Round 2 November 2022 Product Spotlight

[tim boyd]

3 hours ago, Plowboy said:

The results on the Bronco and Charger speak for themselves. As does the Foose F-100 and Eldorod. Doesn't it cost to make corrections to to the tooling also? How much time is lost going back and forth with test shots and corrections?

Seems to me that 3D printing doesn't always equal accurate. The Moebius '65 Nova was printed and the roof on that kit is butchered 'til hell wouldn't even have it. It had to have cost them to change the window openings, door panels and glass trying to hide the chopped roof.  

The Moebius Nova and Chevy II sedan Gasser kits were not based on a digitally scanned 1/1 car to my understanding, which was the primary discussion taking part above in this thread. 

During the model kit project development, an early version of the data set (not derived from 1/1 scale digital scanning) was 3D printed, again to my understanding, which was the prototype shown several years ago. 

Also, as has been discussed at length on other threads here, my research led me to the conclusion that the Chevy II Gasser two door sedan roof was not chopped.  It appeared as chopped because there was an exaggerated height to a molding along top of the door and quarter panels, which visually served to reduce the DLO (daylight opening above the sill and below the roof).  When Moebius made adjustments to the tooling to address this issue, the concerns about the roof appearing chopped seemed to me to largely disappear in the model car hobby.  Having said that, I again acknowledge that some others (including yourself) see this differently.  I also do agree with some of your other critiques of the final roof design, although to my eye they are minor enough that they do not impact me personally enough to keep me from building the kit again a second time. 

The question you pose on costs of digitally scanning 1/1 scale cars vs. having to redo tooling to address proportion issues is one that I too have questioned for a long time.  Even fifteen years ago, the costs to digitally scan a 1/1 were only in the mid 4-dgit range (at least to 1/1 scale automotive manufacturers), and certainly would have gone down in cost since then.  As alluded to in Steve's post above, the real cost hit was in the personnel and hours to take the resulting digital data, process it, and adapt it for a scale model kit tool.   At the time, Revell was not willing to take that step, but in more recent years (including the kits you referenced, as well as the Starsky and Hutch car (I am told)) have proven (I hope) to Revell that the investment in 1/1 scale digital scanning is worth it in the long run.  How those economics affect a smaller volume manufacturer like Moebius (where much of the kit development is largely done by one person to my understanding), I could not say.  I hope the economics evolve to the point where 1/1 scale digital scanning becomes more of a given in pretty much all kit development, as I share the belief of many here that it does lead to a more authentic scale replica.  

Best...TB 

Edited November 6, 2022 by tim boyd

[Luc Janssens]

14 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

The Moebius Nova and Chevy II sedan Gasser kits were not based on a digitally scanned 1/1 car to my understanding, which was the primary discussion taking part above in this thread. 

During the model kit project development, an early version of the data set (not derived from 1/1 scale digital scanning) was 3D printed, again to my understanding, which was the prototype shown several years ago. 

Also, as has been discussed at length on other threads here, my research led me to the conclusion that the Chevy II Gasser two door sedan roof was not chopped.  It appeared as chopped because there was an exaggerated height to a molding along top of the door and quarter panels, which visually served to reduce the DLO (daylight opening above the sill and below the roof).  When Moebius made adjustments to the tooling to address this issue, the concerns about the roof appearing chopped seemed to me to largely disappear in the model car hobby.  Having said that, I again acknowledge that some others (including yourself) see this differently.  I also do agree with some of your other critiques of the final roof design, although to my eye they are minor enough that they do not impact me personally enough to keep me from building the kit again a second time. 

The question you pose on costs of digitally scanning 1/1 scale cars vs. having to redo tooling to address proportion issues is one that I too have questioned for a long time.  Even fifteen years ago, the costs to digitally scan a 1/1 were only in the mid 4-dgit range (at least to 1/1 scale automotive manufacturers), and certainly would have gone down in cost since then.  As alluded to in Steve's post above, the real cost hit was in the personnel and hours to take the resulting digital data, process it, and adapt it for a scale model kit tool.   At the time, Revell was not willing to take that step, but in more recent years (including the kits you referenced, as well as the Starsky and Hutch car (I am told)) have proven (I hope) to Revell that the investment in 1/1 scale digital scanning is worth it in the long run.  How those economics affect a smaller volume manufacturer like Moebius (where much of the kit development is largely done by one person to my understanding), I could not say.  I hope the economics evolve to the point where 1/1 scale digital scanning becomes more of a given in pretty much all kit development, as I share the belief of many here that it does lead to a more authentic scale replica.  

