johnbuzzed

Put two '55 Chevy kits, side by side. As long as one is the original issue Revell kit with the orange and yellow cars on the cover, I'll go for that kit anytime. It might not be the better of the two kits, but that box art just screams, "BUY ME!!!" in my internal language. Or, put two otherwise identical kits side by side- I will go for the box that is more appealing. Honestly, I think most of us here would, even though we think of ourselves as not just your average model car builders. It's natural. Advertising people know this and use it every day. A lot of the foods that we see in ads aren't real, as the artists can make fake food look better than real food, for whatever reasons. The blood in the Psycho shower scene was chocolate syrup- it looked better than actual blood on B&W film.

I won't go into Michael's specifically to look for models, but I will look at their selection when my wife and I go together. Their kit selection isn't bad, but too often, they have nothing that floats my boat, and the $$$ is a bit high. I do buy Testors paints and glues there, and other crafting supplies on occasion. For kits, it's Hobby Lobby or the nearest LHS.

Why, Chuck... aren't you afraid of offending somebody?

Yep, and no matter how much some bottles are stirred or shaken or both, the results are less than desirable.

Why ???

I do agree, this is looking good. I'll be watching.

Quality control is not a method of keeping quality from getting out of control. Consistency is the ability to carry on with a function in the same way in an unbroken manner. Neither of these will guarantee perfection (which, it has been pointed out) , we are not seeking here, but they can bring a manufacturer of any goods pretty darn close. There are no excuses for the lack of either asset in any business, big or small. The lack of these assets will cost more in the long run than the initial expenditure.

Still- a model kit of a relatively current car was introduced in the past year and one of the major body dimensions was incorrect. This was produced by a company that has also produced kits that are just about dead-nuts on. This is a quality control problem; a lack of consistency somewhere along the line. Doesn't matter where or by whom, but people insist on making excuses for this. Please- there are no excuses for this. I don't care if it's a major international corporation or a mom-and-pop small business.

The thing that seems to be forgotten about investing corporate dollars here in our own nation is that the money will stay here, and not make those in other nations rich.

If NASA can e-mail the software for a wrench to be 3D printed aboard the ISS, then a competent company wih a sharp IT department and the courage to spend a little money- as an investment in a tool- should be able to use 3D printing as an R&D tool. The software will continue to be developed until the digital effects won't be noticeable. Think digital sound- it sounds cool and all high-tech, but natural sounds are not digital- they are analog. It's the same with hi-def TV- look close at that digital picture and it looks ugly, but from a viewing distance, it looks great- all sharp and clear. But in reality, nowhere near the real thing, which is also analog. True, natural sound and light are waveforms, not series of pulses. But those digital signals are carefully processed and manipulated to fool the brain; so, too, will be 3D printing. Companies and corporations, businesses of all sizes need to remember that you have to spend money to make money. Whether those expenditures are on tools, research or employee morale, there will be expenses. Those who are too stingy are doomed to producing mediocre, poor- selling products. Maybe their shareholders will see a little more in their dividends, or the owners might be able to get a bigger Christmas tree, but in the long run, they will be hurting. t have seen it live and in person, firsthand, at my employer back on LI. And in the news recently-Think "GM and ignition switches"...

Good point. But, most of us are here to discuss scale models, not brakes in a real car. Here is where we can complain and share our gripes about our hobby and (hopefully) get results; else, who's gonna listen? And, we can also pass along accolades where they are deserved.

Merry Christmas to all of my fellow modelers. I hope it's a good one for you and your families; that you not only get what you want, but whatever you might really need.

Sure it does. A forum is a discussion, a conversation, and like all conversations, has a way of straying from the initial topic, for various reasons. Perhaps the issue should be discussed endlessly. It has to do with quality, which has been sorely lacking in too many products and services in recent years.

Whoa... I wrote to him many years back in regards to a B1 for a Pro Mod Superbird that I had planned. We kidded around about my intended "sponsor" for that build (Fredericks of Hollywood) and he wondered if Gates or Goodyear would be supplying "belts and hose(s)...". I guess you had to be there. I still have the engine; now, I have the impetus to build and use it. RIP, Ross.

"I... do wonder how they got it wrong." Exactly. While the comments might have strayed from the intention of the original post, that little fragment is the gist or crux or essence of those that followed.

Amen to all that.

