Comparing car models to airplane models

[Terry Sumner]

This is kind of a companion thread to the Lazy Revell thread. This will probably cause a furor but I gotta say it. NONE of todays 1/25th scale car kits are ANYWHERE near the detail and quality of today's airplane kits. And they are twice the scale when comparing to 1/48th scale. When it comes to 1/32 scale airplane kits the difference is even more apparent! Details are very soft in car models compared to the crispness of airplane details. Just look at panel lines.... Aircraft panel lines are very petite and very sharp. If you scaled up a car model door panel line or trunk line the space would scale up to probably over an inch+ wide!!! Removeable panels in an airplane model fit the opening precisely. A car model's hood rarely fits very well. The tires in a car model continue to be molded in inaccurate vinyl whereas aircraft model tires are injection molded with excellent detail. Airplane modelers have perfected the techniques of painting plastic or resin tires to look much more realistic than our vinyl pieces of junk. Ejection seats too...the detail airplane modelers want is very sharp and precise. Car model seats not so much. I know the cost is less in car model kits but I think we as car modelers are just less demanding. There have been a few car kits that had corrections made after some complaints but nothing like the airplane models.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Terry Sumner

[scalenut]

I've found that aircraft and armor modelers in general are extremely picky about every detail of a kit .. I know that auto modelers are also , but it seems that military modelers take it to the extreme. Every time I have to do decals for a military modeler they want to pick every detail apart to the point of pulling my hair out .

I've found auto modelers to be much more forgiving and understandable about how accurate i can get.. military modelers ...forget it ..if it's not perfect down to the last historic detail and shade it's not good enough !

I have shy'd away from military decals for just this reason.

I guess this plays into the demand for military kits to be perfect or be bashed for eternity on every forum.car modelers are more prone to take it and make it right.

Edited December 22, 2011 by scalenut

[kenb]

I think scalenut is right about armor and aircraft modelers being rivet counters, but I don't think that's why the kits are engineered better. I think that most of the car kits are older molds that have been touched up. Most of the armor and aircraft are new issue and done with more advanced techniques. The older aircraft and armor were not really that good. The newer release car models are very good. I belong to 2 local clubs, an auto club and another club that is models in general but mostly aircraft. They are a great bunch and don't beat you up. One of our members was talking about going to another clubs meeting (aircraft) and some of our guys said "you won't like it there, those guys will be measuring everything and checking the rivets". The car club is the bomb. Good ole boys having fun. I love going to those meetings. Ken

[Guest]

They pay for the accuracy. Aircraft and armour models tend to be quite spendy compared to auto models. Of course, most aircraft and armour kit companies are also japanese.

[Gluhead]

Hello Terry, good to "see" you.

One other point is retail price. I'm not sure what the ratio of car modelers to military is, but most of the nice kits on that side of the fence seem to be a fair amount higher than the $10-20 we're used to paying for a new car kit.

Even so, you're right. The "high end, pro" kits we get often suffer the same lack of crispness as the regular kits. Trying to remember back to the airplane kits I've built in the past. They were certainly the less expensive variety, and I'm thinking they were comparable to our stuff.

[Terry Sumner]

Ken...as I said in the OP, I'm talking about the kits of today...meaning new tool car kits and new tool airpane kits. And all aircraft modelers are definitely not rivet counters. I know a heckuva lot that aren't...more than are for sure. But I disagree with you that the airplane models are not engineered better because of the so called rivet counters. It is precisely why they are engineered better. The model companies will only make what sells. When an airplane model comes out and it is flawed greatly, it won't sell because the airplane modelers won't settle for mediocrity anymore and they don't buy that kit. We as car modelers though tend to accept it and buy them anyways even when they're flawed a lot. And I'm not talking about the little things when I refer to flaws. It's like Andy said.... "car modelers are more prone to take it and make it right." Why should we have to "make it right" when they have the ability to make it right in the first place? Of course this would end up costing more for better kits so maybe that is why Revell doesn't make them like airplane models.

[Terry Sumner]

Hey Chris! Good to see you too. Glad to see you've joined the best car modeling forum on the net! Welcome....

[philo426]

I agree !The average newer-toll 1/48 and 1/32 scale Aircraft kit are very well detailed and engineered!Like this 1/32 Trumpeter Wildcat with factory folding wings!

[Scale-Master]

A lot of it has to do with the manufacturers making what they think will sell.

None of today's 1/25 scale kits are anywhere near the detail of the aircraft kits? Look a 1/24 scale car Tamiya kit.

You can get that same level of fit that is described as standard on aircraft kits, but you must pay for it, just like those nice aircraft kits. Have you priced any of these new airplane kits?

I have heard a lot of whining about the high price of Tamiya car kits, but there is a reason for that price tag.

Model kits are aimed at different levels of builders, never will all builders agree on what all kits should be like. The bottom line is the companies produce what the market will bear.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Scale-Master

[Harry P.]

There is a basic philosophical difference between armor/military/airplane builders and car builders.

