What Do New Kits Have Inaccuracies

[69NovaYenko]

I am asking this question not start a bit*hing or manufacturer bashing session!!!!

In fact, I am VERY pleased to see so many new and some well done revised subject matter ( '67 Camaro -'70 Cuda etc.) being released by all the modeling companies.

Additionally, the level of detail that manufacturers are incorporating into kits now a days (chassis, interiors etc) is a far leap ahead of the 60ties thru 80ties kits.

However, over the last several years I have read a number of post expressing disappointments and sometimes outright rants about inaccuracies of the kits that are being released now a days. Truthfully, some of grievances are a tad bit nit picking while others are out and out legitimate concerns.

So, my question is:

With all the restored 1 to 1 subject matter that manufacturers can use as a guide to base their tooling on. With all the reference materials and specs that are readily out there. With all the advantages current technology affords manufacturers (3-D modeling, digital scanning etc). Why are companies kitting inaccurate representations of the 1:1 subject matter. With all the aforementioned capabilities at kit companies disposal what causes these discrepancies?

I'm hard pressed to believe it occurs due to them rushing to meet a release deadline hence details fell through the cracks or are over looked....because they miss projected release dates constantly.

Is it a lack of earnest interest in releasing a "TRULY" accurate replica?

Is it about the bottom line and the accounting department is reining in the research and tooling guys base on per-projected budget allocations to do the replica?

Are the people that green lighting the design or tooling not "TRUE CAR GUYS" and as far as they are concerned close enough is good enough?

Could it be that the projects are outsourced overseas or to the lowest bidder?

Is there a lack of good communication between the research team and the tool/die makers?

Or is a combination of some of the above, if not all the above?

If anyone has any knowledgeable insights or best guess to the answer I'd like to hear them.

Remember no bit*hing, ranting or manufacturer bashing...please.

Edited April 19, 2015 by 69NovaYenko

[Petetrucker07]

I think that part of the problem is some things are more difficult to scale down and would cost more to correct. There are some things, like roof lines, posts, rear end angles that, to me, have no excuse other than just not paying attention or not caring by the manufacturer. There some issues that, as you said, just nit pickin. There issues with the trucks I build, but, the issues that are molded in the factory aren't as big of issue as the mistakes I make. I'm not a stickler for an accurate model. Never will be. So I'm not gonna worry too much about the manufacturers mistakes. I will do my best to make sure what I do the kit, is my best.

[Longbox55]

With all the restored 1 to 1 subject matter that manufacturers can use as a guide to base their tooling on.

You would be surprised at just how many "restored" vehicles out there are restored incorrectly to how they were new. Case in point, the Nova the Revell used as the guide for their '69 kit had aftermarket quarter panels on it, so the kit is made to match that, rather than what the OEM quarter panels really looked like.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Is it a lack of earnest interest in releasing a "TRULY" accurate replicas?

Is it about the bottom line and the accounting department is reining in the research and tooling guys base on per-projected budget to do the replica?

Are the people that green lighting the design or tooling not "TRUE CAR GUYS" and as far as they are concerned close enough is good enough?

Could it be that the projects are outsourced overseas or to the lowest bidder?

Is there a lack of good communication between the research team and the tool/die makers?

Or ... a combination of some if not all the above?

You've answered your own question.

I've been involved with various aspects of manufacturing, at various levels, throughout my 40+ year professional life. I've seen what happens to even the best intentions.

ANY less-than-optimum product brought to market is so because of a combination of all the above, in varying degrees.

And ONE large problem in today's business world is the mistaken belief that it's too "hard" for an individual or really REALLY small team to get a job done. The more fingers you have in a pie, the more "specialization" you have to rely on, the more "outsourcing" you choose to use...the more opportunities there are for problems to creep in and to fall through the cracks.

There simply IS NO OTHER REASON than the ones you've listed above, and anyone who says otherwise is making excuses.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Harry P.]

There is no reason why a model kit should have inaccuracies, The fact that so many of them do is basically the result of the "it's good enough" mentality that's become pervasive in our society.

