mikemodeler Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I'd love to build one like this...I like the look of the crew cabs of that generation.. Hey resin casters, this crew cab could be a good seller! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Hard to find pictures of the 1:1 that are near the same perspective as the model shot, as the photographer would need to be up on a ladder. Did manage to find a fairly close shot of one on a wrecker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Look what I was just sent....... I could almost let the flat roof and too curved windshield pass. What I can't let pass is that awful looking grille! What happened? The top of the grille should be flush with the top of the fenders. It does not come up and meet the leading edge of the hood! There should be an open space between the top of the grille and bottom of the hood. The test shot was at least right in that area. The hood also looks too thick. Especially in the front. The center portion looks like it has too much rise to it throwing the rest of it off. I'll have to pass on this. I hope the '71 doesn't have the same problems. Here's what the '69 should look like... http://www.patsautosales.com/trucks/69%20Ford%20PU/69%20Ford%20PU1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk11 Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) It also appears that the years are different too How so? "what I can't let pass is..." Seriously? Well, when you walk away, just leave yours on the table and one of us will look after it for you.... mike Edited July 22, 2014 by mk11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Janssens Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) Hard to find pictures of the 1:1 that are near the same perspective as the model shot, as the photographer would need to be up on a ladder. Did manage to find a fairly close shot of one on a wrecker... Think one of the issues is, one of shadows, like the creases, curvatures are there, but don't realy show up right, due to photo shoot lighting, where the pics of the 1:1s are in natural light. Maybe Sven needs to build one, which looks like it was exposed to the elements for a few decades, faded red, with flat white bumpers and grille, adding weathering, which will pop out the details. just sayin'... Edited July 15, 2014 by Luc Janssens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabrux Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 It appears to me that the cab's B pillar is rather thick compared to the real truck. I don't care, I'm still going to buy far more of these than I should! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) It appears to me that the cab's B pillar is rather thick compared to the real truck. I don't care, I'm still going to buy far more of these than I should! Yeah, the B-pillar is the one thing that's stood out to me from the beginning. It looks good from the back, but too thick from the front. I'm thinking they don't angle inwards at the right angle so you're seeing more of it from the front view. Could be a molding compromise so the different moving parts of the cab mold that have to reliably come back together thousands of time over the life of the mold are broken down on a (relatively) straight line. Here's the tooling mock up, I'm assuming that the mold breaks right where the highlight is shining. I haven't seen a test shot in person yet to study how the mold lines fall (the first thing I do to a new kit, I'm weird like that...) Edited July 15, 2014 by Brett Barrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S. Svendsen Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I built the test shot pictured. The only photoshop work done was lightening up the background and adding the license plate from the decal sheet. The windshield tooling did not have the final polishing done yet so my example was a little hazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my80malibu Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 I built the test shot pictured. The only photoshop work done was lightening up the background and adding the license plate from the decal sheet. The windshield tooling did not have the final polishing done yet so my example was a little hazy What did you think of the Kit? Are there issues that You feel could be resolved /should be resolved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Anderson Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 It appears to me that the cab's B pillar is rather thick compared to the real truck. I don't care, I'm still going to buy far more of these than I should! In order to correctly judge any model car/truck subject, particularly the bodywork, against that of the real thing, unless one takes the time to hold the model body in their hand AS CLOSELY as possible to the same angle and eye level of the actual car/truck, it's truly hard to nigh-impossible to correctly evaluate the model as to accuracy. I spent considerable time, on at least three occasions helping judge the tooling mockups for this kit, and trust me, it was not an easy task--but I beliee it to be very, very close to correct. Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platerpants Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 hey as long as it looks more real than a lindberg kit sign me up oh wait already preordered one a while back. I think it would be cool to help with test forms of the kits getting dimensions, designing the body and all the parts would be awesome but take alot of time, although my attention to detail compared to 90% of the rest of the members on these forums is quite bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Thanks for ruining this kit for me, I was prepared to reward Moebius and Model King for bringing this kit to market but apparently there are flaws with it. JK- If I were to let the resident "experts" keep me from buying kits that are not 100 percent perfect, I would be doing something else with my time and money. I love how people can decide what flaws are present based on some pictures posted on a forum. I would at least have the decency to wait until I had the model in my hand to do a comparison. Maybe they should list out all kits and the corresponding problems, you know, as a public service tip for the uninformed. I am sure this topic will go up in page count quickly as everyone starts chiming in with their comments like "In this day and age of computers.." and "There is no excuse for inaccuracies" instead of being grateful that there is a company out there trying to deliver some new, never offered model kits. Edited July 16, 2014 by mikemodeler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S. Svendsen Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I enjoyed building the kit. I can't really comment more than that because I was building a test shot and I haven't seen a production kit. As far as any inaccuracies people have noticed all I will say is that the people involved in the project are incredibly passionate about doing their best to try and make it as perfect as possible. That said, until somebody invents an incredible shrinking machine, model kits will have to be made by artisans who "interpret" what they see or sometimes don't see and try to reduce it in scale. I'm not an F-100 expert. I'm sure if one looks hard enough they will find something not perfect about it. I think the finished model captures the spirit of the truck and I will be happy to display it on my shelf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I enjoyed building the kit. Isn't that what this is all about? I can't really comment more than that because I was building a test shot and I haven't seen a production kit. As far as any inaccuracies people have noticed all I will say is that the people involved in the project are incredibly passionate about doing their best to try and make it as perfect as possible. Imagine that, having passion for your job?! That said, until somebody invents an incredible shrinking machine, model kits will have to be made by artisans who "interpret" what they see or sometimes don't see and try to reduce it in scale. I'm not an F-100 expert. I'm sure if one looks hard enough they will find something not perfect about it. Maybe they should have had a 67-72 Ford F series group review this so it might not make it to market because of all of the flaws! I think the finished model captures the spirit of the truck and I will be happy to display it on my shelf. My thoughts exactly Sven! It wouldn't be the first model that isn't perfect that made it to my display case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Kourouklis Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Really, Mike? "Decency", to wait to have the thing in your hands? I have had that whole angle, along with a host of other tired old tropes, torn to pieces for more than a year now. Yours is item 4 at the April 2013 blog linked in my signature below. That's how predictable, rote, and constantly regurgitated all these canards are. So without any sort of RATIONAL argument, try to make it a matter of "decency", I guess. Okay, then how exactly is it INDECENT to judge a kit on pictures - most particularly, when you've done it before, and things have turned out in your hands exactly the way they looked in those pictures, time and time again? This fluff about gratitude is a fine little warm-and-fuzzy, but Moebius doesn't RUN on gratitude and they don't CLOSE DOWN on criticism. Moebius runs on SALES, and I'd have to think making sure the side window opening and the door frame around it don't actually get worse from tooling pattern to production certainly wouldn't hurt. Then again, considering all who are willing to lap up "good enough" and browbeat anybody who asks for better, maybe US manufacturers indeed know the market better than I do. But people who constantly make criticism of inanimate objects grounds for personal attacks are on distinctly shaky ground, daring to bring up topics like "decency". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Turner2 Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) Really, Mike? "Decency", to wait to have the thing in your hands? I have had that whole angle, along with a host of other tired old tropes, torn to pieces for more than a year now. Yours is item 4 at the April 2013 blog linked in my signature below. That's how predictable, rote, and constantly regurgitated all these canards are. So without any sort of RATIONAL argument, try to make it a matter of "decency", I guess. Okay, then how exactly is it INDECENT to judge a kit on pictures - most particularly, when you've done it before, and things have turned out in your hands exactly the way they looked in those pictures, time and time again? This fluff about gratitude is a fine little warm-and-fuzzy, but Moebius doesn't RUN on gratitude and they don't CLOSE DOWN on criticism. Moebius runs on SALES, and I'd have to think making sure the side window opening and the door frame around it don't actually get worse from tooling pattern to production certainly wouldn't hurt. Then again, considering all who are willing to lap up "good enough" and browbeat anybody who asks for better, maybe US manufacturers indeed know the market better than I do. But people who constantly make criticism of inanimate objects grounds for personal attacks are on distinctly shaky ground, daring to bring up