For model airplane builders, and military/armor builders in general, accuracy and scale fidelity are very important to most of them. They demand and expect quality kits, and they are willing to pay a premium to get them. Also, most aircraft/military/armor guys are adults who are willing to pay the price for quality.

When it comes to model cars, first of all it seems that model car builders are generally incredibly cheap. They complain about kit prices all the time, so manufacturers sometimes cut corners to save costs (and keep retail prices lower). Also, a higher percentage of model car builders are kids, and a lot of them (and a lot of adult car modelers, too) don't care too much about accuracy. For some reason, car modelers seem to be much more willing to accept substandard kits than military guys are, and a lot of car builders throw together parts from various sources... sometimes from kits that aren't even the same scale... huge cartoon wheels that don't allow for any suspension travel or could never be steered in real life, engine/drivetrains that would never work in real life, "dipped in syrup" paint with flakes that are hugely out of scale, etc.

In military modeling, accuracy seems to be a strong driving force, and the majority of builders are after correct detail and historical accuracy. "Creativity" isn't much of a factor, or even desired, in military modeling.

In car modeling, "creativity" (meaning "doing your own thing regardless whether it's accurate/realistic/plausible") seems to be what a lot of people think is the point, and accuracy or realism isn't as important as being "creative."

The kit manufacturers know their market, they know who demands what, and they make their kits accordingly.

[Guest]

Harry, you hit the nail on the head.

[Junkman]

Terry, I have rarely agreed with anyone more!

And just to add insult to injury, I mention railway models.

The progress that has been made over the past 30 years in those non-automotive subjects is simply incredible. Same goes for diecast cars really.

And what I find seriously annoying is that all the common glitches we actually do moan about, like sink marks, ejector marks, chrome pieces attached to the sprues in visible places, mold separation lines, etc. have all been mastered by the armor, aircraft, and diecast guys, yet the model car kit makers keep telling us it is technically impossible.

I think they are just living in the past (this is to an extend confirmed by the subject matter they release) and I also think that none of them have been to appropriate exhibitions of the trade in ages. I don't mean model exhibitions. I mean mold making and molding equipment exhibitions.

[Guest Johnny]

I used to build planes too but finally gave away everything I had to one of my biggest critics and told him he could build then now to suit himself!

Got tired of people picking at my work on them!(plus running out of airspace! )

[Peter Lombardo]

Harry, that is very true, but only to a point. Rat Rods, Customs and Street Rods, by their nature allow for a lot of creativity, but Factory Stock and certainly Race Cars, of all types, require a fair amount of accurate casting and modeling. As was stated before, if we want more detailed offerings, then we will have to demand it by voting with our wallets. Don't buy the inferior offerings and remind the manufactures with e mail comments that you did not buy the current offering because it was not up to your expectations.

They will cut corners and save money as long as we the modelers allow it.

Buy an inferior model and you will continue to get inferior models. Tamiya routinely charges $50.00 to $60.00 (list price) for their newest offerings and they have much more crisply molded bodies, but the current crop of models tend to eliminate or use a "plate" for the motor casting.

If you want the incredibly detailed 1/20 F1 kits you can look at the multi-media MFH or Studio 27 kits, but they will set you back between $200.00 and $350.00. There is a world wide market for these cars, but it is a much smaller market.

Bottomline to me is, if it is not up to your standards, don't buy it.

Edited December 22, 2011 by Peter Lombardo

[Austin T]

A great example is when was the last time you saw a plane painted aztec gold or candy apple red with Craiger Mag rims?Military guys have only one way to build that model,the historical way.We can do what ever we want to them most of the time.

[Harry P.]

...if we want more detailed offerings, then we will have to demand it by voting with our wallets. Don't buy the inferior offerings and remind the manufactures with e mail comments that you did not buy the current offering because it was not up to your expectations.

Buy an inferior model and you will continue to get inferior models....

That's the basic difference between most armor builders and most model car builders that I mentioned. There's a very basic philosophical difference. Armor guys demand accuracy, because armor modeling is all about accuracy. They don't build "rat rod" Stukas or hot rod Sherman tanks. There's no room for "creativity" in building a detailed, historically accurate WWII fighter. It's either right... or it's not. They're all about historical accuracy and scale fidelity/detail, and they're willing to pay for it. They get better kits because they won't support junk, and the manufacturers know that.

Many model car guys are willing to accept bad kits, because a big chunk of model car builders don't care all that much about accuracy. They see a kit as nothing more than raw material for them to create their own vision. Their intent isn't an absolutely correct model that's 100% faithful to the real thing. It's a basically different philosophy than a typical armor guy has.

Model car builders are just a lot more accepting of lousy kits. How many times have we heard "But we're modelers... we can fix it." A lot of car modelers have that "Sure it's a crappy kit but we're just so lucky to have that kit at all, so we have to buy it and support the manufacturer" mentality. And what message does it send to a manufacturer when simplified, poorly engineered or inaccurate kits sell? It tells them that we think the kits they're making are good enough.

