Tamiya Ford Mustang GT4

[Dave Van]

I don't think any of the US based model companies are lead by MBA's today. Some were in the past.....but the real US based model kit companies are lead by hobby guys. Atlantis, Salvinos, R2 and Moebius are VERY small and all hobby guys....still have to make money....

[Luc Janssens]

1 minute ago, Dave Van said:

I don't think any of the US based model companies are lead by MBA's today. Some were in the past.....but the real US based model kit companies are lead by hobby guys. Atlantis, Salvinos, R2 and Moebius are VERY small and all hobby guys....still have to make money....

They were in the past (except Moebius that is) 

[Justin Porter]

4 hours ago, keyser said:

Chuck, that's one amen per Zoom. 

Seems myopic that hugely popular car like Mustang didn't advance from snap. Same with 2 iterations of Raptor/F150. They sell 2-3 Ford trucks per minute, 24/7/365, so I'd think someone would like a replica. 

Hellcat, Trackhawk, new Bronco, all popular. Someone had said Vette kits dead, OK, do promo style kit, but get it out there. 
Hard to get anyone under 30 to think Pintos, Vegas, and Pacers are fun builds. 

Bear's repeating X3 and design a good kit first, price it second. Those Tamiya Ford GT's aren't exactly gathering dust on shop shelves. 

[Dave Van]

46 minutes ago, Luc Janssens said:

They were in the past (except Moebius that is) 

And why I said 'in the past'........But Salvinos, Atlantis and Moebius never have been.  The current R2 crew is lead by Tom Lowe who is a car guy and hobby expert......weather he has a MBA or not don't matter.....from my dealings with him....hobby first. 

[Darin Bastedo]

I find it interesting how Tamiya has a reputation for “getting it right” where the American companies get ripped to shreds for the smallest error. While I will admit that with exceptions, Tamiya makes easy to build kits that look good when built, when it comes to the details Tamiya often drops the ball. They usually (at least here in the states) don't get called on it because many of the cars they model Americans have very little exposure to.

My case in point is Porsche 959 (#24065). You cannot out of the box build a correct Porsche 959 with the parts in this kit. First and most important is Porsche built two versions of the 959. The Sport, and the Komfort. The Tamiya Kit has the body of a Sport, and the interior of a Komfort. Most people on this board will never see one up close but to those of us who know 959's the difference is glaring

You can try to change the body to a Komfort which wold include adding the filler door for the hydraulic suspension fluid, which is possible with a steady hand, and you then have to add the passenger side mirror. This gets tricky as the 959 mirrors are bespoke. So you have the choice of scratch building one, or using similar but inaccurate mirrors from another kit.

Alternatively to can modify the Komfort interior by removing the rear seat, modifying the dash and scratch building a roll cage for it (This is the route I took)

Then there is the matter of the under body which they completely made up out of their imagination what is there and left out most of what is supposed to be there. The entire under body panels in the rear are missing from the kit. This would not be so bad but they would have also covered up the inter-coolers that the didn't include in the kit. You are able from underneath to see the gaping empty rear fenders where the huge inter-coolers are supposed to be.

As for being easy to build, yeas if you just build it as it is in the box with no mods it goes together easy. If you want to build it with no seams where the rear spoiler attaches you can expect to spend a lot of time on the engine cover alone.

Sadly I could write a similar post on everything wrong with their Ferrari F-40, They all make great shelf models but get the details wrong more often than not. My point here is all Model manufacturers take short cuts whether for ease of assembly, lower cost or simply they don't have the time to properly research the prototype.

I have some curbside kits as well as full detail kits. What I buy depends on what compromises I'm willing to make to get the subject I want. The old Studebaker Avanti from AMT is not perfect, but it's the only one on the market. The Revell Dodge Sidewinder Show truck needs a lot of work to look right, but it's the only one available.

Buy this Mustang or don't buy it, that is up to you, but you don't have to make excuses for Tamiya to justify buying it. The 959 kit is still crappy, but I bought it corrected it and I'm building it, because I wanted a kit of the Porsche 959.

