What Model Disappointed You The Most Once You Opened The Box?

[John Goschke]

I can understand when the box art shows a photo of the real car, or an artists rendering that creates some excitement for the subject, but when the box art shows a built up kit made from the parts inside the box, even if just on the side panels, why is it such a surprise once the box is opened?

I see more than a few comments about how about how some kits are unbuildable or the parts are basically useless. How can that be if there are photos of the actual kit completed well enough to show what it looks like finished provided on the box?

Well, I s'pose in my case, when I actually followed through and completed the purchase of the AMT's humpbacked '58 Plymouth kit in spite of how bizarre it looked on the box, I can only chalk it up to the admittedly futile hope that after all the months of anticipation the contents wouldn't prove as awful as what was on the box cover. Fool me once, as they say.

Continuing with the example of the '58 Plymouth, though, the kit is apparently buildable, but whether it's useful as supplied in the box for building an accurate replica (or even one that simply captures the essential character) of the original, without a zillion hours of work, is another matter, (though the rear view mirrors did prove useful on another model). If nothing else, perhaps AMT should be credited for their staggering honesty, or their testicular fortitude, for showing the completed model ("See, it IS buildable!") on the packaging, and luckily it did prepare me to be disappointed on seeing the actual product. Or maybe it was simply apathy, rather than honesty, among the powers that were in charge of the company at the time, in which case I guess they deserve no credit at all.

As a fan of unintended irony I like that the most recent release of the kit carries prominent horror movie branding.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

...As a fan of unintended irony I like that the most recent release of the kit carries prominent horror movie branding.

Comedy gold. Well played.

[Scale-Master]

The Accurate M iatures McLarens were a bit of a turnoff for me. It was impressive when I opened the box, but fiddly as all get out.

Bob

OK, that one would qualify as a disappointment to me, but not for those stated reasons as they were expected.

My disappointment in those three kits is the woefully undersized rear wheels and tires. Something I had not noticed prior to opening the kit. Which I went ahead and built to completion. All the other issues can be overcome relatively easily, but not sourcing a new set of rears to match the rest of the car.

[Dragline]

Perhaps my skills were not up for the challenge at the time. I am reaching into my mind for the impression I first got. Now, I can handle one, but I didn't know about the tire issue.

I'll revisit it at some point in time.

Bob

[Tom Geiger]

A lot of kits came with that disclaimer.

I can see how a person would buy a kit based on the photo of the "actual model" on the box, then be less than thrilled with what is found inside.

Ever notice that your McDonalds burger bears no resemblence at all to the one displayed on the menu?

[Mark]

Ever notice that your McDonalds burger bears no resemblance at all to the one displayed on the menu?

I remember years ago, when Campbell's (the soup maker) got busted for putting marbles at the bottom of the soup bowl for commercials, so the vegetables would be closer to the top instead of laying at the bottom under all of the broth. For the McDonald's commercials, they probably shove everything to one side of the bun, then show the "good" side of the burger. I don't often eat at places like that any more; I'm spoiled for that stuff because at work I can get lunch in the dining room.

Most of the Revell drag car kits had that "prototype model" disclaimer on the box. The "prototype" was often a 1/16 scale kit with the hoses and wiring left off. The one-piece front tires and slicks, and the Cragar Super Trick front wheels that actually looked like Super Tricks were the giveaways...

[Tom Geiger]

I actually own the box art vehicle for one of the laster versions of the Deora kit. I got it at a GSL auction years ago. The cars on the boxes are heavily airbrushed. The box art vehicles are built without glass or lenses to avoid glare in pictures and to make the interior visible. The air brush artist draws them in. My car is quite different than how it looks on the box. They even changed the tone of the paint job.

[Scale-Master]

Ever notice that your McDonalds burger bears no resemblence at all to the one displayed on the menu?

Do you really want to eat the plastic model replica of the burger in the photo?

"Food" for photos is a lot more model than food in many cases.

[Brett Barrow]

Do you really want to eat the plastic model replica of the burger in the photo?

"Food" for photos is a lot more model than food in many cases.

Food photography is actually a rather interesting field. Lots of weird tricks they use, like Elmers Glue instead of milk in cereal, mashed potatoes instead of ice cream, they hose vegetables down with WD-40 so they look shiny, bread is often dried and shellacked, etc... They pretty much have to make it inedible to make it look appetizing.

[59 Impala]

Revell's 66 GEE-TO super stock car. There are no drag parts in the kit at all. Not even headers. They show the car doing a burn out on the box and no slicks in the kit either. Not good when you're trying to build replicas of super stock cars and no parts to build them. Dan

[Harry P.]

Ever notice that your McDonalds burger bears no resemblence at all to the one displayed on the menu?

I don't eat their food, so I have no idea.

But once a few years back I was the art director on a photo shoot for a print ad for a muffin mix. The ad was going to feature a photo of a basket of their blueberry muffins.

We got there at the appointed time the morning of the shoot, we all had coffee, etc... the client came to the shoot with a very large box full of muffins.

First they spent an hour or so picking out the nice looking muffins, until they had it down to the "stars" that were good enough, in their opinion, to be used in the photo. Then the "food stylist" literally picked at the sugar crystals and the blueberries on the muffins with tweezers... rearranging the individual grains of sugar, removing some, moving others around, "styling" the blueberries, etc. This took several hours.

By the time the client and the stylist had done their thing and arranged the muffins in the basket for the shot, it was late afternoon!

And all that was just for a basket of freakin' muffins!

Edit: we did get to eat any of the "rejects" we wanted... they were good!

[Jantrix]

The Badman gasser.

[1930fordpickup]

I think it is more of my ability than the problems with the kits that gave me fits.

