AMT kits suck!

[TransAmMike]

Everytime I see that '57 Chevy Steve I start to drool????.

[unclescott58]

4 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

Bold statement to make.

Building model kits is a learning curve, and yes some manufacturers and require more dry-fitting and adjusting before a bonding agent is applied  then others, but unbuildable no, more of a challenge yes.

Anyway maybe look at some videos from this guy, maybe you'll find the model that suits you the best and increase the skill lever as you go

 

Another great review from Chris. The guy is phenomenal. I love watching his builds. Rather sit there and complain about things, he builds some beautiful models. Oh, he'll tell you if there is a problem. But, then works on solution and tells you how he fixed it. I don't want my builds to be exact copies of his. But, using several his techniques, and some of his inspiration my models get a little bit better every time I work on one. Thank you Chris. 

By the way, I love his playful imagination. The story of delivering the red phone up to Wayne Manor. And he found a reasonable use for the squirrel!  

[1972coronet]

35 minutes ago, unclescott58 said:

Another great review from Chris. The guy is phenomenal. I love watching his builds. Rather sit there and complain about things, he builds some beautiful models. Oh, he'll tell you if there is a problem. But, then works on solution and tells you how he fixed it. I don't want my builds to be exact copies of his. But, using several his techniques, and some of his inspiration my models get a little bit better every time I work on one. Thank you Chris. 

I agree completely . I've learnt some techniques from him which have worked very well . 

I don't know why anyone would complain about Chris' techniques nor the outcome of his works ! He's having fun , which is the most important component of the hobby . 

[peteski]

One thing's for sure: Plumcrazy's bold statement sure spurred a very lively thread!

[misterNNL]

On 12/24/2020 at 2:02 PM, Chuck Most said:

Lofty expectations for a fifty year old kit, wouldn't you say? 

I will admit to not reading this entire thread so this may be redundant but those of us who were around at the dawn of the model kit industry can remember that the new annual kit releases were as highly anticipated as the new 1:1 real cars was. We accepted them as accurate and never looked back with the judgmental attitude displayed here. Those kits started as 1\10 scale wooden master models and then pantographed down to 1/25.

To compare those to today's computer generated and 3D printed offerings and expecting them to be equals  can't be done on a level playing field. If we weren't sure were something went or how it was mounted we had to look at the real thing to find out. It was a much different world of information then. No internet or Google to consult.

My suggestion is if you don't like AMT, just don't buy them. I have been building for over 60 years and have never built anything from Monogram and darn few from Revell there are no Japanese kits in my stash either. Guess which kit maker that leaves....You figure it out!

[Claude Thibodeau]

53 minutes ago, misterNNL said:

I will admit to not reading this entire thread so this may be redundant but those of us who were around at the dawn of the model kit industry can remember that the new annual kit releases were as highly anticipated as the new 1:1 real cars was. We accepted them as accurate and never looked back with the judgmental attitude displayed here. Those kits started as 1\10 scale wooden master models and then pantographed down to 1/25.

To compare those to today's computer generated and 3D printed offerings and expecting them to be equals  can't be done on a level playing field. If we weren't sure were something went or how it was mounted we had to look at the real thing to find out. It was a much different world of information then. No internet or Google to consult.

My suggestion is if you don't like AMT, just don't buy them. I have been building for over 60 years and have never built anything from Monogram and darn few from Revell there are no Japanese kits in my stash either. Guess which kit maker that leaves....You figure it out!

Hi Sir!

Just curious as to why you stayed away from Monogram and Revell kits... Do you care to expand on this?

Happy holidays to you and your wife!

CT

[cobraman]

Been building for over 50 years and lots of kits suck !  Some kits seem to fall together but where's the fun in that ?

[misterNNL]

37 minutes ago, Claude Thibodeau said:

Hi Sir!

Just curious as to why you stayed away from Monogram and Revell kits... Do you care to expand on this?

Happy holidays to you and your wife!

CT

The Monogram kit offerings were a different scale than the 1/25 stuff I was building and to be honest their box art was not exactly to my liking either. I have cut up some Monogram stuff for parts I could use in kit mash ups like my Anglia three window wip for the roof and a very early '34 street rid sedan I built in the late 60's. The Revell stuff I bought was very difficult to build like their '59 Ford retractable hardtop and '55 Chevy sedan.  I liked single piece bodies for customizing rather than thin walled multi-piece ones that tended to be warped right out of the box.

