New kits with flaws.

[Dave Metzner]

I read some of the threads here - not all - and not completely, because my time for such activities is limited, so I don't see every comment on every new kit.

There seems to me to be a feeling among some members here, that we are somewhat careless and sloppy in the way we go about researching and developing kits.

I guess that you could say I have an interest in making an effort to provide some explanation of how / why some new kits have flaws .

I think that I can speak for all of us who try to put nice new kits on store shelves when I say that flaws in kits occur for many reasons none of which include intentionally sloppy research or a lack of caring about the quality of kits we work to produce.

#1 As has been stated over and over, unless the subject is an all new car there are no factory drawings / factory clay models/ digital files to work with - In the "old"days" Johan and AMT had direct accesss to the factory design departments because they produced promos for the Big 3.

Today a 1960's era car kit is an exercise in finding a good reference vehicle to photograph and measure (hopefully a factory stock perfectly preserved or restored example) - then getting photos of every possible detail with good dimensional reference in every photo so China can see exactly what the car looks like. Believe me when it come time to make a mock-up there are never enough photos - there are always details that can't be found in photos.

To be truthful the best solution for me would be to have a perfectly restored example of my next kit sitting in my garage from start of research to finally approved kit in the box so that I could walk out and photograph or measure each little detail whenever there was a question from China

As for the suggestion, often offered in these forums, that reference vehices can be simply scanned into a computer file, my answer is not yet - not for a cost that works for us - and even after a scan is done that still does not provide all the details needed to produce a kit. Even if I could simply scan the car into my computer, I'd still need photos of all the interior, probably photos of the engine bay and lots of details that will not show clearly on a scan.

Errors are bound to creep in because the reference vehicle has non stock features - or because available photos are not perfect references or because the product developer didn't catch them. I can't speak for others but I share images of 3Ds, and mock-ups with several other experienced and trusted modelers and car guys as well as sending test shots to some of these same folks, in my best effort to catch errors that I did not see! ( I don't know for sure but I'd bet that Revell does the same thing) Even then I know thay errors will creep in! I try to educate myself on any specific vehicle we're doing - but I am not a walking encyclopedia of automotive details, and there is no chance that I will ever become one.

#2 The days of working from hand built 1/10 scale models and cutting tools with pantograph machines are as far gone as the age of the steam locomotive. Today every detail if the finished model is produced in a computer 3D file before any physical parts are made. All tool mking is now done from digital files - no more tool makers going into a tool into a tool and revising it by hand if you need to fix something. (To make revisions to our 61 Pontiac we needed to first go back and revise everything in the 3D files and approve all that before they'll touch the tools)

Which brings me to one of several reasons that we miss release dates. The tooling revison process takes time, LOTS OF TIME - when I find a problem - I tell China - they revise 3D files - 15 to 30 days later I get revised 3D files - I review the 3Ds if the files are right they make changes to tools - 30 to 45 days later they send me a test shot. which take about a week in transit. For me to build and review a test shot add another week or so - IF the 3Ds files were NOT right - add 15 to 30 more days. when I get done reviewing the test shot and something else needs to be fixed we can go right back to the revise 3D files step again!

#3 Simple economics dictate that we can't delay a kit to tweak of every tiny detail. We do our best to get these details right - honestly, we do, and product release dates get pushed back because we're doing our damnedest to get them right! BUT at some point we need to decide whether it's more important to keep pouring time and added dollars into revising tools or putting a less than PERFECT kit on store shelves. Trust me, as an example, our factory doe not revise tools for free. I can't keep going back and fixing every tiny detail - if I do try to do that, then there won't be a Moebius Models any longer.

#4 Styrene Plastic injected in steel tooling is an imperfect medium - steel tooling and injection molding can produce spectacularly complex shapes IF you have a big enough budget and plan on producing a big enough run of parts. That said, there are limits to our tooling budgets and production quantities, so from time to time there will be some compromises made in order to keep costs in line - sometimes there will be shapes that cannot be produced in a core, cavity and four slides typically used to make up a car body - that's just the nature of the beast

#5 I see the comments regarding high price of kits these days - I hate to say it but our costs are rising steadily, as are the costs of every other manufacturer - wages in China are going up, old cheap technology is going the way of the Dodo bird, 3D file and CAD design are more costly now in China than a room full of guys making tooling models by hand was a few years ago.. the day of the 10 or 15 dollar kit is past - the days of running 15-20,000 kits every run are long gone. Now those of us who produce kits need to find ways to keep our lights on while running 10,000 or less of a given kit and paying higher tooling and development costs - that. my friend results in a more exensive product on the shelves. It cannot be helped - the days of running 50 thousand copies of any one kit are also long gone.

