The absolute worst kit ever!

[Nick Notarangelo]

Like it say's the worst of the worse Craptacular kits of all time, the one's where you get to a certain point after working on it cause you think you can't go any further cause it's just that bad.

Example,mine was Lindberg's 1940 ford from the dodge two and one kit that you were to build and put on the flat bed, soft details and the who ever was filling the mold didn't seat it properly that it was thick and almost solid flash.

What's yours?

[metalhead]

Mine was the Revell 69 Baldwin Motion Camaro. Almost nothing fit right. The engine leaned to the right even after I superglued the blasted thing in with superglue and clamped it to sit upright. This in turn made the exhaust manifolds not fit, The tires were such a tight fit that they actually bulged out the fenders. There were other problems, but I don't really care to remember them.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

My Revell Camaro Z/28 is a real heap. I'm making it curbside because of the stupid suspension. I had to put shims under the engine for it to sit right, but it looked so out of place I swapped the block with a 427.

[booboo60]

Hands down for me Is "AMT Red Alert Chevelle" This kit has the wrong Body right off the bat, it has the 72 with the single head lights on each side! Bob Hamalton ordered his, and it was the 70 with the twin lights on each side! His was the Factory LS6 1970 Chevy Chevelle with a 454 Automatic! The kit has a 396 SS with badges! Crazy! You would think amt would have atleast got the right year for such a famous Car as the Rec Alert! Now also as i said, the kit has a 396 that has a Blower! WHAT! Yup, even o. His window has big white lettering with his class and A for automatic 1127 D/A! The 1127 changed from 127 or 1127 due to sometimes racing in the IHRA! But the D is his class and A is for automatic! And he ran on average low 12's this being his national record holder, back too the kit! It has a 4 speed! So with getting the right body, and dropping a 454 from the 70 impala kit, i had to make a H ot T shifter for the automatic! The kit had full roll cage! His interrior was fully black stock, with the exception of z big tech and z set of 3 gages under the dash where the ash tray pulled out, i replaced the carb with a Holly 4 barrel! Put the stock air cleaner on with 454 badges had to print them, also Bob use to flip the air cleaner upside down for max air flow, he had a set of lakewood traction bars, i have pics of my car in this fourm if ya wanna look, but this kit has too be in top 5 of worst kit ever. Thy even made a tow van combo kit, and heck this car kit only sells up too 125.00 or more, for a fubur kit! Lol. Sorry for the history lesson but i did a lot of research on this car.

p.s. the new Jack Reacher kit is a good start for building the correct car!

[Snake45]

Hands down for me Is "AMT Red Alert Chevelle" This kit has the wrong Body right off the bat, it has the 72 with the single head lights on each side! Bob Hamalton ordered his, and it was the 70 with the twin lights on each side! His was the Factory LS6 1970 Chevy Chevelle with a 454 Automatic! The kit has a 396 SS with badges! Crazy! You would think amt would have atleast got the right year for such a famous Car as the Rec Alert! Now also as i said, the kit has a 396 that has a Blower! WHAT! Yup, even o. His window has big white lettering with his class and A for automatic 1127 D/A! The 1127 changed from 127 or 1127 due to sometimes racing in the IHRA! But the D is his class and A is for automatic! And he ran on average low 12's this being his national record holder, back too the kit! It has a 4 speed! So with getting the right body, and dropping a 454 from the 70 impala kit, i had to make a H ot T shifter for the automatic! The kit had full roll cage! His interrior was fully black stock, with the exception of z big tech and z set of 3 gages under the dash where the ash tray pulled out, i replaced the carb with a Holly 4 barrel! Put the stock air cleaner on with 454 badges had to print them, also Bob use to flip the air cleaner upside down for max air flow, he had a set of lakewood traction bars, i have pics of my car in this fourm if ya wanna look, but this kit has too be in top 5 of worst kit ever. Thy even made a tow van combo kit, and heck this car kit only sells up too 125.00 or more, for a fubur kit! Lol. Sorry for the history lesson but i did a lot of research on this car.

p.s. the new Jack Reacher kit is a good start for building the correct car!

If you really want to do a nice '70 Chevelle, start with the Revell snapper, which has a better shaped body (IMHO, anyway) than the AMT. You'll have to cut out the hood but no biggie. You can put it on the AMT '70 chassis but a more detailed chassis like the Revell '72 Cutlass or the AMT '69 4-4-2 would be even better.

The AMT kit you're talking about actually builds into a fairly nice '72 Chevelle.

[unclescott58]

Worst kit ever. I had several with the brand name Palmer on the box. Not one was a good kit! Never bought one personally. But got several as gifts when I was kid.

Scott

[Ace-Garageguy]

Worst kit ever. I had several with the brand name Palmer on the box. Not one was a good kit! Never bought one personally. But got several as gifts when I was kid.

Scott

Yeah, both Palmer and Premier were so horrible that surely they rank as the worst car kits imaginable. Scaling was poor, details non-existent, and they rarely even looked much like the supposed subject matter unless you squinted your eyes while peering through a coke-bottle.

