Where are the Model Trucks?

[Art Anderson]

Unfortunately that seems to be the case, I haven't seen anything to support the idea that Trucks lose money, although it has been made abuntently clear why they make '32 Fords which seems to be arguing past the issue in your post.

I haven't seen anyone who can explain why Harry's idea of seeking customer interests is a bad one, just the same "the model companies can't make everybody happy". What is clear is the US model companies are very conservative and unwilling to look into other markets.

You see the same thing in all areas of modeling, everyone makes a P-51 Mustang and Me 109. Where I see a difference is these other manufacterers are giving military modelers more variety, who would have thought we would ever see WW2 Italian or French tanks, but we now have several nice kits. Some one made the comment military modelers don't complain about not having xyz subject (completely untrue BTW, they obviously never spend any time on miitary model sites) but simply they have way more variety particularly in recent years. I mean we now have 3 or 4 versions of the Fairey Gannet (1/72 & 1/48) from 2 manufacturers, the Gannet is a rather obscure post war sub hunter that saw limited service with the UK and Germany.

I know I'm just one person, but here are my buying habits. Tower lets me go back and look at my past 3 years of orders. In the past 3 years I have spent nearly $1700 just at Tower, Revell got $235 of that total, about 1/2 of that just for their '41 Chevy and '50 Ford pickups, another 1/4 on other Revell truck kits, the last 1/4 went to a few of cars, mostly the '06 based Mustang kits.

During this period I have bought all of the Steven's / AMT truck re-issues from various sources mostly Model Round Up, 8 or so at $50-60 each, so at least $400.

The companies getting my money are making kits I want, funny how that works both ways.

Conservative is a rather relative term, it seems to me. With decades of data on what has sold, plus what is selling today, it only makes sense to at least look at that. Beyond the AMT Fire Apparatus, I can think of a car kit that had a lot of requests for reissue, back though the 1980's, that being the AMT '53 Studebaker Commander Starliner--apparently, when that kit was introduced, in 1964, it laid a very large egg in the marketplace, even for as fine a kit as it was then, and still is. It was reissued in the late 1970's and I was told at that time, it just did not sell in numbers large enough to have justified it. So, it was very surprising to me to see it repopped in the early 1990's, and in fact at that, the kits gathered a lot of dust in a lot of stores. As late as 2002, The Studebaker National Museum Gift Shop in South Bend had huge stacks of that early 90's kit, a decade after they were produced. Hardly the stuff of good sales numbers, yet someone at AMT Corporation, back in the 60's decided to go forth with it. Monogram's gorgeous sprint car kits of 1986 sold like Sno Cones on the 4th of July--to sprint car fanatics, who bought them by the case lot (I sold, in my hobby shop, something like a dozen cases (144 kits) to a single buyer, and then never saw him again. Same thing happened elsewhere, and then, as suddenly as they took off, they died on shelves. The Monogram '64 Thunderbolt came out with great fanfare, kudos in the magazines, great excitement from builders, but guess what? Monogram still had stacks of cases of them, 10 years later, still in their warehouse, from the first production run, again, a somewhat speculative kit that promised a lot to someone at that company, but was a huge commercial failure. Model companies aren't into running museums, or maintaining a hoard of unsold product, they are in the business of selling what they produce, pure and simple, to put money in the till for future products, in addition to paying wages and salaries and hopefully dividends to their stockholders. yet on the other hand, a Corvette is almost a guarranteed sellout, probably the most popular single model car subject of all time in the US. 25yrs ago, a Lamborghini Countach was a no brainer, make it, sell the hell out of it--nearly every maker of that subject in kit form had a long waiting list, it was that hot for about 3 years or so in the US. And, to add to the mix, in 1977, the late Bill Brown, then the Marketing VP of AMT Corporation told me that if he could get KMart to buy 30,000 of any new kit subject, the company would go ahead, as they could surely sell an additional 30K kits on the hobby shop market, and that was in a very dark period for model car kits. Obviously, not very many new product ideas made it back then, those were years of perhaps a dozen new model car kit (and truck kits of all sizes as well) releases annually in the latter half of the 70's. So, being conservative (meaning very cautious with new product dollar investment) meant survival of the companies producing them.

