Revell Jaguar

[GMP440]

4 hours ago, bobthehobbyguy said:

First off the kits that have been done with scanning have come out spot on.

Second not all older kits were 100 percent correct.some were better than others. I seriously doubt that the wooden masters were perfect and a fair amount of wood filler was used to get it right. I see it as a fine tuning to get the product right. There is simply not the budget to afford the fine tuning in the past. Every process has its shortcomings. Its not necessarily that someone is not doing their job.

I'm just saying you have to look at the whole picture. Its not just a case that someone isn't doing their job in all cases.

Very true.  Simply put , yes , the model kit companies  could add more accuracy if they really wanted to.  But , guess what;  the price of the kit will go up.  That kit that was $24.99 that is reproduced with more accuracy, builders would be paying at least $40 or more for that kit.  So, what happens , people will be crying about having to pay more money for the kit.  On the other spectrum, the military modelers spend much more money on their kits because of the level of accuracy that those builders demand.  That's why there is so much more offered  because  builders are willing to pay for it.

Edited December 7, 2020 by GMP440

[Ace-Garageguy]

42 minutes ago, GMP440 said:

...Simply put , yes , the model kit companies  could add more accuracy if they really wanted to.  But , guess what;  the price of the kit will go up. 

Here's a little secret for you.

If something is 12" long, it doesn't cost any more to measure it and get 12" than to have some idiot chimp measure it and get 13".

It only costs more when the first clown gets 13", the tools get cut, and then somebody else has to fix the problem.

[niteowl7710]

Another secret would be 95% of the models sold go to people who don't care if the real thing is 12" long or 17" long. They buy what the magic styrene fairy defecates into Hobby Lobby when the shelves reset. 

When the majority of your customers don't care and you multiply it by all the loud mouthed derpage who think models should be priced like Halloween candy at Veteran's Day you have neither the inclination or budget to try harder. 

Aoshima has been 3D scanning kits for over a decade, Revell (US) had to this point scanned three...vehicles. I'll let you guys figure out the difference in overall customer expectations, sales price point, and budgets.

Edited December 8, 2020 by niteowl7710

[bobthehobbyguy]

2 hours ago, GMP440 said:

Very true.  Simply put , yes , the model kit companies  could add more accuracy if they really wanted to.  But , guess what;  the price of the kit will go up.  That kit that was $24.99 that is reproduced with more accuracy, builders would be paying at least $40 or more for that kit.  So, what happens , people will be crying about having to pay more money for the kit.  On the other spectrum, the military modelers spend much more money on their kits because of the level of accuracy that those builders demand.  That's why there is so much more offered  because  builders are willing to pay for it.

Exactly. 

Not all errors are bad measurements some are shape errors which need to be tweaked. Those errors are caused by interpretation of photos and not necessarily measurement errors.

Second there is no way to know what caused the error on the windshield for the jaguar. An incorrect original measurement is one possibility.

 

[the other Mike S.]

It might be the failed in translation communication process between Revell and the Chinese tooling designers in wang tang or whatever China.  Look at their previous new tool effort, the Fox body Mustang LX notchback.  That kit looked like it had 4 scale inches missing from the greenhouse height.  It was extremely noticeable, even on the box art, and encouraged me to not even consider the kit, even though I would have bought several if it looked more correct.

I think Round 2 even had some trouble with their tooling modifications of the AMT '70 Camaro Z28/RS to the non RS full bumper style.  Since the people who do this type of specialized work are employed in China, the people in charge at the corporate level, who may have oversight in this process, lose control fast once the ball gets rolling.  When this process took place in the states, the ability to keep track of the quality control was easier, especially when it came to popular U.S. based subjects.

The odd thing here is that the Jaguar XKE has international appeal, even in China for the middle class.  So, something like this should not really be happening anywhere in the world for a car like the XKE no matter what the country of origin or language may be.  Scanning may be the answer, but I don't think that process was readily available when Racing Champions/Ertl did a fantastic job on the new tool '70 Monte Carlo SS, '67 Impala fastback and the '62 Impala convertible.  Those new tools were pretty much spot on (especially the '70 Monte Carlo SS and '62 Impala convertible) to the real counterparts in 1:1 scale. 

