Well, I wouldn't refer to the kit as "junk" merely because it has a few problems. I just won't buy the kit... And, do you really equate asking "Why?" with "whining and moans....."? Golly!
What HE said. ^
And didja get a load of that premature deployment of the whole "perfect kit" angle, John? A perfect example in action, here.
It's as if there's a group of self-appointed defenders of Revell's honor, who somehow feel it's their place to take offense when a kit gets criticized. Time and time again, I've PUT it to this crowd: if somebody criticizes an object you had nothing to do with developing, just what is it to you? What are your stakes, that you should take criticism of that object so personally, you somehow justify it in your mind to take personal shots at the critics? A person "attacks" an object; you attack the person. Why? Nobody has even begun to provide an answer for this, because there IS none.
Oh, but we've seen some wonderful rationalizations. The favorite saw that people keep coming back to, no matter how conclusively history gives it the outright lie, is that key personnel at Revell/Monogram are so stupid that they'll hack their own financial nads off by refusing to produce any more new tooling if they don't like the feedback they get.
And then, if any discrepancy is brought up it all becomes "whining and moaning", which has hectored some national-caliber talent clean out of offering any pearls of wisdom for all the pious squealing those pearls elicit. There are some top guys we could stand to hear from, who have useful information they'd be willing to share but for the one-time-too-many they've been called "rivet counter". Somebody explain to me how that particular brand of neo-McCarthyism is helping this hobby grow.
Now if you miss an error in a wheel arch or a drip molding, at least that can be chalked up to a lack of prescription eyewear. And yes, the Rat Roaster is obviously geared to a different, less critical audience than the other three 2012 offerings. It's Revell's most o b v i o u s l y compromised kit of 2012, with essentially an entire chassis that's not correct for the prototype; but If Revell's cost-benefit analysis pays off, they'll take the critical drubbing and laugh all the way to the bank.
So, why? WHY all the righteous chiding about whining and moaning, and all the proselytizing about that mythical "perfect kit" that once again, nobody asked for?