Comparing model car kits to model aircraft kits is almost an "Apples and Oranges" thing though! For starters, the military aircraft modeling market is, in comparison to model cars, HUGE, as it is worldwide, in most countries much larger than that for model car building, and almost always has been. One very real reason for this is, aircraft tend to be built in multiples by those enthusiasts, particularly if the plane in question is of their favorite air force, or their favorite type. Also, in much of the rest of the world, models of American vehicles, while interesting to some locals, don't mean as much as the cars they see themselves on the street. and until fairly recently, in most countries, not all that many cars either.

The second issue is one of tooling costs. To do a one piece car body shell takes generally, 6 separate mold cavities (for top, innner surfaces, two sides, front and rear mold cavities, all but one of them movable (body side molds, body end molds and body top molds must pull away upon demolding the body shell, sometimes the inner cavity (the male part of the mold) must telescope inward from the ends, to release the styrene body shell as well). That multiple sliding cavity tool has to be huge and heavy compared to the simpler two-way opening tools which make say, engines, chassis, and all those small little parts in a kit. In addition, the sliding core mold simply has to be very precise in its operation, to minimize misalignment, those damnable mold parting lines. All this makes for a very expensive part of the tooling for a model car kit, as it seems that nobody very much likes a multi-piece body shell in a kit (I say that after years of reading comments on old Revell kits, or more current Heller or Italeri kits) and decades of hearing those same comments over the counter in a hobby shop.

By contrast, the tooling for aircraft and armor can be (and with armor often is!) done in the much simpler and less expensive two way opening tool, which can also be cut in materials far less expensive than hardened steel, due to the much lower stresses involved, and virtually no sliding cores (if indeed there are any needed). To kit say, a 1/72 scale P-51 Mustang likely takes but one tool for the colored plastic, a separate one for the clear canopy, both of which can be made in China for about $9000 ea in US Dollars--a far cry from what it costs to do a model car tool, even there. In addtion, there are almost no royalty fees charged by aircraft makers, although licensing does exist there, primarily required by Boeing Aerospace (owner of North American Aviation, Sikorsky, and of course Boeing, and agent for several others) and Northrop Grumman, who in addition to planes by those makers, also has rights to several ship builders), they being more concerned with accurately presented models than commercial income from royalties. Addtionally, no licensing is needed for most national markings, nor even the personal markings on aircraft such as nose art, that sort of thing. (Before anyone goes off on a tangent here, all US Military aircraft were, and are, privately developed to meet the specs of an RFQ, not designed by any branch of the military--the military was and is, just the customer).

Thus the comparison between what model companies worldwide do with military aircraft and those few who do model car kits just isn't a very valid one.

Art

[The Red Ranger]

Don't let it get to you to the point that you would leave here. Just do what He does. Put Him on your ignore list. Harry has the right idea. That is if the model companies will listen to Him. I really don't care what Mark or anyone else thinks of Me here. That is their problem not mine. Just because a company is in business does not mean they are that smart. Just look around at what has happened to most of the companies today with all their wisdom? Failing at every turn.

I just wish people could either say "I would love truck models cause I could do this this and this with them" or not say anything at all. I don't understand why every place has to have naysayers.

Anyway.

I was wondering, is it possible to mold a plastic kit from a metal body? Cause Revell does have some Metal body monster trucks, not really sure how that process goes but it's an idea.

[Art Anderson]

I just wish people could either say "I would love truck models cause I could do this this and this with them" or not say anything at all. I don't understand why every place has to have naysayers.

Anyway.

I was wondering, is it possible to mold a plastic kit from a metal body? Cause Revell does have some Metal body monster trucks, not really sure how that process goes but it's an idea.