I, for one, don't see anyone getting "nasty", but I guess that's a matter of personal opinion. Perhaps caps, bold, italics, underlines, etc, are ways to emphasize a point. And, while I do appreciate your taking the time to do some marketing and research on or in this forum, I do not appreciate all those posts that advise placating the manufacturers- any manufacturers. Why should we? We are the consumers. The manufacturers might supply us with goods for our hobby, but we put bread on the manufacturers' tables. And I do realize that "there is no perfect model kit" and some minor flaws, inaccuracies, mistakes, errors, etc, are inevitable, I also know that some aren't. Try passing off errors equivalent to those which I cite on military modelers (where in 1/72 scale, a wingspan difference of 3 scale inches can be pointed out in a review) or model railroaders. Talk about a lead balloon.

Umm... i didn't see Dave run away. And, again- if the roof height didn't matter, why does the aftermarket offer a resin body with the correct roof height? Apparently, there is enough of a need for a private individual to take it upon himself to do this, and from what I remember from posts in the threads about that kit, more than a few happy customers. Ironically, I do have one of those kits and I will be building it right from the box because I don't consider the flaw to be intolerable. I do, however, consider HOW the roof height came to be incorrect, intolerable. Why do some expect all of us to kiss butt when it comes to the manufacturers? It seems that we are supposed to write personal thank-you notes to them whenever a kit is produced or re-introduced, no matter the quality. Granted, they might be the only game in town for our hobby, but as has been stated, their market demographics are dwindling. How about keeping the customer- and please, don't give me "the retailer/warehouse/merchandiser is the customer" line because, if we don't buy, they won't buy and if they don't buy, there go the manufacturers.

Revell '67 Charger- not the Foose edition.

So, many people think that because they agree with an "expert", then no one is allowed to have another opinion or idea. Or, are we all- all of society- supposed to kowtow to the bean counters and corporate talking heads who try to get the consumers to buy goods of a lesser quality because it would cost more money to produce goods of a better quality? I understand that the model manufacturers are not giant corporations, but having been involved in a small business that went through the "save a buck" syndrome, I am aware that in order to sell a quality product, one must not be afraid to spend money. I have seen the results and it inevitably costs the company more to correct the mistakes after production begins than if said mistakes were eliminated in the engineering stages. I do agree that many, if not all of the complaints in these posts, are not directed toward Moebius and are directed at other manufacturers, but I do wonder how many more of the infamous Fox body Ford kits might have been sold had that roof been just a little taller. Obviously, someone (or, many someones) wanted correct dimensions, else, the aftermarket would not be selling resin bodies with a correct roof height. And, being a forum, the subject can, will and does skew away from the original, much as in an actual conversation. Get over that. It happens in more posts/strings here than we might realize.

I agree. And, as for the allowance of mistakes or errors, particularly in the instance of co$st $savings- remember what happened with GM and the ignition switches, and more recently, with the airbags, in multiple brands, that explode and send shards of metal through a vehicle's cabin? Co$t-cutting at it'$ fine$t. In our world of scale modeling, there are are some things that should not be overlooked due to cost- ie, basic contours and dimensions. Otherwise, put a block of styrene in a box and call it a car model. If our community is so forgiving, why was there such a demand for a far-more-accurate '70 Barracuda for so many years?

Tiny, little details are one thing. Major dimensional or contour discrepancies are another, and they are inexcusable. The kits that are being introduced today are of subjects of which the actual vehicle can be found. Maybe not in your or your neighbor's garage or your neighborhood or even your state, but they are out there. Research. Accurate measurements. Pictures, pictures and more pictures. Time, effort and accuracy. Pride and integrity. Care for the end user/builder. Consistency. And, if some steps to produce a more accurate kit cost more money, remember the adage: "Sometimes, you have to spend money to make money". You get what you pay for.

Simpsonville?

I would think that the old dies would require a lot of "touch up" before being re-used. That would add to costs. In my opinion, the problem with parts packs is perception- you get some cool stuff, but you pay what seems to be out of proportion for a relatively small, skinny box of plastic. At least with a kit, the box is BIG and you get a lot more stuff, even if you don't use it all.

Regarding those body emblem or logo decals: I once used thin, clear stock (acetate?) under body logos on a GMC truck to add some dimension. I had cut the appropriate size GMC logos from a dealer brochure but I don't remember what I used as an adhesive. It wasn't an original idea; there had previously been an article in another magazine regarding the application of decal emblems and logos onto clear stock, then applying that to the body (that author was working with a Ferrari). This method raises the decal above the body enough to eliminate the painted-on look of a decal. If you're careful, you might even be able to outline the perimeter of the piece with a silver Sharpie to add that chrome emblem appearance.