1/25 Galaxie Ltd. '46 - '48 Chevrolet Aerosedan
Posted 15 April 2010 - 01:09 PM
Posted 15 April 2010 - 01:20 PM
I never got the sense that the article was intended to be a review of the kit. I always thought it was intended to show folks some of the possibilities the kit held for building versions beyond those depicted on the box. However, I DO remember that there was a build-up review of the kit published in Car Modeler, which, of course, was SA(E)'s sister publication until Kalmbach killed it off.
And yet on the cover is a "Review" of the new 1948 Ford kit next to the new 1948 Chevy kit. Both came out same time and the Galaxie kit out-sold the Revell kit two to one! Gary was promised a review of his kit and that was the first and only time in SA(E) it was featured until the "best of the year" article. The review in Car Model.... Pleeeeezzzeee
Posted 15 April 2010 - 01:21 PM
Galaxie did sweat the details and considered all avenues as I said. Your stating that the metal trim was a "last minute thought" is disingenuous and insulting.
What I said is that it seems like a last-minute decision. As in "appears to be" or "looks like." And I'll concede the point... I shouldn't have worded it that way.
But if Galaxie did consider all avenues, why did they decide on stickers instead of molded pieces? Obviously one of the "avenues" would have been to mold the detail onto the fenders and give the builder the option of removing it if they wanted to. An "upscale" kit like this should offer the builder every chance to build an accurate model. And mylar (or metal, or whatever) stickers just don't cut it.
Look, man, I'm not here to pick a fight with you. I'm just calling it like I see it. You can agree or disagree with my opinion, that's perfectly fine... but no need for the personal attacks.
Posted 15 April 2010 - 07:53 PM
Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:17 AM
Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:03 AM
I have no idea why so few of these wonderful kits fail to be constructed. The quality is first rate and more than a dozen members of THIS forum have admitted to having more than one on the shelf. Ken even admitted, and I agree, that because of current trends the subject matter is even more valid. Yet, we still see only a few completed kits on tables and in the forums compared to the plethora of Camaros, ElCaminos, Caddys, Tri-fives and... Mercury low riders. (I believe Virgil has built more than his share.... )
Check this picture out....
Pretty cool huh? No aftermarket, just paint and the basic kit!
Posted 16 April 2010 - 10:22 AM
I have to say I never got then, and don't get now, what the reasoning was behind this kit. When it came out I thought "wow...a super-detailed kit of a subject nobody asked for."
This kit was made me shake my head then, and makes me wonder: "What if Galaxie had made a kit people actually wanted?" Maybe it would have been the start of something instead of a dead-end.
Good points, & a prime example of why I have exactly one of the kits, with no desire to buy another.
Man I hate belaboring the point but it indeed was the most requested subject. Do you think Gary would have invested so much time effort and money on a radical new project if there would be no payoff? The fact that it out sold the Revell '48 Ford kits should be your answer.
Is the kit too hard? Yeah, probably for some builders who don't have the skills. But then the box is clearly labeled as being for the advanced modeler.
Former SAE editor Gary Schmidt wrote in one of his editorials asking what builders would like to see as a new kit. I am not totally sure of the issue but I am very sure of the written response. SAE you will remember WAS the voice of the adult modeler in 1990 and it was in the June issue that Gary wrote the following paragraph in his editorial:
"A few issues back I asked what cars from the '50s, '60s, and '70s you would most like to see in kit form. I got some heat from readers who wanted to see more cars from the forties. Although no particular body style was specified, the '47-48 Chevy was the choice of those who favored the forties. The fifties was another matter. Everyone had a favorite, but he overwhelming vote-getter was the 1955-57 Chevy Camio pickup. Ford fans favored the 1952-54 Victoria, while the '58 Edsel and the '59 Cadillac attracted attention."
If you want to read the rest of the editorial then you will have to dig up the magazine yourself. But the point is modelers did ask and the industry answered all requests!!!! I was one of hundreds who put a 3 cent stamp on an envelope and wrote in my three requests and I remember celebrating each time a new kit was announced and recalling it WAS on that holy list of desired subjects Gary wrote about. AMT, Revell and Monogram all listened and all the projects have been successes.
Edited by Jairus, 16 April 2010 - 10:46 AM.
Posted 16 April 2010 - 11:09 AM
Yeah, but the question is... how many people wanted cars from the fourties? If several thousand readers were clamoring for a subject from the fourties, that's one thing, if a few hundred wanted it, that's a whole different story.
So to say that the '47-'48 Chevy was the choice of those who favored the fourties may be true enough... but that's not the whole story in context.
Posted 16 April 2010 - 12:40 PM
Actually, that approach would have required molding an extra body as well, seeing as how the rear fenders were not molded separately, and those also have the Fleetline trim ...
Exactly Ken! Frankly, separate chrome trim such as Harry suggests has almost NEVER been a successful way of doing it, short of making "trenches" in the fenders (necessarily overly wide, in order to accommodate a paint job--the thickness of the paint, or locating pins and holes. Either method would have meant filling the locating holes or recesses, and how may questions do we see on these very forums as just how to do that?
