Parts count for vintage kits

[HotRodaSaurus]

I have some old Monogram, AMT  models and also various other well known makes that have a parts count listed on the box.

When I count the parts for my own satisfaction or sometimes for sale, the kit parts never tally even though every part of the model is there. Back in this far off days were all the  other items such as box lid, box base instructions, decals and any shrink wrap also counted in?

Some years back I bought a cheap far eastern tool set listed as 100 piece. There were 95 tools were in the box but to make it 100 meant adding 1x metal tray, 1 x plastic separator, 1x clear plastic tool cover, 1 x tool contents list and 1x cardboard sleeve with description = 100

As kids we were often impressed by parts count as I remember building a model of a B29 plane that had over 200 parts, the 3 in1s put out by AMT etc were often jammed to the brim with custom parts.

Curious

 Cheers, John

[gtx6970]

The majority of the kits I have an interest in have a REALLY low parts count.

Take a look at the 1958 or 59 annuals for an example. On most of them the chassis consisted of a chassis plate and 4 axle locators , 2 axles, the tires and wheels and that's it. Or the  Interior was the tub with seats molded in , a dash and steering wheel. The body had the hood molded in , so no engine or under hood detail . most had just the body shell, glass, front and rear bumper/grille assy. Some had extra tail or headlight bezels .

Actually the majority of the kit ,,was custom parts. like lake pipes , fender skirts , glue on fins / wings ,,,etc etc .

If building it stock and not painting anything. It could be completely assembled in probably 15 minutes or less. They were held together with screws so in reality even no glue was required unless you were adding on all the gaudy custom stuff.

[Mark]

I never actually counted the parts in a kit to check against the count given by the manufacturer.  I'd assume they were counting everything as a "part", like individual lenses, the decal sheet, wire axles, screws, hood clips, things like that.  Maybe in some cases they are counting the box, instruction sheet, and the little catalog? 

The only time I ever paid too much attention was with the "100 piece accessory sets" for Dremel/similar tools.  Usually, those consist of about 75 paper sanding discs, eight or ten sanding drums, a couple of mandrels (which you've probably got two or three of already), and the case.

[Snake45]

I've never counted parts or cared, except when a kit is advertised as 150 parts or more, I start thinking it will take too much time and lose a certain amount of interest in it.

Cheap is good. Simple is good. Easy is good.

[HotRodaSaurus]

The majority of the kits I have an interest in have a REALLY low parts count.

Take a look at the 1958 or 59 annuals for an example. On most of them the chassis consisted of a chassis plate and 4 axle locators , 2 axles, the tires and wheels and that's it. Or the  Interior was the tub with seats molded in , a dash and steering wheel. The body had the hood molded in , so no engine or under hood detail . most had just the body shell, glass, front and rear bumper/grille assy. Some had extra tail or headlight bezels .

Actually the majority of the kit ,,was custom parts. like lake pipes , fender skirts , glue on fins / wings ,,,etc etc .

If building it stock and not painting anything. It could be completely assembled in probably 15 minutes or less. They were held together with screws so in reality even no glue was required unless you were adding on all the gaudy custom stuff.

I have a couple of JoHans like that from the early days

I never actually counted the parts in a kit to check against the count given by the manufacturer.  I'd assume they were counting everything as a "part", like individual lenses, the decal sheet, wire axles, screws, hood clips, things like that.  Maybe in some cases they are counting the box, instruction sheet, and the little catalog? 

The only time I ever paid too much attention was with the "100 piece accessory sets" for Dremel/similar tools.  Usually, those consist of about 75 paper sanding discs, eight or ten sanding drums, a couple of mandrels (which you've probably got two or three of already), and the case.

I'm thinking of selling a Monogram Sizzler soon and that has a parts count on the box I know all the parts are there but it is 1 short after counting box base decals and instructions. I don't want someone sending it back saying "There is 1 part missing". I can only guess it is the paper catalogue.