[Force]

Monogram usually was in 1:24th scale but they went to the common 1:25th scale for most of the kits in the 90's but that was under the Revell umbrella since they are the same company since many years.
Revell went away from multi piece bodies a long time ago so the bodies are one piece and 1:25th scale.
There has been nearly nothing new when it comes to car kits from Round 2, or RC2 before them, and Revell is the company who has done most of the new US car kits released the last 20 years together with Moebius and a couple others and the quality is quite good, so I don't understand why one would stay away from them.

[Cowpunk]

2 hours ago, misterNNL said:

Guess which kit maker that leaves....You figure it out!

It leaves a few (Lindberg, Polar Lights, ...) but my faves come from original MPC molds no matter what brand name is on the box.

[unclescott58]

57 minutes ago, Cowpunk said:

It leaves a few (Lindberg, Polar Lights, ...) but my faves come from original MPC molds no matter what brand name is on the box.

There are some Polar Lights, and even Lindberg kits that are pretty good. Now Palmer and Premier kits are another story. They do suck. Despite that, if the right Palmer kit comes along I'll buy it (read '72 or '73 Thunderbird). 

[BlackSheep214]

2 hours ago, cobraman said:

Been building for over 50 years and lots of kits suck !  Some kits seem to fall together but where's the fun in that ?

That is the most intelligent answer ever. Why didn’t I think of that response earlier? LOL!

[Chuck Most]

6 hours ago, misterNNL said:

 

To compare those to today's computer generated and 3D printed offerings and expecting them to be equals  can't be done on a level playing field. If we weren't sure were something went or how it was mounted we had to look at the real thing to find out. It was a much different world of information then. No internet or Google to consult.

Exactly what I'm saying. And all of that's before you take into account wear and tear on the mold, something that won't apply to a newer kit for a while. 

[Force]

7 hours ago, Cowpunk said:

It leaves a few (Lindberg, Polar Lights, ...) but my faves come from original MPC molds no matter what brand name is on the box.

Well there are realisticly just three manufacturers of US car and truck kits to talk about today as many of the older brands has been bought and merged with others.
Round 2 who owns AMT, MPC, Lindberg, Polar Lights and some ERTL molds.
Revell who owns the Monogram brand.
Moebius Models now owned by Pegasus Hobbies.
Occationally some others do too but these three above are the main ones who does the majority of the US car and truck kits we have today, lately Atlantis and Salvinos Jr are coming on and has bought some old molds from other brands and produces some car kits.
So it's not like it was back in the 60's and 70's when all these brands were separate companies, and many like Jo-Han and other smaller brands are gone forever.

Edited December 27, 2020 by Force

[Sandboarder]

Ok so I’ve read most of this thread and I’m going to throw my 2 cents in. So I’m talking to Plumcrazy Preston as it seems the majority here are AMT fan boys.

 

From my experience AMT kits have a softer plastic and usually have loose fitting location pins and more flash then other brands.

 

Ive built old Revell kits that are just as bad. I’ve built new AMT and Revell kits (from the last 12 years) that I felt weren’t good enough. Now that opinion is base on the price paid for the quality of product. 

 

Of all the kits I’ve built not many can be built without test fitting most parts before painting. Lots of stuff needs sanding and extra work to locate parts. So I would build 2-3 kits from each manufacturer before you choose to stay away from a brand. 

 

Not everyone wants to put in that extra work and I’ve seen threads on here discussing why builders are turning to different subjects like planes, tanks or Gunpla. Maybe it’s to do with the kits quality and the enjoyment those builders are getting from those kits/subjects of model.

 

I feel that everyone here should hold any model kit manufacturer to a higher standard if they are just pumping out kits of a 60 year old mould. They’ve made enough money off the mould to be able to re-tool and reward the loyal fans with a better building experience. 

 

If you want to know what standard I think kits should be made to in this day and age. We have some incredible technology that wasn’t even thought of 15 years ago. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to say if Bandai can hand check and repair faults in moulds etc that every model kit manufacturer should be able to do the same. 