It's been done. Monogram first did this with their '53 Corvette, '56 Thunderbird, and '48 MGTC, all of which were first produced with cast metal bodies along with plastic everything else. They then did the same with their '48 Jaguar XK-120. However, tooling for a diecast body shell can leave lots to be desired, due to the engineering necessities of molding in hot, molten zamak, most notably the incredible thickness of body sides, due to the often deep undercuts caused by the tumblehome in the shape of the original body--the inside mold has to have straight sides, with a bit of draft angle in order to be able to pull away the hard metal body, where a normal plastic body shell can be sprung off a mold that apes the exterior shapes generally.

The other engineering issue is that of engraved panel lines. While those can be represented in styrene only tooling with very thin ridges making very small grooves, most generally in diecast production tooling, those "ridges" must be extra wide, in order to delay their "burning" off of the surface of the tool prematurely. This makes for door lines that often appear way too wide to most eyes.

In addition, while it is quite possible to engrave scripts, even very delicate chrome trim spears into the tooling for a diecast body, the marketplace for those cars simply has dictated the use of separate plated parts for door handles and side trim, the side trim requiring a deep, wide groove that roughly fits the chrome spears, but not so close as to be invisible once assembled. This is due to mass production requirements when those products were first introduced, intended to be heavily painted with production spray guns, then assembled by hand, quickly, on an assembly line.

Art

[Harry P.]

To do a one piece car body shell takes generally, 6 separate mold cavities (for top, innner surfaces, two sides, front and rear mold cavities, all but one of them movable (body side molds, body end molds and body top molds must pull away upon demolding the body shell, sometimes the inner cavity (the male part of the mold) must telescope inward from the ends, to release the styrene body shell as well).... In addition, the sliding core mold simply has to be very precise in its operation, to minimize misalignment, those damnable mold parting lines. All this makes for a very expensive part of the tooling for a model car kit, as it seems that nobody very much likes a multi-piece body shell in a kit...

As you describe, in order to produce a one-piece body shell the molds have to have sliding cores. But what's the problem with multi-piece bodies? Real cars are built that way-panel by panel, as the panels each have to be able to be taken out of the stamping dies. If real cars are built that way, I see no problem with a model car being molded the same way, as long as the kit is designed and engineered well and the panels fit.

If multi-piece bodies equate to huge tooling cost savings, I say go for it, kit manufacturers! I'd much rather see a kit of a new subject done with a multi-piece body than no kit at all... or worse, another rehash of an old kit we've seen before.

[crappiefisher]

I agree i want more trucks!!!! right now im building a 99 chevy silverado custom

[James Flowers]

As you describe, in order to produce a one-piece body shell the molds have to have sliding cores. But what's the problem with multi-piece bodies? Real cars are built that way-panel by panel, as the panels each have to be able to be taken out of the stamping dies. If real cars are built that way, I see no problem with a model car being molded the same way, as long as the kit is designed and engineered well and the panels fit.

If multi-piece bodies equate to huge tooling cost savings, I say go for it, kit manufacturers! I'd much rather see a kit of a new subject done with a multi-piece body than no kit at all... or worse, another rehash of an old kit we've seen before.

Harry that is what a truck is mostly made of slab sides. You have hit on another idea. Like you say if they fit together well. It might just be cheaper.

[James Flowers]

multi-piece bodies generally don't go over very well with builders, especially those who don't have alot of experience or skills. Revell has done several multi-piece bodied kits, like thier '57 Ford wagon and Ranchero's for example. those kit's while of cool and unique subjects just never seemed to go over very well and i believe it had everything to do with the bodies.

how many here have built the IMC based '48 Ford kits? those are some good examples of how bad a multi-piece bodied kit can be. Tamiya offered a Toyota Hiace delivery van kit that was very nice though and went together just as any Tamiya kit does, very nicely.