Edited April 2, 2020 by Darin Bastedo

[Dave Van]

Tamiya is smart enough to get things wrong most of us will never know....I have two 959 in the stash.......never knew that!!!! thanks

[Chuck Kourouklis]

That, and the fact that Tamiya's game may have moved on a wee in the past 30 years...

[Bennyg]

2 hours ago, Darin Bastedo said:

I find it interesting how Tamiya has a reputation for “getting it right” where the American companies get ripped to shreds for the smallest error. While I will admit that with exceptions, Tamiya makes easy to build kits that look good when built, when it comes to the details Tamiya often drops the ball. They usually (at least here in the states) don't get called on it because many of the cars they model Americans have very little exposure to.

My case in point is Porsche 959 (#24065). You cannot out of the box build a correct Porsche 959 with the parts in this kit. First and most important is Porsche built two versions of the 959. The Sport, and the Komfort. The Tamiya Kit has the body of a Sport, and the interior of a Komfort. Most people on this board will never see one up close but to those of us who know 959's the difference is glaring

You can try to change the body to a Komfort which wold include adding the filler door for the hydraulic suspension fluid, which is possible with a steady hand, and you then have to add the passenger side mirror. This gets tricky as the 959 mirrors are bespoke. So you have the choice of scratch building one, or using similar but inaccurate mirrors from another kit.

Alternatively to can modify the Komfort interior by removing the rear seat, modifying the dash and scratch building a roll cage for it (This is the route I took)

Then there is the matter of the under body which they completely made up out of their imagination what is there and left out most of what is supposed to be there. The entire under body panels in the rear are missing from the kit. This would not be so bad but they would have also covered up the inter-coolers that the didn't include in the kit. You are able from underneath to see the gaping empty rear fenders where the huge inter-coolers are supposed to be.

As for being easy to build, yeas if you just build it as it is in the box with no mods it goes together easy. If you want to build it with no seams where the rear spoiler attaches you can expect to spend a lot of time on the engine cover alone.

Sadly I could write a similar post on everything wrong with their Ferrari F-40, They all make great shelf models but get the details wrong more often than not. My point here is all Model manufacturers take short cuts whether for ease of assembly, lower cost or simply they don't have the time to properly research the prototype.

I have some curbside kits as well as full detail kits. What I buy depends on what compromises I'm willing to make to get the subject I want. The old Studebaker Avanti from AMT is not perfect, but it's the only one on the market. The Revell Dodge Sidewinder Show truck needs a lot of work to look right, but it's the only one available.

Buy this Mustang or don't buy it, that is up to you, but you don't have to make excuses for Tamiya to justify buying it. The 959 kit is still crappy, but I bought it corrected it and I'm building it, because I wanted a kit of the Porsche 959.

Let’s compare current kits with current kits. Tamiya is just a superior product. Subject matter is pretty good too. I love Revell’s new subject matter, but the execution is no where near Tamiya unfortunately. 
 

Ben

[Zoom Zoom]

Perspective: Tamiya’s 959 kit debuted 33 years ago in 1987. It currently retails for $22.50 in 2020 dollars before any discounts.

Yes, it’s definitely flawed. I’ve actually been working on one in the past year with a few local friends as part of a group build. Mine’s going to be like a modernized restomod like the love child of Magnus Walker, Bruce Canepa and Hurley Haywood all in one because it’s a solid/fun canvas to start with and I’ll likely just glue the engine cover down. What kit wasn’t flawed in 1987, especially looking from 2020 perspective? The 959 builds up into a decent looking model OOB and they got the basics right. Yeah, the engine cover fit isn’t great and the rear spoiler requires molding in, you have to be good at body and paint. With Canepa revisiting real 959’s as continuation builds with Porsche’s blessing they already have rebuilt 959’s the same “wrong” configuration Tamiya did theirs. Cool! Spend millions for a real one or about 20 bucks for a kit...no 40% off coupon necessary. 

