Scale accuracy: how much is enough, and why do you care (or not).

[2002p51]

I would REALLY like to know the actual size of the model car market in this country, and how it breaks down. I was doing some research on the Ala Kart recently and came across several quotes that AMT's first release of that kit in the early '60s sold a MILLION copies. If that's a good number (I know, everything on the internet is true...) I wonder if any issue even comes close to those numbers today.....even though there are about twice as many people in the US as there were then.

I think you can get a pretty good idea of the general size of the various segments of the market by looking at the ads in the niche magazines. Compare the number and size of the ads for aftermarket products in a magazine like Model Cars or that "other one" to what you see in a magazine like Fine Scale Modeler or Model Railroader. When compared to model railroading, the adult model car hobby seems miniscule.

[moparmagiclives]

This rings true, and I'm certain it's the reason the scale-accuracy and function-represented-correctly issues matter to me apparently more than to the average modeler. As a life-long professional builder and restorer of 1:1 prototype and high-performance vehicles that HAVE TO FUNCTION CORRECTLY, it does feel like a "salp in the face" when a model company misses the mark hugely on a scale or design issue that is instantly obvious to me, or when a modeler builds something with a total and complete dis-regard for how it would function in 1:1.

Understanding how things work and making things that DO work (or REPRESENT CORRECTLY things that work) is part of the satisfaction I get from my employment AND my hobbies. And I guess that's a difference in 'how-I'm-wired' from the guys who just don't care to understand function, or model company employees who don't bother to measure carefully.

But I've known people all my professional life that didn't have the "bond or passion" (to quote Shane again) for what they did that I seem to have, and I guess my real question is "Why not?". Why is it so often acceptable to so many to slide through life with minimal effort, understanding, and involvement, and being perfectly satisfied with mediocrity rather than excellence? This is obviously a philosophical question and I don't really expect it to be answered here, but it's something I wonder about constantly.

Though I am in no way a professional builder or restorer. I do have a lot if pride in my work as a technician and service manager, but I wonder the same thing when I look at a " rat rod" !!!

And I think it comes around to my generation (30s) and younger that are VERY satisfied with instant gratification rather then craftsmanship...

I just don't get it sometimes..

[jaydar]

I would REALLY like to know the actual size of the model car market in this country, and how it breaks down. I was doing some research on the Ala Kart recently and came across several quotes that AMT's first release of that kit in the early '60s sold a MILLION copies. If that's a good number (I know, everything on the internet is true...) I wonder if any issue even comes close to

those numbers today.....even though there are about twice as many people in the US as there were then.

That is funny because over on the military side they say cars are the bigger market. Just ask why Revell doesn't bring out a new plane, tank or ship. Everyone says Revell's market in the US is cars!

Joe.

[Harry P.]

I would REALLY like to know the actual size of the model car market in this country, and how it breaks down. I was doing some research on the Ala Kart recently and came across several quotes that AMT's first release of that kit in the early '60s sold a MILLION copies. If that's a good number (I know, everything on the internet is true...) I wonder if any issue even comes close to those numbers today.....even though there are about twice as many people in the US as there were then.

More people in the US today, but far fewer people in the model car hobby than there were in the "good old days" when a single model could sell a million units. These days, a kit that sells 50,000 is a huge success.

[sjordan2]

That is funny because over on the military side they say cars are the bigger market. Just ask why Revell doesn't bring out a new plane, tank or ship. Everyone says Revell's market in the US is cars!

Joe.

They haven't done any new ships in a while (that I know of), but they continually have new planes and armor. And the US isn't their only market.

http://www.revell.com/

[Dennis Lacy]

Understanding how things work and making things that DO work (or REPRESENT CORRECTLY things that work) is part of the satisfaction I get from my employment AND my hobbies. And I guess that's a difference in 'how-I'm-wired' from the guys who just don't care to understand function, or model company employees who don't bother to measure carefully.

This here is a double edged sword for me. Being in the business of building cars too, on one hand helps me with building models because I have a strong mechanical awareness. It also helps me fabricate custom parts that I need and do so in a believable way both in appearance and structure.

However, at the same time I admire the people I see build a killer looking model on the surface that might night be exactly functionally correct but it's obvious that they're having fun. I have a build going on right now that was "supposed to be" a simple project. The point was to challenge myself to not get hung up on details and see what I could throw together from my boxes of leftovers, making due with what I have and not giving into raiding another kit for the perfect parts or spending a bunch of time making parts. Well, that plan is out the window... It will be a better model because of my "condition", though.

[doggie427]

You get what you pay for (sometimes). I want detail and accuracy and i will pay for it. If higher cost kits will kill the hobby, then it is not worth it to me to have the mfrs do so.

I come from the 1/48 airplane group, we have costly kits and the avg age on the forums is at least 50!

The strangest thing about the car hobby is the relative lack of aftermarket. If cars were planes you would have way more resin engines, resin engine copartments, whells and tires. Our photoetch a/m is not even close to planes and ships and they do it in scales MUCH smaller.