Different people will trot out different excuses or "explanations," depending on whether they are in the industry or not, but the bottom line is that "good enough" has become acceptable. Don't ask me why, because I'm not a sociologist and don't know the answer... but for some reason our society today just accepts mediocrity.

Mediocrity is the new excellence.

[cobraman]

I wonder how many notice all the things wrong in a kit. I will admit that sometimes until it is called out here I don't notice some but then .... Oh ya, that ain't right !

[Fat Brian]

There is no reason why a model kit should have inaccuracies, The fact that so many of them do is basically the result of the "it's good enough" mentality that's become pervasive in our society.

Different people will trot out different excuses or "explanations," depending on whether they are in the industry or not, but the bottom line is that "good enough" has become acceptable. Don't ask me why, because I'm not a sociologist and don't know the answer... but for some reason our society today just accepts mediocrity.

Mediocrity is the new excellence.

Harry, I think part of the reason for the lowering of expectations is that it's become so hard to hold any one person accountable for anything. Think about the last few times you've been wronged, how many times was it an individual versus a cog in a nameless, faceless multinational corporation or governmental morass? We've become so accustomed to these various degrees of injustice that we have lowered our threshold for what "good" is.

[69NovaYenko]

Very interesting thoughts so far on the issue. I think everyone have valid points and observations.

If the 1 to 1 '69 Nova used as the guide for the kit had inaccurate aftermarket quarter panels on it, so the kit is made to match that, rather than what the O.E.M. quarter panels; couldn't the kit manufacturer consulted with someone like O.P.G. (The Original Parts Group) or Classic Industries. Both of these parts suppliers are revered for having authentic re-pops for all G.M car and truck parts. Certainly, these type of highly respected parts vendors could earnestly be another research resource...just saying...

If there's anyone out there that's involved in the kit manufacturing or resin business that's willing to share their thoughts please feel free to comment, your input would be greatly valued.

Edited April 19, 2015 by 69NovaYenko

[Bruno]

There is no reason why a model kit should have inaccuracies, The fact that so many of them do is basically the result of the "it's good enough" mentality that's become pervasive in our society.

Different people will trot out different excuses or "explanations," depending on whether they are in the industry or not, but the bottom line is that "good enough" has become acceptable. Don't ask me why, because I'm not a sociologist and don't know the answer... but for some reason our society today just accepts mediocrity.

Mediocrity is the new excellence.

I'm no sociologist either, but my guess would be... money. Everybody wants more money. The boss wants more money, so the employee has to work faster. 100% production is not enough anymore, 130% is what they want. And when 130% is reached, they now want 150%. Never enough money. All this does hurt quality in the end.

That's how it is today.

[1930fordpickup]

So many things come into play but Money is the number one cause, it causes many things to change and not always for the best.

[Daddyfink]

[Danno]

This thread is an oxymoron.

[Matt Bacon]

Because companies that make kits are in the business to make money. The maximum amount of money that can be spent on developing the kit is the amount of money it's going to generate over the years, and that leaves no profit. So the amount of time and effort that can be put in is strictly limited.

However (and I urge you to take a look, even if WW1 airplanes are not your thing...), if you want to see something as close to perfection as you'll ever see in a kit, check this out:

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3117&cat=5

But then, it does cost $350...

It's also worth clicking on the "instructions" link, to see how it _should_ be done by everybody!

(And Wingnut is less driven by the profit motive than most, because it was set up and is supported by Sir Peter Jackson, who has a bob or two these days...)

bestest,

M.

[DeeCee]

The best thing about being an Aussie, is most of the kits i build, are American based and

i have never seen a PERFECT example in the flesh to compare it too,

all the examples i see are modified and at a car show,

so pretty well all kits are a spot on good starting point to me.

(there have been the odd one that is just munted though.)

[kruleworld]

having your production on the opposite side of the world, where english is their second language and a 12-hour time difference means it takes 3 times longer to do anything.

