Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I'd like to raise an aspect of the auto modeling hobby that I think is fairly unique and helps distinguish it from other idioms such as military, airplane and ship building. Since the advent of the 3-in-1 kit more than 50 years ago auto modelers have created models that are not replicas, often using combination of kit bashing and scratch building. I'm certainly one of those auto modelers who has almost never built out-of-the-box and I know that an awful lot of what is discussed on this and many other boards involves something besides replica modeling. I believe this is important because it drives sales in specific areas and for specific kits. When was the last time you saw a 3-in-1 Ferrari, regardless of vintage, from one of the Japanese companies? Indeed, many kits are engineered to discourage this, or at least render it quite difficult. So which kits do support the creation of "imaginary" cars? Generally speaking you're talking about hot rods, customs and drag racing subjects. These types of kits drive a lot of "surplus" sales, as enthusiasts buy up multiple copies for their parts and the rich possibilities for build variations they support. I believe this is why you've seen the rise of Round2 and their re-issue driven sales strategy, and why you've seen the dominance of automotive re-issues and complex new-tool 2-in-1 automotive kits from Revell. Just look at the most recent Revell new release brochures, as far back as Fall 2009, and you'll see that far more than half the releases are of these types. The only other modeling discipline that I can think of that has as much or more of this type of activity is possibly in the fantasy and sci-fi genres. Anyway, I think this goes some way toward explaining the preponderance of older subjects and re-issues. Just like in the 1:1 world, it is quite difficult to modify and customize a contemporary Aston Martin or Honda without a pretty radical design approach and modeling skill set. The kits don't support it, nor do contemporary trends in the "real" world. I'm not saying it can't be done, or shouldn't be done, just that it isn't done as often or to the degree it was in the past, and that has heavily influenced kit design and release schedules. This guy gets it! How many of those 50 Olds will be sold just for that early OHV V-8, or the 57 Ford for the Y-Block?
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 This guy gets it! How many of those 50 Olds will be sold just for that early OHV V-8, or the 57 Ford for the Y-Block? I'd buy more Olds kits if it had the inline six, but....
Junkman Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 There's been some good points made in this thread, but I think there's one thing that needs to be said. You have to, at one point, separate the hobbyist part of your brain from the businessman part of your brain. It's something I, and the other folks who work in the hobby industry, have to do on a daily basis. Would I personally go absolutely ape over a 1909 American Underslung, a 29 duPont, or a 1956 Facel Vega? Sure I would, but would I ever in a million years go up to someone from a mainstream plastic model kit company and suggest that they do one of these? No way. I still hold out hope for a new-tool Cobra Daytona Coupe and 289 Cobras, but that's looking more and more like a pipe dream now... So, next time I'm in a product development meeting, I'll bring up subjects like the '73 Dodge Monaco, '73 Pontiac LeMans, '71 Cadillac, '77 Caprice, '77 Continental Town Car, late-model pickup trucks, etc... I promise. But what do you want to bet I wouldn't be asked to take a "random" drug test the next day? Yes, it's a crying shame, but you are right. I honestly had no idea how pettifogging the management of the American model kit industry really is. Too bad, since more money will go to the diecast makers.
Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I'd buy more Olds kits if it had the inline six, but.... I wish there were a couple of thousand folks who were like you, the state of the hobby would be in a much different place. But, alas, it is what it is...
Harry P. Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Yes, it's a crying shame, but you are right. I honestly had no idea how pettifogging the management of the American model kit industry really is. Too bad, since more money will go to the diecast makers. The management of American model kit companies looks to the bottom line... same as the management of any company does.
Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Yes, it's a crying shame, but you are right. I honestly had no idea how pettifogging the management of the American model kit industry really is. Too bad, since more money will go to the diecast makers. I wish there were a couple of thousand folks who were like you, the state of the hobby would be in a much different place. But, alas, it is what it is...
