Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Kit Bashing - The Art of Rivet Counting


Recommended Posts

First:  NIIIICE looking kit!

Second: minimum threshold of accuracy is something that'll be almost impossible to hammer down. One man's "eh, it's barely a millimeter and a half!" is another's nearly 20% proportional error. It's too subjective and dependent on factors like a modeler's enthusiasm for the subject, his objectives, whether the deviation flatters the subject or not, and on and on.

The heat in these discussions comes from intolerance of the variations between one modeler's personal threshold and another's.  And I believe the record shows it's the Manufacturer Defense Brigade showing far greater intolerance than the actual rivet counters themselves - the very term "rivet counter" itself is in fact a vivid embodiment of that intolerance.

Edited by Chuck Kourouklis
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should never be an issue with pointing out flaws, and the kit manufacturers  should be able to read and make a better product from it. 

Then comes all the personal attacks, or the ones sayin "here we go again"  That kills the thread. My recent thread about posts being deleted was deleted because that started. Sad that the ones that want a better kit have to consider just being quiet so they are not called a rivet counter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally,

 

I do not mind comments from a knowledgeable person who can actually back up their statements with photos and facts. I still contend that no model kit is perfect. They all need some sort of "massaging" to look right in my eyes.  I look forward to the comments from certain modelers on the board. Others, I take with a grain of salt.I buy and build models to satisfy me, and I try to get the best example of the car.  

When Monogram brought out that '69 Camaro Z28 kit back in the '80's, unless you could get your hands on an AMT or MPC annual, it was the only game in town, and until Revell brought out the '69 Yenko with the yellow car on the box, we did not have a really good '69 Camaro kit. I bought one of the Monogram Camaros, built it, and put it on the shelf. In the '80's when MPC retooled and reissued their '69 Camaro, I bought a couple of them, and scrapped the Monogram '69 Camaro, which by the way, had a beautiful set of Motor Wheel Fly/Spyder Mags, and some nice Scheel Sport Seats, and when Revell brought out their series of '69 Camaros, I bought and built several of them. 

In the case of Revell's '90 Mustang LX, a good friend of mine pointed out its shortcomings at our NNL. He owned a few of them over the years and he stated that he would not buy one. I bought one anyway, but I have yet to build it. Mike Schur did a marvelous job of correcting the body in that kit. I may get one of the hatchback resin kits he designed, as I like the Hatch better than the notchback. I can only hope that Revell can correct the kit like they did the '69 Charger, and offer the corrected parts to the Modelers who want them at no charge. Sure it's expensive, but that bit of goodwill will do them quite a bit of good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally,

 

I do not mind comments from a knowledgeable person who can actually back up their statements with photos and facts. I still contend that no model kit is perfect. They all need some sort of "massaging" to look right in my eyes.  I look forward to the comments from certain modelers on the board. Others, I take with a grain of salt.I buy and build models to satisfy me, and I try to get the best example of the car.  

 

You are correct Ron, nothing is "perfect" I am the same way, I look forward to test shots and reviews.

Sad part is, like the Mustang you commented on, I have not bought one..... yet. I may eventually, but that roof line does ruin the character of the car.

As a 1:1, I always thought a lower roof would look better, and it really does look good lower, but is not correct. A low slung road racer build would work well though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the saying goes it takes 2 to tango. If this endless cycle is going to be broken its going to take effort on both sides. Being silent is an option but not the solution to the problem. Tolerance and restraint is necessary from both sides if the situation is going to be resolved.  As the OP pointed out there needs to be a balance. Its really that simple. If this continues we all lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

until Revell brought out the '69 Yenko with the yellow car on the box, we did not have a really good '69 Camaro kit.

 

Actually the Yenko was one of several in that series that began with the Monogram Z/28 patterned off the Monogram 1/12 scale Camaro that had been previously released.  It first offered with a Blue car in white stripes on the cover.  It didn't become a Revell kit until the two companies merged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they have paid attention and they have made what "We" want, and yet the belly aching continued. Nothing is perfect in the eyes of somcomplainingd here. Yet "we" all get cast in that die.

They have other ways to gauge the market, and petty crying on web boards seems like a dead end. Yes, it starts out like sensible critique and it quickly turns into a Three Stooges movie. 

