Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

The worst model kits I have personally built have to be divided into two areas:

General: Any of the MPC flip nose kits, especially the '57 Corvette (the weird, wide rear tires made it even worse) and '53 Ford pickup. I built them in the 80's and hated them. Tried them again a few years ago, still hate them. I do like the regular MPC kits, though.

Specific: Sorry to step on anyone's toes here, but the absolute worst is the Revell 1959 Ford Skyliner. I got it for Christmas as a teenager in 1987 and it still sits unbuilt in 2014 because the parts just didn't work for me. I've tried several times over the years to work on it and it's a disaster.

Specific (runner up): Mr Hobby Volkswagen Karman Ghia Convertible. The body is nicely done, great wheels and tires, but some of the parts, such as the seats and convertible boot are almost rubbery and were impossible to glue down. A poor fitting interior tub that never fit correctly didn't allow for contact with the frame of the car, so it could never be permanently attached. Great tooling, very poor follow through.

Best Model Kits I have personally built: AMT '57 Ford, any JoHan kit, and although it lacks separate exhaust, the Monogram 1958 Ford Thunderbird is by far the easiest and most well done kit I've come across.

Just my opinion...

You rate AMT's '53 Ford pickup as one of the worst kits ever?

Scott

Edited by unclescott58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the MPC flip nose kits, mainly because I thought they where really cool back when I was a kid, but they do build nicely when you take your time with them. Yes, they are finicky and not all that great fitting, but, they look ok when done.

53Ford001.jpg

Spirit57002.jpg

53Ford010.jpg

Spirit57004.jpg

Edited by Daddyfink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad has an old Mustang fastback he built back in the day of a '65. It is awful, a toy at best.

For me I received for my 10th birthday the Revell '59 Ford Retracrable. I loved the white and yellow box art and followed that look. I stopped and started it so many times. I did get it done by the time I was 13 or 14 years old. I still have it in storage. The body was too wide and I had to hack up the rear chrome trim across the back to fit on the car. I was very disappointed in the build and the roof never worked right. I was too young to have tried it. I built AMT's 40 Ford and it went together without a hitch for me.

Another awful Revell kit was a Turbo 1980 Mustang. Revell used the tooling from the Capri and said it was a Mustang with fender flair and slapped on a Mustang front and rear end treatment. The engine was a lump, the interior had a ridiculous granny and drive shaft hump and not much detail. Just all around bad.

Kits I got and looked at and reshelved:

AMT '67 Cheverlle- A pillars just wrong on either version. The Pro Street version had a nice chassis to steal, through away the body.

Revell '34 Ford... looks more like a British Model Y Ford. I have built one other Buttera chassis, but I am always fixing the front suspension.

Something I am screwing with now is trying to build the Revell parts pack Caddy engine. Not liking how the bell housing goes together. I cut off the pieces of the upper bell housing off of the top of the engine block and I am Making one bell housing part and filling the seams. I have an original and the new piece has a lot of sink marks I am also fixing. The new chopped Merc engine is pretty lackluster in the detail department compared to the 50 year old Revell tooling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any of the MPC flip nose kits, especially the '57 Corvette (the weird, wide rear tires made it even worse) ...

I've gotta agree, the MPC Flip-Nose kits were horrible, but those great big slicks were my favorite part, they looked great on many other models!

Although I do need to find another one of the Spirit Of '57 kits, just to see if I can finally build it and get a decent result!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Specific (runner up): Mr Hobby Volkswagen Karman Ghia Convertible. The body is nicely done, great wheels and tires,

>but some of the parts, such as the seats and convertible boot are almost rubbery and were impossible to glue down.

that must be the Gunze Sangyo (at one time imported by Mr Hobby I think) Ghia. that upholstery rubbery material they use is very hard to work with and in most cases I have just replaced it. but I have found that 5 minute epoxy works well for holding it in place, and I recommend a thin even coat on both pieces with not much wiggle room for adjustment unfortunately, once they contact they hold together! it does look pretty convincing for vinyl upholstery and the door inside panels in the TR2/3 models were really nicely engraved, a shame to ditch...

jb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revell '34 Ford... looks more like a British Model Y Ford.

Excellent nomination! What went wrong there was, they shrank a '34 Ford to fit on a shorter T-length chassis. The whole body's slightly undersized (I've never measured to see exactly how much) but the worst part is they took too much of the length out of the hood, giving the whole thing a weird "snub-nosed" look. I'm thinking of doing something with it, maybe either a hoodless altered or a street rod on a longer chassis with no hood and a '32 radiator/grille.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not the worst kit out there, but building it was out of the question for me. As was mentioned in a previous thread, the body was a poorly proportioned brick. The subsequent street rod version was just as bad. However, AMT's '34 Ford three window from 1977 turned out to be one of my biggest disappointments. Talk about Palmer quality (or lack thereof)? Neither kit has ever been reissued.

post-9023-0-95834000-1413464381_thumb.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that 59 ford retracrable top kit and the older 59 vette by revel were petty bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dscf0210.jpg

How did Monogram go this far wrong? I had one but couldn't find any usable parts in it so I sold it on the big auction site in a bundle just to get rid of it.