#6 I keep seeing this question:Why can't you move back to the US? - The simple answer is that there is no one-stop shop for producers like Moebius or for that matter Revell in the US.

In order to produce kits here I'd need a design operation to produce the 3D files for tooling - then a tooling shop to translate those drawings to tooling - then a production shop to shoot plastic in those tools - a printer to produce packaging and instructions - probably a decal printer because the guy who prints boxes can't print decals - then I need to bring everything together somewhere to put it all in a box for the custome to buy - Now it all happens in one place I deal with one guy who makes ONE profit from the transaction, not 6 different guys each of whom expects to profit fromthe their piece of the total project

#7 We are a model kit company, not only a model car kit company, unlike Johan and AMT were, "back in the day". We produce a wide range of kits, not only car kits, so we are not specialized to only do cars - Johan started as 100% cars - AMT originated as 100% car models, while about 30% of the projects that I have going right now are car kits. (BTW Revell is also a multi line model kit company also with a wide range of kits, not only cars)

#8 Company staff size and work loads. I can't speak for other domestic brands here - but our staff in the US is very small

I do almost all product development for EVERY kit we produce NOT just car kits.

Currently I have 20 projects in various stages of development, only 6 of which are cars/trucks. Even though our car kits are less than 1/3 of my project list thay are by far and away the most complex and time consuming projects that I have.

I do my best to research each car project and I talk to several pretty good car modelers and a number of car guys on a very regular basis- I don't pretend to know every detail of each car project - I do my best, but I will be first to tell you that I can and do make mistakes - I'm sure that the same is true of the other guys at other kit producers who do the same job.

We have a full time graphic design guy who produces almost every piece of packaging, decals art, instruction sheets, any magazine ads, all brochures and he does some special project product development - the Florida home office does everything else- licensor relations, purchasing, sales, customer service,warehousing,shipping etc.. All design, tooling, manufacturing, packaging etc is done by our partner in China.

When I see comments here wondering why Moebius or Revell can't put out kits that are absolutely accurate at more affordable prices and on time according to announced release dates all I can think is that there a lack of understanding behind those comments.

I'm sure I won't have changed any minds with my attempted explanation here.

I'm sure that our upcomming kits will inspire the usual chorus of critical comments.

It would, however, be nice to think that there might be a little better understanding for some of the reasons that these kits will have occaisonal flaws, and that we can't just jump right out there and fix them right away.

Dave Metzner

New Product Development Manger

Moebius Models

Edited December 20, 2014 by Dave Metzner

[disabled modeler]

I am just too happy to have them myself...being able to re-live some of my childhood is priceless.

[rctruk]

Dave:

Thank you very much for this information. I find this very refreshing that you are able to be so candid about your job and products.

[The70judgeman]

Thanks for the explanation in depth Dave. I knew there was much more to creating a newly tooled kit than meets the eye and there is only so much that can be done when detailing a miniature of a 1:1. Some details are just too small and/or delicate to reproduce. I do appreciate the amount of detail that is put into these new Moebius kits. They are, in my opinion, far superior kits to AMT, Revell/Monogram, and other popular brands with fit/finish and detailing for the more advanced modeler. I, for one, can't wait for the new '61 Pontiac to come out and look forward to buying multiple copies of it.

[DrGlueblob]

Thank you. That cleared up some things I thought the manufacturers still do. Whole 'nother thing, indeed.

That said, IMO, as long as I can correct any flaws in the subject kit I'm building, I'm good.

Chip

[Guest]

Thanks Dave for a fascinating and informative look at this.

[Ramfins59]

Dave, thank you so very much for your detailed explanation.

While it's very easy for some hobbyists to "pick nits" about every little detail that might not be "perfect" on a model, most of us everyday modelers are perfectly happy and thrilled just to be able to have a model of a subject that has never been available to us before. If we have the skills to correct a minor flaw here or there, fine. If we don't have those skills, or, if it's not that big a deal for us, we'll just live with it. I don't believe that the majority of the modelers on this Forum are "rivet-counters". Hopefully those that are will try to be a bit more understanding of the model making process as you have explained in detail above.

Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion and some are more vocal about them than others may be. As has been said before, you can please all of the people some of the time, and, some of the people all of the time.

[Luc Janssens]

I thought this was common knowledge

;^)

But seriously, thanks Dave, it needed to be addressed, the negative overtook the positive, in the posts you proudly showed the work in progress.

I for one love, seeing the behind the curtain work, from the development of a model kit, it sort of brings me back to the days, when I was working on pilot cars at GM.

Anyway, in a way it's unfortunate now that model companies are no longer part of a larger toy manufacturer, or teamed together with a precision Die-cast company if only to share the development and licensing costs.

Ertl for example had lots of potential in the 90s, but brand managers didn't talk with each other, thus valuable resources were wasted.

Model companies now, are trying to spread the costs by releasing multiple versions of the same basic model, so in a way limited resources fuels creative thinking, hope that along the way some common part groups, like engines and such are no longer tooled over and over again, but will have their own tool, ready to be run with the rest of the automotive kit which needs it, same for wheels, standard and optional.

IMHO having the choice of several wheels styles, adds a lot to the fun factor of a automotive kit, certainly coupled with a theme, meaning adding period correct aftermarket items, a 60s car for example has been on the road for over 4 decades, with each one having a change in style, going from Street machine to resto-mod or whatever, I don't yet see that in model kits, which should reach a broad clientele.

On the States side development, IMHO only plausible if all plastic modelkit manufactures join together, forming sort of a separate company, to spread the cost inherent with development (I'm available to form a team when the industry is ready ;^)

Again thanks Dave and other passionate, hard working men and woman in the model kit industry, for catering to us, passionate model car kit builders/collectors

Edited December 20, 2014 by Luc Janssens

[RancheroSteve]

Thanks for taking the time to explain, Dave. I think it's important to remember that while this is a hobby to most of us here, it's a business - and hopefully a labor of love at times - for you.

I'm greatly looking forward to that '65 Comet. It's exciting that it's being done at all, and even if it isn't perfect, I know that Moebius has a better chance of getting it right than just about any other company out there. But I've got enough kits here to keep me busy for a few lifetimes, so no rush!

[Junkman]

Nothing is ever perfect, but Moebius kits are orderly and the prices are fair, particularly in international comparison.

Heck, I wish Round2 would reissue the Craftsman series, how's that for being easy to please?

Moebius is head and shoulders above some of the rubbish we had to do with in the past.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Junkman

[afx]

I'll admit I have not been moved to purchase a Moebius kit - yet. The reason is base solely on subject matter. Cars of the 50's are not my particular interests. However from the photos I have seen of the Chrysler 300 and Hudson Hornet the kit quality appears to be excellent.The engines alone are worth the price of admission IMHO. I am anxiously awaiting The '65 Comet and the '71 Ford Ranger pickup and will certainly be buying these kits. Thank you Dave for putting out kits of far over due subjects. And thank you for sharing all the "sausage making" that goes into bringing a kit to market. Keep up the great work!

[High octane]

There still is going to be some cry babies who will complain about any new kit no matter who makes it. I can guarantee it.

[Phirewriter]

There still is going to be some cry babies who will complain about any new kit no matter who makes it. I can guarantee it.

I agree! As in life often those that know the least yell the loudest! At this stage in life and with my current building habits, I am just glad to get many of these subjects. I had pointed out in a post a while back to one those detractors that I have yet to see a "perfect kit" I am a kit whore (can I say that here?) and have thousands in my collection dating back to the early 50's - haven't seen a perfect one yet. Some better that others for sure, but I am happy with all of them to one degree or another otherwise I wouldn't have purchased them. So Dave, (and any one else in the industry if you are reading this) keep up the good work and ignore the peanut gallery!

And... a big THANKS for all your efforts!!!!!

