Some more Round2 surprizes!

[Tom Geiger]

  

I too would buy those simple 1958 annuals if they could ever be found and reissued. But, look at the recent thread on AMT's reissued 1966 Mustang. A lot of modelers would flip out and complain about the lack of detail. Look at the chassis and lack of engines in those! Now this doesn't bother me one bit. I like curbsides as much as the more detailed kits. But, other, younger modelers, will never understand these kits. And we'd end up listening to a lot of whining about them.

That was the problem with the Model King issue of the '59 Imperial.  There was a thread on another board started by a guy who wanted to buy the Moebius Ford pickup.  He was upset because he ordered and saw he got the Model King version.  He complained that he had bought the '59 Imperial and saw that Model King "made nothing but junk" and never bought another Model King kit. He expected to get the same with the Ford pickup.  That is the ignorance out there!

[Dave Darby]

  

That was the problem with the Model King issue of the '59 Imperial.  There was a thread on another board started by a guy who wanted to buy the Moebius Ford pickup.  He was upset because he ordered and saw he got the Model King version.  He complained that he had bought the '59 Imperial and saw that Model King "made nothing but junk" and never bought another Model King kit. He expected to get the same with the Ford pickup.  That is the ignorance out there!

They COULD put a disclaimer on the side of the box like Revell did back in the 1970s when they re-issued the 57 Ranchero, 59 Skyliner, and the 1960 (really a 59) Corvette with their multi piece bodies:

"IMPORTANT: As one of Revell's earliest designed, fully detailed car models, this kit is engineered differently than models of today. This kit contains the original multi-piece body panels that require assembly before attaching to chassis."

Funny how none of the later re-issues carried this disclaimer. And nobody seemed to complain either. Would still like to see those come back. Especially the Ranchero with the cool custom bits and gorgeous box art (1960 issue) by Jack Leynnwood.

OK, back to Round2. Bring on all that old curbside stuff!

 

[charlie8575]

No kidding!

The folks who don't like the '66 Mustang would really howl when opening a '58 annual.

 

Simple, mark the box as "original 1958 tooling." 

If you still don't get it after that, you never will.

Charlie Larkin

[charlie8575]

  

That was the problem with the Model King issue of the '59 Imperial.  There was a thread on another board started by a guy who wanted to buy the Moebius Ford pickup.  He was upset because he ordered and saw he got the Model King version.  He complained that he had bought the '59 Imperial and saw that Model King "made nothing but junk" and never bought another Model King kit. He expected to get the same with the Ford pickup.  That is the ignorance out there!

Quite true regarding ignorance.

The question (and problem) occurs when ignorance is willful or not.

In some case, however, I feel that peoples' actual mental capacity may be the root cause of ignorance, not want of proper information and instruction.

Charlie Larkin

[Tom Geiger]

They COULD put a disclaimer on the side of the box like Revell did back in the 1970s when they re-issued the 57 Ranchero, 59 Skyliner, and the 1960 (really a 59) Corvette with their multi piece bodies:

"IMPORTANT: As one of Revell's earliest designed, fully detailed car models, this kit is engineered differently than models of today. This kit contains the original multi-piece body panels that require assembly before attaching to chassis."

Funny how none of the later re-issues carried this disclaimer. And nobody seemed to complain either. .

 

 

I don't think it's the guys we hang with who were disappointed.  Most of us know what's in just about every reissue.  It's the 90% of the kit market who aren't as astute and buy kits at hobby shops and other retail outlets.  I remember reading somewhere that the manufacturers could reissue kits every 2-3 years because research showed that the average model builder stuck with it 18-24 months. That means every time they reissue a kit, it's brand new to a lot of buyers.  And I've seen it more than once on the boards where someone bought a later AMT kit like the '57 Chrysler and liked the kit. Then they bought a '62 Buick and thought they'd been had!

 Round 2 started putting the photos of the parts trees etc on the bottoms of the boxes.  Easy enough to put a whole explanation of the history of kits and how this kit represents the craft in the the late 1950s. Still, those most likely to complain, or worse not complain and just not buy again, wouldn't read that either!

