MrObsessive Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 We ended up putting a bunch of big firecrackers in it and sent it off a cliff at a nearby stream...The explosion probably sent the tires into the next county!! Needless to say, there wasn't enough of the model left on the ground below, to put in a doggy bag to take back home.. ............And thanks for the compliment Jeff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalefinishes Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 (edited) I am surprised no one has mentioned the AMT '71 Mustang. WOW! that was a horrible kit, start to finish. http://www.modelexpress.net/cgi-bin/modele.../AMT_38160.html Edited November 25, 2009 by Scalefinishes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my name is nobody Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Wow! Unless I missed it, I'm surprised no one's mentioned this gem................. Those of you who remember the thread I did of building this a couple years ago, will remember the nearly COMPLETE re-engineering I had to do to make it correct! I tried my hand at this one originally back in the late '70's when I was starting to build, and it nearly made me give up modeling all together! Well, I'll tell ya, that was one of the first kits I ever assembled, and I still have it. being young, dumb, and in-experienced helped. well, that, and a neighbour had one during the "Chrysler lets the public drive one around before we crush them experiment." ( I think their were fifty? or so that the company loaned out.) The sound of that turbine at 22,000 rpm gave me chills. I assembled mine way, way back. But Nothing about it stands out as a complete turd. The opening doors, hood, trunk were fun, as were the seats, and it didnt turn out as clean as your build. I still think that AMT's '69 Chevelle SS396 is a complete waste of fossil fuel. Now, I 'm gonna have to dig that old turbine out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Irwin Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 Another badly proportioned kit is the Monogram 1/24 1956 Chevy hardtop. The body is the same width as the new Revell 1/25 1956 Chevy sedan, but is longer than the Monogram 1/24 1957 Chevy hardtop. Also the roof is shorter than the roof on the 1/25 AMT 1957 hardtop. Its like a stretched 1/25 kit with a coupe roof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fishburn Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 well, I've certainly learned something from this thread- If I come across an unbuildable stool sample of a kit, I need to send it to Bill, where it will be turned into something quite nice. What's your address again, Bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrObsessive Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 (edited) Another badly proportioned kit is the Monogram 1/24 1956 Chevy hardtop. The body is the same width as the new Revell 1/25 1956 Chevy sedan, but is longer than the Monogram 1/24 1957 Chevy hardtop. Also the roof is shorter than the roof on the 1/25 AMT 1957 hardtop. Its like a stretched 1/25 kit with a coupe roof. If I didn't know better, I'd say that the toolmakers at Monogram did that car from memory and not from photos or any blueprints in front of them! That's one car BTW, that's begging to be kitted (properly)! We've got just about every other tri-five Chevy, but not a decent '56 210 or Belair hardtop. A modern '57 Nomad would be nice too for good measure! If I come across an unbuildable stool sample of a kit........... B) I like that! I have to remember that line! Edited November 26, 2009 by MrObsessive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldscool Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Yeah, those 71 Mustangs were a big disappointment to me too. The 71 I have in my stash has the big fat 73 front bumper on top of everything else that is wrong about it. oldscool - night stalker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2002p51 Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 i have a partially built Firefighter Mustang that i won't say is a horrible kit, but one that requires alot of patience and thinking about how to tackle some of it's "issues". most of the finished builds i have seen it does make for a nice model once done. some other examples in my opinion of "horrible" kits? the AMT AWB drag cars the same basic chassis for all of them regardless of the make or body style and a crude chassis at that. probably the only thing that tops these are the absolutely horrible AMT Modified kits with their monster truck sized tires and 4x4 stance. Dave I agree with you on the altered wheelbase kits; useless chassis. And those AMT Modified Stockers are indeed horrible and should be banished. But I think the "Firefighter Mustang" is okay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldscool Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 That is one nice Mustang Drew. I built one of those when they were released and remember it being a very good kit and quite accurate for the time period. oldscool - night stalker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jas1957 Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 My votes are the Pyro Lincoln, Cord ,& Auburn. All hard to build, very poor tool work, the bodies were lumpy. But with a LOT of work can be made presentable. The IMC 48 Fords, Cougar II, & Mustang II. They were almost impossible to build. I finished the Cougar many years ago & couldn't stand to show it to anyone. Another I found very hard to build was the AMT Mercedes Gullwing. Just badly engineered. John Strick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyBradKeselowski Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 The AMT 71-73 Mustangs are based on the old MPC annuals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fishburn Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 I can't speak for worst EVER, but worst in recent memory is easily the R-M '59 Chevy Impala. When I was looking through the box, and assembling the subassemblies, it looked like such a jewel. Then came time to put it all together. BLEH! So, I took it back apart, redid the interior, and tried to put it together again. Double BLEH! So now, it's just going to be a case of do the best I can with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrObsessive Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 I can't speak for worst EVER, but worst in recent memory is easily the R-M '59 Chevy Impala. Hmmm..............I built the convertible Brian years ago and found it one of the easier kits to build. Yours may have had some warp perhaps? The hardtop I've always had some issues with, but that's due more to some proportions that aren't right to me, but you're the first I've heard that's had a real problem with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoom Zoom Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 (edited) The worst ones never get finished, and some of my favorites fight me tooth and nail for issues that may have nothing to do with it being a good or bad kit. I started a vintage Pyro/Lindberg Triumph GT6 this year, I've seen decent built examples (though obviously they weren't contest winners, more like 5 or 10 footers), but to be perfectly/bluntly honest it's such kraptastic handful that