Preferences

[Donny]

So after a fair bit of research, I see Revell and AMT pretty much have the market. Back in the day when I built my first kit, don't really want to go there, too long ago, AMT was the most popular then Revell. On my recent checking, it looks the other way around, depending what hobby store you check. I found some stores almost exclusive AMT and others Revell, the minor players filling in the gaps. So, I ask, in the learned opinions of my colleagues, is there a preferred brand by you guys, quality, content, price, etc.

 Don     

[MeatMan]

You'll get a lot of different answers to that one! 

[Can-Con]

You can't really judge a kit by the maker in that broad of terms. Most of the model companies have been in business for many decades and still reissue a variety of kits from all of them, right from the early '60s to brand new freshly designed kits so the quality varies wildly.

You pretty well have to take each kit on it's own merit.

Just ask on this forum about any kit you're interested in and you'll get a lot better answers.

[Fat Brian]

I agree that each kit is very much its own animal and there are winners and lovers of every brand. But, especially with younger builders Revell is making a better name for themselves than AMT/MPC due to a larger portion of their tools being newer and in better condition. The General Lee alone has caused a lot of disappointment among younger builders on Reddit.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I don't really care who the manufacturer is. I buy a kit primarily based on subject matter and accuracy of the major bits (so it looks like what it's supposed to be) and deal with whatever warts it has as they come up.

[espo]

Going back many years, the popularity of which model company offered the best kits had to do with the subject and how accurately the company captured the body and interior proportions along with the engine and chassis parts. All of these things have evolved over time. The original AMT and some of its later companies may have had an advantage in that they also had the Promo contracts with GM and Ford. Revell was offering multipart bodies that could be intimidating for many modelers. JoHan had very nice bodies, but the interior buckets were visually shallow. Through the years as the model building community proved to be finically viable to their business, they all started to make vast improvements in the accuracy of body and trim along with interiors. The basic chassis platform gave way to a more accurate chassis with even some separate suspension parts. The generic looking engine lumps became recognizable as to manufacturer and even whether it represented a small block or a big block engine. Interiors buckets became flat floors with separate door and interior panels along with separate rear seats as well as fronts along with bucket seats and even consols. All along the way the accuracy and detail has been constantly improving to the point now that we as builders whine over every little fly dropping in the pepper. Who's the best? Depends on the subject matter and the time frame of when the kit was designed. I feel that as a group we have an awful lot to be thankful for based on what is available to us to build. Now you can just put a program in your little printer and create just about anything you can imagine. Man, we sure have it tuff don't we.      

[Donny]

3 hours ago, espo said:

Going back many years, the popularity of which model company offered the best kits had to do with the subject and how accurately the company captured the body and interior proportions along with the engine and chassis parts. All of these things have evolved over time. The original AMT and some of its later companies may have had an advantage in that they also had the Promo contracts with GM and Ford. Revell was offering multipart bodies that could be intimidating for many modelers. JoHan had very nice bodies, but the interior buckets were visually shallow. Through the years as the model building community proved to be finically viable to their business, they all started to make vast improvements in the accuracy of body and trim along with interiors. The basic chassis platform gave way to a more accurate chassis with even some separate suspension parts. The generic looking engine lumps became recognizable as to manufacturer and even whether it represented a small block or a big block engine. Interiors buckets became flat floors with separate door and interior panels along with separate rear seats as well as fronts along with bucket seats and even consols. All along the way the accuracy and detail has been constantly improving to the point now that we as builders whine over every little fly dropping in the pepper. Who's the best? Depends on the subject matter and the time frame of when the kit was designed. I feel that as a group we have an awful lot to be thankful for based on what is available to us to build. Now you can just put a program in your little printer and create just about anything you can imagine. Man, we sure have it tuff don't we.      