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 You see that is what happens when the model companies listen to us. We are are not the core of their business. Uh... okay... Explain to me the sucess of the 150/Black Widow kit. Or the '65 Z-11 Chevelle? These aren't the kinds of vehicles that big-box-store department managers want in their inventory.These were kits that were wanted by the real, finely-threaded car nuts. The core of the scale modeling business in other words. Oh, sure, there were always a slew of '57 Chevy kits, but you'd have never seen one that could be built out of box as the Utility Sedan or a 'close enough to get the message across' Black Widow replica? (Imagine how 'Mr. Disappointed this Impala is stock-only would feel once he cracked open that '57 and saw it had no back seat...)And something obscure like a Z-11 Chevelle? A Chevelle SS would be a no-branier, but only the diehards would have wanted a Z-11. I think every SAE 'most wanted' list had a Z-11 Chevelle on it until Revell came out with theirs. And there's proof everywhere that the model companies are listening- for years we've wanted better accuracy and detail, and for the most part, the manufacturers are delivering on that. Moebius? I defy anyone to say those guys aren't listening to us loud and clear! The Hornet and Chrysler were both on many hardcore modeler's wants lists speaks to that. And be honest, who here ever thought they'd see a kit of those two, much less the International Lonestar? I'm crossing my fingers for them to bring out a bulletnose Stude one of these days, and I don't care what anybody says! I'd hazard a guess and say if the model companies were NOT listening to us, the quailty of kits never would have progressed much past the mid 1980's or so.
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I wish there were a couple of thousand folks who were like you, the state of the hobby would be in a much different place. But, alas, it is what it is... You and me both. Wait, do you mean that in a good or bad way? But on a serious note, the fact that a '50 Olds was even considered to be kitted is uplifting to me, not even considering the fact it is actually going into production at some point.
Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 The management of American model kit companies looks to the bottom line... same as the management of any company does. Really. I don't know if folks know what it takes just to amortize the cost of new-tooling, we're talking tens of thousands of units. And to bring up something like a 73 Monaco, which only sold about 30,000 units in real life, you think there's tens of thousands of people out there that would buy a model of one forty years later? I doubt there's ten. Would there be any potential for something like this to be a donor kit for other projects, No. Like I said earlier, I wouldn't advise a resin caster spend a couple hundred dollars to master one, much less a plastic company spend hundreds of thousands of dollars... Same goes for all that 70's stuff. It just ain't gonna happen. Revell's 77 Snap Monte - dog. Revell 80 Caddy - dog. MPC 76 Caprice - dog that only gets bought for the trailer, MPC 80(?) Monte - dog that only gets bought for the Honda chopper, Trumpeter 78 Monte - colossal dog, even by Trumpeter standards. Look, they've done stuff like this before, in a far more favorable market. These kits are tough sells nowadays. That's just the state of the market.
Danno Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I bought zero Tahoes- they're yuppiewagons. Besides, that's an SUV, not a pickup. I do have a few of the Revell Expeditions, though. Dodge Rams? Which one? The Revell VTS? Or the Ertl Snap kits of the 2500 and 3500. Five of the VTS, ten of the 2500, and about fifteen of the 3500, if ya must know. I've got nearly 30 of the AMT '97 style F-150s in various stages of 'not done yet', and a dozen Revell Lightnings. Lindberg F-150's? Twelve of those at the moment. Easily as many of the Monogram F-250, and I buy EVERY Monogram F-350 that comes near me. AMT Chevy C-series pickups? I've got all of them except the promos. Sorry- not too many of the AMT Rangers or GM S-trucks, but that's mostly because the Rangers are getting tougher to track down, and I don't care for the S 10s much. And don't get me started on all the AMT '92-'95 F-150s. If there were any kits of modern pickups (SVT Raptor, Ford Super Duty F-2 or 350, Ram Power Wagon), I'd have just as many of them laying around as I do now. I even have a stash of the Maisto diecast F-250 Super Duty kits (1999 vintage) if you're curious. Cool. You're an exception.
Danno Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 So, next time I'm in a product development meeting, I'll bring up subjects like the '73 Dodge Monaco, '73 Pontiac LeMans, '71 Cadillac, '77 Caprice, '77 Continental Town Car, late-model pickup trucks, etc... I promise. But what do you want to bet I wouldn't be asked to take a "random" drug test the next day? Well, perhaps. But, a better bet would be a '73 Dodge Polara 4door sedan (with McNairy County Sheriff markings from the 'Walking Tall' movie series), a '73 Pontiac Can Am, and a 4 door '77 Impala/Bel Air. Don't know about the Caddy and the Town Car. Trucks? Maybe. And try the '74 Dodge Monaco/Plymouth Gran Fury (can you say "lues Brothers?") ... at least the Polara and Can Am and bluesmopar might get you to the second day before the drug test invitation.