Earlier this year I built Tamiya’s new Supra kit. Brilliant engineering, basically the most enjoyable experience possible. They just keep moving the goalposts. Immediately on it’s heels I built the allegedly “Tamiya-like” Moebius ‘65 Comet. Ralphie’s Dad has nothing on my ability to string together a tapestry of curse words to describe my adventure beating that Comet into submission. Five times the effort, easily three plus times the hours spent vs. the Supra to make it almost look as good as if Tamiya had made the base kit. I love my finished Comet with modified suspension, aftermarket wheels and extra engine detail and a vinyl top. It was worth the pain and looks great, yet it sits there mocking my outrage at the battles it waged on my sanity. Twice since 2016 I made the mistake?! of building an all-new Tamiya kit followed by an all-new Moebius kit. Tamiya kits make you look and feel good with ease. If want that from other companies you’re likely going to have battle scars and war stories. I knew that full well before starting the Comet. It fought me harder than the Moebius Ventura.

If the Mustang GT4 was coming from anyone but Tamiya I’d automatically buy/build at least one. Without hesitation I preordered two because it’s not just “Tamiya-like”, it’s the real thing and I can’t wait to get them on the bench. 

 

[Dave Van]

Tamiya\s DTM Alfa Romeo Jagermiester  kit is the best building kit I have ever completed.  Not best detail or favorite....but it falls together without a single hitch. 

[Daddyfink]

Comparing 30+ year old kits to the latest in their line is not really fair. Tamiya does keep improving. Sadly, how often can you say that about our domestic kit makers. 

I look forward to buying one or two and throwing them on the pile! 

 

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Tamiya Evo IX flew together, intricate decals and all, in less than three days - enabling me to bring in a long article ahead of schedule - simply because it was well-designed and it fit.

EIGHTEEN. Years. Ago.

Even going back two decades is a less risible standard for comparison than cherry-picked kits relatively fresh  out of Tamiya's motorization phase. I see we've conveniently left the Testarossa and the Peugeot 205 out of the argument when it comes to '80s releases.

[Justin Porter]

8 hours ago, Chuck Kourouklis said:

Tamiya Evo IX flew together, intricate decals and all, in less than three days - enabling me to bring in a long article ahead of schedule - simply because it was well-designed and it fit.

EIGHTEEN. Years. Ago.

Even going back two decades is a less risible standard for comparison than cherry-picked kits relatively fresh  out of Tamiya's motorization phase. I see we've conveniently left the Testarossa and the Peugeot 205 out of the argument when it comes to '80s releases.

You could also point to the Tamiya 1/24th scale Lotus Seven for a Tamiya 80's release that really sets the bar high. Honestly, having built one recently, a modern Revell kit that I would actually point to as being comparable in terms of engineering would be the Kurtis Midgets. 

[Luc Janssens]

15 hours ago, Dave Van said:

And why I said 'in the past'........But Salvinos, Atlantis and Moebius never have been.  The current R2 crew is lead by Tom Lowe who is a car guy and hobby expert......weather he has a MBA or not don't matter.....from my dealings with him....hobby first. 

Oops, my bad, sorry Dave.

Note to myself: work on comprehensive reading.

[Zoom Zoom]

8 hours ago, Chuck Kourouklis said:

I see we've conveniently left the Testarossa and the Peugeot 205 out of the argument when it comes to '80s releases.

When the Testarossa came out my co-worker and I visited our local Ferrari dealer during lunch, a convenient 5 minute drive from work. There sat a black Testarossa with a $119k sticker price (perhaps $109k plus ADP). Hated it in photos, loved it in person. So when the Tamiya kit popped I immediately built it. Thank goodness black does a decent job *ahem* hiding that hideous vertical panel gap in the doors. 

I liked the 512 TR even better. Blindly thought the Rosso kit was as good as Tamiya. Was I ever wrong, the fit of suspension/chassis and other parts gave me fits. After the pain it came out great, gifted it to a modeling friend who was moving out of state. Replaced with the R/M 512 TR, which arguably solved the side strake issue better than the other players. Wheels/tires bleh, but Rosso sold their 512 TR wheels/tires separately. Win...I think, but still unbuilt.

[Dave Van]

15 minutes ago, Luc Janssens said:

Oops, my bad, sorry Dave.

Note to myself: work on comprehensive reading.

You do better with English than I often do!!! I did a lot of technical writing in my real job.....and too often write in tech speak!