Thanks David, great reply/info. Having built a few models back in my "younger" days, I can see the difference in then and now detail. Reading your reply, yes,  "Man, we sure have it tuff don't we." Along with all this great detail, unfortunately comes cost. As I've delved more deeply into the requirements for car modelling and discovered this extra detail, I have also discovered the cost. Over time as everything evolved, so has the cost. I don't have a problem with that, that's life as they say, with all that extra that I really like, you need extra paints, tools, etc. As I have been out of the hobby for so long, it came as a bit of a surprise what is needed to complete your model to your satisfaction with all this extra detail. I look at the cost of items in the US and drool, in Australia because of the lousy exchange rate the kits and other items cost so much more, and a lot of the kits have to be purchased through Amazon and Ebay which adds freight. Playing catchup, this week I spent about $800 for a few kits and other items, the upside is, I don't drink, well the occasional port, or smoke, so what else do I have to spend it on. I acknowledge that had I been doing this over time, I would not have to spend big amounts now but been adding items along the way as you guys are/have been doing. What the hell, in the end I'm going to have a ball doing/using it all for my enjoyment.       

[Donny]

8 hours ago, Can-Con said:

You can't really judge a kit by the maker in that broad of terms. Most of the model companies have been in business for many decades and still reissue a variety of kits from all of them, right from the early '60s to brand new freshly designed kits so the quality varies wildly.

You pretty well have to take each kit on it's own merit.

Just ask on this forum about any kit you're interested in and you'll get a lot better answers.

Thanks Steve, I was really interested in what you guys thought re what kits had improved over the years, and from my own observations, not having been involved in it for so long, what the differences/improvement had been in that period.

Don

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Donny said:

...I was really interested in what you guys thought re what kits had improved over the years, and from my own observations, not having been involved in it for so long, what the differences/improvement had been in that period.

In general, AMT-labeled kits haven't evolved all that much. There were some bleak years where accuracy suffered, but their current offerings are very similar to the best of their work in the 1960s. Some are re-releases of quite old kits, and some are very nicely entirely retooled.

Revell has lost some accuracy as far as mechanical bits in some kits go, but has gained a little in ease of assembly.

For example, for all the complaining about the "fiddly" nature of their early '29-'31 Ford kits and all the re-releases of same...

  

...I consider them superior in a number of ways to their more recently tooled versions and re-releases, though the later kits ARE easier to build.

  

SOME current/fairly recent Revell offerings are re-releases of much earlier kits (Revell of Germany) but are generally excellent in my opinion. For example...

Many of the kits from Atlantis are '60s-vintage Revell tooling in new packaging.

   

Japanese kits like Tamiya and Fujimi are pretty consistently high quality with a lot of parts and detail. There are other Japanese and knockoff kits that are of uneven quality and accuracy in even major proportions and lines.

There are several lower-volume manufacturers like Salvinos and some I can't recall at the moment that make interesting, good quality stuff too.

Search for specific opinions here before buying a particular kit.

And note: I'm only referring to injection molded styrene. Resin is a whole 'nother ball game.

 

Edited Monday at 11:38 PM by Ace-Garageguy

[stavanzer]

Donny. Not sure what the Discount Store/Low Price landscape is in Australia, but while it is great to have quality tools, I've seen guys build masterpieces with Old Nail Clippers, and Emory Boards. I'm saying start small, and add tools as you determine the need for them.

You can make a great start with the Tamiya Basic Tool kit.

https://www.tamiyausa.com/shop/tools/basic-tool-set/

Sprue Nippers, Knife and a simple File. The tools will be great quailty, and I expect it would be easier to buy them at a hobby shop there, than here in the U.S.

Add some fine files and sanding films, and you have a good basic set to start from, for model building.

Good Luck, and Have Fun!

I am glad you are here!

Alan

[Donny]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

In general, AMT-labeled kits haven't evolved all that much. There were some bleak years where accuracy suffered, but their current offerings are very similar to the best of their work in the 1960s. Some are re-releases of quite old kits, and some are very nicely entirely retooled.

Revell has lost some accuracy as far as mechanical bits in some kits go, but has gained a little in ease of assembly.

For example, for all the complaining about the "fiddly" nature of their early '29-'31 Ford kits and all the re-releases of same...

  

...I consider them superior in a number of ways to their more recently tooled versions and re-releases, though the later kits ARE easier to build.