As a kid I also built an Airfix Short Stirling as that had a massive parts count but a fair amount were at the little two part bombs for the loading trolly and tractor. But like great artwork on all kits back then, that little trolly with the bombs on was the decider.

[StevenGuthmiller]

The majority of the kits I have an interest in have a REALLY low parts count.

Take a look at the 1958 or 59 annuals for an example. On most of them the chassis consisted of a chassis plate and 4 axle locators , 2 axles, the tires and wheels and that's it. Or the  Interior was the tub with seats molded in , a dash and steering wheel. The body had the hood molded in , so no engine or under hood detail . most had just the body shell, glass, front and rear bumper/grille assy. Some had extra tail or headlight bezels .

Actually the majority of the kit ,,was custom parts. like lake pipes , fender skirts , glue on fins / wings ,,,etc etc .

If building it stock and not painting anything. It could be completely assembled in probably 15 minutes or less. They were held together with screws so in reality even no glue was required unless you were adding on all the gaudy custom stuff.

Speaking of low parts counts, a while back I built an AMT "Junior Craftsman" 1959 Ford Galaxie kit.

The total parts count was 22 parts!

 

Steve

[oldnslow]

I was looking at one of the Millennial 64 Ford Galaxies, 24 parts. 

[Harry P.]

Wow... you could build that kit during a commercial break...

[Eshaver]

Speaking of low parts counts, a while back I built an AMT "Junior Craftsman" 1959 Ford Galaxie kit.

The total parts count was 22 parts!

 

Steve

Regardless, they were Hours and hours of fun laying on the floor admiring them and dreaming . At age 66, I'm an overt the hill kid

[Harry P.]

You want to talk parts count on a vintage kit? Here ya go...

Pocher Rolls Royce Torpedo Phanton II Convertible... 2,905 parts.

[StevenGuthmiller]

Wow... you could build that kit during a commercial break...

Funny part is, even a kit like that can build into a nice shelf model.

 

Steve

 

[1930fordpickup]

You want to talk parts count on a vintage kit? Here ya go...

Pocher Rolls Royce Torpedo Phanton II Convertible... 2,905 parts.

Harry  do you display that with mirrors to show off all that great detail? 

22 parts was a dream as a kid. Those were tough little plastic cars that I pushed on the floor for a long time. 

[HotRodaSaurus]

Funny part is, even a kit like that can build into a nice shelf model.

 

Steve

 

Fantastic

[gtx6970]

Funny part is, even a kit like that can build into a nice shelf model.

 

Steve

 

Sweet,

Gives me a color option for mine when the time comes . I was thinking red and white with a red and white or maybe black and white interior.

[Harry Joy]

I've never counted parts or cared, except when a kit is advertised as 150 parts or more, I start thinking it will take too much time and lose a certain amount of interest in it.

Cheap is good. Simple is good. Easy is good.

+++ for truthiness.

In my short car modeling career, I have already firmly decided that I would rather build 100 of the old classics over 1 modern uber-kit. But then, my preference in airplane models in recent years has been for old Monogram and Revell kits, and my all-time fave Hasegawa never goes for high parts counts.

[HotRodaSaurus]

+++ for truthiness.

In my short car modeling career, I have already firmly decided that I would rather build 100 of the old classics over 1 modern uber-kit. But then, my preference in airplane models in recent years has been for old Monogram and Revell kits, and my all-time fave Hasegawa never goes for high parts counts.

When I was a kid one of my first kits was the Airfix B17 Flying Fortress. Not only was the box art fantastic but all the gun turrets rotated and elevated, the flaps flapped the rudder rudded, and he wheels revolved and went up and down(if you didn't go overboard with the glue) the only thing missing was the bomb doors didn't open. So I had to get the Revell Memphis Bell. All down to lots of parts

[Lunajammer]

I used to think I was out of sync with the modeling community who wanted more parts and ever higher detail. When the '57 Chrysler 300C came out I bought it, but upon seeing the instructions I knew in my heart I would not finish a car with such a high parts count. The most disdained and "tired" kits of the 60's, 70's and 80's have become my favorites and I think one reason is the lower parts count.