I don't get it.

I think inherently car modelers are not as commited to fidelity.(translation: We're cheap !!) :rolleyes:

[Art Anderson]

IMHO, "Scale Accuracy" can only carried to a certain point, at which the law of diminishing returns sets in. By this I am referring to an endless search for more perfection, more scale correctness with each model kit, or each of a builder's projects. At some juncture, there will be a "tipping point".

For certain, no model car kit that any of us likely would afford will ever have scale thickness body surfaces--that would be foil thickness or at least very close to that. Not likely we will ever see exact scale reproductions of fabric, leather or vinyl interior upholstery, due to the limitations of injection molding tooling.

Scale thickness paint jobs? Not hardly, not even with the finest of airbrushes used with the most delicate of techniques.

However, we can and should expect to be able to create "an illusion of realism, of accuracy", starting with the model kits we buy (and there are some out there that do fill that bucket pretty nicely.

Art

[Danno]

I'm with Art on this one!

[2002p51]

Me too!

[martinfan5]

Me three, I agree with Dart

[zenrat]

Personally the appearance of accuracy is more important than actual acuracy.

I am a firm believer in "if it looks right it is right".

And, in the end this is my hobby. I'm doing it to relax and have some fun. If i'm sweating it then i'm trying too hard and it's not fun any more.

[niteowl7710]

There's a big difference between accuracy and ease of assembly and "engineered your ears off and 500 immaculate, yet impossible to assemble pieces".

I bring up Tamiya repeatedly for a reason, even the curbside stuff (like the Porsche Boxter) is well engineered, looks dead-on when assembled, and they have that whole "Shake 'n Bake" reputation for pouring paint and glue in the box and the thing assembles itself while you make a sandwich.

But then I've had conversations with people here back when the chat room was around who told me that didn't like kits like that because they're "too easy" and they want a challenge...My answer still remains unchanged, l don't want to engage in hand-to-hand combat with my models, more over I don't find it satisfying/exciting to have to fix an Army of problems (yes I'm looking at you Moebius), that shouldn't be there in the first place. If you gotta charge $25 to hire competent engineers and tool makers, so be it.

Edited September 3, 2012 by niteowl7710

[southpier]

....I've known people all my professional life that didn't have the "bond or passion" (to quote Shane again) for what they did that I seem to have, and I guess my real question is "Why not?". Why is it so often acceptable to so many to slide through life with minimal effort, understanding, and involvement, and being perfectly satisfied with mediocrity rather than excellence? This is obviously a philosophical question and I don't really expect it to be answered here, but it's something I wonder about constantly.

all of my life i have battled this conundrum. i always thought it to be paramount to my career to keep vigilant. now, at 60, i realize all i ever wanted was a weekly paycheck, and 90% of the i worried about didn't matter anyway.

people - ask yourselves:

do you want to be alone on the top of the mountain, or half way up with some friends have a good time?

most of the decisions we make don't make a bit of difference in the scheme of things.

[jaydar]

They haven't done any new ships in a while (that I know of), but they continually have new planes and armor. And the US isn't their only market.

http://www.revell.com

The key word here is new. The only armr came fro repopping Renwal. They have had a few new planes. The put several times more new cars than planes, in my opinion.

joe.

[Darin Bastedo]

To me Fit, finish and stance is what makes a car look "real" to me. While i still attempt to avoid glaring accuracy issues, (like rusty fenders on a corvette) I usually go for close enough, knowing that 90% or more of the people looking at my models, usually have no clue which car it is much less whether it is accurate. even at contests the judges and the participants rarely have a clue. The model below is a good example, It won second place in a local model show, but it has several glaring inaccuracies. the door handles, I completely forgot to install, the engine compartment is not accurately detail painted, and the carefully scratch-built side pipe covers, the ones I worked so hard to replicate open slots, are wrong. the slots on these are supposed to be painted on not open. As nice looking as it is, it should never have won an award against the other models on the table.

[Art Anderson]

Personally the appearance of accuracy is more important than actual acuracy.

I am a firm believer in "if it looks right it is right".

And, in the end this is my hobby. I'm doing it to relax and have some fun. If i'm sweating it then i'm trying too hard and it's not fun any more.

I've often referred to this very thing as "the illusion of real". Let's face it, short of replicating EVERY single part, piece, nut, bolt, washer and cotter key (does anyone even remember cotter keys anymore?) exactly to scale, then figuring out just how to assemble those thousands of bits and pieces in exactly the same manner as the real car, we can only have that "illusion" that somehow the model we are building will be an exact scale replica.

Dealing, as nearly all of us on these forums do, with molded styrene plastic model car kits, just think of all the compromises that must be made (and they are inevitable) in order to come up with a kit for a scale model that when built and finished, looks like the real McCoy but miniaturized. Just the mere act of creating a one-piece body shell for a model car is compromise all over the place in so many ways.