  

SOME current/fairly recent Revell offerings are re-releases of much earlier kits (Revell of Germany) but are generally excellent in my opinion. For example...

Many of the kits from Atlantis are '60s-vintage Revell tooling in new packaging.

   

Japanese kits like Tamiya and Fujimi are pretty consistently high quality with a lot of parts and detail. There are other Japanese and knockoff kits that are of uneven quality and accuracy in even major proportions and lines.

There are several lower-volume manufacturers like Salvinos and some I can't recall at the moment that make interesting, good quality stuff too.

Search for specific opinions here before buying a particular kit.

And note: I'm only referring to injection molded styrene. Resin is a whole 'nother ball game.

 

Thanks Bill. As I've been away from the hobby for so long, it's good to get some catchup info. I'm a bit of a "rodder" fan, and have the '29 Ford A to build somewhere along the line after my current '40 build. I'll see how that goes first.

Don

[THarrison351]

I have too many unbuilts too want more, but I lean to getting releases from Moebius and Salvinos JR occasionally. Otherwise, it's the rerererereleased stuff that don't have from the domestics. I've built Tamiya and Hasegawa, but there's no real challenge from those.

[Janice Berry]

I’ve built both recently and tend to prefer Revell—better fit and cleaner details. AMT has some great subjects, especially older cars, but the quality can vary. Price is usually similar, so it depends on the kit.

[Donny]

2 hours ago, THarrison351 said:

I have too many unbuilts too want more, but I lean to getting releases from Moebius and Salvinos JR occasionally. Otherwise, it's the rerererereleased stuff that don't have from the domestics. I've built Tamiya and Hasegawa, but there's no real challenge from those.

Don't know Moebius Tm, I'm a new boy LOL, haven't caught up yet

Don

[Donny]

1 hour ago, Janice Berry said:

I’ve built both recently and tend to prefer Revell—better fit and cleaner details. AMT has some great subjects, especially older cars, but the quality can vary. Price is usually similar, so it depends on the kit.

I haven't been back long enough to be able to make a judgement Janice

Don

[Donny]

8 hours ago, stavanzer said:

Donny. Not sure what the Discount Store/Low Price landscape is in Australia, but while it is great to have quality tools, I've seen guys build masterpieces with Old Nail Clippers, and Emory Boards. I'm saying start small, and add tools as you determine the need for them.

You can make a great start with the Tamiya Basic Tool kit.

https://www.tamiyausa.com/shop/tools/basic-tool-set/

Sprue Nippers, Knife and a simple File. The tools will be great quailty, and I expect it would be easier to buy them at a hobby shop there, than here in the U.S.

Add some fine files and sanding films, and you have a good basic set to start from, for model building.

Good Luck, and Have Fun!

I am glad you are here!

Alan

Thanks Alan, I'm not too bad off for tools, having been doing some MRR for my grandson, and I added a few more in the last few weeks. I bought that one you have recommended, good starting point for model car building. Thankis for the welcome and advice.

Don

[Chris V]

You'll find there are about as many opinions as people to respond: Essentially it's mostly a matter of personal preferences. 

It's important to remember that the larger makes have been around for many decades, and thus their tooling archives reflect the technical advancements and changing consumer preferences throughout history. Furthermore there's no definitive correlation between the age of the tooling and quality of the model: Some models dating back to the early sixties are amazingly enjoyable to build and feature an impressive level of detail, while others are crude and toylike with the added risk of worn or damaged tooling. However, even newly tooled kits can be somewhat simplified and suffer from poorly fitting parts and accuracy issues, bodywork proportions being one of the most commonly noted issues.  

As a glutton for punishment I sometimes opt to base my builds on kits known to have certain issues or shortcomings - just to prove a point that they can in fact be built into nice models.

[stavanzer]

You are most welcome, Donny.

[Ace-Garageguy]

5 hours ago, Donny said:

Don't know Moebius Tm, I'm a new boy LOL, haven't caught up yet

Don

I very stupidly left out Moebius. They make some absolutely BEAUTIFUL models of vehicles nobody else has kitted (for the most part).

