What's the worst, or lousiest kit you've ever built?

[Ragnar]

The Worst Kit, Had to be The Old Revell 56 Ford Victoria with the multipart body. None of the different Body sections would line up leaving large gaps. I spent several days working with putty to get that old kit to look right. This was the first kit that I had used a lot of putty on( 12 years old), and I ended up doing it over several times. I ended up removing a lot of the body trim working on it, it became my first Customised Model Car( I had started out to build it with all the Chrome on it). and I actually took a second place trophy with it. When I think back to that old kit, I realise it made a better modeler of me, But I still hate those kits!

CHEERS!

[Terry Jessee]

This is the Scalekraft 1929 Irving-Napier "Golden Arrow" LSR car.

I've had worse resin kits than this one, but this was hard enough to build that I almost put it away a half dozen times. Nothing fit. It was a constant massage of parts, and the surface flaws on those big radiators took weeks to clean up. It's a neat model, but was miserable to put together.

Terry

[george 53]

Terry, are those louvred lookin thingies between the front and rear tires the radiators? Yeeesh those woulda been a bich ta try ta fix with some "Bars Leaks"

[LoneWolf15]

I have to go with the Revell kits of the ' 70s . Chrome plating so thick , it looked like it was blobbed on. The bodies , on the otherhand , were so thin that if you put a strong light behind you , you could actually read the instuction sheet through the side panels . As for the assembly , fergit it ! Just hit it with a hammer and call it a day .

Ahhh , the good old days ! I have to laugh at a lot of the purists in today's modeling . They have no idea what they missed . Give them the kits of bygone days and they would have ended up in a rubber room . As for the Revell ' 69 Camaro being out of proportion , add the Badman ' 55 gasser right up there with it !

The Old Man

[Scott H.]

Anyone remember the old Skip's Fiesta release of the Revell 1959 Ford with the retractable hard top?

The multi piece body was a royal pain to get right and the roof never did fit or retract properly.

-Scott H.

[MikeMc]

I don't think there is a bad model.

Some are just more challenging then others,(sometimes more challenging then they should be).

Try the firefighter mustang II....I did use the gas tank on my Willys...I think it is the only part I could use as everything else was a toy!!

Don't forget this goodie!!!

Edited November 25, 2009 by MikeMc

[Mountaineer]

I have only built two kits since coming off my 5yr break. The first kit I built after my break was the 71 Mustang by Linberg. Not a whole lot of detail, the engine was terrible and body had a lot of sink marks and divots. It did not want to stand on its wheels. Maybe I had a bad kit, or I was just having a case of ring rust. The kit I am working on now is the revel 69 nova 2 n 1 ss. It’s going good and has a lot of out of the box detail. Overall I think the Mustang was a good comeback kit, it caused me to remember some old things and learn a lot of new techniques.

George Booth

Edited November 25, 2009 by Mountaineer

[2002p51]

Well, those original Revell tri-five Chevys were pretty bad but the absolute worst kit I ever had to build was the Accurate Miniatures Can Am McLaren!

It took lots of frustration and effort to get things to fit and the stance, when finished, was a mile high. Body panels fit poorly with huge gaps. I did a review in that other magazine when the kit first came out and once the story was done and photos were shot, that monstrosity went right in the trash! It's the only model I ever threw away in my entire life!

[Jeff Sauber]

Well, those original Revell tri-five Chevys were pretty bad but the absolute worst kit I ever had to build was the Accurate Miniatures Can Am McLaren!

It took lots of frustration and effort to get things to fit and the stance, when finished, was a mile high. Body panels fit poorly with huge gaps. I did a review in that other magazine when the kit first came out and once the story was done and photos were shot, that monstrosity went right in the trash! It's the only model I ever threw away in my entire life!

That sounds pretty bad, Drew.

I've thrown 2 models in the trash....One was a multi-botched paint job that I just didn't feel like having to redo a third time....It was like the body was cursed or something. I had another kit on hand so the project eventually got done, but that first body and chassis was just a nightmare. It was like the plastic was bad or something and it just wouldn't accept primer or paint for some reason no matter how clean and smooth I got it.

The second model that got tossed, was a TKM resin. TKM's are absolutely the worst resin bodies I have ever seen. I built one up several years earlier with acceptable results, but this particular one was so bad, that it simply couldn't be built and into the trash it went....I really don't know what possessed me that day, to even try to work on it.

Edited November 25, 2009 by J. Sauber

[Chuck Most]

I think the Trumpeter '78 Monte Carlo also is richly deserving of enshrinement in the Model Car Kit Hall of Shame because with that particular kit, Trumpeter achieved a trifecta rarely seen in the scale modeling world _ lousy kit quality, utterly uninspiring subject matter and a price tag that had folks wondering if the folks in charge at Trumpeter had taken leave of their senses. The only good thing I can say about it is that Jairus did a nice job on the box art!