[Darin Bastedo]

28 minutes ago, Justin Porter said:

You could also point to the Tamiya 1/24th scale Lotus Seven for a Tamiya 80's release that really sets the bar high. Honestly, having built one recently, a modern Revell kit that I would actually point to as being comparable in terms of engineering would be the Kurtis Midgets. 

Of course every company has it's stand outs and lets face it with something as simple as the Lotus Seven you would have to work hard to screw that up. But to all those who say it's unfair to bring up kits from 30 years ago, I'm 54 years old> people have been gushing over how much better Tamiya is than American kits for 30+ years. in that amount of time american model companies have put out some really great kits as well as some bad ones. So has Tamiya, My point was that Calling Tim a hypocrite for being willing to buy a vintage screw bottom curbside while passing on this because it has no engine, is simply uncalled for. You buy what you but and Tim, like me, prefers race cars with engines. I didn't care that the Lindberg Chrysler Atlantic was curbside because the body was the star of that show. Buy what you like, but please stop pushing the myth that Tamiya can do no wrong while Revell and the other are pushing overpriced junk. It simply isn't true. Each company has different design priorities, Tamiya chose "easy to build" over detail, and the others went the opposite and offer more detail and more challenging kits.

 

[Justin Porter]

8 minutes ago, Darin Bastedo said:

Of course every company has it's stand outs and lets face it with something as simple as the Lotus Seven you would have to work hard to screw that up. But to all those who say it's unfair to bring up kits from 30 years ago, I'm 54 years old> people have been gushing over how much better Tamiya is than American kits for 30+ years. in that amount of time american model companies have put out some really great kits as well as some bad ones. So has Tamiya, My point was that Calling Tim a hypocrite for being willing to buy a vintage screw bottom curbside while passing on this because it has no engine, is simply uncalled for. You buy what you but and Tim, like me, prefers race cars with engines. I didn't care that the Lindberg Chrysler Atlantic was curbside because the body was the star of that show. Buy what you like, but please stop pushing the myth that Tamiya can do no wrong while Revell and the other are pushing overpriced junk. It simply isn't true. Each company has different design priorities, Tamiya chose "easy to build" over detail, and the others went the opposite and offer more detail and more challenging kits.

 

There is only one company that I have leveled the "overpriced" complaint at, and it most certainly isn't Revell. In fact, my exact statement regarding Revell on the previous page was "Revell I congratulate for keeping prices as low as they have while still creating new tooling like the astonishing new Land Rover."

I also, on the prior page, commented that Tamiya DID have a recent period of exorbitant pricing on new tooling to which they have corrected. For a stretch, they were pricing themselves to the same scheme as Dragon does in armor kits. I don't believe Tamiya can do no wrong. I do believe that Tamiya is much more consumer focused as a brand than most others. 

[Dave Van]

42 minutes ago, Justin Porter said:

I also, on the prior page, commented that Tamiya DID have a recent period of exorbitant pricing on new tooling to which they have corrected. For a stretch, they were pricing themselves to the same scheme as Dragon does in armor kits. I don't believe Tamiya can do no wrong. I do believe that Tamiya is much more consumer focused as a brand than most others. 

Right....then new 1/20  F1 kits were hitting $80....curbside......I thought I had bought my last Tamiya. 

[Zoom Zoom]

1 hour ago, Justin Porter said:

I also, on the prior page, commented that Tamiya DID have a recent period of exorbitant pricing on new tooling to which they have corrected. For a stretch, they were pricing themselves to the same scheme as Dragon does in armor kits. I don't believe Tamiya can do no wrong. I do believe that Tamiya is much more consumer focused as a brand than most others. 

Amen. They learn, they adjust, they improve. They seem to be healthy enough to invest in the future by making excellent products consumers want. The stumbles that they created along the way are minuscule compared to the continual comedy of errors their competition seems to self-inflict when saving time/$$ is their first priority and only way to survive. 

[Matt Bacon]

Revel’s “astonishing new Land Rover” has some significant simplifications and errors. The 30 year old Esci kit is more accurate, and still an excellent parts donor for improving the Revell kit, albeit quite expensively because you end up with a lot of a fire engine you don’t need...

