I have two Bf 109 G-6 kits and was curious of how hard it would be to back date one to G-4 standards. Would it be mainly the leaving off the "bumps" on either side of the fuselage for the larger cowl 13mm guns? Are there any other noticeable changes in the airframe? Thanks---John

According to Prien & Rodeike, that was the main difference initially. You would also need to omit the oval hatch on the left of the fuselage between Frames 8 and 9. Most main wheels had plain hubs on G-6 but on G-4 you need spoked hubs.

Depending on the timeframe of the kit, there may be other changes, although most involve omitting or removing fittings. If a DF loop is present, remove that and you may need to replace the antenna mast with the tall version. No bulletproof glass rear head armour on a G-4 and obviously no Erla-Haube. No GM-1 filler hatch on right fuselage between Frames 3 and 4. No FuG 16zy antenna below fuselage.

Having acquired a couple of cheap G-4s myself, I’m planning to go the other way with mine as I think there are more interesting G-6 schemes.

Thanks....also is the -4 the one with bigger wheels than -2 and the -4 had tires not at same angle as landing gear leg. I thought about -2 but too many differences. Thinking Trop scheme in Tunisia, not sure if any -6s were"tan over blue" scheme sorta like Marsailles.---John

Yes, the G-4 had the bigger tyres and different MLG angle compared to the G-2 so it had the small upper wing bulges. I ignored that as the G-6 had them too.

There were G-6 Trop over Tunisia. Yellow 13 of 6./JG 51 was one. Supposedly captured in April 43 after a forced landing. However it had the usual greys 74/75/76 scheme with white spinner and fuselage band. It looks as though the other users in that theatre (JG 27, 53 and 77) also used the greys scheme, presumably as they were based in Italy rather than Africa.

Thanks Robert, I am going with a G-4 so I can use the tan and blue camo scheme. The gray schemes are getting old to my taste.---John

In addition to removing the fuselage bulges, you'd also need to rework the nose (the gun troughs on the cowling are quite different in shape and location: G-6 vs.G-2/4), swap to the machine gun barrels to the appropriate MG 17 items, and fill in the MG 131 shell ejection chutes under the wing between the landing gear attachment points.

According to the Aero Detail #5 book I have at hand, you should be good to go with G-6 main wheels when building a late production G-4, which would then go with wings with wheel well bulges à la G-6. Also, late production G-4s could also have the 'Galland panzer' head armor. The book notes that the G-4 was essentially a G-3 without cabin pressurization and the GM-1 power booster system, thus making them often hard to distinguish from late production G-2s.
I could imagine it also being very possible for G-4s to have been overhauled with replacement parts from earlier machines as well, similarly to how among the G-2s bought by the Finns a few of the planes came with later variant wings (w/ wheel well bumps) installed.
According to this review of the Hasegawa/Revell G-2 kit, G-6's tail wheel would be appropriate for later production G-4s, whereas earlier ones need the smaller, retractacle kind. I feels it's noteworthy to point out how that review is not on the same lines on the use of Galland Panzer head armor or the usual type of wheels used.



You mean the tail wheel maintenance hatch? Huh, that's new to me. I've been under the impression that the hatch was there for the majority of Bf 109 variants.
While far from a comprehensive sampling, I think the hatch is definitely there on G-4 W.NR. 19310 (picture in middle of bottom row).

Thanks Emeritus, real good info!---John