Edited December 20, 2014 by Phirewriter

[StevenGuthmiller]

Personally, I've never been a huge stickler for 100% accuracy. I leave that for the anal retentives among us. I'm just happy to have interesting & new subject matter & I'll be the first to say, Mobius kits are some of the finest I've ever seen in my 40 plus modeling career. So, keep up the good work Dave! You're doing it right!! Steve

[Dave Metzner]

Yep, I'm still a kit addict myself - still buying and stashing kits MUCH faster than I can build them I'm sure that there are more than 1000 kits in my work shop (big airplane and resin figures kits are my big real weakness) - someday my widow will probably be stuck trying to figure out what to do with this big pile of plastic and resin..

[tbill]

Dave, great insight into what the 'real deal' is as far as kit production is concerned, for that, I say thanks. I can't imagine the PITA that doing this results in [ idea to complete product]. I have bought several of your products, and must say, they are 'top of the heap', the pro star and '53ft trailer are just dynamite, and I have several others to build [lone star, a few more trailers, and a few Chryslers].

I know a lot of people whine about cost of kits, but to me, if it's a quality product, I will pay the piper. to me, although it's cliché, quality is priceless.

I personally can understand the delays, but at the same time understand 'our' clamour to get the newest cool thing.

in the grand scheme of things, I am not even a blip on the radar, but I will continue to buy your products, and wait patiently for them, because from what I have seen and built of your product, they are worth the wait, and the money.

[Harry P.]

Well, I for one am impressed with the fact that a top guy at a model manufacturing company would come on this forum and lay it all out for us, warts and all.

Congratulations, Dave, for giving all of us an insider's view of how the industry works. Your honesty and candor are commendable. Just another reason why I think that Moebius is a company that "gets it."

Just one suggestion: Since there are always unseen delays and snags in production, why not stop giving out "expected" kit release dates? Wait until you KNOW when the kit will be released before announcing the release. Just a suggestion.

[62rebel]

again, thank you, Dave, for putting that out there. having suffered through the bad part of the "good old days" when all of the companies were churning out dross in the form of decontented kits, poorly retooled "theme" kits, and running tools until parts were buried in flash, i'm more than pleased to see the effort come to fruition where reissues get corrected, new tools get accurized, and best of all, customers get listened to.

i'll be honest, Revell kits were my bane as a youth- fiddly fit issues, flaking chrome, they were tough to build WELL. getting 60's era kits to look good took supreme effort. the newer '70's kits went together well; didn't share fit issues, and made good shelf-sitters with moderate effort and looked GREAT if the builder had some skill.

i've been working the new '57 Ford and the '50 Olds and they practically FALL together. GREAT kits.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I've been impressed favorably across the board with the quality and accuracy of Moebius' offerings.

I also think it's incredibly funny that the new-improved-oh-so-much-better digital and outsourcing means of producing models is being blamed for the delays in production and poor accuracy (I assume in your competitors' products), as all of this new-improved stuff was SUPPOSED to speed and simplify production and lower costs. Interesting how that has all played out in reality, eh?

NONE of the excuses or reasons cited in ANY WAY EXPLAIN 2 SCALE INCH discrepancies in roofline height, or supposedly 2 identical engines in the same scale that are 1/4 inch REAL difference in length, or an engine released in approximately 1/32 scale in a 1/25 scale kit.

Small errors are quite acceptable and expected. Gross errors like I mentioned above (NOT Moebius' products, obviously) are sloppy and incompetent.

I'm also fully aware of what IS and is NOT possible in working in CAD, and how long it takes to perform "corrections". Again, CAD was SUPPOSED to SPEED the development of product and streamline the correction process, and the fact that digital "drawings" can be transmitted instantly to just about anywhere on the globe, corrected in a matter of minutes or hours at most, and re-transmitted for approval (we used to have to wait for our drawing corrections and revisions to be physically mailed, AFTER they were drawn by hand and THEN turned into blueprints... if you recall) would make one wonder where, why and HOW the bottlenecks are occurring.

Edited December 21, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[bill_rules]

There still is going to be some cry babies who will complain about any new kit no matter who makes it. I can guarantee it.

!!

[Quick GMC]

I've been impressed favorably across the board with the quality and accuracy of Moebius' offerings.

I also think it's incredibly funny that the new-improved-oh-so-much-better digital and outsourcing means of producing models is being blamed for the delays in production and poor accuracy (I assume in your competitors' products), as all of this new-improved stuff was SUPPOSED to speed and simplify production and lower costs. Interesting how that has all played out in reality, eh?