Also, we didn't have to pay more for these kits as been alluded to in this thread.  These new tools were priced around the same price point as the rest of the product line up including the old tool reissues.  Paying more for more "accurate" model in 1/25th scale is too ludicrous to even comprehend.  If that's the corporate sentiment, they should just close up shop right now because $30-$35 is about the limit most people will pay for a 1/25th scale plastic kit.     

Edited December 8, 2020 by the other Mike S.

[iBorg]

On 12/5/2020 at 5:27 PM, Matt Bacon said:

Well, I imagine it's because Revell is a European company and brand these days, having proved that they can't make money as a US model kit maker any more. Do I put that entirely down to picking the "wrong" scale? No. But making odd-scale models of cars that have no relevance or following outside of one market is not a route to staying afloat when that market is not buying enough kits. It seems kinda perverse when the rest of the world, even the metric countries, are buying 1"=12 feet, 1"=6 feet, 1"= 4 feet, 1"=2 feet scale models (the less said about 1/35 the better) to pursue a 1cm=25cm scale, especially when those very metric countries are not making everything 1:100, 1:75, and 1:50...

Matt the issues wasn't Revell but Revell's owner Hobbico. In the simplest explanation, Hobbico tried to corner the US hobby market and seriously over extended the company. When Hobbico declared bankruptcy, the Hobbico assets were sold. Revell sold for much less than anyone would have expected. For the most part, the buyer bought the inventory on hand and got the mold, trademarks and other intellectual property for free.

 

[GMP440]

1 hour ago, the other Mike S. said:

It might be the failed in translation communication process between Revell and the Chinese tooling designers in wang tang or whatever China.  Look at their previous new tool effort, the Fox body Mustang LX notchback.  That kit looked like it had 4 scale inches missing from the greenhouse height.  It was extremely noticeable, even on the box art, and encouraged me to not even consider the kit, even though I would have bought several if it looked more correct.

I think Round 2 even had some trouble with their tooling modifications of the AMT '70 Camaro Z28/RS to the non RS full bumper style.  Since the people who do this type of specialized work are employed in China, the people in charge at the corporate level, who may have oversight in this process, lose control fast once the ball gets rolling.  When this process took place in the states, the ability to keep track of the quality control was easier, especially when it came to popular U.S. based subjects.

The odd thing here is that the Jaguar XKE has international appeal, even in China for the middle class.  So, something like this should not really be happening anywhere in the world for a car like the XKE no matter what the country of origin or language may be.  Scanning may be the answer, but I don't think that process was readily available when Racing Champions/Ertl did a fantastic job on the new tool '70 Monte Carlo SS, '67 Impala fastback and the '62 Impala convertible.  Those new tools were pretty much spot on (especially the '70 Monte Carlo SS and '62 Impala convertible) to the real counterparts in 1:1 scale. 

Also, we didn't have to pay more for these kits as been alluded to in this thread.  These new tools were priced around the same price point as the rest of the product line up including the old tool reissues.  Paying more for more "accurate" model in 1/25th scale is too ludicrous to even comprehend.  If that's the corporate sentiment, they should just close up shop right now because $30-$35 is about the limit most people will pay for a 1/25th scale plastic kit.     

  Very true about the price point.  However, you proved my point in your last sentence.  Model car builders will not pay more money for a kit even if its more accurate.

[the other Mike S.]

20 minutes ago, GMP440 said:

  Very true about the price point.  However, you proved my point in your last sentence.  Model car builders will not pay more money for a kit even if its more accurate.

That's the whole point though. Don't make accuracy related to price.  Amount of detail and the parts count?  Yeah, that's a given.  However, the basic proportions of the major parts (body) should be good whether it's a $30 kit or a $75+ kit.  I don't want cartoon kits that are cheap.  I wouldn't buy them if they were $2 each.

Edited December 8, 2020 by the other Mike S.

[Ace-Garageguy]

12 hours ago, the other Mike S. said:

That's the whole point though. Don't make accuracy related to price.  Amount of detail and the parts count?  Yeah, that's a given.  However, the basic proportions of the major parts (body) should be good whether it's a $30 kit or a $75+ kit. 

Dead on the money.

