Carbs: The most unrealistic part on every model car I've had

[1930fordpickup]

What we think are simple fixes to the mold may take hours . It is hardly ever a quick fix when you are working with tool steel .

On the other end we have to remember what is called Die Lock . This is when the top of the mold is overhanging the bottom .The perfect example is A Tupperware Lid .Remember they are a soft plastic, it will come out of mold and not break. That snap when they close is what would happen to the model car.

To get away from this they have to use what is called a slide in the mold . When the plastic cool the slides move out so the part can be taken out of the mold without breaking.

That being said it is very costly to have these in a mold. First everything that moves breaks sometime in its life , This leads to down time and loss of money . The slides take longer to operate (cycle time ) so less product per the hour = loss of money. The higher the detail the more the molds cost to produce the higher the detail the more to fix the mold after you run it for awhile.

[Junkman]

For me it's windscreen wipers and pulley/fanbelt assemblies. I don't so much mind the hovering alternators, because a bracket is quickly fabricated.

I find the lack of ancillaries much more annoying. Many of the older kits come with just that - a hovering alternator. There is rarely a hovering power steering pump, or a hovering A/C compressor, despite those things were very commonplace on real cars at the time, albeit not hovering of course.

[Harry P.]

  On 6/2/2012 at 5:34 PM, 1930fordpickup said:

What we think are simple fixes to the mold may take hours . It is hardly ever a quick fix when you are working with tool steel .

On the other end we have to remember what is called Die Lock . This is when the top of the mold is overhanging the bottom .The perfect example is A Tupperware Lid .Remember they are a soft plastic, it will come out of mold and not break. That snap when they close is what would happen to the model car.

To get away from this they have to use what is called a slide in the mold . When the plastic cool the slides move out so the part can be taken out of the mold without breaking.

That being said it is very costly to have these in a mold. First everything that moves breaks sometime in its life , This leads to down time and loss of money . The slides take longer to operate (cycle time ) so less product per the hour = loss of money. The higher the detail the more the molds cost to produce the higher the detail the more to fix the mold after you run it for awhile.

Individual small parts like carbs can very easily be improved upon without the use of sliding dies. Much external detail could be added without any undercuts. Any halfway competent tooling designer can do it.

[vintagestang]

Old kits with mirrors glues to the windshield. Mold line accross the bumper. No anteannas. No side windows if you wanted working windows.

[Pete J.]

  On 6/2/2012 at 6:10 AM, Art Anderson said:

Sliding molds would be required, end of statement!

Sliding molds are only require if there are undercuts. Casting each side and the top as separate pieces would eliminate the need for undercuts. The ejector pins could be run off the the back side. Most parts trees are not done on sliding molds. End of statement!

[Nick Winter]

These are from Pro-tech, Nice carbs are out their,

For me it's the Belts and Pulleys and/or Intakes on most kits engine, the old Blob and 12" wide belt, Right now I'm replicating my truck and while the AMT 90 Chevy trucks were very well detailed for their time, that particular kit lacks quite a bit regarding the belts/pulleys, the kit includes an A/C Compressor on the Pulley's but no other A/C parts (Condenser, lines ETC), the Alternator is nothing more than a Chrome blob, and the Power steering looks nothing like the Power Steering pump you would find on the 305/350 in the real trucks, it also just a blob, yet in the kit they over detail other area's with super crisp engravings, to me that's just laziness.

Rant over.

Nick

Edited June 3, 2012 by Nick Winter

[charlie8575]

Two-part engine/transmissions. Anything else can be fixed with paint, scrap plastic, or the aftermarket.

Charlie Larkin

[gray07]

Master cylinder and a wiper motor.

