Tamiya canopy on the left and ProMod on the right. There are several subtle differences, including: ProMod is slightly longer; ProMod is noticably narrower; bracing tapes on ProMod vary in width more like those installed on aircraft; ProMod has the access panel line engraved on the canopy tail. Also, the Tamiya kit has the bracing tape lines engraved, and the ProMod kit has them raised. This means it would be easier to backdate the ProMod canopy to the non-braced style used on early Thunderjets. Not visible here is the slight radius at the side rails where the canopy fairs into the fuselage which is present on the Tamiya part but is missing on the ProMod part. The extranious longitudinal bracing tape extending from lateral tapes 3 to 4 has been removed from this Tamiya part, and it is intersting to note that the Tamiya part has the longitudinal tape extended to the tail and ProMod does not; the ProMod is correct as compared to photos I have taken of two aircraft. There may be some aircraft which had the bracing like the Tamiya part, but I have not seen photos of any aircraft with bracing tapes like Tamiy's part has. See the discussion of how to correct the Tamiya canopy in the Tamiya kit review page links.
Tamiya canopy posed open. The front of the bottom rail is parallel with the fuselage panel line just below it, and the tail of the canopy correctly sits fairly close to the fuselage spine.
ProMod canopy posed open. The front of the bottom rail is not parallel with the fuselage panel line just below it, and the tail of the canopy "kicks up" too much above the fuselage spine.
Tamiya main gear fairings on the left, and ProMod on the right. Tamiya's upper and lower fairings line up correctly, ProMod's parts do not. The upper and lower fairings should line up like the Tamiya parts, and should not be offset like the ProMod parts. I corrected this misalignment by drilling replacement mounting holes offset from those molded into the part. Also, notice the leading edge of the lower doors (facing left). The Tamiya part has the radius tanget into a straight line which extends to the bottom, while the ProMod part has the radius continue to the bottom. The shape of the Tamiya part is correct.
Tamiya main gear struts on the left, and ProMod on the right. Tamiya's struts are angled slightly, perhaps even more than they are angled on a real aircraft, which look to me to be very nearly vertical. The ProMod parts are severely angled, and are not correct. I corrected them partially (but not to vertical) by cutting a wedge from the top.
Tamiya auxilliary tank at the top, and ProMod at the bottom. According to the measurements a friend took of the tanks on the E-model at the USAFM in Dayton, the Tamiya tanks are too large and the ProMod tanks are a match. The caveat here is, there were two sizes of tanks used on the F-84, and we don't know if the large or small tanks are on the F-84E at Dayton.
ProMod fuselage at the top, and Tamiya at the bottom. At  compare the shape of each fin; Pro-Modeler is more rounded than Tamiya. At  the Pro-Modeler tailpipe is a separate part, Tamiya's is integral with the fuselage. At  the Pro-Modeler ventral fairing extends much further forward than does Tamiya's. At  the Pro-Modeler auxilliary air intakes are separate panels; Tamiya's are integral with the fuselage. At  the Pro-Modeler fuselage is longer (and the correct length) while Tamiya's is five-scale-inches too short. Also notice the difference in angle of incidence of the wing roots on the two kits. Not as noticable in this photo is the difference in the wing root fairing panels. Generally, the ProMod kit is more accurate in this profile view than the Tamiya, including shape of the fin and rudder  and the ventral fairing length . However, it appears, based on the wing root span measurment, the the ProMod is slightly too narrow, and that Tamiya is correct. Also, the ProMod wing root fairing panel does not slope downward toward the front as much as it should, while the Tamiya part is correct.