Why?

[El Roberto]

Why can't the model car manufacturers cast thin plastic?  Look at a model car and if you scale up the thickness of the hood or fenders it would be like tank armor plate.  The model aircraft manufacturers cast thin plastic, some sections are translucent they're so thin. Wonder why the car people can't do the same...

[Mark]

Pick up a Trumpeter car kit, build it, and get back to us...

[Ace-Garageguy]

I think the general perception in the industry is that model cars still appeal somewhat to the "toy" crowd these days, and that planes, armor, (and the better train stuff) is going to be more likely built by adults who have fully-developed eye-hand coordination and manual skills. They're also apparently not as likely to run screaming when they see a high-ticket model as the typical car-modeler either, for some reason. Finer, thinner, more accurate tooling costs more bucks to develop, which translates to more expensive kits.

It IS unfortunate. I dabble in all the genres mentioned, and I'm well aware of what CAN be done with injection molded styrene when the kit designers target competent modelers, and when the designers themselves are competent.

The HO railroad kits from Tichy / Gould are a case in point. They're little jewels. Some of the grab irons are only .010" thick.  

But ham-handed kiddies tend to need clunky, thick parts so they don't destroy them during handling, and they're not as discerning about scale accuracy and technical correctness either.

PS. Speaking of Gould, this is the guy himself. Started a model company on a shoestring, did all his own tooling. Not the kind of guy to say "it can't be done here anymore" and hand off all the real work to the Chinese.

http://www.craftsmanshipmuseum.com/Gould.htm

Edited March 27, 2018 by Ace-Garageguy

[Xingu]

The 1:1 cars have a lot of internal supports and structure. There are also a lot of different curves, bows and odd angles on the many different types of cars out there. I don't think we could afford to buy a model that also needed that structure to support the correct thickness styrene skins over the doors, hood and trunk.

I am sure it could be done, but would you sell enough to make it financially feasible.

[El Roberto]

1 hour ago, Mark said:

Pick up a Trumpeter car kit, build it, and get back to us...

So, does Trumpeter build any American muscle cars or hot rods?  The only motor vehicle I saw on their web site was a fire truck.  I know their airplane kits are nice.

Edited March 28, 2018 by El Roberto
added something

[StevenGuthmiller]

8 minutes ago, El Roberto said:

So, does Trumpeter build any American muscle cars or hot rods?  The only motor vehicle I saw on their web site was a fire truck.  I know their airplane kits are nice.

'60 Bonneville, '63 Nova, '64 Falcon........

 

Steve

[peteski]

1 hour ago, Xingu said:

The 1:1 cars have a lot of internal supports and structure. There are also a lot of different curves, bows and odd angles on the many different types of cars out there. I don't think we could afford to buy a model that also needed that structure to support the correct thickness styrene skins over the doors, hood and trunk.

I am sure it could be done, but would you sell enough to make it financially feasible.

Cars are also made (mostly)from steel.  And if they have plastic parts (like bumper covers), those are also much thicker than the steel body parts. Steel is much stronger and stiffer than let's say urethane plastic.

If you wanted to have scale-thickness body panels in 1:25 scale, those would be around the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil.  Even if you could mold plastic that thin, it would have no strength.  Some things just can't be scaled.

[Ace-Garageguy]

12 minutes ago, peteski said:

Cars are also made (mostly)from steel.  And if they have plastic parts (like bumper covers), those are also much thicker than the steel body parts. Steel is much stronger and stiffer than let's say urethane plastic.

If you wanted to have scale-thickness body panels in 1:25 scale, those would be around the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil.  Even if you could mold plastic that thin, it would have no strength.  Some things just can't be scaled.

This is absolutely true...but.

Using high strength epoxy and tissue-thin fiberglass cloth, I can make .010" thick body panels that are quite sufficiently strong to be used for 1/25 scale models. They are very time consuming to make, and require rather a lot of skill and judgment that comes from long experience. And still, they would be 1/4 inch thick if scaled up to 1:1 (though with careful design, they can be made to give the impression of scale-thickness parts).

Now here's the "but" part: Though it wasn't specifically the OP's question, there are MANY things on some very recent car models that are highly disappointing from an unnecessarily-thick standpoint, clumsily represented, and downright toy-like klugey.