[Modelmartin]

A great example is when was the last time you saw a plane painted aztec gold or candy apple red with Craiger Mag rims?Military guys have only one way to build that model,the historical way.We can do what ever we want to them most of the time.

Oh I don't know! I knew a guy who built a very realistic looking 1/35 armored personnel carrier and brought it to our all-subjects IPMS club meeting. It was very well built and weathered but when you opened the hatch for the engine there was a chromed supercharged small block Chevy! We all cracked up!

I think Terry, Mark, and Harry all have it right about the differences between the types of builders and quality of kits at different price points. When Superior Models in Japan produced their 1/43rd Ferrari 250 LM with 400 parts, an electro-formed body and pre-soldered tube frame, it blew everyone out of the water and rightly so for the $900. price.

[kenb]

I build everything, but my trend has been towards cars. I like the fact that I can build a 32 ford street rod and put whatever engine in it that I want and not be criticized for using the wrong engine. And yes, something that I did overlook that was mentioned here is that the aircraft models are extremely high priced. Ken

[Terry Sumner]

Even a high priced airplane kit is cheaper than 18 holes with ensuing libations and food. And then what have ya got? Just a memory and indigestion...

[turn1wonder]

About a month ago I finished this, a CFCF-18...

...a CanadianFunnyCarFighter-18, just because I wanted to. Started it over 30 years ago.

Bob

Edited December 23, 2011 by turn1wonder

['08SEAL]

I come to find out, that if you build cars for about 1 and 1/2 years or so. Once you build an airplane, it is the most boring build you have ever built. I built cars forever. Now with this B29, it is boring as crud.

[Terry Sumner]

I come to find out, that if you build cars for about 1 and 1/2 years or so. Once you build an airplane, it is the most boring build you have ever built. I built cars forever. Now with this B29, it is boring as crud.

THAT my friend is nothing more than a personal opinion/preference...

[whale392]

That borders on lazy.

I build both military and auto. Add in H-O scale railroading and I have the bases pretty well covered. One of the reasons I rarely finish anything is I am looking to make it as realistic as possible. I will figure out how to re-engineer a car kit to fit the larger wheels and still retain a somewhat functional suspension (albeit I quite often will lay it right down on the rubber, but it will look right when viewed as all suspension bits have been modified to be 'functional'). My H-O and (when I was into it) N-scale stuff was also held to a high level of realism. I have no real need or room for crud modeling. By profession, I am held to a very high level of attention to detail, as if I fail to do so, people can DIE. My job is very detail-oriented, and so too is anything I do as a hobby. Laziness is NOT an operating motive. Get it right or don't to it at all.

Now, as to Terrys' original intent of the thread. As car modelers (as a whole), we are extremely cheap. We are lazy with our money and lax with our standards. However, there is a group of car modelers who are of the same mind-set as our military brothers. They strive for accuracy and overall fit/finish. Too often though, they are lambasted and ridiculed by the at-large-masses for being that way. Too often a truly nice kit COULD be done, but the cheapskates complain about the MSRP of the kit. Get off your stinginess and pony up for quality. Too few car guys see the forest through all the darn trees. You want a highly detailed kit? Invest in it by paying for the development. Buy the quality kits and the manufacturers will listen (again, see our military brothers). You all piss and moan about a $25.00 kit, but will spend over $100 on photoetch and aftermarket goodies to bring it up to the level of a $100 kit. Why not just spend the $100 to begin with and get the far better kit? Simple really, Laziness and Cheapskate attitude.

If I ruffled any feathers, good. I full well meant to. Terry (and Harry as well) are completely correct about auto modelers as a whole. If you can't stand that reflection looking back at you, do something to change it. Simple words really.

P.S: Terry, I'll catch you over at ARC!

[ranma]

I think that its unfair to say that all car builders cheap some of us here have a fixed and or low imcome. and simply cant afford higher costing kits.

Edited December 23, 2011 by ranma

[whale392]

Did I say 'All' car modelers were cheap? No. Read it again, this time without jaded eyes.

No malice meant, just a good hard slap of reality. If there are those who can't deal with the reality of the situation and decide to lash out, well; that is their prerogative. The way I see it (and this is merely my view and IS NOT open for debate) is very black and white: you pay for quality or you work with what you have/are able to. If you choose to complain and have the means to buy better right off the bat, your best bet is to 'put up or shut up'. If you only have a very limited means, work within that and go as you can. That simple really. Or, there is the third method, start with a lower range kit and turn it from that sows ear into a purse. Those who do that WITHOUT COMPLAINING have my respect. Aircraft/Armor guys do it all the time, and nary a complaint. As a matter of fact, they revel in the fact they did the conversion/upgrade and came out the better for it.

Maybe it's time auto modelers took a page of scale etiquette from our Air/Armor/Rail brothers. Instead of being viewed as the social misfit/shut-in cheapskate that is so common a stereotype of auto modelers, we need to elevate our thinking/build/investment in the hobby.

Edited December 23, 2011 by whale392