Best...TB 

Thank Tim for explaining, while knowing more or less how a model kit is created, it's always good to hear the specifics, pro's/con's and costs of going this or that route.

[Joe Nunes]

Good post, Tim. I would have to add that with today’s rising price point with regards to the future of new model kits, authentic scale replication will become very important to the model kit buyer when deciding whether or not they take the wallet out at the checkout counter. 
Joe

[Luc Janssens]

11 hours ago, Joe Nunes said:

Good post, Tim. I would have to add that with today’s rising price point with regards to the future of new model kits, authentic scale replication will become very important to the model kit buyer when deciding whether or not they take the wallet out at the checkout counter. 
Joe

Indeed, the automotive side of modelling is gradually morphing from toy to replica, catering to a much smaller but demanding group of customers.

Trying to get kids involved is a total waste of recourses cuz in their mind, there is so much cooler stuff to do then static modelling

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Luc Janssens
kids not kits

[SteveG]

7 hours ago, Plowboy said:

The results on the Bronco and Charger speak for themselves. As does the Foose F-100 and Eldorod. Doesn't it cost to make corrections to to the tooling also? How much time is lost going back and forth with test shots and corrections?

Seems to me that 3D printing doesn't always equal accurate. The Moebius '65 Nova was printed and the roof on that kit is butchered 'til hell wouldn't even have it. It had to have cost them to change the window openings, door panels and glass trying to hide the chopped roof.  

Both of our modern tools Dodge Charger and the Ford Bronco started with factory supplied date, the Moebius Chevy Nova's were done the old-fashioned way starting with photographs and measurements.  The 3D mockups are really just an evaluation tool, a bridge between 3D design and the tooling.  There's a lot that can and does go wrong during the whole process.  For example, I have had it where a certain part has gone through several design changes until finally approved.  Only to discover later during a test shot review that the tooling was cut from one of the earlier file versions or even where a completely wrong part file was used.  It's happened more than once, it just human error.   All those fixes take time and in many cases after the tooling been cut, cost extra money. 

-Steve 

 

[stavanzer]

For my Money, I'd like to see some serious effort spent on extending existing kits to get more variants out of the them. Since Pick Up Trucks are thin on the ground, I'd like to see parts restored to the (78) Ford Camper Special and (78) Dodge Pickup.

The Ford has the "Star Truk" & "Tuff Truk" versions and the '77 that has a Camper Shell (aka Topper) that would make great additions to the kit. Simply Cloning the Star Truck's larger Chrome Tree with its 73-76 Grill and putting the Shell/ Topper back in the box would yield a couple more kits that could be sold.

The Dodge had even more potential. The LRE (Little Red Express) short bed could come back as is, and adding the 4x4 Parts for the Warlock Version would be great. Adding the 4x4 to the Longbed, would make it possible to bring back the Baja Brute. I know that Round2 understands how much expansion there is in the Dodge. 

I just wish that a new version would come out soon. Preferably with a backdated grille, and a Complete Chrome tree, rather than the somewhat shortened one in the kit. Be nice to have all for LRE 5 Slot Rims dished the same way too. 

[Plowboy]

19 hours ago, tim boyd said:

The Moebius Nova and Chevy II sedan Gasser kits were not based on a digitally scanned 1/1 car to my understanding, which was the primary discussion taking part above in this thread. 

During the model kit project development, an early version of the data set (not derived from 1/1 scale digital scanning) was 3D printed, again to my understanding, which was the prototype shown several years ago. 

Also, as has been discussed at length on other threads here, my research led me to the conclusion that the Chevy II Gasser two door sedan roof was not chopped.  It appeared as chopped because there was an exaggerated height to a molding along top of the door and quarter panels, which visually served to reduce the DLO (daylight opening above the sill and below the roof).  When Moebius made adjustments to the tooling to address this issue, the concerns about the roof appearing chopped seemed to me to largely disappear in the model car hobby.  Having said that, I again acknowledge that some others (including yourself) see this differently.  I also do agree with some of your other critiques of the final roof design, although to my eye they are minor enough that they do not impact me personally enough to keep me from building the kit again a second time. 

  

Best...TB 

Sorry Tim, but measurements with a digital caliper prove that the top is chopped on the Moebius Nova sedan. Right at 1.5 scale inches. Measurements also proves that the backlight is eight scale inches too narrow and the headlights are a scale inch too small. You can find all of the Nova's dimensions on Nova Resource. com. Personally, I doubt I'll ever buy another Moebius kit. If there's a kit company that needs to do things differently, it's Moebius. 