Certainly from a "value" standpoint, I think this Trumpeter turd deserves consideration as THE biggest turkey of all time!

The '60 Bonnevilles by Trumpeter rank a close second- Lego-block engine detail, not one but TWO choices of incorrect radial whitewalls, poor quality plastic, fussy parts fit, and whoever's job it was to lay out the chrome sprue must have been smoking crack! I've never cracked into the '78 Monte (just not my kind of car), but I've heard it was quite a bit worse than the Bonnies. But the Trumpeter Bonnie isn't the worst kit I ever built- not by a long shot....

AMT '69 Mustang- as has been pointed out, it's underscale, the parts don't fit, and it really doesn't look all that great once it's all toggether. This one was more useful in it's original, molten styrene form. It did have some decent plated steel wheels, though.

AMT '69/70/72 Chevelles- Another one you guys seem to hate passionately. What's with those two tabs on the bottom of the interior tub... they seem to serve no other purpose than to prevent the chassis from fitting up into the body!

Lindberg '48 Lincoln Continental- Substandard detail in every assembly, a fussy multipiece body, and a rather toylike finished appearance. I often wondered why they even bothered. (The Monogram '41, however? One of the finest kits ever produced, in my opinion.)

AMT '73 Mercury Cougar- Evidently, the rear of the body is just supposed to magically float in midair, thus ensuring a level body. Crude and ill-fitting parts don't help matters much, though I will say the Astro Supreme wheels included in the kit are among my all-time favorite kit parts.

Revell '76 Chevy C-10 Street Machine- This one has potential, but the tooling is getting a bit rough. Still, I could do without the caveman-like engine and underhood detail.

IMC/Testors/Union '48 Ford Coupe/Convertible- Detail and comprehensive parts breakdown are good... but there is a line you can cross. This kit not only crosses that line, but does the Mexican hat dance all over it! Look for the Revell '48 instead.

Ertl/AMT-Ertl International Scout II- Just plain lackluster detailwise, and not very accurate. It's one of the worst kits ever, but I still love it! It can build into a very nice Scout II replica with a little skill and a whole lot of love!

Any Resin kit produced before 1995 or so- Yes, I know there were good quality resin kits before then, but the quality we are used to today was nowhere near what it is now, even considering the fact that most any resin kit will not be as 'easy' to put together as a styrene kit.

Any 'Reissued To Death' kit- I've said it once- I've said it a thousand times: If you don't want to spend the money to clean up the tooling- DON'T BOTHER WITH A REISSUE. AMT's '50 Ford Convertible and '72 Nova pop immediately into my head, for some reason.

I must say, though, that the 'worst' kits are often the most fun to build!

[MrObsessive]

IMC/Testors/Union '48 Ford Coupe/Convertible- Detail and comprehensive parts breakdown are good... but there is a line you can cross. This kit not only crosses that line, but does the Mexican hat dance all over it! Look for the Revell '48 instead.

Chuck, I gotta second the motion about IMC's less than stellar '48 Ford Convertible!

I built this one back in the early '90's and don't think I ever want to attempt it again! The parts fit is abysmal, the gaps are totally unacceptable to me...........too much in one area, not enough in others. This one I had put away for a long time, but decided to clean it up and display it to remind me how things were in the "bad old days"!

[Jeff Sauber]

Chuck, I gotta second the motion about IMC's less than stellar '48 Ford Convertible!

I built this one back in the early '90's and don't think I ever want to attempt it again! The parts fit is abysmal, the gaps are totally unacceptable to me...........too much in one area, not enough in others. This one I had put away for a long time, but decided to clean it up and display it to remind me how things were in the "bad old days"!

Actually Bill, thats a pretty darn nice version of that kit....

But yes, that kit is a disaster to try and work with. I built the coupe version years ago and it was awful....just awful.

[Harold]

Chuck, I gotta second the motion about IMC's less than stellar '48 Ford Convertible!

I built this one back in the early '90's and don't think I ever want to attempt it again! The parts fit is abysmal, the gaps are totally unacceptable to me...........too much in one area, not enough in others. This one I had put away for a long time, but decided to clean it up and display it to remind me how things were in the "bad old days"!

But if you're doing a convertible based on the AMT Studebaker Starliner, that convertible boot is a perfect fit. For really crappy kits, though, I'm surprised no one mentioned that horrid ARII '72 Thunderbird.

[Harry P.]

Chuck, I gotta second the motion about IMC's less than stellar '48 Ford Convertible!

