There are lots of new brands in 400 scale, especially within China, and several offering something different in terms of their approach even if not always in terms of their release content. Geministar is one such brand and one that has become prolific in the past couple of years. They have used a variety of existing moulds from Panda, HX Models and most recently Kylin Model, to produce high quality releases at lower prices. In this review I wanted to explore one of their many recent Airbuses and look at their product offering.
I made a Who’s Who video for Geministar just under a year ago, in mid-2025, and since then they have released a lot of models and I’ve learnt more about them. GeminiStar originated from a mainland China distributor called “模时代”(literally translated as Model Era), a comprehensive model store selling various types of products. The civil aviation business was emphasized by one of its owners, who went on to establish what is now GeminiStar (formerly BinaryStar). For the ‘Who’s Who’ video see:
Each review is to split into three key areas:
- The model mould
- The paint and livery reproduction
- Printing and quality control
Each section can get a maximum score of 10 for a maximum combined score of 30
This review is sponsored by Northeast Diecast. Check out their store for an excellent range of hard to find 200 and 400 scale collection sale models and get 15% off!
MOULD
This model uses the Kylin Airbus A321 and in fact of the 123 releases from Geministar 49 use Kylin Airbus moulds (A319/20/21 and A330s). One of the ways Geministar can release so many models is that they usually make multiple similar but slightly different versions of the same aircraft. Indeed, there are 4 versions of a China Eastern Skyteam A321 here with the only changes being the engine type and registrations.
This strategy, along with a standardised box and larger production runs is part of what allows them to keep their prices down. This model cost only RMB190 (about £21 / $28) whereas most 400 scale in China are in the 250-350 range (except for JET which is even cheaper than 190).
From a mould perspective Geministar don’t go the full JET Models route and this aircraft uses the standard Kylin A321 including aerials. I reviewed a Kylin A320 in late 2025 and a JET A319 using a version of the Kylin mould in early 2026. Obviously the A321 shares many of the same features.
Broadly this is a very acceptable A321, especially if you are comparing it to the Aeroclassics, Phoenix or JC Wings versions which are all inferior. It doesn’t quite reach the heights of the NG Models, Panda Models or HYJLwings versions but isn’t a million miles from them either.
The core mould components such as the fuselage barrel, and wings all show very little to criticise. That is something you can’t say about the Phoenix and JC Wings moulds. Compared to an NG A321 the nose does appear a little slimmer.
Similarly, the wing structure correctly captures the double-slotted flaps of a non XLR A321 – something that once again has not always been the case with legacy moulds (especially when they have sharklets on). The sharklets themselves angle backwards a little too strongly.
The landing gear is well detailed, but the nosegear is a little taller than necessary and, on this model, it doesn’t angle forward well (although I think that’s a QC issue, not mould related). It has also been pointed out that the nosegear sits almost on the axle rather than the tyres, but you can’t tell that from the side-on and it doesn’t stand out dramatically except in macro shots.
The IAE engines look good and unlike the cheaper JET version I reviewed feature the nacelle strakes / vortex generators present on both sides of the nacelles. The model comes fitted with 4 aerials, all well sized and fitted.
At the rear the vertical stabiliser is well shaped but similarly to the A320 version probably not wide enough at the rear margin. As I stated before the fix seems quite simple – to extend the rudder portion aft a small smount.
While not quite matching the detail and finesse of the best A321s in 400 scale this Kylin mould easily beats the weaker versions (which make up a disturbingly large % of releases). Given the price point that makes this a very competitive mould and one I’d favour over Phoenix, Aeroclassics and JC Wings regardless of cost.
Despite its relative quality I know that Kylin are producing a new A320/321 family mould for their own usage leaving this version for the cheaper JET and Geministar products.
SCORE – 7
PAINT & LIVERY
Older photos of this aircraft dating from around 2015 show a very metallic paint finishing whereas shots from 2017 onwards have a much lighter and matter base colour. Indeed, some more recent photos (like this 2024 shot from Planespotters) make the scheme look like a matt light grey. The frame wasn’t repainted into the latest livery version (with the 2014 logo on the tail) until 2023 so it definitely shouldn’t be as metallic as this.
That appears to be a mistake – possibly derived from the fact that it is one of 4 models and one of the others made (B-8976) still sports the more metallic finish. This is one of the unintended consequences of making multiple models that are basically using the same artwork.
Placement of the livery components themselves is not an issue. The print quality is good, they are well sized and located and smaller details (like the 38 on the nosegear doors) are not skimped on.
SCORE – 8
PRINTING & QUALITY CONTROL
Given the retail price you might be forgiven for thinking that this model would feature weak printing, but the level and quality of printwork here is broadly on par with NG and the other better brands in the scale. Likewise paint finishing is very good and puts brands like Aeroclassics to shame around the engine nacelle rims and inners.
Build quality is ok but could be better. As well as the previously mentioned angle of the nosegear leg, the starboard wing is noticeably higher at its tip than the portside. The vertical stabiliser also has something of a lean to it. It could be that to keep the costs low the QC checks and build quality are compromised slightly?
From an overall packaging perspective, as mentioned already, the box design is relatively generic, although unlike JET Models which goes the full generic route, it is individualised to this released aircraft. No doubt the other 3 versions, featured on the box rear, have basically the same design as this one but it isn’t a fully genericised box.
The model also comes with a collector’s card, which features a model number on it but not the production run size (so mine is 0005), but the card is thick paper rather than a credit card style plastic. No doubt this is to keep costs down again and since it is very much an optional extra anyway, I don’t really care.
SCORE – 7
CONCLUSION
The approach Geministar are taking with their recent releases makes a lot of sense. They are able to produce models that are competitive with many standard brands and sell them at a cheaper price. They aren’t necessarily troubling brands at the top of the market, like NG Models, but they should be a very viable, and arguably superior alternative, to some brands that pretend they are premium but often use weak out of date castings. Geministar aren’t operating at quite the same ultra-budget level as JET Model, but they are keeping costs low by limiting packaging variation and releasing larger production runs with multiple aircraft versions. If only someone in the West was taking this sensible approach, which enables good quality products at cheaper prices to be available on the market.
FINAL SCORE – 22/30