In many cases, the somewhat delicate appearance that would make parts of these models MUCH more realistic in certain areas has been sacrificed in order to (apparently) combat the "fiddly" complaints typically leveled at some of the better models by less competent builders. Dumbing down to appeal to the lower common denominator seems to be more prevalent in model cars than other genres.

[Aaronw]

3 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

 They're also apparently not as likely to run screaming when they see a high-ticket model as the typical car-modeler either, for some reason. Finer, thinner, more accurate tooling costs more bucks to develop, which translates to more expensive kits.

 

I think that is the number one reason. You will see armor and aircraft builders paying $50+ for a kit and then see them slap on another $50 in aftermarket without a whimper. Car model sites seem to have a lot of discussions about 40% off coupons that I just don't see with other model types.

[SfanGoch]

58 minutes ago, Aaronw said:

Car model sites seem to have a lot of discussions about 40% off coupons that I just don't see with other model types.

The reason being that you'll never find an $80 Rye Field Model Tiger I w/interior sitting on a shelf at Michaels or other stores offering them discount coupons. You'd be lucky if you found any expensive armor kit (which most are) with more than a ten buck discount online. I paid $125 for a Voyager M1A2 Abrams TUSK II detail set for my $70 Dragon M1A2.

[Aaronw]

2 hours ago, SfanGoch said:

The reason being that you'll never find an $80 Rye Field Model Tiger I w/interior sitting on a shelf at Michaels or other stores offering them discount coupons. You'd be lucky if you found any expensive armor kit (which most are) with more than a ten buck discount online. I paid $125 for a Voyager M1A2 Abrams TUSK II detail set for my $70 Dragon M1A2.

 I don't think so Hobby Lobby does stock some mid range aircraft, armor and ships, Italeri, and Revell of Germany maybe even some older Tamiya (not sure on the last, I'm rarely in a HL). I picked up the new Revell C-54 kit at a HL with a 40% off coupon (I'm not made of money, or proud, if someone want to save me $20 I'll take it). While it is true you are unlikely to find some of the smaller more expensive brands in your HLs, Micheals and Walmarts, you won't find the high end model car kits there either.

 

You can certainly find cheap aircraft and armor kits but if you spend time on forums dedicated to those subjects the cost of kits just doesn't come up with the frequency and volume as it does on model car sites. When it does it is typically a new kit breaking an accepted ceiling for the scale.

Except for race cars which are an expensive niche, model cars as a genre have gained a stigma of being the cheapskate end of the hobby. I don't speak Japanese maybe that message hasn't been heard as loudly based on what we see coming out of Japan. 

We are starting to see some companies take a chance on higher end kits, ICM, Meng, Belkits, Ebbro, Beemax are testing the market for $50-100 kits, I guess we will see if companies feel there is a market there or not.

 

 

I certainly don't mean to bash people who don't have the money to spend on expensive kits, but the message has gotten out there loud and clear that model cars builders are less willing to part with their money that other genres.

[disabled modeler]

Me..id rather have one molded thick than thin.   I have very little issues with warpage on the old kits even after all the  year they have been around but most newer ones I get have some warp to them.   Myself I like the thickness of the 60s and 70s kits.

[Mark]

11 hours ago, El Roberto said:

So, does Trumpeter build any American muscle cars or hot rods?  The only motor vehicle I saw on their web site was a fire truck.  I know their airplane kits are nice.

They used to...not any more.  They tried to reinvent everything...gimmicky working steering in the Novas (steering wheel actually turned the front wheels) but to do that they ran the exhaust down the wrong side of the chassis.  Weird wheels and tires, where you had to stretch the tire over a huge wheel.  Metal plating that is impossible to remove, and sometimes dull.  Photoetch hood hinges that are difficult to assemble and seldom work.  And, in the Pontiac kits, too-thin hood and trunk outer panels that were warped while still attached to the parts trees.  There just aren't enough people out there willing to pay the premium for a premium" car kit (the Fujimi Enthusiast Series being a prime example). 

[Jim N]

Car modelers are price sensitive.  They always have been, and likely always will be.  However, there are some car modelers who will buy kits by the case, or at least will buy a few of the same kit because there may be multiple ways the builder wants to create the finished kit.

The difference between car modelers and the military modelers from what I have seen is that the military modelers will build one of a kit and then move on.  For example, they will build one Abrams tank, one F-15, and generally, they will not buy another of these kits.  The "creative license" is not with military kits the way it is with cars.  So their expectations are set higher because there is likely only one way to represent the kit.  The military modeler who paints his tank Panther Pink or Candy Apple Orange would likely rue the day he showed the finished model to his fellow military modelling friends.  There may very well be a serious debate as to whether we should once again permit public floggings.  