[unclescott58]

I'm not always the brightest bulb in the bunch.That's why I come websites like this. To learn. There is info on just about everything out on the web now. Now if your not smart enough to do the work of searching the web for what you need. Than I can't help you.

[gtx6970]

Although I would certaintly not kick out the idea of stocking up on the 58 annuals IF they re-issued them ( IMO not likely )

I already have all but one so its no longer a top priority for me

[Bob Ellis]

There are not that many 58 annuals to worry about. I would rather see a new tool of the 1958 Ford.

[louie]

I'm not always the brightest bulb in the bunch.That's why I come websites like this. To learn. There is info on just about everything out on the web now. Now if your not smart enough to do the work of searching the web for what you need. Than I can't help you.

I'm not always the brightest bulb in the bunch.That's why I come websites like this. To learn. There is info on just about everything out on the web now. Now if your not smart enough to do the work of searching the web for what you need. Than I can't help you.

Absolutely Perfect, I too come here to learn and more. I'm happy with every kit that I buy, why, I read the box I read the reviews and I am on this forum that I get a tremendous amount of information from. Also being a modeler  I usually will add or fix any kit that is not up to today's  standards and to me that's  half the fun of it. It seems like most of us are on the same page here.     Thanks.      Jeff 

[Eshaver]

Simple, mark the box as "original 1958 tooling." 

If you still don't get it after that, you never will.

Charlie Larkin

Charlie , you always make such eloquent points ! Here is a Revell 1958 Austin Healey which was tooled in the same vein as the Ranchero

[buildnething]

Simple, mark the box as "original 1958 tooling." 

If you still don't get it after that, you never will.

Charlie Larkin

You know some of us weren't even around yet, when these were made, so..how would know whats in the box? LOL JS I was born in 1983. But yes some simple googling and researching will help. 

[charlie8575]

You know some of us weren't even around yet, when these were made, so..how would know whats in the box? LOL JS I was born in 1983. But yes some simple googling and researching will help. 

A couple of pages back, there was a picture of a Revell disclaimer for a re-issue explaining what you'll get. 

If you're too lazy/stupid to read, you get what you deserve.

I actually like AMT's parts layout on the bottom. I think it might be smart to move to photos, but, that should answer your general question. 

Charlie Larkin

[buildnething]

A couple of pages back, there was a picture of a Revell disclaimer for a re-issue explaining what you'll get. 

If you're too lazy/stupid to read, you get what you deserve.

I actually like AMT's parts layout on the bottom. I think it might be smart to move to photos, but, that should answer your general question. 

Charlie Larkin

By "you" are you referring to me? I deserve what? I know how to read perfectly well, and so well in fact I sense a tone of frustration in your post. Whats wrong? I simply was saying that not everyone knows these kits like the backs of their hands, like many older/more experienced model builders do. This is why Forums exist in the first place. A place to share information.  Also, as you obviously know, not all kits have parts layouts printed on the box. So how would an inexperienced and unaware modeler know? Besides doing research before hand? What if they bought it online, where there was no image of the back of the box? Also doing a google search on this is limited in itself. I spend hours researching and looking at model related websites, and sometimes reviews are few and far between. 

[Tom Geiger]

 not everyone knows these kits like the backs of their hands, like many older/more experienced model builders do. This is why Forums exist in the first place.

Bingo!  You know enough to come to this forum and ask about any kit you are interested in.  Within minutes of posting a bunch of guys will be pleased to tell you all about that specific kit.

The ones who drive me nutz are the guys who are on this board regularly, but refuse to absorb any of the history of the model companies, or their current size and status.  The ones who start a complaint post with "These big corporations are taking advantage of little ole me, They put out flawed kits on purpose and are laughing at us for buying them."  Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[charlie8575]

No, "you're" was not directed at you, but intended as a general admonition.

However, we need to think. 

1. It certainly will not occur to the vast cross-section of consumers to do an internet search on a kit prior to purchase.