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 The Blues Brothers might be why there are some very vocal souls requesting a Monaco. I'd be happy whith any Town Car or Crown Vic besides the '97 Lindberg kit (not knocking that one, just saying). I wouldn't mind any of the above, simply being a fan of good old American land barges.
Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 You and me both. Wait, do you mean that in a good or bad way? But on a serious note, the fact that a '50 Olds was even considered to be kitted is uplifting to me, not even considering the fact it is actually going into production at some point. No I mean that in a good way. If everyone who ever put X-Acto to styrene was like you the model car business would be thriving and I'd be making money hand-over-fist. But it is what it is for whatever reason. As I said, you dance with who brung you. You'll see more esoteric subjects in the future, I'm sure, but they'll still be within a certain genre, they're not going to go completely off the reservation. The 57 150 and 2-door post Bel Airs were great calls, they used a good deal of existing tooling and had a nice crossover/kitbashing potential (gassers, stock class dragsters, NASCAR, etc...) I'm sure the 57 Ford will do just fine in a similar vein. Same goes for the 50 Olds. I've got a feeling we'll see more nostalgic drag racers as well. This is the type of stuff that's gonna pay the bills for the foreseeable future. I think American car modeling has found it's niche inside of the existing hot rod/muscle car enthusiast crowd, I think they're more likely to make a new modeler out of someone who is already into these types of cars than to try to attract kids off the street who would rather be playing video games or texting on their iPhones, whatever it is they do these days (I'm 34 and I've never felt so old as when I typed that). Find the people who are into these types of cars, the types of cars you already make, and then get them into building models.
Brett Barrow Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Well, perhaps. But, a better bet would be a '73 Dodge Polara 4door sedan (with McNairy County Sheriff markings from the 'Walking Tall' movie series), a '73 Pontiac Can Am, and a 4 door '77 Impala/Bel Air. Don't know about the Caddy and the Town Car. Trucks? Maybe. And try the '74 Dodge Monaco/Plymouth Gran Fury (can you say "lues Brothers?") ... at least the Polara and Can Am and bluesmopar might get you to the second day before the drug test invitation. The Blues Brothers might be why there are some very vocal souls requesting a Monaco. I'd be happy whith any Town Car or Crown Vic besides the '97 Lindberg kit (not knocking that one, just saying). I wouldn't mind any of the above, simply being a fan of good old American land barges. A 74 Monaco is a totally different car than a 73, and IMHO would be a 1000% better choice because of the Bluesmobile and Police Car potential.
Junkman Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) A 74 Monaco is a totally different car than a 73, and IMHO would be a 1000% better choice because of the Bluesmobile and Police Car potential. But the '73 is so much better looking. And yes, I'd buy a bunch of 74s too just because of the BB connection. Then we need the Murph and the Magic Tones Caddy, a Pinto wagon, a late 70s Ford wagon, a '76 Pontiac whatever, a Winnebago, an F-Series Ford PU reissue with a newly tooled camper shell, and an "early released this year" '80 Oldsmobile... Edited October 23, 2011 by Junkman
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 You mention utilizing existing tooling, and I'm a big proponent of that. While I confess that I'm not a huge fan of Tri-Five Chevys, Revell/Monogram has gotten a lot of mileage out of that original Monogram '55 tool. Odds are better now more than ever that modelers will finally get that GOOD '57 Nomad kit they've always wanted. Or what about a '57 Bonneville? The 1:1 automakers used common parts among several different lines and years, and I think it's well past the time that the kit manufacurers followed suit. And if, say, the hardtop version of Kit X includes a different set of custom wheels and engine hop up parts than the Kit X sedan variant, so much the better. The days are over when merely refreshing the box art and throwing in a new set of decals is enough to tart up an existing kit, and I'm glad to see that. I remember when Revell started bringing out variants on the Deuce kit, and a small but very vocal group kept asking why they didn't just include the new bodies in with an existing kit. I did get a chuckle out of that. For one thing, could you go into a Ford dealer in 1932 and buy a Tudor sedan, and a spare Roadster body to go with it? Of course not. And there's that bottom line everyone keeps refering back to- if you want the Tudor kit, Revell wants you to buy the Tudor kit. To me those kits are a great example of expanding on a base kit- from the initial Roadster, Three-Window, and Speedwagon (what ever happened to that one?) the line has grown to include a five window and Tudor, and not only new bodies- that Tudor has some very nice wire wheels and a full-dress Flattie, and the Hemi and those hairpin radius rods from the Five Window are tasty indeed. Some might see that as trying to 'pull one over' on the customers, I see it as a great thing.