Most kits from the real manufacturers have some redeeming quality and can be built into nice models with extra effort and applied skill.

Not so with the two big Ps.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[ChrisBcritter]

Pyro '48 Continental. I had built the Auburn Speedster first and didn't think the Continental would be so bad. Wrong, wrong, wrong... The tires had tread like a Jeep, the only correct hubcap was on the spare, grille molded inside out so all the openings were flush instead of sunken, engine barely looked like an engine, let alone a flathead V-12, front fender seams were huge and the fenders themselves too square... worst part is the molds are still around for this clunker, so nobody's ever bothered to do a good one - and with so few classics being molded any more, I doubt anyone ever will. Plus the Monogram '41 is too big to kitbash with it.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Pyro '48 Continental. . The tires had tread like a Jeep, the only correct hubcap was on the spare, grille molded inside out so all the openings were flush instead of sunken, engine barely looked like an engine, let alone a flathead V-12, front fender seams were huge and the fenders themselves too square...

Yup, the Pyro (reboxed as Lindberg) kits were pretty bad too, as you pointed out. But they were so much better than the Premier and Palmer kits as to be in an entirely different class altogether.

At least Pyro kinda got the general proportions kinda right, the kits can supply a good basis for radical customs, and the Lincoln can be built into an attractive model with huge extra effort. This one was done by Jeff Sauber. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26396

Edited September 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[unclescott58]

For all the bad one can say about Palmer kits, I still put them together them when I was given them. As bad as any kit is/was, I'll still try to build it to the best of my abilities. I had several Palmer model cars sitting on my shelves as a kid.

Another one to put under the worst kit category, for me, were the old Revell gasser kits. Revell's Henry J is a good example. Separate hood and front fenders, glued together and setup then to be a flip nose. And the front axle that could not support the weight of the model over time. Slowly bowing the tops of tires inward as it sat on the shelve. And those two piece hard plastic tires. As kid, I was almost always disappointed with the Revell kits I had from from the 60's and 70's. They were tough to build. And never looked as good as my AMT and MPC models I the end.

Scott

Edited September 28, 2014 by unclescott58

[Ace-Garageguy]

You can get an idea of how truly bad the Palmer kits were from these shots. A picture, as they say, is worth a lot of typing...

Apologies. Web-sourced pix disappeared

Edited July 5, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Ace-Garageguy]

The Revell gassers get a lot of bad press as kits, and they were certainly beyond the skills of the average younger, less experienced modelers (I was responsible for a less-than-stellar Anglia myself) but again, they COULD (and still can) make very nice models with enough time and patience.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[unclescott58]

Hey, Bill. Don't scare me like that, showing old Palmer kits. I still have nightmares after more than 40 years. Showing me Palmer kits again, just makes them worst.

Scott

[Deano]

The Revell gassers get a lot of bad press as kits, and they were certainly beyond the skills of the average younger, less experienced modelers (I was responsible for a less-than-stellar Anglia myself) but again, they COULD (and still can) make very nice models with enough time and patience.

/sarcasm on/ But. but ... I don't want to be patient and invest time and effort into a model; it should just fall together outta the box! /sarcasm off/

[unclescott58]

Boy, the more I look at those pictures of the Palmer kits. The more I realize how bad they were. You can ignore everything I said above about old Revell gassers. They were great compared to the Palmers. I just can not get over how bad they are looking at the pictures! I don't remember them being that bad. But, as soon as I saw the the photos, it's like, oh yeh, they were that bad!

Scott

[Snake45]

If you're talking shape/accuracy problems, I could come up with a dozen candidates. Some are obvious, like the two Revell '70 AAR Cudas, but the AMT ex-MPC '69 Camaro and Firebird would be near the top of my list.

If you mean fit and buildability, every kit seems to have its quirks, some of which have sent builds of mine to the Shelf of Doom for YEARS, but it seems like I can get anything built that I really WANT to.

That said, any kit with a flip nose seems to come out of the box with a Death Vendetta against me. I've been working “at” the Monogram '66 Chevelle and MPC flip-nose '57 Chevy since the '70s and no matter how much I file, sand, and mate, I can't seem to make the nose match the body. Same story with the Monogram Bad Actor '60 Chev SD. And I'm just talking the two body parts here, haven't even gotten anywhere NEAR trying to get them on a chassis and make everything line up and work. Have also collected several original MPC Mako Shark glue bombs and I swear I am going to get one of them together sooner or later. The '66 Chevelle I am giving up on and will just chop the front and rear ends off that backbirth and graft them onto a Revell '67 body. The roof looks smashed in on every Monogram '66 Chevelle body I've ever seen anyway, built or unbuilt.

The AMT '41 Willys, I gave up trying to make that match up, too. I just glued that front end on VERY solid and then cut the hood out with the black edge of an Xacto #11. This is one of those stupid models where, all the hard work is done, it would be all downhill from here, but I've lost interest in it. I really need to finish this one sometime.