2. An inexperienced builder should be able to discern "hmm, we have something different" with a simple disclosure. Stating "original 195x/6x/7x tooling" or "patterned after origin195x/6x/7x tooling" should be warning enough. Over the course of the last 40-60+ years, plenty has changed. Would you expect model kit development to remain static? This should give hint to anyone that this will not be a state-of-the-art product. 

One needs to think and read the features of the product before making a purchase. This applies to anything. 

Too much of a defense of sloth and willful ignorance, equally problematic is the manufacturer's failure to completely disclose what's in the box. 

Charlie Larkin

[louie]

I'm fairly new to this forum  ( within the past year ) and within this time frame l have seen quite a few posts exactly like Tom explained. Basically, I couldn't agree more with Tom and Charlies posts above as I've seen and heard all of what's been said in their posts. I come to this forum to learn, listen and appreciate others in this hobby of ours  ( like a sponge ) . Also, bring on all of the 58's as I'll take them all, lacking in design or not, I love em. 

Thanks.    Jeff 

[disabled modeler]

To me its the cars or vehicles they are of that I like...bad kit good kit snap I do not care pretty much I just like them for what they are of.  Some kits require more work to build...its just how they are to me.  If its of interest to me Ill get one or try to....they all are what you make of them...I have made some cool replicas from junk or damaged kits/models before one I spent a month working the body into what I wanted it to be. I am just happy the companies are listening to us for what we want.

[Brett Barrow]

No, "you're" was not directed at you, but intended as a general admonition.

However, we need to think. 

1. It certainly will not occur to the vast cross-section of consumers to do an internet search on a kit prior to purchase.

2. An inexperienced builder should be able to discern "hmm, we have something different" with a simple disclosure. Stating "original 195x/6x/7x tooling" or "patterned after origin195x/6x/7x tooling" should be warning enough. Over the course of the last 40-60+ years, plenty has changed. Would you expect model kit development to remain static? This should give hint to anyone that this will not be a state-of-the-art product. 

One needs to think and read the features of the product before making a purchase. This applies to anything. 

Too much of a defense of sloth and willful ignorance, equally problematic is the manufacturer's failure to completely disclose what's in the box. 

Charlie Larkin

Take it from someone who's spent 15+ years in the hobby business - whatever you put on the box (or on a web page in my case) consumers don't read it.   They just don't.  Or I should say, the ones that would benefit from reading the box don't.  

And I may come off as a jerk for saying it, but in 2016 there's just no excuse for not knowing about a kit.  I have a device that fits comfortably in my pocket that can access the entire internet and all the information on it.  And it's available to everyone.  Ignorance in 2016 is willful ignorance, anything we want to know is at our fingertips.  We just have to want to know it.  

Edited March 2, 2016 by Brett Barrow
didn't know that word was censored

[boss 302 mustang]

If you're a real modeler, you should be able to come up with something good out of anything........detail paint a flat pan chassis or just paint it flat black if you want......the old annuals can come out really nice with a little effort.   There's no reason that every kit has to have a high part count.....these guys need to use their imagination and work with what they have

I like to get old builts, gluebombs, even, and try to rebuild......I don't need 150 part kits to make me happy.......but I have been a builder since like 1962

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by boss 302 mustang

[Snake45]

If you're a real modeler, you should be able to come up with something good out of anything........detail paint a flat pan chassis or just paint it flat black if you want......the old annuals can come out really nice with a little effort.   There's no reason that every kit has to have a high part count.....these guys need to use their imagination and work with what they have

I like to get old builts, gluebombs, even, and try to rebuild......I don't need 150 part kits to make me happy.......but I have been a builder since like 1962

 

Agree completely. The old AMT '66 Mustang, with a little extra effort such as scribing in the fender end caps and so forth, builds up into an excellent model. Its body shape is actually MUCH more accurate than a number of much newer, "better" kits I could name.