[1930fordpickup]

Food photography is actually a rather interesting field. Lots of weird tricks they use, like Elmers Glue instead of milk in cereal, mashed potatoes instead of ice cream, they hose vegetables down with WD-40 so they look shiny, bread is often dried and shellacked, etc... They pretty much have to make it inedible to make it look appetizing.

Having painted bottles for this it is a trip. You have to paint it to match the food, not white, yellow or red. It was mustard , mayo or catsup. Some of these were a wood model and some were 3D Printed bottles ( this was in 95 -98 ) before they started to paint them themselves.

[Jordan White]

I would have to go with the Fujimi Toyota Land Cruiser 80. I knew that Fujimi tend to have fewer details than other companies, but I didn't expect it to be one of the "designed to be motorized" kits, that also happened to be closer to 1/22 scale. I'm going to just make a monster truck out of it with a USA-1 kit.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Jordan White

[jbwelda]

>And all that was just for a basket of freakin' muffins!

uh no, that was for over a billion dollars worth of potential sales. the muffins were props. get it?

jb

[Lovefordgalaxie]

Yeah, Palmer kits as gifts when I was a kid. Oy. "Uh. Gee. Uh. Thanks, Gramma..."

But in recent years the biggest disappointment was this nightmare, AMT's ridiculous '58 Plymouth. Was really excited when it was announced. When I picked one up I bought it in spite of the box "art" photo, hoping maybe it showed camera distortion. Fortunately the photo did, in part, prepare me to clench my sphincter for the disappointment to come on opening the box and realizing the distortion was in the eye of the pattern maker, who may have never actually looked at a real '58 Plymouth. "Uh. Gee. Uh. Thanks, AMT..."

Second worst disappointment was Trumpeter's absurd '60 Pontiac Bonneville hardtop. Again a case where the patternmaker may never have actually looked at a real car and seemingly mislaid all their photo reference.

Third was undoubtedly Revell's chopped '49 Merc, where the main reference for the roof chop was apparently the goofy Merc from Sly Stallone's equally goofy movie, "Cobra." Note how the B pillar "props up" and appears to interrupt the flow of the roofline just like on the kit!

You know, THAT's why I really love kits tooled when the cars were at the streets. The engineers and pattern makers actually saw the cars.

I have many vintage kits, like the AMT '59 Galaxie, AMT, '58 Fairlane Mint in box, that I will probably never build, AMT '62 Galaxie, AMT '61 Galaxie, AMT '66 Galaxie, AMT '66 Galaxie, AMT '57 Ford, all models with accurate bodies. Simple kits compared to today's standards of separate frames, and parts on the hundreds, but great kits never the less.

[Lovefordgalaxie]

The kit I got most disappointed with was the Monogram '53 Chevy Bel Air.

Lot's of flash, a firewall that is a joke, radial generic tires on a 1953 car, the body is all out of proportion, the hood is too square, the front bumper is too far from the car, the front seat is out of scale, and the list goes on...

My favorites are the AMT 1966 Galaxie 500 7 Litre, followed by the AMT 1957 Ford Fairlane 500 Club Vicky.

[Tom Geiger]

How about this one... I was so excited to get a first generation Capri in 1/24 scale...

So good so far, body looks great! Then.......

Bam! I pull this interior out of the box. Yup that's it! Makes Johan tubs seem luxurious! And why, so they could fit the little motor and batteries in it!

[cobraman]

It would make a good slot car body.

[Danno]

Ever notice that your McDonalds burger bears no resemblence at all to the one displayed on the menu?

It's not just McDonald's. That's true of any/every restaurant, even the vaunted 'high-end' high-dollar places and socially-acceptable joints favored by vegans, isolationists, organic-fetishists, tree huggers, and nuevo-riche foody snobs.

[om617]

All because of lack of detail.

Tamiya McLaren SLR. What! No full detail engine,i was expecting full detail at this price.

Lindberg 48 Lincoln. Same with this,the engine is an joke.

Arii Mercedes SLC. The interior is horrible,close to the Capri posted by Tom Geiger.

[sjordan2]

Minicraft 1/24 Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud (originally a Hubley promo): Fairly accurate body shape, but with horrible mold seams. Wire axle, blob of an engine top, hubcaps are totally flat without proper dimension. Flying Lady is twice the size it should be. Interior tub is a joke.

Edited July 25, 2014 by sjordan2

[pack rat]

The cars on the boxes are heavily airbrushed. The box art vehicles are built without glass or lenses to avoid glare in pictures and to make the interior visible. The air brush artist draws them in.

That was the practice in the Ertl days, but it certainly isn't the way it's done at Round2. The box art kits also make the rounds at trade shows, etc, ultimately ending up in display cases at the Auto World store, providing they have survived the packing/shipping etc.

Having built 70-odd kits for them, including 30 box-art kits, I can assure you they're not done using hand-selected extra-special test shots, nor do I have the luxury of "taking my time" to make sure it looks good. Typically they're rush jobs (usually 1-2 weeks on my spare time) using previous issues of the kit I have on hand, or early test shots sent to me which may be a little rough around the edges, have no chrome-plated parts, no clear parts etc etc.

Yes, they add little highlights to the photos here and there, but basically what you see on the box is what you get.

And no, I don't "leave parts off" or take similar short cuts (give me a break!).

[Scale-Master]

Of all the companies I've built box art models for Ertl is the only one that had the builder leave the windows out. Headlights were always used.

Knowing what was built and seeing the final retouched box art I can say that other than the windows it was only minor highlights and an occasional reflection that was airbrushed in. It isn't as if they reworked the model to hide major flaws.