Darin Bastedo Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Uh... okay... Explain to me the sucess of the 150/Black Widow kit. Or the '65 Z-11 Chevelle? These aren't the kinds of vehicles that big-box-store department managers want in their inventory.These were kits that were wanted by the real, finely-threaded car nuts. The core of the scale modeling business in other words. Oh, sure, there were always a slew of '57 Chevy kits, but you'd have never seen one that could be built out of box as the Utility Sedan or a 'close enough to get the message across' Black Widow replica? (Imagine how 'Mr. Disappointed this Impala is stock-only would feel once he cracked open that '57 and saw it had no back seat...)And something obscure like a Z-11 Chevelle? A Chevelle SS would be a no-branier, but only the diehards would have wanted a Z-11. I think every SAE 'most wanted' list had a Z-11 Chevelle on it until Revell came out with theirs. And there's proof everywhere that the model companies are listening- for years we've wanted better accuracy and detail, and for the most part, the manufacturers are delivering on that. Moebius? I defy anyone to say those guys aren't listening to us loud and clear! The Hornet and Chrysler were both on many hardcore modeler's wants lists speaks to that. And be honest, who here ever thought they'd see a kit of those two, much less the International Lonestar? I'm crossing my fingers for them to bring out a bulletnose Stude one of these days, and I don't care what anybody says! I'd hazard a guess and say if the model companies were NOT listening to us, the quailty of kits never would have progressed much past the mid 1980's or so. Why did the 65 chevelle, and the 57 Chevy 150 sell? Wow you got me stumped as of course there is absolutely no mainstream interest in Chevelles and 57 Chevies. The model companies must have been out of their minds to even consider such oscures subjects as those. **note that the sarcasim in this post is cutting, it by no means is intended to offend. please take it with the humor it was intended** on a serious note the choice of doing a Z-11 or a 57 150 makes sence. To the hardcore modeler these were highly desireable versions, to the masses who might not know the difference, they are still chevelles and 57 chevies. It's a win-win.
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Why did the 65 chevelle, and the 57 Chevy 150 sell? Wow you got me stumped as of course there is absolutely no mainstream interest in Chevelles and 57 Chevies. The model companies must have been out of their minds to even consider such oscures subjects as those. **note that the sarcasim in this post is cutting, it by no means is intended to offend. please take it with the humor it was intended** on a serious note the choice of doing a Z-11 or a 57 150 makes sence. To the hardcore modeler these were highly desireable versions, to the masses who might not know the difference, they are still chevelles and 57 chevies. It's a win-win. I do see your point on the Chevelle, but really- the 150/Black Widow? Can't imagine that one being a big seller for Walmart, '57 or no. And I can imagine quite a bit. Here's a bit more to chew on- can you see the big box store people wanting to stock a Hudson Hornet? Or a '50 Olds? A cheapo die cast, maybe, but a full-detail kit? Doubt it. I can guarantee no big box retailer would have carried Model King or Dirt Track Racecars dual-branded kits (among others). Sheesh, Dave Burket pretty much makes a living by catering specifically to the 'enthusiast market'. No, those mostly terrible 'Fast And Furious', 'Rides Magazine', and 'American Hot Rod' releases are what the big retailers wanted to have on hand.