topics like "decency". Agreed. Plus all the people complaining about the "complainers" are overlooking a few things here. To wit: 1-Yes, we know that we're looking at photos of the 1/1 compared to the model from different angles in two dimensions. Most people have the ability to unconsciously compensate for that when they are viewing two different things for purposes of comparison. Thus they can see where something is flawed, simple as that. 2-If we are seeing said flaws in 2D, from vastly differing angles & perspectives, then they obviously do exist & are going to likely be even more glaring & noticeable in 3D. When something is inaccurate & shows up as inaccurate in 2D, seeing it from all three dimensions doesn't magically correct that. 3-"That said, until somebody invents an incredible shrinking machine, model kits will have to be made by artisans who "interpret" what they see or sometimes don't see and try to reduce it in scale." There is no interpretation here. Something either looks like a miniature replica of the 1/1 or it doesn't. This kit doesn't. Even without the benefits of CAD, with today's easy access to photos of a subject online, "interpretations" doesn't cut it as an excuse, & that's all it is, just an excuse, not a reason. 4-"Perfect models". Not once in the comments made by those who can see this is seriously inaccurate was the desire for a "perfect model" to be made, just an accurate one. We are intelligent & rational adults, we not only know that nothing is perfect nor do we expect it to be, we also know the difference between "perfect" & "accurate". It's time for others to understand that difference. It's a simple concept to grasp, really. For those not in the know that might see this as my "first" post & try to start something that way, no it's not. I changed email addresses & lost/forgot my original password, so I had to create a new profile. In other words for those that disliked my honesty before, I'm back.... I suggest that you might want to adjust your block/ignore preferences accordingly. Edited July 16, 2014 by Bob Turner2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Van Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I have been lucky enough to build a test shot and help with issues in early production. I don't claim to be an expert on the 1/1 truck but there was nothing that stuck out like a sore thumb. I my OPINION the kit is as close as humanly possible 100% correct. I LOOKS great when complete......and I think Sean's great build shows this. As far as fit and finish....... I was able to build much of the chassis without glue....parts fitting so well they friction fit. The 6 cylinder engine, like the Hudson, is a work of art. I'd ask that all the nit picking wait until at least one PRODUCTION kit is in peoples hands. I know the effort behind the kit was 110%. All you can ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 So I stirred the pot and get called out ....as I expected. I guess my point was that instead of complaining on a forum about a kit that has yet to be released, why not contact the manufacturer and offer your opinion of what is wrong with the soon to be released kit so they can get it right? I am not blind to see some possible flaws with the kit but do understand there are limitations with what can be done when scaling down to make a kit and realize some sacrifices in accuracy get made. Of all of the experts who routinely critique all kits and their flaws, I wonder how many actually have experience in a manufacturing environment similar to model kits? How many understand the model kit process? Go ahead and fire away, can't wait to hear the responses................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Of all of the experts who routinely critique all kits and their flaws, Those who complain the most build the least! Some folks hobby is "whining on message boards". I don't have any gripes here. I know the folks involved and expect that this will be right when it's released. Why? The presidence of their previous products are all top notch. Moebius will sacrifice a release date to go one more round of modifications to make it right. They don't have big box store deadlines on the project, which is why previous models from some other manufacturers went to pressing with glaring and easy to fix errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabrux Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I guess my point was that instead of complaining on a forum about a kit that has yet to be released, why not contact the manufacturer and offer your opinion of what is wrong with the soon to be released kit so they can get it right? There appear to be a fair amount of people directly involved with the production of this kit active in this particular thread. Somehow I think comments made here just might make their way to the appropriate people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) In order to correctly judge any model car/truck subject, particularly the bodywork, against that of the real thing, unless one takes the time to hold the model body in their hand AS CLOSELY as possible to the same angle and eye level of the actual car/truck, it's truly hard to nigh-impossible to correctly evaluate the model as to accuracy. I spent considerable time, on at least three occasions helping judge the tooling mockups for this kit, and trust me, it was not an easy task--but I beliee it to be very, very close to correct. Art I agree 110%. The Revell 'cuda is like that. It looks funky in pictures, but for some reason it looks much better in person (the rear haunches aren't "haunchy" enough, that's my biggest gripe with it). I look at pictures taken of my own model and