Dave

If Tamiya,s went together like a kit should as you say? Then other companies can also do just as good. Would you build another one? It would be all about how well the parts fit and where the seams would be. Most truck beds now are made of separate pieces. Most interiors are made with separate pieces on cars. Some truck models have a separate piece for the back of the cab. One has a separate top. All that would be left is two sides and top of the cab and cowl. How hard could it be to make those fit together right?

[Jordan White]

I would also like to see some more model trucks/suvs. One that would seem to be a hit is a CJ-7. They could give the option of 4.2 I6 or 304 V8 (with option of stock or dual exhaust), hard top w/full doors or soft top (no top) with half doors, stock or custom bumpers, a choice of wheels (steel or custom alloy), a CB, and maybe some performance goodies. Everyone says that the kits of popular vehicles sell the most, and the Jeep CJ is very well known vehicle.

[charlie8575]

I would also like to see some more model trucks/suvs. One that would seem to be a hit is a CJ-7. They could give the option of 4.2 I6 or 304 V8 (with option of stock or dual exhaust), hard top w/full doors or soft top (no top) with half doors, stock or custom bumpers, a choice of wheels (steel or custom alloy), a CB, and maybe some performance goodies. Everyone says that the kits of popular vehicles sell the most, and the Jeep CJ is very well known vehicle.

Especially if they put both engines in it, I'd buy that kit just for the 258 and second-generation AMC V8. I can think of a lot of my Jo-Han kits that would appreciate a more accurate engine, as many of the engines were a hodge-podge of the old and new V8s. I would hope they'd have a choice of 2WD/4WD, with the proper transmissions.

As to the Jeep itself, I remember seeing one guy when I was about 14 that had a pretty burgundy CJ running a TPI 350 out of a Trans Am. Now that would be a nice model to make...

Charlie Larkin

[James Flowers]

What if they had brought out the 64 as a stock model with the option of a racing parts for the Thunderbolt in it? Now they have added some stock parts in the kit. The kit has not received good reviews because the stock version was not done well. How can the Model King afford to bring out truck models for example the 78-79 Ford pickup or the 78-79 Ford Bronco from old tooling and a Model company can not? How many of those is the Model King stuck with in his inventory? How does He know what models He brings out are worth risk?

Edited September 27, 2009 by mustanglover1951

[Modelmartin]

Serious question though Art. If the T-Bolt was such a bad seller,why did Revell reissue it twice?

To try to recoup some of the money invested in it. Even though it wasn't a big money maker for them they aren't going to scrap the tooling. Once their old stock clears out they can run a few more. And regarding Model King re-issues I would venture a guess that his investment is not as great as the model companies. He just buys what he thinks he can sell. He doesn't have to pay for tooling or maintain a building and injection molding machines. His overhead is very small.

[Harry P.]

...but if you've ever built any Taimya kit, you can see the different in quality, fit & tolerances when compared to a Revell or AMT model.

So that begs the question: why don't (can't?... won't?) the American manufacturers put out a product at a comparable quality level?

The price differential between the Japanese and the American kits has closed somewhat, American kit prices are rising faster than Glenn Beck's blood pressure. So where's the rise in quality to go along with the rise in price?

[charlie8575]

So that begs the question: why don't (can't?... won't?) the American manufacturers put out a product at a comparable quality level?

The price differential between the Japanese and the American kits has closed somewhat, American kit prices are rising faster than Glenn Beck's blood pressure. So where's the rise in quality to go along with the rise in price?

The simple answer: greed, in the form of the mentality of short-term profits at the expense of long-term customer retention and sales.

The modern American business model, foolishly in my opinion, de-emphasizes long-term growth and creating long-term customer loyalty. Thus the high prices, sometimes questionable accuracy, and a lot of the so-so quality we saw over the last ten years. The model is hit-and-run, that is, make lots of money upfront, re-vest to ownership (either privately-held or stockholders,) repeat. By simply making large profits upfront and no reinvesting in the business, the business cheats its customers, and, in reality, the stockholder or ownership, and itself, as eventually market-share will suffer. Remember the kits from AMT under the RC2 "captivitiy" (as to me, it was more a hostage taking than ownership, ownership implies some kind of responsibility,) where so many of them had so much flash you couldn't find parts? Yeah...

