'53 Hudson Hornet is coming....

[Art Anderson]

I've been watching all this discussion while not really commenting, but it's time now:

For starters, virtually EVERY model car kit (for that matter, VIRTUALLY EVERY SCALE MODEL KIT EVER PRODUCED, regardless of subject area!) has been, or is, at least to some extent, an "artist's rendition" of the real subject, no more and certainly no less than any famous painting or sculpture you can shake a stick at.

As Dave Metzner points out, CAD files for cars as old as this Hudson are simply do not exist anymore. Also, with the demise, merger, moves, remodels and just about every upheaval one can imagine in the industrial world, for most cars, few if any of even the "loft drawings" exist even today. This is a situation no more prevalent than with an "orphan car" such as this Hudson. Bear in mind, that Hudson, as an independent company, ceased to exist nearly 57 years ago when they were forced to merge with Nash to form American Motors Corporation. That alone meant the end of the Step-Down concept--1955 Hudsons were facelifted Farina-inspired Nash bodies, with your choice of either the 308cid flathead 6 or a Packard-supplied V8 up front. It meant the closing down of Hudson's factory, offices and design studios in Detroit, with AMC having corporate offices in Southfield, and all production moving to Kenosha WI. Now, I suspect that just as with virtually every other marque of car in production in 1954-55, little real thought was ever given to retaining the sheer volumes of styling renderings, drawings, archival photographs--back then, I submit that almost nobody in the auto industry then could imagine that their grown children, their grandchildren or even great-grandchildren would ever collect and restore the cars they were building, let alone seek out toys or model kits of them 55-56 years out in the future, in that misty far-ahead time called the 21st Century.

With any artist or artisan (and I WILL submit here that all the mockup/pattern makers who work/have worked in this model car kit industry are both!!), there are going to be limitations--when last I looked, they are still very much human, with all the strengths and frailties extant in our species. As such, every one of them, just as every one of us, is different--different in how they view anything under their observation. A very good written poem about that very difference comes to mind here (casting absolutely no aspersions on anyone living or dead please!!!), "The Blind Men and the Elephant", which is a very good way to understand, albeit a bit politically incorrect, and roughly humorous, to think about how differently we each of us see things. However, any artist or sculptor worth his salt, when working on any project that portends to reproduce in scale (either larger or smaller than real life)any object, be it animal, vegetable or mineral, will work pretty danged hard to make that project portray reality. Those who are the most successful find continued gainful employment; the others? One wonders.

Back to the project at hand: From all my years of model building, converting one kind of model car into another, even scratchbuilding, one of the most difficult things is converting what I see in photographs to something in three dimensions, and getting it to look just like the photo's. In this process, nobody's dealing with a rectangular box ala a U-Line or USPS Priority Mail shipping carton here, but an object having multiple angles, planes, all tied together with curves, bulges, humps and bumps (Oh, and did I mention a sharp point here or there along the way?). Even technical information is of limited help here--most references will give just length, wheelbase, tread base and curbside weight (now this last item is Sooo helpful in scaling down a real car into a model--I really don't care how flat it will crush an insect on the tabletop!). Few if any give the overall height, ground clearance at rocker panels, that sort of thing.

When the legendary Gordon Buehrig styled his "signature car", the 1936 Cord 810, using his invention, the "styling bridge" (a wooden, "analog" unit that predicted pretty well the present day laser scanning technology), he styled that car in 1/4 scale, using the styling bridge to not only make one side exactly as the other, but also to get the dimensional coordinates necessary for creating the rather complex shapes for cutting stamping dies for production. Having seen many pics of the actual 1/4 styling clays, and perhaps half of the extant Cord 810/812 cars, there are a lot of discrepancies in how the real, 1:1 car appears vis-a-vis the 1/4 scale model from which it was tooled. So, discrepancies appear in the world of real cars as well.

Have we become like the IPMS, the model car version of an "international picky modeler's society", where nothing will suit us short of absolute perfection to the last 10/1000th of a percent? Sheesh, some of those guys are still debating wingtip shapes of Messerschmitt Bf-109's, not caring to believe that of the thousands that were built, there likely were hundreds of slightly different shapes of wingtips!

Does the model car we look at LOOK like the real thing overall? Is it a good representation of what it purports to be? If so, and if one individually perceives an inaccuracy, then a modeler will correct it, a kit assembler likely not. And I don't say that lightly, as if to make someone accept something they don't truly like, no way. But I am saying, given that any model car kit ever made had, has, and will continue to have anomalies that appear to some, but not to others. There are some who will do whatever it takes to correct those anomalies, and there are those that won't. A perusal of onesself in a mirror might help in one's determining just which kind or level of modeler one is. I for one, have gone through that process since I was perhaps about 20 or so, and that's been a long time ago, and I STILL find myself having to make that determination.

OK, enough.

Art

[imatt88]

No, seriously, where can I buy one of these?

[Jon Cole]

No, seriously, where can I buy one of these?

At a hobby shop... once they finally get them in stock. And I bet the Christmas decorations will be packed away for another year before that happens!

[Jairus]

I'll take that bet Jon!

Ian, the slated date the kits hit the shelf is mid March 2011. That is not too far off, is it?

Edited December 13, 2010 by Jairus

[Modelmartin]

Does the model car we look at LOOK like the real thing overall? Art

No, It's smaller!!!!

[Darin Bastedo]

Mr. Metzner,

The trouble with people fawning over the release of this, or any, kit is that they seem to be unwilling to be honest with you. While people buzied themselves with blowing sunshine up your kilt for taking a chance on a kit like this one, their rose-colored glasses would not allow them to see errors and let you know about them in time to do something about it.

The flipside of this is that people who are willing to be honest with you open themselves up for ridicule from other posters, including some very mature name calling, are becoming harder to find. This puts your ability to get useful advice from boards like this one nearly out of reach.

So while I am certain that all the cheerleaders here and on other boards had the best intentions voicing their support for you and this model, they didn't do you any favors and they didn't help you make the best model you could make. The fact that many of the cheerleaders did their darnedest to quell any disagreement with their opinion, and have made a habbit of doing so for a while now, winds up hurting your product and your bottom line.

Bart,

I have no rose colored glasses, I gave mine to Elton John, but what I see are small errors that do not dampen my enthusiasm over the big picture. That picture is, that this is a good, detailed model of a subject I want to build. Having lived through the 70's when just about every model on the shelf was a Custom Van, 4x4 pick up, Pinto Mustang Camaro Corvette or Pacer. I'm loving the diversity of kits we have now today.

You can Poo-Poo this kit all you want but at this stage only small alterationas are possible.What you see is what you get. I know there are things he can't fix now. Why should I dwell on those. If given the choice a Flawed model kit of a new and interesiting subject, and a steady diet of Camaros, Corvettes, Mustangs and such I'll take the flawed kit.

[Jairus]

I don't think Mr. Bart read anything Art had to say.

You accuse us of wearing "Rose Colored Glasses" but I suspect you are wearing blinders my friend. Bart, please go back to Arthur Anderson's post and re-read what he very succulently and eloquently posted regarding model car kits issued in the past.

Personally I accept no responsibility for the quality of any model kit. I only accept the responsibility of the quality of any finished model I build!

Frankly I am grateful that I do not have to carve the body out of a block of wood.

A model car kit is raw material at best. No model project have I started since 1977, that I do not find myself fixing what my research has show to be mistakes, failures and inaccuracies. That is what modeling is all about... crafting and modifying and detailing something to make it a realistic small representation of the real thing.

[Darin Bastedo]

Mr. Bastedo,

The point I was trying to make is that Mr. Metzner provided us with a golden opportunity to help make this new kit the best it could be and we, as a community, blew it. When he posted the early masters of the kit, we could have offered input then, when it would have done some good. But instead, the cheerleaders fawned over the mere thought of this new kit, fearful of saying anything that might put the kabash on it coming out.

I think we need to do more than just accept the kits flaws, we need to take the blame for them.

What's this "we" stuff kemosabe? IIRC in the thread containing the pics of the hand built master there were no posts at all by you, and what suggestions that were brought up such as the door handle position were addressed and corrected. My only comment in the thread was that I liked the kit, and that holds true today. The time to have leveled your criticism would have been then when the master was still in the hands of the master builder.

[Harry P.]

A model car kit is raw material at best. No model project have I started since 1977, that I do not find myself fixing what my research has show to be mistakes, failures and inaccuracies. That is what modeling is all about... crafting and modifying and detailing something to make it a realistic small representation of the real thing.

An equally good argument can be made that a scale model kit is supposed to be an accurate and realistic scale representation of the original straight from the box–and not needing the modeler to fix problems or inaccuracies found in the kit.

Just sayin'...

[Darin Bastedo]

The Step-down Hudsons came out in 1948 and to a lesser extent than the Cord, became an iconic car with an iconic shape. Of the 131,618 Hudson Hornets built, there are probably more than a few still around. In the absence of original drawings, there are actual cars that could be measured, photographed, eyeballed and otherwise surveyed. Now we have all seen thanks to the Trumpeter '60 Pontiac, that even having the real car around to measure and photograph, we can still get a model that has REAL fidelity issues.

But you don't need the real car, to do that. you simply need to hire the several people in this thread who can judge the accuracy of a kit by simply looking at photographs.

[Darin Bastedo]

An equally good argument can be made that a scale model kit is supposed to be an accurate and realistic scale representation of the original straight from the box–and not needing the modeler to fix problems or inaccuracies found in the kit.

Just sayin'...

In a perfect world...yeah. But in a perfect world my BMF would always stick, my paint would never orange-peel, my plastic would never craze, the parts would always fit, and the airbrush would never clog.

[Harry P.]

In a perfect world...yeah. But in a perfect world my BMF would always stick, my paint would never orange-peel, my plastic would never craze, the parts would always fit, and the airbrush would never clog.

Your orange-peeled paint, your clogged airbrush and your bad BMF have nothing to do with the design and manufacturing of the kit, though. What comes in the box and what you do to what comes in the box are two completely different things. The kit manufacturer controls what comes in the box, but they have no control over what happens to it.

[Jairus]

An equally good argument can be made that a scale model kit is supposed to be an accurate and realistic scale representation of the original straight from the box–and not needing the modeler to fix problems or inaccuracies found in the kit.

Just sayin'...

Really? Most kits seem to be missing the brake backing plates Harry... or have you not noticed that? A master cylinder is found in only a handful of kits while few if any contain dome lights and roof liner details. Just how realistic do you expect these models to be? Oil leaking from the pan?

[Harry P.]

Really? Most kits seem to be missing the brake backing plates Harry... or have you not noticed that? A master cylinder is found in only a handful of kits while few if any contain dome lights and roof liner details.

I'm talking about accuracy... not minute detail.

Isn't a model supposed to be an accurate scale replica of the real thing? Obviously there are many items that can't be scaled down 24 or 25 times smaller than "real life"... not every bracket, nut, and bolt can be reproduced in scale, and nobody is saying that it should be... but basic accuracy–the shape of the body; the contours, the proportions– ought to be correct.

[Darin Bastedo]

Your orange-peeled paint, your clogged airbrush and your bad BMF have nothing to do with the design and manufacturing of the kit, though. What comes in the box and what you do to what comes in the box are two completely different things. The kit manufacturer controls what comes in the box, but they have no control over what happens to it.

This was my way of saying, that human error always creeps in, and stuff happens.

[Harry P.]

This was my way of saying, that human error always creeps in, and stuff happens.

I agree, as long as model kits are produced by humans, they'll be imperfect.

But the basic argument we've been having on this thread is whether or not the flaws and inaccuracies in the Hudson kit are a problem... or if that's just "part of the deal" of any kit. Some people are ok with inaccurate kits... they figure it's the modeler's "job" to fix the inaccuracies. Others feel that a model kit should be accurate to begin with, and shouldn't require the modeler to fix the mistakes the manufacturer made.

I guess it all boils down to what each person expects and is willing to accept. Everyone has their own idea of what makes a good model kit.

[Jairus]

I'm talking about accuracy... not minute detail.

Isn't a model supposed to be an accurate scale replica of the real thing? Obviously there are many items that can't be scaled down 24 or 25 times smaller than "real life"... not every bracket, nut, and bolt can be reproduced in scale, and nobody is saying that it should be... but basic accuracy–the shape of the body; the contours, the proportions– ought to be correct.

Guess it all depends on where you draw your line in the sand.

Having never saw a Hudson up close.... which would probably be true for 90% of all modelers reading this... I think the new Hudson is about as close as most of the other kits on the market are to their full sized versions.

Name 5 kits on the market today and I'll wager that a few persons with intimate knowledge of the real thing will tell you where the contour and proportions are off. And THAT is the problem with having Communist countries make molds of cars they have NEVER seen in person!

We get what we pay for.....

Edited December 13, 2010 by Jairus

[Harry P.]

And THAT is the problem with having Communist countries make molds of cars they have NEVER seen in person!

We get what we pay for.....

And who's to blame for the fact that model kits are made in communist countries?

The communist countries?

Or the manufacturers who sent the work there to cut their production costs?

[Casey]

Bart,

I have no rose colored glasses, I gave mine to Elton John

Best quote of 2010.

[Darin Bastedo]

Guess it all depends on where you draw your line in the sand.

Having never saw a Hudson up close.... which would probably be true for 90% of all modelers reading this... I think the new Hudson is about as close as most of the other kits on the market are to their full sized versions.

Name 5 kits on the market today and I'll wager that a few persons with intimate knowledge of the real thing will tell you where the contour and proportions are off. And THAT is the problem with having Communist countries make molds of cars they have NEVER seen in person!

We get what we pay for.....

So I take it that if the Chinese were capitalists the kit would have been better? of course we have no way of knowing for sure if the guy who did the master was a communist or not. he could be a facist, or an anarchist. No strike that if he were an anarchist the car might look like this...

[Harry P.]

No strike that if he were an anarchist the car might look like this...

[Danno]

"buzied"

"habbit"

"kabash"

"differeing"

I guess, then, Bart, little errors render the entirety of your messages unviable and unuseable?

[jeffb]

by the time we saw the test shots, major body changes were not gonna happen i'll bet...bottom line. dont like it..dont buy it..

[Foxer]

Where can I buy this kit? .. although, I can see I will have to fix the rear wheel wells ...

[Chuck Most]

putting the Hornet's 6 into a hot rod is exactly what i was planning on doing, it's just begging to be sitting in the rails of something without a hood.

and no, i never considered building this kit "stock".

Glad to know I'm not the only sick and twisted guy on here. I've wanted to do a 1:1 Twin H powered hot rod for years, but now that this kit is coming, I can do it in 1:25, at least!

I'd have to guess this would be a great donor kit for the old Hendrix and R&R Hudson kits, too!

At least one of 'em will end up something like this...