I would also disagree that Tamiya “prioritises ease of build over detail”. Sometimes, maybe. But the LFA, 300SL and FXX-K for example are both detailed and well engineered so that even a complex kit fits together beautifully. I built the FXX-K and Aoshima Huracan Performante around the same time, and while both had similar levels of crisp, fine detail, the Performante has body shape issues that need fixing and some very sketchy engineering and fit around the back end specifically.

I’m afraid in my experience, Tamiya is the “gold standard” of model car kits. Sometimes Revell comes close, but given the choice I’ll always take the Tamiya. The annoying thing with Revell is that they’re not consistent, or even improving steadily — there are 80s and 90s Revell kits that are better than the new tools of today.  
 

best,

M.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

I'm sorry - no, I'm really sorry - but I guess it all comes down to that same old thing: hanging an argument on straw-man distortions of reality more than on actual fact.

2 hours ago, Darin Bastedo said:

Buy what you like, but please stop pushing the myth that Tamiya can do no wrong while Revell and the other are pushing overpriced junk. 

So we're going along with this line again even though this very thread has covered some of Tamiya's less glorious moments, right?  Of course it's a myth.  It's also pretty grossly misrepresentative of anything anyone is actually saying.  It's every bit as fair to claim you're asserting that there's no basis at all to appreciate Tamiya kits, that anybody who praises one does so more out of some fever dream than from an objective assessment of their unique qualities and some actual advantages they may have compared to other manufacturers.

2 hours ago, Darin Bastedo said:

 It simply isn't true. Each company has different design priorities, Tamiya chose "easy to build" over detail, and the others went the opposite and offer more detail and more challenging kits.

Uh huh.  Like Tamiya's Enzo and LaFerrari, say? Like their Opel Calibra with opening gullwing doors, out a bit more than a decade before their actual Mercedes 300SL gullwing?  Or the Lexus LFA substructure so comprehensive they came out with a clear-body version? 

I'll just spare the instant, face-planting humiliation Tamiya's 1/12 line brings to this premise and stick with 1/24.

How about the headlight bucket design on the Tamiya Ford GT?  Or the two-element solution to the new Supra's wheels so you don't have to spend untold hours of tedious masking to get the 1:1 effect? On average for current offerings, even the curbside Tamiya cars bring in a slightly higher parts count than than the domestics - in the 130s or so vs 120s for the US - which makes it all the more impressive when those parts go together without temperament.  You make it a binary consideration between building ease and detail when the fact is that Tamiya derives building ease out of better design and engineering.

They just choose to spend their detail efforts in areas other than the engine, for some but not all of their new releases. Again it's just as fair to assert you're dismissing any Tamiya curbside straight out of hand sight-unseen because it doesn't depict a complete engine - which in the end is nothing more than a personal preference.

One which I enthusiastically share, btw, for the 105,632nd time.  I just don't treat my preference as a design edict a manufacturer must satisfy or fail, is all.

[Daddyfink]

Yeah, this is literally a Snap Together with no detail! 

 

[Luc Janssens]

37 minutes ago, Matt Bacon said:

Revel’s “astonishing new Land Rover” has some significant simplifications and errors. The 30 year old Esci kit is more accurate, and still an excellent parts donor for improving the Revell kit, albeit quite expensively because you end up with a lot of a fire engine you don’t need...

I would also disagree that Tamiya “prioritises ease of build over detail”. Sometimes, maybe. But the LFA, 300SL and FXX-K for example are both detailed and well engineered so that even a complex kit fits together beautifully. I built the FXX-K and Aoshima Huracan Performante around the same time, and while both had similar levels of crisp, fine detail, the Performante has body shape issues that need fixing and some very sketchy engineering and fit around the back end specifically.

I’m afraid in my experience, Tamiya is the “gold standard” of model car kits. Sometimes Revell comes close, but given the choice I’ll always take the Tamiya. The annoying thing with Revell is that they’re not consistent, or even improving steadily — there are 80s and 90s Revell kits that are better than the new tools of today.  
 

best,

M.

You hit the nail on the head

[jchrisf]

As a newb, I've finally figured out that Tamiya is the way to go until I get enough skill and experience to fix what's wrong with the other's kits.  For a newb, a lot of the headache's I run into for fit, etc. gets frustrating and makes me want to give up.  Tamiya kits are fun to build.