 

LOL...I agree with and Mark...the three stooges made me laugh csuse it sounds so true in a funny way.there us and will always be people complaining about kits don't look right.some of it is right,but other complaints are just throwing stones to throw stones!.those complaints I personally ignore. you have to learn to over look those builders or collector's that complain ...just wanting to have something to say that others have thought of.people have been doing that for ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally,

 

I do not mind comments from a knowledgeable person who can actually back up their statements with photos and facts. I still contend that no model kit is perfect. They all need some sort of "massaging" to look right in my eyes.  I look forward to the comments from certain modelers on the board. Others, I take with a grain of salt.I buy and build models to satisfy me, and I try to get the best example of the car.  

When Monogram brought out that '69 Camaro Z28 kit back in the '80's, unless you could get your hands on an AMT or MPC annual, it was the only game in town, and until Revell brought out the '69 Yenko with the yellow car on the box, we did not have a really good '69 Camaro kit. I bought one of the Monogram Camaros, built it, and put it on the shelf. In the '80's when MPC retooled and reissued their '69 Camaro, I bought a couple of them, and scrapped the Monogram '69 Camaro, which by the way, had a beautiful set of Motor Wheel Fly/Spyder Mags, and some nice Scheel Sport Seats, and when Revell brought out their series of '69 Camaros, I bought and built several of them. 

In the case of Revell's '90 Mustang LX, a good friend of mine pointed out its shortcomings at our NNL. He owned a few of them over the years and he stated that he would not buy one. I bought one anyway, but I have yet to build it. Mike Schur did a marvelous job of correcting the body in that kit. I may get one of the hatchback resin kits he designed, as I like the Hatch better than the notchback. I can only hope that Revell can correct the kit like they did the '69 Charger, and offer the corrected parts to the Modelers who want them at no charge. Sure it's expensive, but that bit of goodwill will do them quite a bit of good.

Ron, excellent point made.  There probably is no model car kit that is 100% perfectly accurate, due to the very nature of how model car kits are created.  I would suspect that Tamiya car kits, for example, suffer from the same problems (remember the hue and cry over their pair of Jeep kits back over 20 years ago?  Those drew a fair amount of criticism on this continent, because we in the United States can SEE Jeeps almost daily, practically any place in the USA), but so many of their model kits are of cars seldom if ever seen widely in the US.  Not many of us have had more than a passing glance at most exotics, and certainly rather few of us have ever seen an F1 car up close and personal.

Over on the aircraft, armor and naval ships side of the plastic modeling hobby, the same is also true--again, very few modelers of those subjects truly have real-life, up-close-and-personal experience with any of those subjects.

So, almost all of us have to rely on photographs or drawings of the real thing (and photography doesn't always tell the truth, and the only drawings worth more than the paper they are printed on are original manufacturer's or naval shipyard drawings--anything else is a latter-day interpretation of the real thing, frankly!).   In my past life, I have had to work with automaker's 3-views, and for the most part I found them of little absolute help, beyond establishing the overall silhouette shape--those drawings seldom ever show the subtleties of surface contours, contrary to this forum's popular opinion.  Photographs?  Perhaps great, once in a while, in my product development years, have I gotten hold of pics of any car that told me EXACTLY how it should be.  Creating a model kit out of "whole cloth" is perhaps the ultimate in scratchbuilding--not much room there for "kit bashing", again--in my 12 yrs of creating masters for resin-casting and then casting them--I've been there, done that, gotten the tee-shirt.  In my almost 3 years developing (as was the plan) accurately done "1/64" scale diecast miniatures of real cars (even a few 1/24 scale diecasts, and a couple of 1/18 scalers in the bargain!), I had to deal with a ton of stuff, including miscalculations of this or that shape or contour.  In addition, I have seen how it was done, nearly 40 yrs ago, at AMT Corporation. Further, I get periodic calls to give up most of a weekend, run up north, help evaluate Moebius tooling mockups, and get the call to do a lot of that via email--so I DO have a good bit in my resume' on this issue.

In short, any model kit, of any subject, and indeed our attempts to build them accurately, are subject to the same "interpretations" of any skilled artist who paints by hand, in oils, a picture of a famous person, a well-known scene or object, or carves same in marble or any other carving medium--all the way through the process, it becomes simply one person's view, one person's interpretation of the real subject.  In result, to pontificate, to shout from the highest altitude that such-and-such is either perfectly correct, or totally wrong is often merely a matter of that individual's perception, and may well not, were it put to the test, fit into any "mold" created off the original.

Bottom line?  If a particular model car kit doesn't meet one's personal opinion as to how it should look like, be it shape, or some small detail--why not exercise what most here on forums such as this claim to be your knowledge and skills, show the rest of us exactly how you see it should look like?  Endless carping about "this is wrong", "So & so" knew how to get it right", all the missives that I've seen in almost 10 yrs of watching these forums, does nothing to advance the art of our tremendous hobby--rather it drags us down into the same gutter as the flood of political mud that I see over on Facebook.  End of reply to Ron's excellent post, and my silly rant here.