1976CDoy01.jpg

Reputed to be a Doyusha kit of a 1976 Corvette. Never saw a real one, built or unbuilt, just this picture. Somehow, I don't think it would look any better in person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the Gremlin kit? Engine poorly detailed. Engine bay parts that just kind of floats around in their and has no diffinitve mounting points, the front header panel too wide for the body. Chassis has no mounting points that touch for the final assembly. Seats that look too skinny for anything. Built it for the Buckey challenge and that was a few hours of my life I will never get back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any more info on the Monogram Ferrari GTO mentioned in David's post above? The first thing I noticed is the scale listed on the box. It says it's 1/25th scale. Not a normal scale for Monogram car kits. Is this maybe a Revell kit originally? I'd like to know more about this kit. The early 60's GTO was iconic Ferrari when I was a kid in the 1960's. I've always been interested in building one.

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some other disappointing kits are the MPC '69 Mustang and the Revell '69 Mustang. The MPC kit uses parts back to the '65 kit. Each generation MPC stretched the chassis. The small block engine is crude for mid to late '60's but the big block is decent. The hood is a bit misshapen. Now the Revell kit has a good engine, chassis, interior but the front end is a smacked flat in the face mess with the grill too flat. AMT's body and overall kit had good body proportions. Why Ertl, and the later incarnations use that MPC body and not the AMT tooling is beyond me. I haven't checked out the special editions Revell '69 yet.

AMT supposedly made a real stinker of a Bonilla from the early '60's and sold it in the late '90's and it was roundly panned.

I do own a 1970 Mustang Mach I from Palmer and the body and wheels look great. They made a hard to find version of the GT rims without the GT symbol. The body was good, but the engine and chassis was weak. I was going to put it on the newer Revell chassis and drive train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also had an Arii '72 Thunderbird. The body was closer to 1/20th scale with tiny 1/24 scale rims. I sold that dog off years ago. It was designed to have more of a toy like quality with a motor so the interior and chassis was garbage and of only curbside appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Specific (runner up): Mr Hobby Volkswagen Karman Ghia Convertible. The body is nicely done, great wheels and tires,

>but some of the parts, such as the seats and convertible boot are almost rubbery and were impossible to glue down.

that must be the Gunze Sangyo (at one time imported by Mr Hobby I think) Ghia. that upholstery rubbery material they use is very hard to work with and in most cases I have just replaced it. but I have found that 5 minute epoxy works well for holding it in place, and I recommend a thin even coat on both pieces with not much wiggle room for adjustment unfortunately, once they contact they hold together! it does look pretty convincing for vinyl upholstery and the door inside panels in the TR2/3 models were really nicely engraved, a shame to ditch...

jb

fiat-vi.jpg

Add the Fiat 500 and a VW Beetle to the Gunze vinyl seat debacle! I built this one years ago and didn't have any issues gluing down the seats using Zap-A-Gap glue. I've heard that acrylic paints will stick to them, but I just left them black vinyl in this case. To add insult to injury, this kit has no inner door panels at all. So I scratched out a pair because it just wasn't right to leave them missing!

I think I remember that one of the new Challenger kit/promos had vinyl seats as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd forgotten about those Revell '55-'57 Chevies where everything opens. Those are notorious monsters to build. I actually managed to get the '56 together when I was 14, but I have NO desire to do one of them again, with what's available today. I recently did a minor restoration/rebuild of that '56 and it took about four times longer than it usually takes me to do this with one of my old AMT or MPC or JoHan builds. Whatta hot mess.

Rev56Chev004_zps51ba7ce0.jpg

Man, that's a cool build!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2e_1-vi.jpg

I have a built example of the Palmer Mercury (not my pic) and it's really bad even by Palmer standards. Palmer's '75 (??) Monza 2+2 is pretty darn craptastic too.

Edited by Don Sikora II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMT supposedly made a real stinker of a Bonilla from the early '60's and sold it in the late '90's and it was roundly panned.

What is a Bonilla?

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pontiac Bonnaville

Oh the AMT '65 Bonneville? The Bonneville was okay. The problem came when they turned the kit into a 2+2. The real 2+2 was based on shorter wheelbase Catalina. Real Bonnevilles rode on a 3 inch longer wheelbase. Plus it seems to me the right and left sides of the model car didn't match up. This I believe was true with original Bonneville kit too. But, guys at time could not understand why Ertl choose to convert the Bonneville kit into a 2+2 without changing the wheelbase, or fixing the other flaws to the original kit.

Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the MPC flip nose kits, mainly because I thought they where really cool back when I was a kid, but they do build nicely when you take your time with them. Yes, they are finicky and not all that great fitting, but, they look ok when done.

53Ford001.jpg

Spirit57002.jpg

53Ford010.jpg

Spirit57004.jpg

Great job, you picked some nice colors for everything too. I like these. :P

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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...