configuration F, which is the flight ready, fully extended wing with torpedo. These were colored in a yellow-orange tinged resin. My comments below on the Kates apply to both configurations that I received.)

I was quite impressed for a number of reasons. The detailing was notable: subtle panel lines and control surface edges, crisp recesses for wheel wells, a beautifully executed, shaped, and open canopy frame with open seating positions within the fuselage beneath the canopy. The torpedo was beautifully rendered and scaled, and positioned with the proper offset starboard to the centerline and in a head down position. Its tail fins, propeller, and attachment points were also sharply done. And, as this particular aircraft configuration has the folded wing option, the exposed end of the wing joint shows proper internal ribbing.

The aircraft is also properly scaled, at least for length, though the wingspan could not be properly measured due to the separate folding wings of this configuration. For comparison’s sake, all the styrene versions were also properly sized.

There were some minute amounts of excess resin material here and there on the fuselage, and a number of projections along the edges of the stabilizers and tailplanes. These are undoubtedly the remnants of attachment points used to anchor the aircraft to its “raft” while being printed. These need to be sanded away. Like-wise, though smooth to the touch, I’m sure the aircraft surface could benefit from a light pass with very fine grit sandpaper or sanding stick as specified in the instructions.

The separate, outboard wing sections for this version are packaged separately, and look to be as nice as the main aircraft. I did note some excess material on the leading edge of one wing, and each underside had three identical placed projection remnants which are also attachment points for the wing to its “raft” during printing. These also need to be removed, but gently and carefully, because there are also two tiny tabs on the inboard, upper edge of the wing that are to be glued to the main wing for the folded appearance.

Also included in this separate package is an extremely thin, printed rod approximately 2 inches long that is meant to be used to make pitot tubes. It was not obvious at first that this was additional material. If I had not read the instructions first, I would have never realized what it was for and might have easily broken or crushed it. So, be advised.

A third storage bag contains right and left landing gear/wheel assemblies and three bladed propellers with hubs. Interestingly, these items are printed in a light yellow-orange tinged resin. As one would hope, the detailing is very good. The tires are formed, the struts have details, and the propeller blades are all canted.

Interestingly, I feel that my digital photos can be a bit misleading. The extreme close-ups reveal the striations resulting from the printing process, particularly when backlit. Also obvious in these digital close-ups are the remains of any excess printed material. So, the impression one might get is that the surfaces are on the crude side when, in fact, this is anything but true.

The surfaces are far smoother to the touch then the close-ups would suggest. The MK.1 eyeball doesn’t pick up the extent of the striations, particularly when more than a few inches away from the surfaces. For the most part, the aircraft and parts appear translucent and smooth. A few passes of a sanding stick are likely to be sufficient to take down any imperfections.

In any case, the printing striations will be eventually be covered by paint. The striations also become less obvious when the resin used is a colored resin.

For the most part, my comments for the “Zeros” echo those for the Kates regarding their very positive traits. My review set was configuration A, which is flight ready with a centerline drop tank. Like the full wing Kates and Kate parts, these were molded in that same light yellow-orange tinged resin.

I was, however, initially disappointed by one aspect of the Zeros. Most of the wings were noticeably warped upward. While the actual Zero’s wing had a visible dihedral angle, the wings themselves were completely straight. In the review set, beyond the dihedral angle, the wings clearly began to curve upward for four of the six aircraft in the set. The wings of the other two were mostly flat, but the port/left wingtip on both also warped upward slightly.

3D-Wild prints its aircraft with an emphasis on truer 1/350 scale than comparable styrene injection aircraft, and that emphasis applies to wing thickness as well as overall dimensions. In this case, I couldn’t help but wonder if that emphasis on proper scale was counterproductive, because I thought it might lessen the wing’s ability to hold its shape. Truthfully, I didn’t know enough about the material and the process to make an authoritative determination.

So, I reached out to 3D-Wild for comment. I learned that all my review sets were early production versions that were several months old. Based on customer feedback to date, 3D-Wild has have been tweaking their products to improve them. In the case of the Zeros, they have chosen to thicken the wing in order to counter any warpage. They also sent me a new set of Zeros for evaluation.

I’m very pleased to report that the newer batch of Zeros showed no wing warpage. Nor is the thickening of the wing noticeable to any extent. Some of them did suffer, however, from some overzealous packaging. Those fuselages were taped down a little too tightly, resulting in a slight bending of the tailplanes, which also rest upon the edges of the U channel. Fortunately, I was able to gently bend them into their proper position with no ill effects. I also alerted 3D-Wild to the situation, and they took proper note of it.

Overall, the Vals were mostly impressive in the same manner as the Kates and Zeros. This set was configuration B, which consists of stowed wings and ordinance of one 250kg bomb along with two 60kg bombs. Sizing was also accurate. And, like the Zeros and full wing Kates, this set was molded in the same light yellow-orange tinged resin.

Notable about these units is that their signature fixed landing gear with spats was printed as part of the main aircraft, as was a 250kg bomb mounted on the centerline under the cockpit. Even better was the addition of their underwing dive brakes, a feature simply not available on the styrene versions. Also obvious was the relative thinness of their wings as compared to the styrene versions, something not seen to the same extent on the Kates.

The only disappointment lay with the canopy frames. All six seemed to have shrunk down somehow. This problem was also brought to 3D-Wild’s attention and, as with the Zeros, they freely acknowledged that the canopies were subpar. Less certain was the actual reason for the canopy issue. In any case, replacements were issued. The replacements were better, but I still feel the that the pilot’s portion of the canopy frame sits too low over the cockpit.

https://3d-wild.com/blogs/news/assembly-instruction-of-1-350-scale-aircrafts-produced-by-3d-wild