[Mr. Metallic]

13 hours ago, iBorg said:

Matt the issues wasn't Revell but Revell's owner Hobbico. In the simplest explanation, Hobbico tried to corner the US hobby market and seriously over extended the company. When Hobbico declared bankruptcy, the Hobbico assets were sold. Revell sold for much less than anyone would have expected. For the most part, the buyer bought the inventory on hand and got the mold, trademarks and other intellectual property for free.

 

Thank you for saying something. Revell US was doing quite well at the time. They didn't go bankrupt, their parent company did (Hobbico)

[Modelbuilder Mark]

On 12/5/2020 at 11:54 AM, Dragline said:

I personally will never understand the entire 1/25 Vs 1/24 thing.

Me either for the most part, I have projects that use both scale parts to complete, as some are oversized, some under anyway..so...

 

[Brudda]

On 12/7/2020 at 10:13 AM, bobthehobbyguy said:

First off the kits that have been done with scanning have come out spot on.

Second not all older kits were 100 percent correct.some were better than others. I seriously doubt that the wooden masters were perfect and a fair amount of wood filler was used to get it right. I see it as a fine tuning to get the product right. There is simply not the budget to afford the fine tuning in the past. Every process has its shortcomings. Its not necessarily that someone is not doing their job.

I'm just saying you have to look at the whole picture. Its not just a case that someone isn't doing their job in all cases.

I have to respond to this. I have a good friend that worked for revell when revell was in Southern California. He told me that revell would send 2 guys to measure a subject and have 2 days to complete the measurements. The Japanese would send 12 guys and stay a week measuring the same subject. Guess who is going to have a better product? But at a cost. The revell kit was sooo much cheaper. But the accuracy was a little off. The tamiya kit was spot on but the price was double. Each had their own market. But the  complaints still come. A good friend of mine that was a president of a big IPMS club, said it the best. “ Most modelers are very cheap. And most modelers will complain about anything. “ Hmmmmm

 

[peteski]

5 hours ago, Brudda said:

“ Most modelers are very cheap. And most modelers will complain about anything. “ Hmmmmm

That is the truth  - preach it brother, preach it! 

[Luc Janssens]

Found this...

 

 

[unclescott58]

13 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

Found this...

 

 

Despite not knowing the language. I assume it's German. I liked the review. And kit looks pretty good to me. 

[unclescott58]

On 12/4/2020 at 4:20 PM, Matt Bacon said:

Hasegawa... great kit, much opportunity to detail, easily available...

best,

M.

I didn't like the XJS when it first came out. It was, and is, nowhere near as pretty as the XK-E/E-Type it replaced. But, as time has gone on, I beginning to the like the looks of it more and more. It's still not as pretty as the E, but it sure has aged well. And I may have to get a model of it down the road. 

[samdiego]

Taking all of the above into consideration, just gimme it! And if you really love me, do the roadster with the accessory hard top so I don't have to build the Gunze in my collection. Now, what about the 1/8?

[Bill Eh?]

This kit kept popping up in my eBay searches. A vendor called shop_us_store, located in Chesterfield, UK has them. The price keeps changing, but hovers around mid to low $40 CDN range, shipping included. I did an additional eBay search and was pleasantly surprised. A company that I have made many CD purchases from, rarewaves.ca , also had them listed. They are also a UK based business. The listed price was $41, shipping included. I couldn't resist. Luc, many thanks for posting the unboxing video.

[GeeBee]

On 12/29/2020 at 4:49 PM, samdiego said:

Taking all of the above into consideration, just gimme it! And if you really love me, do the roadster with the accessory hard top so I don't have to build the Gunze in my collection. Now, what about the 1/8?

That's been released as a limited edition, so get it while you can 

[dbostream]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

That's been released as a limited edition, so get it while you can 

They had the same limited edition release 7 years ago I got one back then. A lot happened to the price tag during these 7 years and not in a good way...But considering what used kits go for today I guess it is still a good deal.

[Mike Chernecki]

I may have missed this in an earlier post, but what year is this Jag suppose to represent?

[Classicgas]

Got mine pre ordered. 

[GeeBee]

18 hours ago, Mike Chernecki said:

I may have missed this in an earlier post, but what year is this Jag suppose to represent?

It's a 1961-64 3.8 

[Mike Chernecki]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

It's a 1961-64 3.8 

Thank you

[Rodent]

24 minutes ago, Mike Chernecki said:

Thank you

Thank you +1