My dad has always built models in the military genre and he was (and still is) very fiddly with the details of these kits.  When I was quite young, I made the wisecrack of painting one of his military kits a typical car color.  The way he looked at me after I made that suggestion, I really thought I was going to be put up for adoption for a few seconds.

[SfanGoch]

46 minutes ago, Jim N said:

The difference between car modelers and the military modelers from what I have seen is that the military modelers will build one of a kit and then move on.  For example, they will build one Abrams tank, one F-15, and generally, they will not buy another of these kits. 

I gotta disagree with that. just like a car modeler who builds different versions of the same car, armor modelers will build multiple versions of their favorite vehicles. Tanks, like the Panzer IV, for example, are available in over 20 main and sub-variants. Ditto with Tiger Is, available in Initial, Early, Mid and Late Production, along with date-specific versions. There are more than a few armor builders at Missing-Lynx, Track-Link, Armorama and other related sites who have built upwards of 15 versions of the Tiger and there are guys who build every conceivable variant of the Sherman; and, there are a lot. Check out R.P. Hunnicutt's "Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank" and you'll see what I mean. Unless you are a dedicated tread-head, you probably won't notice the differences; but, they're there. I have nine Tigers and eight M1A2 Abrams kits which won't go to waste and I plan on adding to those numbers. Others build multiple versions in order to replicate vehicles assigned to specific units during different time periods and battles. That's especially true of WWII-era German armor. Planes are another story. Depending on the scale, they can take up a lot of space really quickly; so, an aircraft modeler is more selective in his choices.

[Aaronw]

This whole table in front was one modeler's display at the 2007 IPMS Nationals, these are all 1/35 Sherman tank models.

Now obviously this is just one individuals obsession, but I've seen similar collections of other tanks and aircraft. There are plenty of aircraft modelers who focus on one or two major types like P-51 Mustangs or Bf-109s.

Certainly there are people who only build one example and move on, but I don't think they are anymore of the majority than people who only build one subject. I know of one modeler who is trying to build one of every aircraft used by the US Navy. With a project that size you would guess he doesn't build many duplicates, but that would be wrong. He has stacks of the same kit of a variety of aircraft.

 

Edited March 28, 2018 by Aaronw

[Aaronw]

I would agree that on the whole model car builders are less strict about "correct" but you will find some whimsy in aircraft and armor

 

 

Model car builders have their versions of rivet counters as well, you will find race car builders who take the markings of a car very seriously down to exactly what markings were on a car at a specific race. Factory stock builders can also be pretty strict, and even the rod and custom guys which are generally thought of as creative can get picky about displaying the right period equipment and style. 

Edited March 28, 2018 by Aaronw

[Jim N]

22 hours ago, SfanGoch said:

I gotta disagree with that. just like a car modeler who builds different versions of the same car, armor modelers will build multiple versions of their favorite vehicles. Tanks, like the Panzer IV, for example, are available in over 20 main and sub-variants. Ditto with Tiger Is, available in Initial, Early, Mid and Late Production, along with date-specific versions. There are more than a few armor builders at Missing-Lynx, Track-Link, Armorama and other related sites who have built upwards of 15 versions of the Tiger and there are guys who build every conceivable variant of the Sherman; and, there are a lot. Check out R.P. Hunnicutt's "Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank" and you'll see what I mean. Unless you are a dedicated tread-head, you probably won't notice the differences; but, they're there. I have nine Tigers and eight M1A2 Abrams kits which won't go to waste and I plan on adding to those numbers. Others build multiple versions in order to replicate vehicles assigned to specific units during different time periods and battles. That's especially true of WWII-era German armor. Planes are another story. Depending on the scale, they can take up a lot of space really quickly; so, an aircraft modeler is more selective in his choices.

Joe, with all due respect, please re-read my comment again as it is based on my observation.  The military modelers that I have known over the years will build one of a kit and move on.  The exceptions have been they were interested in a specific variant, they wanted to try a new modelling technique on a known subject or they wanted to correct mistakes on a previous build.

Having written my comment, you are absolutely correct, there are military modellers who build the different variants of a tank, aircraft, etc.  And they do it for a variety of reasons.  It looks like you and I travel in a different universe of modeling and modellers.