[High octane]

Some modelers log all their hours that they put into building a model car kit, while others count the number of parts in a kit. Others keep spread sheets on the number of un built kits they have, or even inventory their parts boxes. Me, I don't have time for that kind of stuff.

[Eshaver]

Steve , your Galaxy is to die for !

 

Hey kids , here is one of those so called "Unbuildable " Revell Multi piece kits , the 1959 Sunliner .......................

 

[AC Norton]

I've never counted parts or cared, except when a kit is advertised as 150 parts or more, I start thinking it will take too much time and lose a certain amount of interest in it.

Cheap is good. Simple is good. Easy is good.

........as above, oh, as above.....preach it, brother Snake.............the Ace.......

[gtx6970]

I buy to build based on my interests ,,,not how many parts are in the box . I have nothing against the newer higher parts count kit, Its just most of my interests lie in early subject matter. of which there isn't near enough of in newer tooled kits

[JTalmage]

I have the sunliner kit... I can't wait to figure out a color combo and build it.

[Art Anderson]

When I was a kid one of my first kits was the Airfix B17 Flying Fortress. Not only was the box art fantastic but all the gun turrets rotated and elevated, the flaps flapped the rudder rudded, and he wheels revolved and went up and down(if you didn't go overboard with the glue) the only thing missing was the bomb doors didn't open. So I had to get the Revell Memphis Bell. All down to lots of parts

That kit sounds a lot more like the Lindberg larger-scale B-17G kit of the late 1950's--THAT one had just about everything that moved/operated like the real thing. And then there was the Monogram 1/32 scale GrummanF3F biplane figher, which centerline landing gear actually folded--turn the prop one direction, the landing gear extended, turn it the other way, the landing gear retracted.   Monogram brought out their 1/48 scale TBF Avenger, with wings that actually folded -- you pulled the wing out a bit from the root, rotated it, and folded it back in the trademark Grumman manner!

Renwal's Battleship USS North Carolina had it's guns all moveable--not just rotate, but each of the 16" barrels could be elevated individually, just as on the real ship!

Of course, all the movable parts of those models DEPENDED on our 12-yr old hands learning that more glue didn't work better than less glue!

Art

[Art Anderson]

Oh, and the MPC Gangbusters '27 and '28 Lincoln kits, with their "working" steering gear setups!

Art

[Snake45]

That kit sounds a lot more like the Lindberg larger-scale B-17G kit of the late 1950's--THAT one had just about everything that moved/operated like the real thing. And then there was the Monogram 1/32 scale GrummanF3F biplane figher, which centerline landing gear actually folded--turn the prop one direction, the landing gear extended, turn it the other way, the landing gear retracted.   Monogram brought out their 1/48 scale TBF Avenger, with wings that actually folded -- you pulled the wing out a bit from the root, rotated it, and folded it back in the trademark Grumman manner!

Renwal's Battleship USS North Carolina had it's guns all moveable--not just rotate, but each of the 16" barrels could be elevated individually, just as on the real ship!

Of course, all the movable parts of those models DEPENDED on our 12-yr old hands learning that more glue didn't work better than less glue!

Art

I built the Airfix B-17 and he might be right--I do think just about everything worked or moved on that thing. I bought it because the Revell Memphis Belle was $2 and the Airfix Fort was only $1.29.  70 cents was more than a week's allowance for me in those days! I managed to get it together and it was one of my proudest builds of the day.

Art, that Monogram 1/48 (it's actually about 1/50--I measured one a couple years ago) Avenger was the only model of any kind that ever made me cry. I eventually got it together, but I had to step away from it for a day or two. (I could usually get a model together in a single afternoon session in those days--maybe TWO models.) Built another one about a decade ago and it was no problem whatsoever.