100% Accuracy : Is There Really Such A Thing???

[69NovaYenko]

From the offset I want it to be understood that I am not attempting to stir up the hornets nest or poke the sleeping bear...God forbid!!! There is quite enough contention when it comes to discussions about kit accuracy or should I say inaccuracies.

Oddly, the label “rivet counters” has been affixed to those who subscribe to the belief that a scale model should adhere to 100% accuracy with it`s 1 to1 real world counterpart. I do understand your point and sometimes frustration with kit manufactures and modelers who say “it`s close enough”.

It is to this group that I pose my question. “Has there every been a scale model car kit in 1/25, 1/24 or 1/12 scale that has adhered to 100% accuracy with it`s 1 to1 real world counterpart? If so which kit or kits are they…I`d like to acquire a couple.

Again, allow me to state “I`m not trying to whiz in anyones cereal;  I`m  just seeking some knowledge…no more no less.

Thanks for your response in advance.

Edited March 29, 2016 by 69NovaYenko

[69NovaYenko]

By the way I would prefer the kits be automotive in nature.

Edited March 29, 2016 by 69NovaYenko

[Harry P.]

“Has there every been a scale model car kit in 1/25, 1/24 or 1/12 scale that has adhered to 100% accuracy with it`s 1 to1 real world counterpart?

No.

And there can never, and will never be.

[Daddyfink]

I second what Harry said. 

[Harry Joy]

The plastic would be so thin you'd poke holes in it, and you'd have to have an atomizer to paint it. And a little bitty sewing machine for the seats.

[Ace-Garageguy]

The plastic would be so thin you'd poke holes in it, and you'd have to have an atomizer to paint it. And a little bitty sewing machine for the seats.

 ^^

The ONLY THING the more critical kit reviewers expect is that the proportions, shapes, curves, obvious dimensions and LOOK of the subject be reflected accurately in models. 

NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED FOR PERFECTION.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Ace-Garageguy

[Muncie]

don't think so, but some come closer than others - almost close enough to say yes...

The 1/16 Aurora funny cars (except the bodies which were designed separately)

Fujimi Enthusiast series full detail kits

Some of the early 1960's Revell kits - a lot of the kit pieces were pantographed directly from the real parts, probably in a couple of stages - I wish that I had spent more time with Bob Paeth to get those stories

Edited March 29, 2016 by Muncie

[Nova-ss]

There never will be.its impossible. but it depends on the ones judging. But I know of none....Chris 

[keyser]

Speaking of accuracy, the thread title is misspelled. 

 

 

[69NovaYenko]

Speaking of accuracy, the thread title is misspelled. 

 

 

If there any misspellings blame my "smartphone". Lol :-)

Edited March 29, 2016 by 69NovaYenko

[peteski]

In order for a model to be a 100% accurate replica of the real vehicle, you would have to take the real vehicle and shrink it at the atomic level. At this time this is impossible.   The model would be made out of metal (not plastic) and would have everything which 1:1 vehicle has (like a working engine and electric system, hydraulic brakes, climate control, etc.).

As you can see, this to me seems like a silly question.   A plastic model of a real vehicle can only be an approximation of the real thing.

[Sport Suburban]

I think this is a good question and it seems the responses are all mockery. So come on guys. What model kits have been produced that best exemplify a perfect model kit?

I agree that the Fujimi Enthusiast series is a good suggestion. I have built the Countach and have a few Porsche 356s. With a parts count over 250 they are amazing but very finicky to put together.

I have observed that most rivet counting is about the body. If that is right then the critics move on to the chassis and interior. Think JoHan and MPC body's, they are regarded as better but the rest is lacking.

[Darren B]

I think the best thing is to strive for 65% and be happy, if it was 1/2 scale probably could get closer, but that would take all the fun out of the hobby just have fun...

[afx]

 ^^

The ONLY THING the more critical kit reviewers expect is that the proportions, shapes, curves, obvious dimensions and LOOK of the subject be reflected accurately in models. 

NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED FOR PERFECTION.

Agree! 

[afx]

The recently re-released Revell Porsche 914/6 is a good example.  The shape of the kit windscreen is not correct (it should be taller and more rounded).  I personally can look past this error and, to my eye, it still builds into a nice model.  Others may disagree.

There have been some recent releases where the general shape of the body has immediately struck me as odd.  I find it difficult to look past some of those issues.

Edited March 29, 2016 by afx

[Deathgoblin]

I'd say the Fujimi enthusiast kits.  I remember the Porsche 356 being a stunning kit.  Complicated little bugger, but outstandingly detailed.  Look at some of the Mobius kits, the Galaxie Chevys and the really detailed Tamiyas and Hasegawas as well.  No one can guarantee 100% accuracy unless you can actually start it, but these things are relative anyway.  Make them as detailed and accurate as you like.  

[Art Anderson]

My answer is: NO.  Why?  If for no other reason, while we're all human beings, many of us related, we ARE all different--we tend, each of us, to see objects somewhat differently--What's perfectly accurate to you is not to me, and vice-versa--at least in our perception, the message each of our eyes send to each of our brains.

A much wiser man than I, who remains anonymous, wrote a famous poem "The Blind Men and the Elephant", in which 6 blind men traveled to "see" an elephant.  Each one reported what he "saw", by using his hands to feel the pachyderm (which in metaphor, could be 6-sighted men viewing the elephant with working eyesight), and each one reported a finding completely different from the other five.

Add to this mix, for the sake of argument, the complications of "visual perspective" (The inevitable difference in looking at a car in real 1:1 life-size vis-a-vis a scale model), to our equally inevitable differences in interpreting exactly what we are looking at)  and you have the makings of an argument.  No mater how numerically "perfect" a model car body might be, inevitably there will be those who swear that it's innacurate beyond belief.

Now, I'm not excusing seriously visible screw ups--not at all.  What I am pointing out is that no matter how hard a model company's designers/mockup makers/toolmakers work to create an accurate model--there will ALWAYS be that faction who, to their eyes, see it as horribly wrong.   And no, I am NOT making excuses for shoddy work--just pointing out a fact of model car life that I have lived.

Art

[Daddyfink]

What one should really be asking is, what is the best representation of a certain vehicle.

So yes, which one comes the closest to looking like the real deal. It is the best we can hope for. As some have mentioned before, to make it a 100% would mean some pretty spectacular molding process and parts we could barely see or hold. 

[Snake45]

If I'm building a model of something, whether car or airplane, it usually means I LIKE the thing and am at least somewhat (if not obsessively) familiar with the shape. If I see shape errors in the thing that catch my eye, it's "inaccurate." I either fix it, I start with a different kit, or I build another model.

If it looks like what it's supposed to TO ME, then it's "accurate." Or, at least, accurate enough.

BTW, if you think you've seen rivet-counting here in Model Car World, Go over to Model Airplane World and listen to the wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever ANY new kit of Spitfire or Bf 109 comes out.

[gtx6970]

No such thing does or ever will exist.

 

For me personally if I look in my case and see what I was trying to achieve. Its good