Art

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off CONGRADULATIONS AFX on having one of my projects selected to be to offer as a kit, it`s certainly a testament to your model mastering skills.

I also concur that constructive criticism is one thing but nit- picking, rivet counting, manufacture bashing is another. It is truly unfortunate if the model companies have discontinued their participation on the modeling forums because of the rude, childish responses of some (not all) forum participants. However, it is evident that they have occasionally listened to request of the modeling community which is apparent because of the  “new” issues I`ve seen of late.  It`s refreshing to have new subjects kitted and not have to be content with the same old re-pops.

There are numerous challenges to overcome when replicating a 1:1 subject in 1:25 scale that have to be taken into consideration. Additionally, one has to consider the “Business Process” variables that are in play when bring a “new” kit to market (allotted budget, available mastering/tooling skills, manufacturing timelines, projected sale etc. ).  When one takes into accountarrow-10x10.png all the above I fell a number of kit manufacturesarrow-10x10.png as well as after-market resin caters do a great job (IMHO).

True, many modelers are on target with “some” of their observations. But, the incisively whining and over the top criticisms is a bit too much. As Ace Garage Guy pointed out “criticisms of kit flaws usually start out as polite pointing-out of a fairly visible inaccuracy, backed by a credible reference or extensive first-hand experience with the subject.” Then come the folks that want to pile on; like sharks that get the scent of blood in the water. I`m not discouraging criticism but lets be respectful and civil with our critiques. 

It`s certainly reasonable to have expectations that instantly visible proportions and dimensions should be portrayed accurately in scale so the kit TRULY looks like its 1:1 counterpart.  We buy the kits because we want to build fairly accurate depiction of certain 1:1 subject matter.  If the rumors are true, possibly overseas out-sourcing of the mastering/tooling could be part of the problem; because they do not have extensive first-hand experience with the subject..but that's purely speculation on my part.

However, following today's business model manufactures’ should duly make note of the flaws that knowledgeable people point out and make the required corrections with the next project. This business process is called “Continues Improvement”. “Continues Improvement” is one of the major building blocks that make a company viable in today's business world. In theory the mistakes should rapidly become fewer and fewer as they move forward with new releases. This methodology should hold true, particularly when one factors I the escalating cost of kits.

However, for those that are not as meticulous, posses a less discerning eye, find the scale-infidelities less bothersome or have the skills to make the necessary corrective changes then press forward and purchase the kit. True, we should not have to make in the field alteration of their mistakes but, as my 1st Sergeant would say “Yeep...the brass have screwed the pooch again, but it`s up to us to make it work inspite of it all...so adapt and overcome soldier”.  For those that find the discrepancies intolerable may I suggest they pass on that kit and wait for the next new release.

Edited by 69NovaYenko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the Yenko was one of several in that series that began with the Monogram Z/28 patterned off the Monogram 1/12 scale Camaro that had been previously released.  It first offered with a Blue car in white stripes on the cover.  It didn't become a Revell kit until the two companies merged.

I don't believe this is correct.

I seem to remember buying the Monogram 1/12 '69 Camaro in the late '80s. It was molded in orange and so pictured on the box. The first 1/25 Revell '69 Camaro was the Yenko, in the very early '90s, followed a few years later by the Z/28 RS pictured on the box in blue with white stripes. I don't believe this kit was EVER released in a Monogram box, much less before the Revell Yenko.

The cartoonish Monogram 1/24 '69 Camaro has been released in several versions, and it's obvious that the same masters were used to create the 1/32 Snap kit, which is currently being sold under the Revell label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so...if there are fifteen rivets per side of something and those rivets constitute a major or even a minor but easily observed part of "the look" of that something, then you can bet I am going to count those rivets and if there are 14 or 16 or some number other than fifteen of them, I and I would expect anyone else with half a lick of sense, would scream about it or at least not "review" it without bringing up a most obvious defect. And that would be regardless of whether anyone thought me a "rivet counter" or otherwise serves as an apologist for sloppy work (members of the Manufacturer's Defense League in other words) in presenting a supposedly SCALE MODEL of something that exists in reality. The "right" to artistic interpretation notwithstanding.

so there is quite some merit to being a "rivet counter" despite the fact the term can be considered prejudicial on its face.

jb

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Art, not a single person that I've seen has asked for a perfect kit. Most go out of their way to say exactly "there is no perfect kit". 