Of course, with Wal-Mart dumping kits on the market at super-cheap prices a few years ago, something had to go, and unfortunately, the quality management on a lot of those products was the trade-off.

The American companies have not caught on to the concept of quality management as the Japanese did. W. Edwards Deming, the American who taught the Japanese everything about quality control, always maintained quality costs less in the long run. The Japanese companies adapted this philosophy and were able to turn around excellent product at a reasonable price, even accounting for the exchange rate. By spending more on quality control on all ends (research, tooling, manufacturing,) the Japanese companies can save a lot of money. Even though their aggregate costs are higher, their profits are greater....fewer rejects, higher sales, fewer problems with tools that need to be corrected, and so on. One point I read someplace that was an interesting fact to consider- as these kits are shipped worldwide, and cartage can get very, very expensive, they have one more incentive: the less flash, the lighter the box, the more boxes that can be shipped per dollar spent on shipping. Thus, quality control really can be cost control.

The American companies, meanwhile, with lack of maintenance, lack of care in manufacturing, and so forth, combined with (Hobbico especially,) need for short-term profits, have jacked up prices tremendously. As I showed in one of these threads earlier, cutting profit margins (and prices,) will increase sales. To cut down the margin, and maintain, or increase profits, quality management needs to improve. With better QM, new and more tools could come, even with lower profit per unit, because money will be saved on errors.

For more about Deming, read here: Wikipedia Article

Charlie Larkin

[Harry P.]

Harry, that stems from a lot of factors,. but a primary one is most Japanese modelers, (as well as those from other countries besides the US), refuse to accept poor quality & workmanship.

Exactly! Japanese modelers attitude is, hey, you're supposed to please us, the consumers of your product. We don't want junk.

American modelers say, geez, this kit is junk, but I'm so glad we even have this kit.

Two very different mentalities. What does that say about us?

No wonder the Japanese kicked our lazy behinds in the 1:1 auto arena... until it got so bad here that we were forced to upgrade the product, kicking and screaming, or risk losing even more market share to the Japanese.

I wonder if that same sort of "revolution" would ever happen in the scale car world?

[charlie8575]

I wonder if that same sort of "revolution" would ever happen in the scale car world?

The spirit of this post is well-said, Harry, and I could see it happening.

The only fly in the ointment is most of the Japanese subject matter isn't as widely-appealing to most builders. However, as Deming also taught reading your market properly is necessary to succeed (again, waste elimination is essential to profitiabilty,) if Tamiya, Hasegawa or Fujimi did start tooling the popular AMT, MPC and Revellogram subjects in 1/25, aimed primarily at the American/Canadian markets, and priced them intelligently, I can see where there would be a lot of trouble for the domestic manufacturers.

Charlie Larkin

[charlie8575]

I'll be honest, Mark. I love a good deal. I don't know anyone that doesn't. With my work situation now (almost none,) I need good buys on everything. Living at about 1/8 the poverty line, adjusted for the New England region, is not fun.

However, when I need to start really losing value, then it's not a good deal. As I have to watch my pennies, I tend to be very picky about what I buy.

And....lo and behold, for a lot of things, I'll actually spend a little more. Why? Because I can get something better for only a small amount extra.

We as a society, have been lulled into believing thrift, economy, value and cheap are one in the same. I must disagree.

Eating out (which I do maybe once a month because I get sick of my own cooking,) is an example. For $6, I can go to McDonald's, get a so-so hamburger/fries/tonic, or for $7, I can got to the little Italian place around the corner from me on Tuesday evenings and get an all-you-can-eat buffet with homemade food that isn't full or garbage, and just order a glass or water instead. Hmmm....no brainer which one is the better deal. Or on a Friday, for the same money, I can go to one of the two diners in town and get a small fish n' chips, again, all made on premises and it doesn't taste like genuine imitation food. Mc Donald's is cheap, Ma Raffa's is a smart deal, and the Shawmut Diner is a good value. Big differences.