[Mike 1017]

I would like to see an in-depth interview in MCM with any of the model manufactures. A discussion and demonstration of a concept to the finished product. Tour of the design shop, the mold making shop, and the plastic injecting factory. A discussion about the past, present and future of plastic injection industries. The technical breakthrough's and the limitations of the manufacturing process.

It could be a multi part series including questions from us. Number one question: Why the inaccuracies ?

Mike

[Danno]

Interesting that most of the posts that complain loudly about "inaccuracies" in model kits, contain multiple 'inaccuracies' in English, spelling, syntax, and grammar.

Why can't posters get it right when they complain about other people getting it right?

[Ace-Garageguy]

Interesting that most of the posts that complain loudly about "inaccuracies" in model kits, contain multiple 'inaccuracies' in English, spelling, syntax, and grammar.

Why can't posters get it right when they complain about other people getting it right?

Budget constraints and short time-to-posting don't allow, unfortunately, for posters to always do that.

Editing a post for grammatical correctness and using spell-check take time, and everybody knows time is money.

Spellig, gramor, sintax and other facets of Engligh should all be considered "close enough" if you can kinda get the point across.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[62rebel]

bwuhahaha

[69NovaYenko]

I would like to see an in-depth interview in MCM with any of the model manufactures. A discussion and demonstration of a concept to the finished product. Tour of the design shop, the mold making shop, and the plastic injecting factory. A discussion about the past, present and future of plastic injection industries. The technical breakthrough's and the limitations of the manufacturing process.

It could be a multi part series including questions from us. Number one question: Why the inaccuracies ?

Mike

A candid discussion (not an attack) with someone in the kit industry might be in order. The dialog could shed some light on the parameters they have to work within. I'm fairly certain that there has to be limitations in the manufacturing process.

I think that part of the problem is some things are more difficult to scale down and would cost more to correct. There are some things, like roof lines, posts, rear end angles that, to me, have no excuse other than just not paying attention or not caring by the manufacturer. There some issues that, as you said, just nit picking. There issues with the trucks I build....

The comment "some things are more difficult to scale down" is a valid consideration and could be part of the equation.

[69NovaYenko]

Because companies that make kits are in the business to make money. The maximum amount of money that can be spent on developing the kit is the amount of money it's going to generate over the years, and that leaves no profit. So the amount of time and effort that can be put in is strictly limited.

However (and I urge you to take a look, even if WW1 airplanes are not your thing...), if you want to see something as close to perfection as you'll ever see in a kit, check this out:

http://www.wingnutwings.com/ww/productdetail?productid=3117&cat=5

But then, it does cost $350...

It's also worth clicking on the "instructions" link, to see how it _should_ be done by everybody!

(And Wingnut is less driven by the profit motive than most, because it was set up and is supported by Sir Peter Jackson, who has a bob or two these days...)

bestest,

M.

I did take a peek at the link you provided. We were very impressed with the kit. You make a valid point about the level of accurate and detail of Wingnut kits, comes with a corresponding cost ($350.00). That could be another factor to weigh into the equation. Extremely accurate and detailed kits will translate into very pricey car kits.

Edited April 19, 2015 by 69NovaYenko

[Ace-Garageguy]

A candid discussion (not an attack) with someone in the kit industry might be in order. The dialog could shed some light on the parameters they have to work within. I'm fairly certain that there has to be limitations in the manufacturing process.

The comment "some things are more difficult to scale down" is a valid consideration and could be part of the equation.

Oh please. This has been hashed to death over and over and over and over.

To scale something down, you measure it accurately once. You divide the measurements by the scale. Once. You then have an accurate model.

How frigging hard is it to measure and divide?

[John Goschke]

No reason... other than human beings are involved.

[Petetrucker07]

^exactly. Human error.

[chunkypeanutbutter]

There are people on here who scratch up some insane stuff. Whole cars built from sheet and strip stock!

They take all the measurements, divide them down to scale, and recreate them flawlessly.

If one person can do it with no compensation other than the pleasure of building, why can't a huge multinational corporation pay people to do it, too?