Aston Martin DB4 kit?

[sjordan2]

A blood brother to the Aston is Aurora's Maserati 3500GT. Aside from looking similar, they have the same problems with inaccurate roof shapes, bad wire wheels (probably the same ones), incorrect nose, and presumably underscale seats. Matt Bacon fixed all of that and ended up building the best Maserati kit I've ever seen.

Another of our members (simonr) made similar modifications to the Aston and hit a home run. He also found some great wheels from Renaissance. Here's his build journal:

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26809&page=1

Edited May 19, 2015 by sjordan2

[Greg Myers]

Ok, another in the series: in all the GTO books I can find no evidence of only "Two" supplementary radiator scoops,

[Greg Myers]

Edited May 19, 2015 by Greg Myers

[Greg Myers]

These were the other kits in this Aurora series. I'm not sure if they were picked up by Monogram or Revell.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Really a shame the old Aurora scaling and proportions were so bad on all of these kits. When I got back into modeling in '05 or so, I bought several of all of them, based on the beautiful box-art paintings.

If only the parts in the box looked like the paintings. At this point, they're all on the shelf, waiting for me to figure out what to do with them. They're honestly almost as bad as Palmer stuff, being only fair impressions of the actual cars.

Again, what a shame, because a lot of effort went into doing all the little parts and opening bits. If only someone with talent had done the body tooling...

Edited May 19, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Matt Bacon]

Yeah... by comparison to the Jaguar E-Type Coupe and the 250 GTO, the DB4 and Maserati 3500 GT are actually pretty good! Hard to believe that there's still no accurate state of the art E-Type** in 1/24*...

bestest,

M.

*(OR 1/25)

**nor a 1/24 or 1/25 F-102 either, for your diorama scene... I guess you could do it with a 1/48 model and a couple of 1/72 versions and call it "forced perspective..."

Edited May 19, 2015 by Matt Bacon

[Greg Myers]

A blood brother to the Aston is Aurora's Maserati 3500GT. Aside from looking similar, they have the same problems with inaccurate roof shapes, bad wire wheels (probably the same ones), incorrect nose, and presumably underscale seats. Matt Bacon fixed all of that and ended up building the best Maserati kit I've ever seen.

Another of our members (simonr) made similar modifications to the Aston and hit a home run. He also found some great wheels from Renaissance. Here's his build journal:

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26809&page=1

[Ace-Garageguy]

Kinda makes you wonder how long this "well, our Chinese toolmakers have never seen a real one, and nobody here knows how to measure and transmit accurate data anymore, so we just do the pathetic best we can what with all the communication problems, cash constraints and deadlines" BS has really been going on.

[Snake45]

My favorite Aurora story: When I was a kid, I bought their P-51 Mustang, which was clearly illustrated as a D model on the box art. I built it and thought it wasn't even close to a Mustang shape. Many years later of course I found/figgered out that it's not a P-51D at all, it's a P-51H, completely different airplane.

Bought one off eBay and plan to build it. I scanned in a good profile photo of a real P-51H and sized it to 1/48. Guess what? Except for the canopy, the old Aurora kit's fuselage profile is amazingly close to the real thing. When I get around to building it (as a gear-up "desktop" model), I'm gonna use vacformed canopy and windscreen for the F-82 (Twin Mustang) kit. Really looking forward to getting on that project.

[djflyer]

Interesting comparisons - I have both the Aurora DB4 (never opened) and the Monogram that I'll try to build someday. The Doyusha is "supposed" to be a DB5 and there are some differences from the DB4 so it might actually be accurate.

Snake - I had that P-51 too. (how do you like all those rivets?) Never figured out it was really an 'H rather than a 'D before I tossed it many years ago.

[Snake45]

Snake - I had that P-51 too. (how do you like all those rivets?) Never figured out it was really an 'H rather than a 'D before I tossed it many years ago.

All those rivets will be going bye-bye.

Here's a Before picture, before I start working my Snake-fu on the wretched unloved thing:

[Ace-Garageguy]

Jeez Louise...the D is SOOOOO much better looking an airplane than the H. Holy cow. I always thought the H looked like a bad drawing of a D.

P-51D...one of the most perfect aviation designs ever.

P-51H...blecch. Kinda like a tail-dragger Airacobra, but not as pretty...