I built this one back in the early '90's and don't think I ever want to attempt it again! The parts fit is abysmal, the gaps are totally unacceptable to me...........too much in one area, not enough in others. This one I had put away for a long time, but decided to clean it up and display it to remind me how things were in the "bad old days"!

If that's your idea of an example of the "worst kit" you ever built, you're way off base!

Your model looks darn good to me! I know a large part of that is your own personal skill, but if the worst part of that model is variable panel lines, and it can be built into that nice of a model, I'd have to think that there are FAR worse models out there much more deserving of the "worst of all time" label.

[Chuck Most]

First off- Bill... you sure made that piece of junk shine! But, yeah, I'd like to see any mere mortal pull off a build like that!

interestingly there hasn't been much mention of Japanese produced model kits that have little to no chassis and interior details and no drivetrain or engines at all. there seems ot be alot of praise for the quality of kits from Japan, but they aint all that good! Fujimi has some downright crude model kits and there are many more from lesser known companies. even some of Tamiya's kit's can be pretty crude once you look close.

Dave

Dave- I don't consider engine and drivetrain detail to be 100% necessary. All of the Japanese kits I've built except two had engine detail, and the two that did not were Hasegawa's '67 VW pickup, where a detailed engine is kind of a moot point, and a Gunze Sangyo '56 Oval Window Beetle. Yes, the lack of an engine in the '56 bummed me out a bit, but I felt that the rest of the kit more than made up for it. I've never built any Japanese kits with what I'd call poor interior detail, but I know some of the old ex-motorized Fujimi kits are a bit wonky. ( The Trans Am even has- get this- a trench cut into the floor to clear the steering wheel, because the tub is so shallow!)

Oddly- I don't consider the old 'Craftsman' style kits ('64 Comet, '59 Imperial, '64 Galaxie, etc.) to be lousy kits, despite their complete and total lack of engines, or even halfway decent chassis and interior detail.

Maybe, for me, it has more to do with subject matter? Maybe just loving the 1:1 allows me to see past the flaws in a kit.

[Modelmartin]

The Austin, Henry J and Willys PU all have very nicely done bodies, IMO.

Typical '70s Revell junk.

The Henry J is severely short! The wheelbase is a scale 8 inches too short!! The Austin body is better but the Willys is dreadful. The frames are crummy. As you mentioned the engines are junk. The rear axle is not too bad - a beefy looking quickchange which ironically is not accurate for a gasser of that era.

Seeing the great disparities of quality that Revell displayed over time is interesting. Shortly after their junk period they came out with all of their mid- '70s funny cars and dragsters in 1/25 and 1/16 which despite some issues are pretty good kits.

I just remembered those two early '70s ultra-cr@ppy funnycars they had. A Pinto and a Camaro I believe. One was sold as a Mickey Thompson Revell laser and the Camaro as a Jungle Jim car. They were excrement.

A rich vein of crummy kits are the Showrods which were not copies of real cars. As much as I liked the Revell Moon Mixer, Meter Cheater, etc conceptually, they were horribly engineered. How about the Hardhat Hauler, Gridiron Grabber from MPC. I wretch when I see the AMT Royal rail, Depth Charger, etc. Tom Daniel stuff is OK because it is based somewhat on actual automotive practices!!

I see a number of people hating on the old Revell multi-piece bodies. They are not that bad. I have seen a number of them built well. I would never put them in the same category as ...say.... the Pyro Lincoln which dates from the '50s.

The Beetle kit Revell produced was pretty lousy too but then they made a Very Nice Empi Imp as long as you used the Corvair Motor because the VW motor was terrible.

[FujimiLover]

All the ones I never finish because I put too much putty, bondo, thick paint, or plastic on it. Glue smudges over windshields really suck too!

[Harry P.]

I think that what makes a kit "bad" isn't necessarily what is or isn't included... some people couldn't care less whether there is an engine or not. As long as what's in the box is accurate and fits together, that's what counts. Content (or lack of) is more of a subjective thing.

But if a kit, regardless of what's in the box, looks inaccurate, or has parts that don't fit, or needs some sort of major modifications during assembly just to get the dang thing together... well, that's a bad kit! Basic accuracy and engineering should be a given of any "good" kit.

[Jeff Sauber]

The Pyro '48 Lincoln is getting alot of flack, and rightfully so, but just give me a couple more weeks, and I should my version finished. It is buildable.

I think most here will like what the'll see...It's a very mild custom, but I have been carefully nursing the buildup along with some careful parts swapping and some scratchbuilding along with lots and lots of body work.

It's a dreadfull kit, but with a little TLC, it does seem to be turning out much better than expected. Trying to produce a serious and convincing replica stock version from this same kit however, would be a monumental task.....