[tim boyd]

56 minutes ago, Plowboy said:

Sorry Tim, but measurements with a digital caliper prove that the top is chopped on the Moebius Nova sedan. Right at 1.5 scale inches. Measurements also proves that the backlight is eight scale inches too narrow and the headlights are a scale inch too small. You can find all of the Nova's dimensions on Nova Resource. com. Personally, I doubt I'll ever buy another Moebius kit. If there's a kit company that needs to do things differently, it's Moebius. 

Roger, I agree with your comments on the backlight width and respectfully disagree on the top leaving an as built "chopped" appearance.  To each his own, I guess, but thanks for the response and your info.  TIM     

[Dave Darby]

17 hours ago, stavanzer said:

For my Money, I'd like to see some serious effort spent on extending existing kits to get more variants out of the them. Since Pick Up Trucks are thin on the ground, I'd like to see parts restored to the (78) Ford Camper Special and (78) Dodge Pickup.

The Ford has the "Star Truk" & "Tuff Truk" versions and the '77 that has a Camper Shell (aka Topper) that would make great additions to the kit. Simply Cloning the Star Truck's larger Chrome Tree with its 73-76 Grill and putting the Shell/ Topper back in the box would yield a couple more kits that could be sold.

The Dodge had even more potential. The LRE (Little Red Express) short bed could come back as is, and adding the 4x4 Parts for the Warlock Version would be great. Adding the 4x4 to the Longbed, would make it possible to bring back the Baja Brute. I know that Round2 understands how much expansion there is in the Dodge. 

I just wish that a new version would come out soon. Preferably with a backdated grille, and a Complete Chrome tree, rather than the somewhat shortened one in the kit. Be nice to have all for LRE 5 Slot Rims dished the same way too. 

While we're at it, I'd love to see Round 2 backdate their Dodge van to a 76. (Yeah, that would likely involve tooling a new body.) And while I'm dreaming, a 1/25 scale version of the 1/20 scale MPC 71 Ford Econoline.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Dave Darby

[Stef]

7 hours ago, Dave Darby said:

...1/25 scale version of the 1/20 scale MPC 71 Ford Econoline.

Agreed. Also, want STUNT VAN to come back something fierce.

[Mike C.]

Any info on the release date Firestone Wide Oval tire pack? I can't seem to find any info anywhere.

[Plowboy]

On 11/7/2022 at 8:01 PM, Stef said:

Agreed. Also, want STUNT VAN to come back something fierce.

That van has misleading boxart. It shows the early grille with round headlights. But, actually has the newer grille with the square headlights. I bought one thinking it had the early grille. IIRC, it also doesn't have chrome wheels.

[Luc Janssens]

42 minutes ago, Plowboy said:

That van has misleading boxart. It shows the early grille with round headlights. But, actually has the newer grille with the square headlights. I bought one thinking it had the early grille. IIRC, it also doesn't have chrome wheels.

You need this one then...

[Plowboy]

2 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

You need this one then...

I know. I was going to build that one with the Stunt Van. I figured the only difference was the decals. I'd really rather have that one as it's molded in white. I may just use the chassis from the Stunt Van under an AMT van.

[Stef]

7 hours ago, Plowboy said:

That van has misleading boxart. It shows the early grille with round headlights. But, actually has the newer grille with the square headlights. I bought one thinking it had the early grille. IIRC, it also doesn't have chrome wheels.

Pretty sure you're right about the non-chrome wheels, though I'd swear my Stunt Van did come with the round headlight grille. Maybe I traded it with a friend to block out the psychological damage.

These days, I'd gladly take whatever 4x4 version they rerelease.

And speaking of 80s 4x4 Fords, waiting for the ex-MPC 1981 Bronco (Ridge Runner, Dust Devil), to make a comeback, too.

[Robberbaron]

On 11/7/2022 at 7:01 PM, Stef said:

Agreed. Also, want STUNT VAN to come back something fierce.

After seeing the decals on the "Stunt Van", all I can think of is Milhouse's Halloween costume:

 

[Oldcarfan27]

3 hours ago, Robberbaron said:

After seeing the decals on the "Stunt Van", all I can think of is Milhouse's Halloween costume:

That's just advertising what the truck can do. Just like the General Lee! ?

And it would drive off into the sunset.

[stavanzer]

On 11/9/2022 at 8:23 PM, Stef said:

And speaking of 80s 4x4 Fords, waiting for the ex-MPC 1981 Bronco (Ridge Runner, Dust Devil), to make a comeback, too.

Stef has this Right. I hope the MPC Bronco can join the line up someday, too.