One book I saw at the bookstore that I've placed on my Christmas list (or I might grab if I get some money coming in again,) is called Cheap, and it discusses the very situation you've outlined. If I get it, I'll let you know how it is.

Charlie Larkin

[charlie8575]

For those interested, this is the previous response I had alluded to earlier.

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.p...st&p=213112

Charlie Larkin

[The Red Ranger]

Great points Charlie, every one of them!

The problem however lies with us as consumers. The more we have what I call the "Wal-Mart mentality" of wanting something as cheap as possible, we are going to get something made as cheaply as possibly, & the producers are going to maximize profits as much as possible.

I agree with both of you, Charlie and Mark.

It's like when we have a gas "shortage" and people organize those days for people to not buy gas all day, never works. I think the sense of community has been lost, at least here in the Phoenix area. (I lived in Mayfield Kentucky and I can say that for the most part that great sense of community still exists.)

The problem is no matter how many of us were to complain about quality and even refuse to buy kits until the products and quality reflect what us, the consumer, want to see, there would still be people who ignore the protest and buy gas or models anyway, thereby making any sort of protest pointless, because obviously someone will still buy the ###### so they keep going.

I would say the best thing we could do is start buying kits on ebay from private sellers as opposed to ebay stores or hobby shops. At least that way we could continue building kits, but we aren't contributing to the idea that we are particularly satisfied with whats out there.

[Modelmartin]

Regarding the USA vs Japan quality issue I would add that there are big cultural differences that help explain it. The Japanese have a highly developed sense of honor. Every person from the CEO to the Janitor must do their utmost or they will bring shame onto themselves. Contrast that to a lot of Americans who have no shame or sense of honor. Some are even proud of that!

My Grandfather bought a new Oldsmobile in the late 30s and it had a terrible rattle like nothing he had ever experienced before and he started out driving Model Ts! He brought it back to the dealer and they checked it out. The body must have been dropped onto the frame at quitting time because all of the body bolts were found under the carpet in the back seat footwell! That would not happen in Japan.

It's interesting how different model companies quality stacks up over the years. Monogram is a great example. Their kits from the 60s are all very high quality. They were probably the best in the world at that time. They completely lost their way in the mid to late 70s with that awful 69 Camaro and others. AMT with all of their different owners over the years is interesting too. They were consistently good for many years but once in a while a clinker would pop up like the 1/16 NASCARS in the 80s and all of those craptastic showrods in the 70s!! How about those Revell gassers (Henry J, Austin, Willys PU)from the early 70s? They were junk!

Some of the low rent Japanese kits from the past are pretty cheesy - about equivalent to Palmer, Pyro, etc. Tamiya started making wood kits in the 50s. Some of their earlier plastic stuff is very toy-like. Even when they started putting out serious kits they were still motorising them. They have gone from strength to strength over the years and their newest stuff is outstandingly good!

Even in the resin scene I have seen a couple of Japanese kits that were about as good as a TKM!! But then they have Model Factory Hiro which is quite good.

I guess the point I am trying to make is that there is a range of quality both in the US and Japan and some have improved and some have not over the years. A number of Japanese kit manufacturers have folded or quit making kits altogether like Bandai, Eidai, Tilt, and Gakken.

I think the biggest reason for the successes of Tamiya, Fujimi, etc is that their subjects have international appeal and they maintain a consistently high level of quality. I had read that Tamiya sells 80% of their production domestically. I would think that their exports now make up a bigger share than then. The Japanese are mad about models but that extra 20+% they export can't hurt.