[AC Norton]

If you're a real modeler, you should be able to come up with something good out of anything........detail paint a flat pan chassis or just paint it flat black if you want......the old annuals can come out really nice with a little effort.   There's no reason that every kit has to have a high part count.....these guys need to use their imagination and work with what they have

I like to get old builts, gluebombs, even, and try to rebuild......I don't need 150 part kits to make me happy.......but I have been a builder since like 1962

 

boy, thank god for refreshing old school thinking for a change.....I couldn't possibly agree more with your comments. lets face it, even though what I'm about to convey will be unpopular with many.... I find several of the newer so called amazing kits of the last several years to be  much less builder friendly  than the older issues, with a higher than needed part count, that in many cases  assembles with difficulty even for the seasoned modeler. they are over engineered in many examples, and that does not always work perfectly in small scales. the vintage kits of AMT, MPC, and JOHAN  were not perfect, but they usually were a joy to build, and with some paint detail and a builders own ideas and skills, could make something to be proud of then,,,,and even now.....long live Detroit made plastic........the Ace...............oh, just today I got delivered my factory sealed JOHAN 69 GTX annual kit, and I would say its a cut above most of the newer stuff.....gee, I think....

[buildnething]

Bingo!  You know enough to come to this forum and ask about any kit you are interested in.  Within minutes of posting a bunch of guys will be pleased to tell you all about that specific kit.

The ones who drive me nutz are the guys who are on this board regularly, but refuse to absorb any of the history of the model companies, or their current size and status.  The ones who start a complaint post with "These big corporations are taking advantage of little ole me, They put out flawed kits on purpose and are laughing at us for buying them."  Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

I was just sensing a lack of understanding, but yes I see what you are saying and agree. I think people tend to get frustrated and automatically take it personally and say things like that. I usually just ignore personal assumptions like that! 

[buildnething]

No, "you're" was not directed at you, but intended as a general admonition.

However, we need to think. 

1. It certainly will not occur to the vast cross-section of consumers to do an internet search on a kit prior to purchase.

2. An inexperienced builder should be able to discern "hmm, we have something different" with a simple disclosure. Stating "original 195x/6x/7x tooling" or "patterned after origin195x/6x/7x tooling" should be warning enough. Over the course of the last 40-60+ years, plenty has changed. Would you expect model kit development to remain static? This should give hint to anyone that this will not be a state-of-the-art product. 

One needs to think and read the features of the product before making a purchase. This applies to anything. 

Too much of a defense of sloth and willful ignorance, equally problematic is the manufacturer's failure to completely disclose what's in the box. 

Charlie Larkin

Thank you for clarifying that. I see how that can be frustrating. Dealing with willful ignorance can be difficult for anyone. I am of the tech age. I was born at a time where the tides were turning. Early 80s. Im apart of a group of people who experienced life before the internet, and through its development into what it is today. I personally feel people my age (currently 32) are a generational gap in terms of tech. Some of the "older" folk are simply not interested in the computer and the internet and its wealth of knowledge. For some odd reason. But I can understand why that may be the case for them. They are set in their ways. So yes its 2016 and yes we all should do our best to make informed decisions. There really is no reason not to. Ignorance is not bliss as they say. 

[Richard Bartrop]

If you're a real modeler, you should be able to come up with something good out of anything........detail paint a flat pan chassis or just paint it flat black if you want......the old annuals can come out really nice with a little effort.   There's no reason that every kit has to have a high part count.....these guys need to use their imagination and work with what they have

I like to get old builts, gluebombs, even, and try to rebuild......I don't need 150 part kits to make me happy.......but I have been a builder since like 1962

 

And if you're a really real modeler, you don't need kits at all.

Of course, not everyone is a "real" modeler, or even wants to be.  Sometimes people want things a little easier, which is why there are model kits in the first place.

[charlie8575]

I'm fairly new to this forum  ( within the past year ) and within this time frame l have seen quite a few posts exactly like Tom explained. Basically, I couldn't agree more with Tom and Charlies posts above as I've seen and heard all of what's been said in their posts. I come to this forum to learn, listen and appreciate others in this hobby of ours  ( like a sponge ) . Also, bring on all of the 58's as I'll take them all, lacking in design or not, I love em. 

Thanks.    Jeff 

Agreed, Jeff. 

Those original annuals might not have been much underneath, but the bodies look great, and with careful painting and detail look, they look very nice. 

I dunno know about you, but I don't spend most of my time looking at the greasy bits of my models. 

Charlie Larkin