[Jdurg]

For me, it's the belt/pulley assemblies. In the vast majority of the cases, the belts are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to thick for the scale of the kit. I understand that for fragility reasons they can't make them to the proper scale, but would it really hurt them to perhaps mold the pulleys separate from the belt and make the belt a different piece that you fit the pulleys into? This way, if we want to just take some properly scaled belt material and put it into the proper form, we could do that. It's a pain having to go and cut the monsterly thick belts off of the pulleys, then go and sand/shape the pulleys due to the belts. On more modern cars, this is even more of a pain due to all the detail they've properly molded into the pulleys. If you do like I did with my 1988 Corvette build and forget to measure out a template for the belt before pulling it apart, you put yourself in a lot of extra work.

And although this only affects certain kits, I also hate it when depressed lettering on a piece is molded as raised lettering. On the 1996 Monogram Grand Sport kit I'm building, the Corvette lettering and Emblem on the Injection Covers are incorrectly molded as raised parts. On the real thing, they are depressed on the Injection Covers. It become kind of a pain to paint them the proper red coloring since they aren't raised high enough to allow for proper dry brushing. If they were sunken, I could easily thin out some red paint, let capillary action draw it into the recesses and dry, then add as many coats as I would need to get the proper color and easily rub off the paint that gets onto the black portions. I was able to do an okay job on the covers, but it still doesn't look correct to me.

[W-Machine]

  On 5/31/2012 at 10:10 PM, SuperStockAndy said:

Carbs are definitely molded badly.

But you gotta give them credit for the invisible alternator brackets!

Those two are my "favorites" as well.

[jamesG]

Wondering how many of these suggestions actually reach the kit companies?

I would like to see some detail on tires myself even if it's not the name of an actual company. They could even use there own name, rebellion tire would look veteran than just a round chunk of rubber.

[Foxer]

  On 6/3/2012 at 6:21 PM, jamesG said:

Wondering how many of these suggestions actually reach the kit companies?

I would like to see some detail on tires myself even if it's not the name of an actual company. They could even use there own name, rebellion tire would look veteran than just a round chunk of rubber.

Who knows, but it sure is some cheap research as to what's in your regular customer's minds.

[deja-view]

  On 5/31/2012 at 10:09 PM, Michigan Madman said:

Always loved the metal axles passing through the engine block and/or oil pan on the older AMT and MPC kits. How unrealistic is that?

"Noticed I had an oil spot under the car, and thought maybe I had a bad rear main seal. But I crawled under the car to look and there's this big, metal rod..."

Yeah....but you could change wheels really easily if you wanted a new look.

[JMD904]

One issue is the lack of any kind brake baking detail. Its just smooth and plain plastic! Also, a lack of any fluid dipstick!

[Erik Smith]

  On 6/3/2012 at 9:22 PM, grayghost said:

For me the script and lettering and emblems.

That stuff needs to be separate ether made of plastic or a photo etch set.

Same for the interior parts.

Metal transfers like Tamiya uses would be awesome.

[Harry P.]

  On 6/3/2012 at 9:22 PM, grayghost said:

For me the script and lettering and emblems.

That stuff needs to be separate ether made of plastic or a photo etch set.

Same for the interior parts.

Adding separate PE parts would drive up the cost of a kit. Many people are already crying about the cost of kits... they'd be screaming if the price went up any further. The manufacturers know that model car kit buyers are incredibly price-conscious (or in plain English, cheap). That's part of the reason that manufacturers cut corners... to keep the price down and appeal to more potential buyers.

Military modelers are willing to pay for quality, and in general they get it. Most car modelers aren't willing to do that.

[Fat Brian]

I think one of the reasons car modelers are cheap is that the companies just keep recycling the same old molds over and over again. I think we've all been burned buying a kit at full price that turned out to be basically a box of unidentifiable lumps and flash. I wouldn't mind paying more for a kit that I know will be up to current mold making technology. The old kits have their place but would it kill them to retool some of the more popular vehicles from yesteryear?

[Harry P.]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:08 PM, grayghost said:

What if they used styrene or what ever the car is molded from.

Could they not make a small separate mold to do these on a small tree.

Then we could clean them up and use alcad.It would make a big difference in the models appearance.