 

[Plowboy]

Something to remember also is that it's those tough kits that will make you a better builder. You will learn patience, perseverance, problem solving and new curse words along the way. But, when you stick it on the shelf, you'll have more pride in it than an easy kit. I'll take a tough kit with fit issues and an accurate body over an easy kit with lousy proportions any day.   

[unclescott58]

[Classicgas]

Lol

[Claude Thibodeau]

13 hours ago, misterNNL said:

The Monogram kit offerings were a different scale than the 1/25 stuff I was building and to be honest their box art was not exactly to my liking either. I have cut up some Monogram stuff for parts I could use in kit mash ups like my Anglia three window wip for the roof and a very early '34 street rid sedan I built in the late 60's. The Revell stuff I bought was very difficult to build like their '59 Ford retractable hardtop and '55 Chevy sedan.  I liked single piece bodies for customizing rather than thin walled multi-piece ones that tended to be warped right out of the box.

Hi Sir!

I see. Thanks for the answer!

CT

[Vince Nemanic]

Tamiya kits build really nicely. Just saying.

[Erik Smith]

4 hours ago, Sandboarder said:

If you want to know what standard I think kits should be made to in this day and age. We have some incredible technology that wasn’t even thought of 15 years ago. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to say if Bandai can hand check and repair faults in moulds etc that every model kit manufacturer should be able to do the same. 

Yeah, but those kits have hundreds of parts, different colored sprues (sometimes, magically, different colors on the same sprue), and cost too...oh, wait:

[Bill Eh?]

3 hours ago, Sandboarder said:

Ok so I’ve read most of this thread and I’m going to throw my 2 cents in. So I’m talking to Plumcrazy Preston as it seems the majority here are AMT fan boys.

 

From my experience AMT kits have a softer plastic and usually have loose fitting location pins and more flash then other brands.

 

Ive built old Revell kits that are just as bad. I’ve built new AMT and Revell kits (from the last 12 years) that I felt weren’t good enough. Now that opinion is base on the price paid for the quality of product. 

 

Of all the kits I’ve built not many can be built without test fitting most parts before painting. Lots of stuff needs sanding and extra work to locate parts. So I would build 2-3 kits from each manufacturer before you choose to stay away from a brand. 

 

Not everyone wants to put in that extra work and I’ve seen threads on here discussing why builders are turning to different subjects like planes, tanks or Gunpla. Maybe it’s to do with the kits quality and the enjoyment those builders are getting from those kits/subjects of model.

 

I feel that everyone here should hold any model kit manufacturer to a higher standard if they are just pumping out kits of a 60 year old mould. They’ve made enough money off the mould to be able to re-tool and reward the loyal fans with a better building experience. 

 

If you want to know what standard I think kits should be made to in this day and age. We have some incredible technology that wasn’t even thought of 15 years ago. So I don’t think it’s a stretch to say if Bandai can hand check and repair faults in moulds etc that every model kit manufacturer should be able to do the same. 

 

I am not an "AMT fan boy" , nor is AMT my favourite brand. However, the portion of your post, that I placed in bold, is both misleading and inaccurate. This has been covered in multiple past threads, and explained very well by Tom Geiger. The molds that constitute AMT kits are currently owned by Round 2. They have passed through varied hands of ownership.  Each time a new owner has bought them, that new owner rightly should make money from their new asset. So the molds are not in fact written-off any longer. I am thinking that that your lack of knowledge about this aspect of model kit history, led you to make this incorrect statement. Having differing opinions is fine. Drawing conclusions from incorrect facts... not so much.

[peteski]

Looks to me like Plumcrazy just wanted to vent.  If he was hoping for sympathy, he didn't get much.  He might already be off on another project, because AMT trucks (and making custom decals) are just too difficult do deal with. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

4 hours ago, Sandboarder said:

... it seems the majority here are AMT fan boys.

Nope. Not at all.

We recognize the flaws in some of the old kits. 

But we elect to deal with them rather than whining and saying an entire product lineup "sucks" (except for Palmer and Premier, which are pretty much irredeemable).

Same goes for the multiple flaws and inaccuracies in many new kits.

We mention them, complain some, but either accept them, don't buy the kit in question, or opt to correct them.

Big boys...not "fan boys".

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

8 minutes ago, Bill Eh? said:

...Drawing conclusions from incorrect facts... not so much.

Sadly, that's SOP for many in the interdweeb age.