Just what is the difference between the 787-8 and -9 series?

[FireAngelZero]

As Boeing starts to release their newest variation to their newest member the 787 Dreamliner family the 787-9 I asked myself what's the big difference with the -9? Looking through many pictures online and reading the dimensions kind of gave me an idea of how big the -9 series would be but as hard as I tried I couldn't really find a direct comparison between them. When Geminijets released the 787-9 Air New Zealand "All Blacks" it definitely gave me an idea of the difference but unfortunately the "All Blacks" ANZ really is all black, and the black kind of threw me off when it came to a direct comparison. Seeing that Geminijets was due to release the 787-9 in United livery was a relief for me because I had already owned a United 787-8 and having the -9 would really give me an idea of how these two jets stacked up. Well today the United Airlines 1:400 scale 787-9 arrived, and the fact I have two United 787's the comparison between the -8 and -9 variations really helped me understand and in fact appreciate and like the -9. Below are two pictures showing the differences between the -8 and -9:


United 787-8 (left) United 787-9 (right)


As you see the fuselage difference gives the -9 a little bit more appeal, the fuselage is 20 feet longer than the 186' the -8 has and to me gives the -9 a little less of a fat look that I feel the -8 has...
The wings difference between the -8 and -9 is 3 feet which I feel you can't really tell in 1:400 scale.



In this photo you can see that the -9 has more windows in the rear between the L3 and L4 doors. While the front has a huge gap between the L1 and L2 doors but the -9 has 3 more windows added due to the stretch...



Action SHOT! just really liked how sleek it looked on the side...

Hopefully this can help you guys see the difference between variations and hey maybe you guys will decide you want to get a United -9!

[RStretton]

Thanks for the photos. I have to say I think the 787-8 is a really ugly plane when on the ground as only the A310 looks dumpier what with its short undercarriage. The 787-9 at least looks better with the extra length. Still it'll be a cold day in hell before a 787 finds its way into my collection . That doesn't mean these aren't great models though and I appreciate your posting.

[JAL1628]

My customer told me that more of the -9 is built in the United States, as opposed to the -8 which was widely sourced around the world.

I initially didn't like the 787 until I saw one up close at KBFI. It's a big airplane; appreciably bigger than a 767-300. Photographs just don't do it any justice.