Measurements are exactly that. How can one "interpret" a Del Rio bumper guard? You did the 57 Courier for PL IIRC, and the bumper was right. What about a doorsill drop on a BelAir convertible? I don't see "interpretation". It's a yes or no. 

I also differ on your comment to use the skills you claim to fix it. It's not my job to fix a bumper guard, a door sill, whatever. When Lee Baker RIP mastered things you cast, he did it right. New kits that needed things fixed got bought, opened, and shoved into project pile. Likely never bought another, and probably sold on. 

Now, with internet, you can see issues, decide if you want car enough to fix, or pass. I bought resin from you automatically, new kits as well. I no longer do so. I bought a 57 BA convert, opened it, looked at what I needed to fix, tossed it in the box, and filed it in the pile. Same with the Del Rio, added supercharger instructions and a PL Courier rear bumper, then in the vault. 

It gets very old hearing the "kit assembler/rivet counter/real modeler can fix it/mean men drove manufacturers away" nonsense. That is what drags the threads out. 

Everyone that points out a problem is a target. Doesn't understand the "business". BS. We've known each other for decades, and I don't drive what I drive and do what I do without understanding business. 

I've used the hamburger analogy before. I may love the hamburger at a restaurant. I don't love the hair, roach, rat turd in it. If I made it at home? Shame on me. If someone sells it to me, shame on them. If a customer doesn't see the problem, that doesn't mean it's not there. It also isn't an accident if multiple people with eyes, willing experts on 1:1's available, and it makes it to production anyway. 

Cars I like don't use rivets anymore. Just bonding and composites. Does that make me a thread and bead counter? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Art, not a single person that I've seen has asked for a perfect kit. Most go out of their way to say exactly "there is no perfect kit". 

Measurements are exactly that. How can one "interpret" a Del Rio bumper guard? You did the 57 Courier for PL IIRC, and the bumper was right. What about a doorsill drop on a BelAir convertible? I don't see "interpretation". It's a yes or no. 

I also differ on your comment to use the skills you claim to fix it. It's not my job to fix a bumper guard, a door sill, whatever. When Lee Baker RIP mastered things you cast, he did it right. New kits that needed things fixed got bought, opened, and shoved into project pile. Likely never bought another, and probably sold on. 

Now, with internet, you can see issues, decide if you want car enough to fix, or pass. I bought resin from you automatically, new kits as well. I no longer do so. I bought a 57 BA convert, opened it, looked at what I needed to fix, tossed it in the box, and filed it in the pile. Same with the Del Rio, added supercharger instructions and a PL Courier rear bumper, then in the vault. 

It gets very old hearing the "kit assembler/rivet counter/real modeler can fix it/mean men drove manufacturers away" nonsense. That is what drags the threads out. 

Everyone that points out a problem is a target. Doesn't understand the "business". BS. We've known each other for decades, and I don't drive what I drive and do what I do without understanding business. 

I've used the hamburger analogy before. I may love the hamburger at a restaurant. I don't love the hair, roach, rat turd in it. If I made it at home? Shame on me. If someone sells it to me, shame on them. If a customer doesn't see the problem, that doesn't mean it's not there. It also isn't an accident if multiple people with eyes, willing experts on 1:1's available, and it makes it to production anyway. 

Cars I like don't use rivets anymore. Just bonding and composites. Does that make me a thread and bead counter? 

 

Well said

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the key thing is for knowledgeable people to express their opinions of what's bad or good in a kit, to warn them, to prevent disappointment, to provide suggestions, to modelers of all different skill levels and expectations. And I think nit picking is important to advise people who have a high level of standards, while it may not matter to others. However, I can tell people not to waste their time on a horrible kit like Revell's 1/12 Ferrari 275 GTB, but I won't be a wet blanket on kits in progress or under glass that are quite wrong. Just a different way of saying that nits should be picked before people spend their money, and manufacturers should be alerted that there is an upper level of modeler that should be satisfied.

One thing I haven't noticed much discussion about, though, is the team aspect of model design. Example-- the 1/12 Revell/Monogram Mercedes 300SL Gullwing. The way the kit was imagined, with lots of separate chrome parts cleverly conceived to replicate the complicated dash and body chrome, was unusual and smart. And the body shape is very accurate -- this could be a great kit. But it's like the old story of the blind men trying to describe a camel to each other. Nothing works together. Scale portions of interior, engine and body chrome are all over the place. Whoever the people were who did the details, they obviously weren't talking to each other, and anyone who has built this crazy kit knows what I'm talking about.. Too many cooks spoiled the soup and it's very obvious. 

Edited by sjordan2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...