But I think my Grand Prize Worst Kit/Biggest PITA Build award goes to the AMT, ex-MPC '57 Corvette flip-nose gasser. The two body halves don't come close to mating in any way. I glued them up solid, then did a buttload of work filling, filing, and sanding to make the two pieces look like they belonged together. Here's a pic of (top to bottom) the kit parts OOB, my “unitized” body, and an original MPC '57 Corvette stock body.

Then, using a stock kit hood for a template/scribing guide, I just scribed a hood into the body. This will be a curbside build.

That done, I painted the body with Odds N Ends Hunter Green enamel from the bottle. I'd been painting with Model Master and Testor enamels thinned with lacquer thinner for decades, no trouble at all except for some orange peel that needs to be rubbed out. I'd recently discovered that I could thin these paints with lighter fluid (naptha) and get a much smoother flow-out requiring very little polish, so that's what I did with this. BIG mistake. Instead of drying in 24-48 hours as the MM paints will, this stuff stayed tacky for well over a year. When it finally got hard enough to handle, I scuff-sanded it and re-shot it with the same paint thinned with lacquer thinner. THAT dried just fine in timely fashion, but was quite pebbly and orange-peely and required a laborious rub-out. I will say that after all the effort, I got a nice shine on the wretched thing.

At this point I thought things would all be downhill from here, but that just NEVER happens, does it? The engine and chassis both started fighting me every step of the way and at that point I sentenced the SOB to the Shelf of Doom, where it sits to this day, having served about four years so far. Might be time to “parole” it and see if it's ready to play nice. We'll see. If I ever get it done, it will have richly earned the name I plan to paint on it: “Mr. Bad Example.”

[Greg Myers]

I think you must realize with any "Flip Nose" "Dragster" kit , they are replicating a real life situation where the actual parts you are having trouble with were not original factory fit pieces ( although many times 'factory fit' left a lot to be desired) but copies made from a just emerging fiberglass industry and thus had many 1:1 fit issues as well. Well, at least that's one way to look at it.

[Hawk312]

This was mentioned in the reviews section, but this has gotta be one of the worst I have ever built:

Revell 1:12 scale Mustang

A "chopped" top, brittle/thin a-pillars that twist on their way down from the roof to the cowl, doors that will not have convincing gaps no matter what you do (I actually secured them shut on my build and used lots of styrene and filler to get it "presentable"), a ride height suitable for off road, a flat front nose, slab-sided rear fenders with no shape to them, and just in general all proportions seem off. I swore I would never build this one again.

[Snake45]

I think you must realize with any "Flip Nose" "Dragster" kit , they are replicating a real life situation where the actual parts you are having trouble with were not original factory fit pieces ( although many times 'factory fit' left a lot to be desired) but copies made from a just emerging fiberglass industry and thus had many 1:1 fit issues as well. Well, at least that's one way to look at it.

Uh-uh. I ain't having any of it.

[Greg Myers]

Yeah, nothing like a factory fresh flip front.

[unclescott58]

Interesting, two of the flip noses you mentioned Mr. Mesner I had no problems with at all. And that is AMT's '40 Willys and Monogram's, in my case Street Fighter, yours Bad Actor, '60 Chevy sedan delivery. I find it interesting that what workers for one person doesn't always work for another. Then it can turn around and other person has no troubles with something the first person now has trouble with. It's strange that it sometimes works that way. By the way, my Street Fighter '60 Chev nose fits like a glove. The '40 Willys not as well. And I was able to get both to work smoothly.

Scott

P.S. What is your first name? I'm not a fan of calling people on these blogs by their last names. I assume we're all friends here. And calling you "Snake45" just doesn't seem right either.

[Ace-Garageguy]

This was mentioned in the reviews section, but this has gotta be one of the worst I have ever built:

Revell 1:12 scale Mustang. A "chopped" top, brittle/thin a-pillars that twist on their way down from the roof to the cowl, doors that will not have convincing gaps no matter what you do (I actually secured them shut on my build and used lots of styrene and filler to get it "presentable"), a ride height suitable for off road, a flat front nose, slab-sided rear fenders with no shape to them, and just in general all proportions seem off. I swore I would never build this one again.

Geez Louise, that thing looks awful in the box art photo. Thanks for putting this up. I've only ever seen little photos of it and never really looked close. I WAS thinking of buying one too, but after this...never.

How does a kit this bad make it into production? Was everyone on vacation but the janitor, and the dog ate HIS homework?

[unclescott58]

Geez Louise, that thing looks awful in the box art photo. Thanks for putting this up. I've only ever seen little photos of it and never really looked close. I WAS thinking of buying one too, but after this...never.

How does a kit this bad make it into production? Was everyone on vacation but the janitor, and the dog ate HIS homework?

In another recent thread, it was determined that that kit was a modified tolling of old a Renwal Mustang 2+2 kit from the 1960's. Why Revell first reissued it, and then modified into a Shelby is anybody's guess.

Scott

[Snake45]

P.S. What is your first name? I'm not a fan of calling people on these blogs by their last names. I assume we're all friends here. And calling you "Snake45" just doesn't seem right either.

I answer exclusively to Snake.

[Draggon]

I answer exclusively to Snake.

The name's Plisskin.....

Edited September 28, 2014 by Draggon