[Snake45]

Jeez Louise...the D is SOOOOO much better looking an airplane than the H. Holy cow. I always thought the H looked like a bad drawing of a D.

P-51D...one of the most perfect aviation designs ever.

P-51H...blecch. Kinda like a tail-dragger Airacobra, but not as pretty...

Oh, I disagree. H model is a thing of beauty in its own right. But a D/H comparison is kind of like comparing a '65-'66 Mustang Fastback to a '67-'68 or '68-'69. You have to give it the freedom to be what it is, and enjoy it for that.

That Aurora kit will look better when I get done with it. Here's what a real one looks like, in-flight and (IMHO) very sleek:

[Ace-Garageguy]

One of those "eye of the beholder" things I guess.

Whereas I think the last of the Spitfires managed to retain the perfect proportions of the originals even though they were larger and heavier airplanes, to me the P51-H, while not bad really, just isn't anywhere near as perfectly drawn as the D below (and I'm sure there are plenty of folks who won't really see the differences...)

Edited May 21, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Snake45]

Oh the D Mustang is a beautiful airplane no doubt...one of the prettiest ever built by anyone, anywhere. But I like the lines of the H, too. Maybe it's just a "Dare to Be Different" thing with me.

I'm almost finished construction of a limited run P-51H 1/48 kit (just need to do final detail painting and assembly, just can't find the time and motivation at the same time) and it looks good. The Aurora H, gear-up on the stand, with the corrected canopy, will look very cool sitting next to it.

[Matt Bacon]

Getting slightly back on track... ;-P

White plastic is the Airfix "James Bond Aston Martin", silver plastic is the Aurora/Monogram DB4, the built one is the Doyusha DB5 in its Bond incarnation (came with rather nice Bond and Oddjob figures). The Airfix James Bond tooling was modified to make a Kamm-tailed DB6 and then disappeared. Later Airfix boxes called "Aston Martin DB5" have the Doyusha plastic in, with no Bond accessories. The non Bond version is also available in a Doyusha box.

The Doyusha is pretty slab-sided, especially at the back, but not quite as much as the Aurora/Monogram. As you can see, the original Airfix Bond DB5 does a pretty good job of rendering the curves and undercuts of the real thing. The Airfix is also the only one to get the window line along the roof right. All in all, it's probably the most accurate starting point for a DB5 model (or a DB4 Series III with the faired in headlights, if you cut and shut it, taking a section out of the doors). The only problem is that they are rare and highly collectable. I bought mine for £7 in a charity shop, so I've got no qualms about building it...

bestest,M

.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Great comparison shots, Matt. The Airfix model is so much better than the others as to almost look like a different car. Very informative pix, and most helpful of you to take the time to photograph and post these.

[Matt Bacon]

Thanks!

This:

Is the Doyusha kit "cut and shut" to make a racing DB4GT. If you look at the rear of the "greenhouse," you can see the fuel filler cap on the wing (there's one on each side). Another thing the the original Airfix DB5 kit captures much better than either of the others is that width of the "ledge" around the top of the wings. I could see in photos that there was plenty of room for two full size fuel fillers on the real thing , but the ones on my model are "as big as possible" but still pretty weedy, and they are really set into the apex of the wing, not sat on top of a flat plane...

bestest,

M.

[Snake45]

Yes, great pics and comments. Being unable to find/afford either an Airfix or Aurora DB5, a couple years ago I "settled" for an affordable MPC DB6 I found on eBay. When it arrived I compared it with some net research photos and became disappointed with the shape almost immediately, and it went right onto the Shelf of Despair, where it sits to this day. Sigh.

[Matt Bacon]

Yes, great pics and comments. Being unable to find/afford either an Airfix or Aurora DB5, a couple years ago I "settled" for an affordable MPC DB6 I found on eBay. When it arrived I compared it with some net research photos and became disappointed with the shape almost immediately, and it went right onto the Shelf of Despair, where it sits to this day. Sigh.

