• Announcements

    • General Usage   05/10/2017

      If someone is acting badly, either in a forum or a private message, please report it. There are conveniently located buttons for sending the post to the moderators. 
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Which Countach is the better kit?

18 posts in this topic

Posted

Fujimi kits are hands down the best Countach kits ever made. They were originally issued during the Enthusiast Series run and are full detail like few kits then or since have ever been.

 

Working features and fantastic detail all the way through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I second what Bob said! I built one of the EM Countachs back in the '80's and while it was a challenge, the amount of detail was unlike anything I've seen before or since! I don't know what happened to that builtup, but I recently got in a trade another EM Countach kit (WITHOUT the wings and spoilers) and should make plans to build that sometime.

Like I mentioned in another thread though...............get yourself a LOT of patience as you're going to need it! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Thanks, Guys.... I saw the Fujimi kits, but were unsure if they were the Enthusiast series because they aren't really priced like a full kit. I've seen curbside kits that cost more....

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Timothy, on the box it should denote either "EM" or "Enthusiast Model". Those are the ones that have the millions of parts. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There are also curbside versions of the Fujimi Countach kits. Hobby Search usually has pictures that show the plan and parts from Japanese kits. That's where I'd start researching, especially if you know the kit number.

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/list/439/0/1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I will now step in and disagree with all of the people and point you to the Aoshima kits. They are the most recent - being tooled in 2012 - and are 3D scanned from the actual cars at the Lamborghini Factory & Museum in Italy. 

They are 98% full detail - bottom of the engine fits to the chassis plate rather than the engine to make the various types (there are 5 kits in the series) modular rather than having to retool the engine compartment 5x over. They're much more proportionally accurate IMO, and they're a notch or two below the EM insanity of the Fujimi kits (which I think have more parts than a 1:1 Countach).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Second the Aoshima kits

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So is there a good "compromise" kit that maybe doesn't have all the opening features of the EM kits, but still has a full engine? Also I have a built Revellogram Countach that I'm not satisfied with, I could take the engine from it and put in a better kit........ What would be a good kit to use the Monogram engine in?

You guys are most helpful, Thanks! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

http://www.1999.co.jp/eng/10320856

 

It does not have 100% full engine, but its so close that you will never know once its finished, unless you are going to display the engine next to the car.

Edited by martinfan5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

As Impressed as I was with the Aoshima kit I thought "Why". The EM kits filled the niche quite nicely. As for being more accurate? Eye of the beholder I guess. I think the Fujimi kits look like the real thing to a tee. And, I like all those parts. I've built three and used every one of em every time. If I had a built here I'd snap a pic. Perhaps I'll build one of the ones I currently have and see what can be done with it. I'm thinking all white with a red interior.. And it'll be carbureted like a proper Countach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

As Impressed as I was with the Aoshima kit I thought "Why".

Hi,

Good question and I suppose if I were you, it would be to try something different.

I've built a few Fujimi kits so far and none have gone together w/o adjusting/test fitting and have been persnickety.  Albeit none of them have been the Countach.

The Aoshima Sesto I am building now fits about perfect out of the box and for a newbie like me, that is cool.

So I guess try an Aoshima to spice things up?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There it is then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think the Fujimi Enthusiast Countach is probably the most detailed 1/24th kit out there! I haven't built it, just looked at it over and over and over, but I DID build the enthusiast M6 and Daytona, they are NICE KITS!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I built the Monogram ones and the AMT one (ESCI) back in the 80s-90s, have the Tamiya ones in my stash.   I've heard the Aoshima ones are quite good, I have a bunch of other Aoshima Lamborghini kits in my stash, may add one of their Countaches also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And Aoshima went there because even with the EM kits on the market for around 25 years,  there was still more demand for a state-of-the-art Countach kit than there was for any other exotic - according to Aoshima's research, anyway.

Fujimi vet here, managed to wrestle a 5000 QV together.  Great detail, no big problems when working with the subassemblies - but really white-knuckle when you try to get all the inner fenders and ducts into the body work.

Depends on how fussy you are about such things, but back-to-back Fujimi 400 to Aoshima 400, the Aoshima just looks more on-the-money, in many subtle ways and some more overt.

Have not done the Aoshima yet, but building ease was a mandate in the design.  For this you sacrifice operational hinges on the doors, absolutely complete suspension detail (we're talking the full length of those trailing links at the rear), and about the 50% of the engine that's invisible anyway.  One other issue that a few build-ups have had some difficulty concealing:  the rocker panels are separate on this kit to ease chassis installation.

On the other hand, molding refinement in the Aoshima kit is superior, even if it's not quite as detail-crazy as Fujimi's.  Nothing makes this clearer than a comparison of doors between the two kits - Aoshima's are far more completely developed and shaped to fit, right out of the gate; even if they operate on non-prototypical hinges, Fujimi's are still pretty crude by comparison.

For ultimate detail, it's still Fujimi EM - and there's a pretty serious cost in builder-friendliness in some areas.  For noticeably better accuracy at what's likely to be far less of a building headache, Aoshima's probably the better bet.  Even without building it - but having thoroughly examined it - I'll third the motion on that one.

Edited by Chuck Kourouklis
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

 what's likely to be far less of a building headache, Aoshima's probably the better bet.  Even without building it - but having thoroughly examined it - I'll third the motion on that one.

Hi,

Well I can tell how how surprised I was at how quickly I built up my mock/temp glue build of the Sesto.

My only complaint were its wheels/tires, absolute rubbish.  But probably very accurate in scale as I prefer fat tires and wide wheels on any car.

Edited by aurfalien

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Bob F.  Chuck beat me to it, but "Customer Demand" is the correct answer. Over in military modeling, Sherman Tanks, P-51 Mustangs, and Me (Bf)-109s its all the time. Each time they are advertised as "Newer", "Better", or "Improved" in some subtle way. And they sell. In great numbers.  And so it continues. Auto Modeling is pretty much unique in that instead of getting new tools of old favorites, we just get re-issues of the same old tools. If we are lucky, we get a few new parts added, or "lost" parts re-tooled. I suspect that much of this is driven by cost. Multi part slide molds for one piece bodies are far more expensive than the 'flat' tools needed for most planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0