[Chuck Most]

Just remembered another baddie-

The old Revell Jeep J10 Honcho

The body is clunky, the taillamps are molded into the bed endcaps, the grille looks wrong (either too narrow or too tall- or both?), and all the glass is tinted.. even the headlamp lenses! The wheels look like something off a Matchbox car!

Still, like the Scout kit, I do like it!

[Jeff Sauber]

Just remembered another baddie-

The old Revell Jeep J10 Honcho

The body is clunky, the taillamps are molded into the bed endcaps, the grille looks wrong (either too narrow or too tall- or both?), and all the glass is tinted.. even the headlamp lenses! The wheels look like something off a Matchbox car!

Still, like the Scout kit, I do like it!

How about that horrid Revell chopped custom ranchero that came with all the seperate body pieces?

I remember that thing was a bear to assemble and had serious alignment issues.

[John Goschke]

When I was about eight years old in the very early '60s, and just discovering model cars, having received several AMT annual and Trophy series kits as gifts, I was really excited to receive from my Grandparents a kit of a '60 OLDS 98 CONVERTIBLE! Talk about exciting!

Talk about disappointing! It was a Palmer! Not only did it look horrible, but it was really hard to build! As young as I was I could tell that it was garbage. Later, interspersed with the great AMT and Monogram kits I received or purchased with my allowance, were gifts of two(!) Palmer Sting Rays, which were at least as bad as the Olds!

In fact the Sting Rays and the Olds had the same swell chassis and engine block as in this Palmer Porsche (in the Porsche it's flipped so the engine's in the back, of course.)...

Pretty sweet, huh? In order to get an AMT '58 Ford I had to give this thing a home. It's kinda grown on me.

As a youngster I was also soundly defeated by Revell's original SWC Willys, and never built another of their car kits, until much later when I built their '56 Chevy two-door sedan (with opening doors, trunk,etc) which is a whole 'nother story.

These days I try not to build horrible kits... Which is why the AMT '58 Plymouth Belvedere and Trumpeter Bonneville still remain unbuilt on my shelf!

Edited November 25, 2009 by John Goschke

[Jeff Sauber]

When I was about eight years old in the very early '60s, and just discovering model cars, having received several AMT annual and Trophy series kits as gifts, I was really excited to receive from my Grandparents a kit of a '60 OLDS 98 CONVERTIBLE! Talk about exciting!

Talk about disappointing! It was a Palmer! Not only did it look horrible, but it was really hard to build! As young as I was I could tell that it was garbage. Later, interspersed with the great AMT and Monogram kits I received or purchased with my allowance, were gifts of two(!) Palmer Sting Rays, which were at least as bad as the Olds!

In fact the Sting Rays and the Olds had the same swell chassis and engine block as in this Palmer Porsche (in the Porsche it's flipped so the engine's in the back, of course.)...

Pretty sweet, huh? In order to get an AMT '58 Ford I had to give this thing a home. It's kinda grown on me.

As a youngster I was also soundly defeated by Revell's original SWC Willys, and never built another of their car kits, until much later when I built their '56 Chevy two-door sedan (with opening doors, trunk,etc) which is a whole 'nother story.

These days I try not to build horrible kits... Which is why the AMT '58 Plymouth Belvedere and Trumpeter Bonneville still remain unbuilt on my shelf!

Thats about as crude as it gets....LOL.

I kinda feel sad for that little Porsche......sort of reminds me of the "Charlie Brown Christmas tree".

[MrObsessive]

Wow! Unless I missed it, I'm surprised no one's mentioned this gem.................

Those of you who remember the thread I did of building this a couple years ago, will remember the nearly COMPLETE re-engineering I had to do to make it correct!

I tried my hand at this one originally back in the late '70's when I was starting to build, and it nearly made me give up modeling all together!

[Jeff Sauber]

Wow! Unless I missed it, I'm surprised no one's mentioned this gem.................

Those of you who remember the thread I did of building this a couple years ago, will remember the nearly COMPLETE re-engineering I had to do to make it correct!

I tried my hand at this one originally back in the late '70's when I was starting to build, and it nearly made me give up modeling all together!

I was never brave enough to try one of those turbine cars way back when...I opened up the box and put it right back in my closet...

I eventually gave it to a buddy of mine several years later, and the finished buildup was of course, a mess...

We ended up putting a bunch of big firecrackers in it and sent it off a cliff at a nearby stream...The explosion probably sent the tires into the next county!! Needless to say, there wasn't enough of the model left on the ground below, to put in a doggy bag to take back home..

One again however, your version of this "monster" is outstanding. Excellent work!