[Art Anderson]

What if they had brought out the 64 as a stock model with the option of a racing parts for the Thunderbolt in it? Now they have added some stock parts in the kit. The kit has not received good reviews because the stock version was not done well. How can the Model King afford to bring out truck models for example the 78-79 Ford pickup or the 78-79 Ford Bronco from old tooling and a Model company can not? How many of those is the Model King stuck with in his inventory? How does He know what models He brings out are worth risk?

In many ways, our hobby mirrors real life, the true popularity of an actual car often translates into the model kit having similar high levels of interest. Not always the case, but I suspect more often than not. As for stock versions of the '64 Fairlane, I suspect that at the time this kit was tooled, a stock version would have had about as much popularity among the majority of model car customers as a bowl of leftover milquetoast--just a model kit of a used car--look at the real ones, generally they don't bring much on even the collector car market, although there is a dedicated following for them.

Model King's buying up relatively small reissues of older kits is, in terms of costs, far removed from the notion of a model company tooling up an all new kit. The old kit tooling is already in existence, perhaps a bit of tuning up of the tools, a minor bit of cleanup, load the molds into the injection molding press, squeeze out perhaps 5000-6000 pcs, print up some new instruction sheets, new boxart, pack the kits, and go. Compared to doing an all new tool, the cost for doing this is much, much less.

In a population as large as ours here in the US (300,000,000 or so) just about any $20 product can be sold to say, 5000 people, but it takes way more than that for an all new kit to get the payback of invested dollars.

Art

[charlie8575]

this is pretty OT in regards to the "trucks" in question in this topic, but i feel it should be addressed. Japanese kit quality does not tower over or surpass U.S. or domestic kit's. i will go so far as to even say the Japenese kit manufacturers as a whole have nothing on U.S. kits! why would i be so bold? simple comparison of what you get both for your money and in content. 90% of Japanese kit's DO NOT have engine details which also includes engine bays, transmissions and drivetrains. the majority also do not have anything more than basic interior detail. there are some that do, but it makes up a small percentage. even Tamiya's best kits that do have engine details are simplified much in the way a 80's era Monogram kit was. there are few examples from Tamiya and Fujimi that ever had very detailed chassis, engines and interiors. there are very few U.S. based kits that don't have engines, mostly those early kits that began life as promo's. it's my estimate that over 90% of U.S. based kits have detailed engines and interiors. some will argue that the Japanese never get body proportions wrong and i'll disagree there too. in general and in most cases they do a pretty ###### nice job, but it's not always.

we still have them beat as far as content and pricing goes even at our higher than ever retail price point.

these opinions are based purely on the automotive kits, not the aircraft or military subjects.

Dave

Dave, you're right on many points. For value, the domestic, and many European manufacturers are unbeatable. Value, if defined by the amount of detail and parts count, we win no questions asked.

Nobody is perfect, nor was I trying to imply it. Sure, everyone makes their errors. If we didn't, we wouldn't be human.

The difference is that, even though the Japanese manufacturers might not have as high a parts content, what's in the box is generally better-produced; that's the difference I was alluding to.

I will grant, and perhaps I should have made clearer, that Revell does have pretty good QC, but I have noticed that a lot of the American and European manufacturers are less consistent in their quality than their Asian counterparts. I haven't purchased a post-buyout AMT kit, so I can't say on theirs, although most of the reviews I've read have been very positive. It's much like the American 1:1 car companies, where the products were (and are) perfectly good cars, but the quality has been inconsistent, causing customer dissatisfaction and the results we now see with the whole GM/Chrysler/Ford meltdown.

That was the whole point I was driving at.

Dollar-for-dollar, we beat the Japanese content-wise, they beat us quality-control wise. It's a strange paradox. Usually these two things go together, but not always.

Perhaps someday, the answer will be found.

Charlie Larkin

[The Red Ranger]

^

What he said.

[James Flowers]

The pickup builders are definitely starving and looking for something different to " eat" and not just another bologna sandwich with wheat instead of white bread. I like that a lot. Well said. Never give up! From a little spark a big fire can grow.