I may never get mine finished. To get one to look anything like a really nice model will take a lot of patience & a good bit of scratchbuilding to correct the driprail area & windshield surround; tasks that I often don't mind if I like the subject, but mine went back in the box because it wore me out to just look at it due to the domino effect of "fix this, you'll then have to fix that". I was surprised at it being reissued & all the positive forum response it was getting (obviously from dreamers rather than people who have built this thing). Bluemoose did nice builds for boxart, but Model King really did their best to hide the worst evils of the kit on the boxart. It isn't a good kit...it's just the only game in town for the subject. There's a reason we haven't seen any or many ever built. Look back @ Lownslow's build...he's usually game for anything. Edited November 26, 2009 by Zoom Zoom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modelmartin Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 (edited) I tend to cut kits like these some slack on body proportions because, after all, they're drag cars, not replica stockers! Thanks a lot, Man!! Like us drag racing guys aren't into accuracy. We can count rivets as well as anyone! I know you are joking. I don't think that Revell Mustang F/C body is that bad. It is a later version when they started distorting the shapes more. I have seen several built and they look fine. The Jo-Han M/T Mustang was a '71 and they were not cutting up the shapes nearly as much then. I know that only 3 years separate them but things were evolving quickly then. In this whole thread (aside from differing opinions on the Turbine car)I don't think Jo-han has been mentioned once! That is striking. Edited November 26, 2009 by Modelmartin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Irwin Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Four pages and no one has mentioned the AMT 65 GTO? That kit has been butchered and "restored" so many times and they still haven't got it right. I really like the bug-eye headlights ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayC Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 (edited) I've been following this thread and the number of bad kits is eye-popping. Even though it's not a vehicle I just wanted to give a little update on my 1/196 USS Constitution by Revell. The update is: I stuffed it back in the box. That thing is just dreadful. Maybe someday when I'm feeling masochistic I will get it out again. The instructions have a copyright of 1987 (they're lousy, too), so I'm not sure if later molds are better or not. Edited November 26, 2009 by JayC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modelmartin Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Funny, too, I never realized that until you pointed it out, so THANKS A LOT for ruining this kit for me forever, Mr. Martin! No problemo!! I used to like it, too despite the awful guts of it until I laid a ruler on it. It looks like it was shortened in the quarters and the tail so lengthening it out would be a major undertaking. I will pass on that project!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Kortman Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 One of only 2 kits that I've ever tossed, after starting the build was the Johan Petty '70 Superbird. Man. I hated that kit. granted, that was probably 20 years ago. Some times I think that i'd like to take another crack at one now...then I bang my head into a wall for even letting that thought into my head. BANG BANG BANG!!! The other Kit I tossed was the AMT "General" steam locomotive. I had the tender done. It went together OK. The boiler on the locomotive was another matter entirely. BAM, BAM, BAM!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modelmartin Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 the Johan Sox&Martin Superbird isn't much better! pretty crude and rough right out of the box kitbashing it with an AMT '68 Roadrunner will get you a much better chassis to build from, but the body is still pretty lame. much better results can be had from the Monogram '70 Superbird kit and a set of Slixx decals. Dave I did that kitbash and had no issues with the Jo-han part of the project. It is no contest model but it is one of my faves. I considered using the Monogram but that was 1/24 and I am not usually a scale bigot but it wouldn't look right sitting next to the S&M GTX and Road Runnermade from AMT/ERTL kits. This is a weird case of me thinking that the Jo-han and AMT kitbash combo is superior to the Monogram kit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Handley Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Don't think anyone has yet mentioned Revell's two misguided attempts at kitting the AAR 'Cuda, so I will ... Yech, almost forgot about that pile................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B_rad88 Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 (edited) well what i think is the worst kits are...... the 80's re-release of the revell 1960 corvette multi-piece body! the amt/ertl fast and furious dodge charger (and the dukes charger too) testors release of the 1/20 fujimi lamborghini countach!(its a mess of a kit) (but honestly these kits are so dang ugly of a kit, i never finished building them, cause they are that bad!) and some of the toughest kits i have that needs to be built is..... monogram bugatti eb110(there is alot os chassis/suspension parts!) monogram porsche 904gts(same with this kit) tamiya castrol-mugen nsx race car(this kit has alot of parts and the decals are VERY complicated!) and more to come! Edited November 27, 2009 by KUZTOMMODELS88 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Most Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Four pages and no one has mentioned the AMT 65 GTO? That kit has been butchered and "restored" so many times and they still haven't got it right. I really like the bug-eye headlights ! Craig- I second that! Let's not even get into the separate, deformed roofs... I can't believe I haven't blurted this one out yet, but I'd have to say the worst kit I've ever had the displeasure of building has to be the AMT (ex-MPC) '53 Ford Flip Nose pickup! Every part fights you to fit (and still doesn't fit well after all that effort), the flip front end never operates smoothly, and it' s never been 'updated', which can be good or bad, and is most certainly bad in the case of this piece of crapola! Molded in headlamp lenses, Carter-era wire wheels, and tooling that's seen better days make this one a 'must-flee' proposition, unless you are a glutton for punishment! The fact it has a Chevy engine doesn't help its case much, either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modeler Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 worst kit i built was the polar lights 64 gto the one i couldent build was a lexus ls400 to much detail for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMT Pacemakers Posted November 28, 2009 Share Posted November 28, 2009 The ONLY kit to ever open a can of whoop @** on me is RM 37 Ford coupe/sedan/convert, just can not get the body to fit the fenders or the hood to fit either. JUNK And I've got several to prove it.. CCSS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.