Given that the real car's exterior sheet metal is made up of upwards of 20 individual sheet metal stampings (perhaps even more), BEFORE any trim goes on, while we modelers expect that body shell to be made in one piece except for an opening hood, perhaps an opening trunk, and it's very easy to come up with a body shell having at least some compromise someplace, in order for it to come out of the molds at all easily. And, even IF the shapes and contours are exactly copied in miniature, there will be necessary compromises here or there due to the required material thicknesses (an exact scale thickness body panel in say, 1:25 scale will be gossamer-thin, impossible to even pick up without denting it beyond use. Extend this thinking to every part of a model car, and the required compromises multiply.

All that said, if the model looks right once built (and that's as much subjective as objective) then it seems to me that that's about as far as it all can go.

Art

[southpier]

.... the real car's exterior sheet metal is made up of upwards of 20 individual sheet metal stampings (perhaps even more), BEFORE any trim goes on, while we modelers expect that body shell to be made in one piece...

oh brother! anyone remember the Revell & Renwal kits with multi piece bodies?

these are truly the best of times to be in the hobby.

[Harry P.]

The model below is a good example, It won second place in a local model show, but it has several glaring inaccuracies. the door handles, I completely forgot to install, the engine compartment is not accurately detail painted, and the carefully scratch-built side pipe covers, the ones I worked so hard to replicate open slots, are wrong. the slots on these are supposed to be painted on not open. As nice looking as it is, it should never have won an award against the other models on the table.

Not to mention the jagged edges around the wheels!

[Ace-Garageguy]

oh brother! anyone remember the Revell & Renwal kits with multi piece bodies?

these are truly the best of times to be in the hobby.

I've got the old Caddy, a retractable Ford and 2 versions of the '57 wagon / Ranchero. Though challenging to build nicely, thay CAN be made into beautiful models without a whole lot of corrections to get the proportions right. They were reasonably accurate for the technology available at the time.

For the technology available when the last Ala Kart with the stupidly-tiny engine, the Monogram '34 snapper Ford with the WAY TOO SHORT HOOD, and the ridicululously WAY UNDERSCALE chopped '34 Ford on the tube chassis were tooled, there's no excuse. I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT HAIR SPLITTING DETAIL. I'm talking about GROSS INACCURACY.

[rel14]

Scale, i like to build models as close to, as i can, But one, NONE of the bodys are to scale, cause the thickness is off, if the

bodys were 16ga sheet metal, they would be about .010 thousand thick, and 16ga wire would be about a hair, so

to me its all up to what makes you happy, So what really is scale?? We could go on and on about scale,, Its a plastic model

and you build it as close to, and as nice as, and half will love it, and half will not... Be cool, be happy, and get back to building.

[Darin Bastedo]

Not to mention the jagged edges around the wheels!

exactly, But I am pleased with how the paint came out!

[Ace-Garageguy]

Scale, i like to build models as close to, as i can, But one, NONE of the bodys are to scale, cause the thickness is off, if the

bodys were 16ga sheet metal, they would be about .010 thousand thick, and 16ga wire would be about a hair, so

to me its all up to what makes you happy, So what really is scale?? We could go on and on about scale,, Its a plastic model

and you build it as close to, and as nice as, and half will love it, and half will not... Be cool, be happy, and get back to building.

I don't think anyone in his right mind would expect a model car body to be scale 20 or 22 gage thickness (16?), but I think we have the right to expect the EXTERIOR MEASUREMENTS of the parts represented to be scaled accurately (within reason). If they are, the proportions will be correct. They can't help it. It's math, ya know, and it just doesn't lie.

And while we're at it, spare me the old saw about liberties needing to be taken with models to make them look right etc. etc. etc. It's BULL, often repeated by people who repeat what they've heard and have no empirical evidence to back it up.

If you photograph a model from the same relative viewing angle as you'd look at a real car from, with a lens that doesn't cause stupid distortions, a correctly scaled model's proportions will appear exactly the same as 1:1. I've done it repeatedly and know it's true from analyzing the results.

Edited September 3, 2012 by Ace-Garageguy

[Harry P.]

I agree with Bill.

Nobody is saying that a 1/25 model should have body panels in scale thickness. Nobody is demanding that a 1/25 model should include all the parts and components that are on a real car. Nobody is suggesting anything of the sort. Obviously, certain compromises have to be made.

But maintaining the correct wheelbase in scale? Maintaining the correct shape of the body (within reason, not within fractions of a millimeter)? Maintaining the correct size of the engine as compared to the rest of the model?

There is really no legitimate reason not to accomplish those things in a modern-day tooled kit.

[moparmagiclives]

There is really no legitimate reason not to accomplish those things in a modern-day tooled kit.

How does the product license work ? Is there such thing as only being able to reproduce something only 90% , for a smaller fee?

Are REALY simple things like wheel base and window size just a little off, to keep the license agreement in range?

I'm sure I'm grasping a staws, and I bet it's more to do with time chrunches and what's left on the bottom line when it's all said and done.

But thought I would ask.