Granted, this is neither a subject matter likely to attract very many 12-16yr old kids due to its age, nor is it one that most younger builders would have a high propensity for a really successful build--but it's wise to consider that not all adults are at the same high plane, skills-wise either--again, anyone who monitors these forums surely has seen the wide disparity of skills admitted to by posters here, or on any model car builder's forums wherever they might be.
Being old enough to have seen dozens of 46-48 Chevy Aerosedans as a kid, I can tell you that relatively few of them were built (or sold--or equipped after the fact from dealer parts bins) with the speed streak chrome strips. Apparently most buyers back then, be they adults having experienced the Depression and the war's home front, or returning veterans seem to have been willing to buy such extra cost items.
In point of fact, it wasn't until the advent of the Bel Air Sport Coupe in 1950 that any postwar Chevrolet came with loads of brightwork from the assembly plants--those were very much post-austerity cars for sure. Now, what is neat, is to see one of the VERY few Aerosedans equipped at the dealer with the "Sportsman" woodie trim on the doors and forward rear quarter panels--now those few were, and the one or two remaining ones still are, ATTRACTIVE to the max!
Posted 16 April 2010 - 12:58 PM
Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:51 PM
While I obviously don't have access to any numbers to back me up, I would be willing to bet that by this point, the '48 Ford has outsold the Galaxie '48 Chevy by a wide margin.
Which, if true, only serves to bolster Mark's argument that this kit was the answer to the question that nobody asked...
Posted 16 April 2010 - 03:57 PM
I am not trying to start a pissing match between Chev'n Ford or Galaxie and Revell. Both are great kits and both have their weaknesses. The difference in my opinion is that the Galaxie kits are clearly higher quality tho I own many copies of either.
But it WAS one of the most requested kits as SAE demonstrated back in 1990 and I proved citing printed examples. The fact that so many of the kits have sold is proof that it was an answer to a demand. So I cannot continue to keep revisiting my question, with so many kits floating around.... why do we not see more built examples?
My thought... there are no 3.5 skill level builders left! At least that is how I see it.
Edited by Jairus, 16 April 2010 - 04:18 PM.
Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:09 PM
Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:52 PM
Besides, that is not my question and you keep citing production numbers comparison. My question is and has always been: with so many kits floating around in circulation, why are there not more built?
My proposal and suggestion is that the skill level of the average builder has dropped precipitously!
The days of chopping and channeling and wiring for lights is over. Very few builders are going the "Bill Geary" route. In fact I think guys like Bill are extremely few and far between. Most modelers want to build a car in a few days instead of a few months like we used to back in the 80's.
But then, that is just my opinion. Take it as you will...
Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:52 PM
Posted 16 April 2010 - 04:55 PM
Let me put this in terms so simple it won't confuse anyone, Jairus. "Because nobody wants a '46-8 Chevy on their shelf bad enough to slap this thing together"
That make sense enough?
Bingo, you just made my point! Thanks Mark!
Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:08 PM
And how does one get ahold of Revell's sales numbers for specific kits?
I have to wonder why a company would boldly state "Accurately scaled, Fully detailed" on the box top, yet not include a single picture of the actual kit to show off the detail? While the box art is great, it gives the buyer very little idea of how accurate the model inside is, or even what it looks like when built.
Now, had Galaxie tooled up sister '70 Dodge Challeger and '70 Plymouth 'Cuda/Barracuda kits, they'd be on their third production run.
Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:16 PM
No, I didn't, Jairus. You don't understand what I said. This isn't an unbuildable kit, it's an undesireable one.
It's not that people can't build this turd, they choose not to because the subject is not at all appealing.
Then why buy a turd? Every kit on my shelf is something I purchased because I wanted to build it eventually. In-freaking-fact I have started nearly everything on my shelves by tossing in aftermarket stuff, reference photos and at least gluing together the engine halfs. That is at least 300 kits that are NOW worthless to sell on eBay. But then I buy them for Sketchpad purposes or other magazine articles or for projects. But I NEVER buy something that I do NOT consider worth building.
I would never buy a turd!
Yes, there are a lot of them out there. Some have my artwork on the box even....
But the Galaxie Chevrolet kits are not undesireable.
Because they are ALL sold!
(Major fail on your part)
Why? Because modeling is dying.
Modelers want simple.
They want quick gratification.
(hmmm, guessing I answered my own question. )
Posted 16 April 2010 - 05:19 PM
My question is and has always been: with so many kits floating around in circulation, why are there not more built?
1) Price- higher than most were willing to pay compared to a typical $10 kit of the day.
2) Subject- as Mark said, they're just not that popular. I think Ken touched on that fact that the 1:1 cars weren't all that popular either.
3) Availability- these were never mass-merchandised at chain stores, so that makes them less available to the general public.
I have no problem with you having a slight emotional attachement to theses kits, but if you want honest answers, you should be willing to put aside you personal feelings and listen.