You should take another look in the box, Richard. T'interweb seems to think that the MPC DB6 is the same as the Airfix one (the Doyusha only ever appeared in an Airfix box as a DB5). If that's true, then it's the same kit as the James Bond one (at least engine and body shell wise... no ejector seat and machine guns...), but with the tail end retooled to the DB6 Kamm tail. Which means that the body should look pretty much like the white one above. So if your MPC doesn't, then the internet sources are wrong (what? WHAT? The internet might have a fact wrong? ;-P).

bestest,

M.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Matt Bacon

[Snake45]

You should take another look in the box, Richard. T'interweb seems to think that the MPC DB6 is the same as the Airfix one (the Doyusha only ever appeared in an Airfix box as a DB5). If that's true, then it's the same kit as the James Bond one (at least engine and body shell wise... no ejector seat and machine guns...), but with the tail end retooled to the DB6 Kamm tail. Which means that the body should look pretty much like the white one above. So if your MPC doesn't, then the internet sources are wrong (what? WHAT? The internet might have a fact wrong? ;-P).

bestest,

M.

First, call me Snake.

Second, I didn't look at any interweb opinions of the kit, I looked at photos of the real car.

Just dug it out for another look at your suggestion. My first impression on seeing the body again is that this thing is the first cousin--or maybe the love child--of the notorious Pyro/Lindberg Triumph Spitfire GT6.

Comparing it to your pic above, it looks like the main body from the front end to the back of the front doors is in fact the same. However, the wheelbase is obviously longer. It looks like the roof has been completely reshaped--and it doesn't look much like a real DB6 pic I just googled up. The rear quarter window shape is notably different, and it looks like the whole roof might be too low, making the side windows too low/small.

If the mood struck me, I suppose I could rework that roof a little and build the think as SOME kind of A-M-looking car, maybe a phantom of some sort. But I think it would take skills (and interest) way beyond my level to turn it into an accurate DB6 model.

BTW, here's some of the pics I looked at:

http://www.boldride.com/ride/1970/aston-martin-db6-mark-ii-vantage#gallery/3

[djflyer]

Snake maybe what you got there could be the basis for a DB4 GT?? Like you said though it would take some work to get it right.

All this sort of makes me chuckle at the guys who complain about not getting the right Deuce or Vicky or 30's era hot rod - try being an Aston Martin fan and see what ya got !!

[Matt Bacon]

First, call me Snake.

Sorry, Snake... will do. ;-P

Sounds as though when Airfix re-tooled the DB5 into a DB6, they left the front half alone, and tried to keep the changes in the back half. But the 2" additional headroom starts at the top of the windscreen, which is taller, but more raked than the DB5. That would explain why it all looks too squashed. The wheelbase extension from DB5 to DB6 was to give the rear passengers more legroom, so adding that in behind the doors is accurate, but without raising the roof probably makes it look even flatter than it should. And once you've got the roofline wrong, the taper to the tail is always going to be a mess...

(I've never seen a DB6 version of the kit in the plastic, built up or not: you don't feel like taking a few pictures, do you, Snake?)

So basically, we're left with the ONLY accurate-ish Aston Martin in 1/24 scale being the original Airfix James Bond DB5, whose moulds were vandalised to produce an inaccurate DB6, and have now disappeared entirely. Surely THAT's an opportunity for Tamiya? ;-P

bestest,

M.

Edited May 22, 2015 by Matt Bacon

[Snake45]

(I've never seen a DB6 version of the kit in the plastic, built up or not: you don't feel like taking a few pictures, do you, Snake?)

So basically, we're left with the ONLY accurate-ish Aston Martin in 1/24 scale being the original Airfix James Bond DB5, whose moulds were vandalised to produce an inaccurate DB6, and have now disappeared entirely. Surely THAT's an opportunity for Tamiya? ;-P

bestest,

M.

Sounds like an opportunity for a resincaster to repop the original DB5 body shell and whatever's necessary to complete it...you could finish it off with some mods to the relatively available 6 kit. BTW, it also looks like maybe about a 3/8" or so extender plug was added to the chassis molds...will have to investigate this further.

Looking at the body last night, thought it might be fun to shorten it back to 4/5 length, but leave the faster fastback and flat tail...would make a nice looking car. If I did that, it would be hard to resist plopping the whole hot mess on a C2 Corvette chassis.

Will see if I can take a pic or two of the body this weekend. I couldn't find a photo of the kit body on google-image last night, either.

[Exotics_Builder]

Sorry that I am a little late to this. Had to dig mine out.

The Doyusha is curbside but has a better roofline. The Revel (old Aurora) does have the arch in the door line as shown previously. I have two of the DB4's, the one with the old Aurora art shows a correct roof line, but the built model version does show the arch.