I suppose it's possible, but needing to use Alclad to get a realistic chrome finish would probably be a turnoff to most modelers. If scripts were included in kits, I think the vast majority of builders would prefer stainless steel PE parts.

[Harry P.]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:36 PM, Fat Brian said:

I think one of the reasons car modelers are cheap is that the companies just keep recycling the same old molds over and over again.

Manufacturers do that for two main reasons.

1. The tooling is already paid for; reissued kits bring much more profit per unit than newly-tooled kits do.

2. People keep buying them!

[Erik Smith]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:36 PM, Fat Brian said:

I think one of the reasons car modelers are cheap is that the companies just keep recycling the same old molds over and over again. I think we've all been burned buying a kit at full price that turned out to be basically a box of unidentifiable lumps and flash. I wouldn't mind paying more for a kit that I know will be up to current mold making technology. The old kits have their place but would it kill them to retool some of the more popular vehicles from yesteryear?

Or the fact that many builders think they need huge stashes of kits and, therefore, can't afford to buy a case of $75 dollar kits. I look at military models all the time and have to say I am jealous of the amount of detail and the kits that the companies make. Anybody seen the new Fine Scale Modeler? Did you see that TWO kits are now available for the Oshkosh MRAP? See how many parts are jammed into a 1/35 scale kit? Remarkable. But, they cost enough to dissuade the average car modeler from purchasing multiple kits - which is the current business model for car kits.

[Fat Brian]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:47 PM, Harry P. said:

Manufacturers do that for two main reasons.

1. The tooling is already paid for; reissued kits bring much more profit per unit than newly-tooled kits do.

2. People keep buying them!

I understand that, but a lot of the reason the reissues sell is that sometimes they are the only kit of the subject available. If given a choice between an old annual version of a kit and a fresh tooling I would buy the new tooling even if it cost more.

[Fat Brian]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:51 PM, Erik Smith said:

Or the fact that many builders think they need huge stashes of kits and, therefore, can't afford to buy a case of $75 dollar kits. I look at military models all the time and have to say I am jealous of the amount of detail and the kits that the companies make. Anybody seen the new Fine Scale Modeler? Did you see that TWO kits are now available for the Oshkosh MRAP? See how many parts are jammed into a 1/35 scale kit? Remarkable. But, they cost enough to dissuade the average car modeler from purchasing multiple kits - which is the current business model for car kits.

There has to be a point at which the companies can still make money on a new tooling and people will still buy enough of them to make it worth the tooling cost. They won't be able to get $75 for a car kit of the level they turn out now but I don't think mid thirties is out of the question if the kit is good and has some build options.

[jamesG]

I don't see 1or2a new tooling a year bankrupting a company and shareholders would likely see a increase. As far as licensing goes, perhaps the 1:1 companies could give the model companies a brake in exchange for promanant advertising on the box. Something like " '68 nova chevy 2 featuring Goodyear tires" . (Just a thought)

[Harry P.]

  On 6/3/2012 at 10:53 PM, Fat Brian said:

If given a choice between an old annual version of a kit and a fresh tooling I would buy the new tooling even if it cost more.

Yeah, but that's just you. Most modelers vote price first.

[Pete J.]

The pricing side of this discussion drives me nuts. There are a lot of modelers who will say, "I would pay for quality" but when it comes time to put the bucks on the counter they scream like a stuck pig when they see the latest issue from Tamiya is $80 even when it includes photoetched grills and metal transfers for the badging or a aftermarket kit from Scale Motorsport is another $80 to $100. No one here will dispute that both of these companies produce some of the best stuff out there. Quality is available, but it comes at a price. As my grandmother would say, "You can't have your cake and eat it too." Before you say you would pay for quality, think about your last 5 purchases and see if that is really true. Did you go on eBay and buy two or three kits from somebodies old stash or did you go to a LHS and buy a truely quality model. Frankly, I know which way I went and it was for the quality. Old lumps just don't interest me. I would rather build something that is a pleasure to build, not something that fights me every step of the way.