Craig Irwin Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I love tri five Chevys, first generation Camaros and 32 Fords, although if you frequent this forum you might think I'm the only one. (I wonder who else is buying all of them?) And I have a thought, how can someone who can't see the need for a 57 Nomad or convertible want ten versions of the 2011 Mustang? After all there is only the coupe and convertible, why would you need 10 different kits? (sarcasm if you don't see it)
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Well, you do have the Shelby versions and such, but I do see what you're getting at! And where are these guys saying a '57 Nomad would be a bad idea. Again, not a fan of Tri-Fives or '57s in particular, but such a kit seems like a no-brainer even coming from my viewpoint.
Junkman Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I remember when Revell started bringing out variants on the Deuce kit, and a small but very vocal group kept asking why they didn't just include the new bodies in with an existing kit. I did get a chuckle out of that. For one thing, could you go into a Ford dealer in 1932 and buy a Tudor sedan, and a spare Roadster body to go with it? Of course not. And there's that bottom line everyone keeps refering back to- if you want the Tudor kit, Revell wants you to buy the Tudor kit. To me those kits are a great example of expanding on a base kit- from the initial Roadster, Three-Window, and Speedwagon (what ever happened to that one?) the line has grown to include a five window and Tudor, and not only new bodies- that Tudor has some very nice wire wheels and a full-dress Flattie, and the Hemi and those hairpin radius rods from the Five Window are tasty indeed. Some might see that as trying to 'pull one over' on the customers, I see it as a great thing. I see it like you do. Each variant allows you to build a distinctly different car even under the skin and pretty much all eras of hot rodding are covered when you have them all, save for the billet one. It was revell who once sold an A-woody wagon with a Tudor body thrown in. I never got the point, since in essence you had to buy the kit twice anyway and then were left with two spare bodies and all their trimmings for the bin. I felt more 'pulled over' then, then I do with their current concept of releasing each body in a separate kit with different goodies to boot.
Rob Hall Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) I love tri five Chevys, first generation Camaros and 32 Fords, although if you frequent this forum you might think I'm the only one. (I wonder who else is buying all of them?) And I have a thought, how can someone who can't see the need for a 57 Nomad or convertible want ten versions of the 2011 Mustang? After all there is only the coupe and convertible, why would you need 10 different kits? (sarcasm if you don't see it) There isn't even one kit yet of the '11 Mustang! AMT did the '10 GT coupe and Shelby, and will be doing the '10 convertible, but the engine upgrades for '11 obsoleted the GT kit. I'd like to see them do the '12 Boss 302 and Boss 302 Laguna Seca in addition to the '11-12 GT and Shelby.. As far as the '57 Chevy, I wouldn't mind a '57 Nomad (the old Revell one and Monogram 1:24th ones aren't that good) and a '57 Bel Air convertible. And more variations of the '32 Ford would be interesting...Victoria, B-400, Phaeton, truck, Sedan Delivery, Sport Coupe, Cabriolet, 4 seat convertible, etc... Edited October 23, 2011 by Rob Hall
Craig Irwin Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 When the 57 Belair post car was announced there was a lot of "Why another 57 Chevy when we need a (fill in the blank) instead" talk, and now some of those same people want a new Mustang kit every time the trim is changed. Go figure....
Chuck Most Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 I see it like you do. Each variant allows you to build a distinctly different car even under the skin and pretty much all eras of hot rodding are covered when you have them all, save for the billet one. It was revell who once sold an A-woody wagon with a Tudor body thrown in. I never got the point, since in essence you had to buy the kit twice anyway and then were left with two spare bodies and all their trimmings for the bin. I felt more 'pulled over' then, then I do with their current concept of releasing each body in a separate kit with different goodies to boot. That's what made me chuckle. "Wow. These guys must love having a stack of spare bodies laying around." I do like the AMT Model A Woody/Pickup, though- seems I always have enough spare Model A parts on hand to make a complete model with the spare body. Ditto the Revell Model A pickup that comes with a closed and roadster cab. But that's just me.
Craig Irwin Posted October 23, 2011 Posted October 23, 2011 Rob, you posted while I was typing but you made my point. 2010, 2011, 2012 Mustang, Shelby, Boss 302, aren't they all the same car?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now