can't believe the thing I'm seeing on my screen is the same thing I'm holding in my hand. Edited July 16, 2014 by Brett Barrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Kourouklis Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 (edited) ….Of all of the experts who routinely critique all kits and their flaws, I wonder how many actually have experience in a manufacturing environment similar to model kits? How many understand the model kit process? But that's the exact thing of it all, Mike. As Bob T2 said above, there's a lot of stuff lately so far off that you don't need to be any kind of "expert" to see that it's off. And I have some understanding of the process, thanks, and the reason it turns out to be irrelevant to this discussion is that this process also produces good kits. Why can't the results be more consistent? And I'm sorry, but unless there are significant changes from preview shots, you can judge from pictures. In all my critiquing, I have found some time, shock and surprise, not only to get some stuff built, but reviewed for national publication. Saw one preview shot of a kit hiked up in the front driver's side with a wheel off center, thought to myself, surely that's a pre-production problem - and don'cha know, wound up evaluating the final version of that very kit with that very issue. Headlights too far out and rear quarters too truncated and wheel arches too flat and roofs too low and upper fenders too broad are all things you only need a fair set of eyes connected to a fairly functioning brain to see in pictures, and there have been too many times in my experience that this stuff came out in 3D exactly the way it looked in 2D previews. Sure, there's engineering you can't see in photos that'll make a kit more seductive once you have it in your hands; the latest drag version of a certain kit is compelling enough almost to overcome its problems, but in the end, it's another case of great design done in by an inaccurate body. And this is a forum dedicated to discussions of kits. Why shouldn't this stuff come up? Those who complain the most build the least! Some folks hobby is "whining on message boards". *sigh* I've had this false dichotomy and irrelevant challenge covered in items 2 and 3 in that same blog for how long now? Suuure, we never build, and we certainly never FIX anything we complain about. It's amazing that no matter how many times the handle snaps right up and thwacks you guys between the eyes, some o' y'all just WON'T STOP STEPPING on that rake. Even the fact that somebody fashioned a rake specifically for you to step on doesn't seem to slow you down. Post script - oh, and until any of you guys produce masters for Ed Fluck, I'd kinda stifle this sort of tripe around plowboy, too. Edited July 16, 2014 by Chuck Kourouklis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 While I would like to see the new releases be a lot closer to the actual vehicle it is modeled after, I also understand that some limitations exist when it comes to the tooling. While I strive for perfection in anything I undertake, I also realize I am human and sometimes I settle for "close enough". Given the costs to bring an all new kit to market, I can see where multiple revisions in the spirit of "making it right" can affect the profitability. I think Moebius has demonstrated that given the opportunity to fix issues, they step up and do so. In the meantime, the other two model companies usually let things go and let us modelers to sort it out. I have been waiting a long time for this kit and will buy several, flaws and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 While I would like to see the new releases be a lot closer to the actual vehicle it is modeled after, I also understand that some limitations exist when it comes to the tooling. While I strive for perfection in anything I undertake, I also realize I am human and sometimes I settle for "close enough". Given the costs to bring an all new kit to market, I can see where multiple revisions in the spirit of "making it right" can affect the profitability. I think Moebius has demonstrated that given the opportunity to fix issues, they step up and do so. In the meantime, the other two model companies usually let things go and let us modelers to sort it out. I have been waiting a long time for this kit and will buy several, flaws and all. What issues (other than the Hudson's incorrect rear wheel skirt location lines and the buggy 55 Chrysler headlights being much better once they were molded into the 56's body) have Moebius fixed once a kit has made it into production? It's one the things (maybe the thing) that bugs me the most about this board, we take Revell to task for things because we think they're not reading (they are) but we blow smoke up Moebius' backside because they have an active presence on the board? I don't get it. Is there a bit of a double standard there, or is it just me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 What issues (other than the Hudson's incorrect rear wheel skirt location lines and the buggy 55 Chrysler headlights being much better once they were molded into the 56's body) have Moebius fixed once a kit has made it into production? It's one the things (maybe the thing) that bugs me the most about this board, we take Revell to task for things because we think they're not reading (they are) but we blow smoke up Moebius' backside because they have an active presence on the board? I don't get it. Is there a bit of a double standard there, or is it just me? Brett, I was generalizing because I was going off of memory on some recent topics on Moebius kits and issues associated with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts