Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

1964 Ford Falcon Sprint Hardtop


jjsipes

Recommended Posts

EXACTLY!

That's what I guess frustrates me so much. The Revell Midget is a great kit of an esoteric subject. One that I think it's safe to say presented a tougher resarch problem than most factory-produced cars because it is a vintage racer that was made in smaller numbers, and there would be fewer unmolested/unmodified/unwrecked cars around to look at, etc. Yet they hit a home run according to anyone passionate about the subject (I'll admit it looks fine to me, but I know next to nothing about the real cars so I discount my reaction in favor of those that have some familiarity with the real things) and were able to bring them to market somehow.

If it can be done properly, and that particular Revell subject shows it can, then that should be the standard.

It should be the standard, and I believe that the designers often reach for it, but I'm afraid that just like in our own lives sometimes we simply miss the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking at this for awhile, it dawned on me. Something must be lost in translation. I used to play Gran Turismo 4 on the playsation alot, and marvelled how they could get most of the Japanese cars rendered so well that they almost looked real, yet the American and a lot of British cars were way beyond horrible, looking incredibly childish and only remotely like the real thing. This Falcon looks like a playstation model. I think thats it, in my eyes. So there must be something to translating to Chinese that throws it off. Converting inches to mm's? I also think an "artist's eye" plays a part.Ive scratchbuilt a few things in my time, and long ago realized that just because something is technically correct by dimensions doesnt mean it will look right in 1/25.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all vote with our wallets. Like most of us, I don't need more kits, but I bought one each of the midgets after hearing what a well done kit it was. Yes, I like the subject matter, but I wouldn't spend my money if it was badly done.

In the case of the Falcon (and the coming Ranchero) I REALLY like the subject and would find the money to buy one of each if they were good. Perhaps my familiarity with the real cars makes me more demanding and critical, but I don't think unreasonably so.

Edited by Steve Roullier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Part of the culture change has to come from us however.

If we simply stop accepting inaccurate & poorly designed & engineered kits regardless of the price or the manufacturer, & let them know why we aren't buying the kits, they will address the problem. Doesn't matter if it's the Trumpeter Falcon, the Revell AAR Cuda, the Polar Lights Coronet, or any other kit like those, we need to stop making excuses for them getting it wrong. No more "Well it's close enough to the 1/1 car, I can live with it/correct the too flat roof/inaccurate intake/too round wheelwells/ad infinitum, I'm just so glad to finally have a kit of this subject!!", or "Well, what do you expect for $20/$25/$40?", or "I'm a modeler!! I can fix it!!!". I'm a modeler also & do a lot of bodywork, since I enjoy building customs, but I chose to do that bodywork, I didn't have to to correct an inaccurate piece of junk. Speaking with your wallet & your voice combined sends a powerful message.

Car modelers too often shoot themselves in the foot by the inaccurate jink too many are willing to accept &/or attempt to correct. Then we wonder why we keep getting junk like that Falcon & other horribly inaccurate kits. A prime example is the Revell Nova kit, I can't begin to express how much I wanted a new tool of that bodystyle. Well, some three years after the kit was introduced, I have yet to buy my first one, due to the glaring inaccuracies in the body.

Stop accepting "good enough" as the standard to hold the manufacturers to & let them know it. That's how to address the problems.

In the case of Trumpeter, since their distributor is Stevens International, contacting them regarding this might be the way to go.

:(

Ok so we should boycott inaccurate kits? Ok at what point do we start the boycott? what level of accuracy sould we expect? Is a missing or slightly misplaced emblem cause for boycott? thickness of the grillbars? oops the angle of tumblehome on this one is off one degree.

Frankly the people who car about this level of accuracy in a kit is a very small minority. Just look at the number of serious modelers who like un-realisticly sized wheels and go to great length to include modifications that from an engineering stand point don't work

I'll continue to buy inaccurate model kits of subjects that interest me, and fix them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, for me personally, a $50 kit that bears, at best, a passing resemblance to the 1:1 subject it purports to represent is the point at which I use my wallet to cash a resounding "no" vote ...

I agree there are a lot of obviously substandard kits out there, like this falcon, but I'm not going to cry over a glitch as small as the taillight panal on Revell's 69 Nova

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twenty pages of outrage yet?

Building is more fun than griping :(

Oh, and Stevens has begun shipping the kits, so some may see them as early as this weekend.

It always amazes me that when ever a new kit with flaws comes out there is always this long thread about how much the new kit sucks, where is sucks in particular, and how it shouldn't suck due to current technology. Why not, here are it's flaws, if you can live with it fine if not don't buy it and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only real flaw I see with the body on the Trumpeter Falcon is the flat body sides. I'm sure that I can fix that pretty easily. It looks a lot closer to a real Falcon than the Revell Nova ever thought about looking like a real Nova.

Comparing the Trumpeter kit to the AMT kit just doesn't fly because it has accuracy issues too. Just because it was made around the same time as the real car doesn't make it correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there will never be a 100% accurate kit, ever

BINGO!

Even in the event we ever DO get a 100% accurate kit produced, there will be at least a handful of people who can find a few faults with its accuracy, or at least claim to. That 'human factor' can be a dodgy thing- ever hear the expression 'one guy's Mona Lisa is another guy's Velvet Elvis'? Is that 100% accurate kit POSSIBLE, given today's technology? Perhaps. Is it going to happen? Well, this guy's not holding his breath! This Falcon isn't on my 'must buy' list, but it is on my 'likely to buy' list. I've bought several examples of some kits which were total turds (AMT/Ertl International Scout II, anyone?) and managed to make decent models out of them, and I'm rather looking forward to trying a few things with this kit, too. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, and on that one the fact that the gas tank was backwards (or whatever was wrong with it) was something that, honestly I found much more humorous than upsetting. But there was a fair bit of discussion about the error here. Everybody has different priorities, I guess.

Am I the only guy who's bummed that they fixed that on he later versions of the kit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanx for those photos Dave! I'm definitely going to pick up a couple of them. Looks like that chassis could house some pretty wide tires in the rear. Have you checked it to see what would fit? I think you and I have somewhat similar plans for this little Falcon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...