Just a few examples:

    

AND...they've purchased the tooling and re-released the excellent Galaxie Chevy kits we were afraid were gone forever:

    

[Ace-Garageguy]

The Lindberg name is also still around, having been picked up by Round2, like AMT, MPC, and Polar Lights.

The kits are all re-releases, some originally tooled by other manufacturers.

Quality and accuracy vary from kit to kit, but there is some very fine stuff in their catalogue too.

      

Their '53 Fords are among my favorite kits, and can make exquisite models, as below, built by Marcos Cruz:

 

Edited yesterday at 02:00 PM by Ace-Garageguy

[rattle can man]

to me, subject matter determines what I buy. In the end it depends on what you make out of a kit. You can build a good (or bad) model out of any kit, and you can build good models with just basic tools and spray paint.

[Ace-Garageguy]

30 minutes ago, rattle can man said:

...You can build a good...model out of any kit, and you can build good models with just basic tools and spray paint.

Entirely true, but some kits are so bad they'll fight you every step of the way, and require significant rework to even look like what they're supposed to represent.

And "basic tools" are undoubtedly sufficient, provided they're good quality tools used correctly.

Some of the knockoff "offshore" stuff like fake X-Actos with plastic collets and flexible blades, cheap drills that won't even go through plastic once, and "sprue cutters" with misaligned, soft jaws with blunt cutting edges aren't worth whatever you pay for them, no matter how little.

Things like cheap sandpaper and bargain-store blue tape are just more problems waiting to bite you.

Garbage tools and materials only lead to frustration and disappointment.

AND...some spray paint is entirely unsuited to building styrene models and can actually destroy the surface, so due-diligence by researching here on the forum or asking specific questions is advisable.

We're here to help.

We've already made every mistake you can make, and we'd like to save you as much grief as possible.

 

Edited yesterday at 03:02 PM by Ace-Garageguy

[espo]

19 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

In general, AMT-labeled kits haven't evolved all that much. There were some bleak years where accuracy suffered, but their current offerings are very similar to the best of their work in the 1960s. Some are re-releases of quite old kits, and some are very nicely entirely retooled.

Revell has lost some accuracy as far as mechanical bits in some kits go, but has gained a little in ease of assembly.

For example, for all the complaining about the "fiddly" nature of their early '29-'31 Ford kits and all the re-releases of same...

  

...I consider them superior in a number of ways to their more recently tooled versions and re-releases, though the later kits ARE easier to build.

  

SOME current/fairly recent Revell offerings are re-releases of much earlier kits (Revell of Germany) but are generally excellent in my opinion. For example...

Many of the kits from Atlantis are '60s-vintage Revell tooling in new packaging.

   

Japanese kits like Tamiya and Fujimi are pretty consistently high quality with a lot of parts and detail. There are other Japanese and knockoff kits that are of uneven quality and accuracy in even major proportions and lines.

There are several lower-volume manufacturers like Salvinos and some I can't recall at the moment that make interesting, good quality stuff too.

Search for specific opinions here before buying a particular kit.

And note: I'm only referring to injection molded styrene. Resin is a whole 'nother ball game.

 

I have to agree with you about the AMT label kits, but many today are reissues from Round 2. Going way back AMT had issues beyond my comprehension having to do with management, money, and constant changes in ownership. I think too little attention was spent on new product development.  

[Donny]

7 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

I very stupidly left out Moebius. They make some absolutely BEAUTIFUL models of vehicles nobody else has kitted (for the most part).

Just a few examples:

    

AND...they've purchased the tooling and re-released the excellent Galaxie Chevy kits we were afraid were gone forever:

    

 

Oh my, I can see a lot more builds coming up Bill. That Hudson looks a treat, as do all of them. Have to add them to my growing list.

Don

[Ace-Garageguy]

3 minutes ago, Donny said:

 

Oh my, I can see a lot more builds coming up Bill. That Hudson looks a treat, as do all of them. Have to add them to my growing list.

Don

But wait...there's more...