NONE of the excuses or reasons cited in ANY WAY EXPLAIN 2 SCALE INCH discrepancies in roofline height, or supposedly 2 identical engines in the same scale that are 1/4 inch REAL difference in length, or an engine released in approximately 1/32 scale in a 1/25 scale kit.

Small errors are quite acceptable and expected. Gross errors like I mentioned above (NOT Moebius' products, obviously) are sloppy and incompetent.

I'm also fully aware of what IS and is NOT possible in working in CAD, and how long it takes to perform "corrections". Again, CAD was SUPPOSED to SPEED the development of product and streamline the correction process, and the fact that digital "drawings" can be transmitted instantly to just about anywhere on the globe, corrected in a matter of minutes or hours at most, and re-transmitted for approval (we used to have to wait for our drawing corrections and revisions to be physically mailed, AFTER they were drawn by hand and THEN turned into blueprints... if you recall) would make one wonder where, why and HOW the bottlenecks are occurring.

Clearly you should start your own model company

[Brudda]

You guys are doing a great job. Just like building models, sometimes things go wrong. Nothing is perfect in is world but people think just because you buy something it needs to be perfect. Really? Is your life perfect? Car? House? Get over it people and build it. Moebius Thank you for the kits!

[Ace-Garageguy]

Clearly you should start your own model company

I have to compensate for excuses from engineers and production people every day of my professional life. I tell it like it is.

My post was in no way critical of the models I've seen and BOUGHT MULTIPLES OF from Moebius.

What does your comment mean, exactly?

[Craig Irwin]

My take on it. First the new kit must be a subject that interests me, or I won't buy it no matter how "right" it is.

Now, if it's a subject that has already been kitted it must be an improvement over the exesting kits in my stash or I have no reason to buy it.

And if it a new subject that somewhat interests me, it's got to be right or I'll pass.

If it is a subject that interests me a lot and it's not quite right I'll make a decision on how bad it is, and if it can be corrected.

If it's way wrong I don't care if I drove one school ang got lucky in it, it's staying on the shelf.

Thankfully the Moebius models I have bought have been great, and severial upcomming subjects do interest me quite a bit.

[keyser]

Bill, he's implying you're one of the cry-babies who shouldn't complain, we're lucky to have kits at all. Balsa is the most accurate medium of all it seems.

Mr. Metzner, thank you for your comments. I understand many of the issues, and Moebius does nice work. Your group seem to respond at an earlier stage to input, and one of the main issues you allude to is the need for accurate 1:1, and people who know it well enough to notice errors.

There is no such thing as a "perfect kit" thrown up in other posts. However, the complaints I and others have are errors that are essential to the look of a car. The sill line on the 57 Bel-Air convertible, the grille issues with the 67 Camaro, the roof of the Fox Mustangs, the door length of the 36 Ford roadster (dating to '62 issue, so not new, was expedient to production, and nobody cared then), the 57 Fury, etc....

All these problems aren't subtle if you know the cars. If you don't know or care, great. The "grateful we have any kit, everyone else shut up" group aren't very discerning, evidently. If a problem is easy to fix, most of us will buy a kit and fix it. Doesn't mean we shouldn't mention it, after all, no kit is perfect, and it'll help people build better kits.

If problem isn't easily fixed, and is important to the car, as a consumer, why should we fix it, or be happy with it? Why should we buy a flawed kit? As a manufacturer who aims at the "lunatic fringe" more than most, what flaws are ok with bodies/trim? Interior size/resolution/restorations are far easier errors to overlook. Chassis/mechanical errors not crucial unless glaring, I'd guess.

Again, not putting you on the spot, just simple questions nobody addresses. No obligation to answer, you're very forthcoming with your product. I looked at the test shot thread on the 67-72 truck thread awhile back, and did see some areas of concern, but it was a test shot, and seemed like things had been spotted pretty well. If not, there are some issues that really aren't good to go to the end user. If we use a hypothetical that that was a final pre-production shot (which is definitely was NOT), how much money (hypothetically) would cost to fix all of it? perhaps as number of kits sold/not sold, or percentage of cost basis, or however you wish.

It's very puzzling why large errors make it through. Revell, AMT, Tamiya (94 Mustang, couple others), Pocher (993), Trumpeter, etc.

And it isn't confined to smaller scales, either. Thanks for all your posts here