Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Who are the modelers' modelers, the legends of the art? Where can one see their handiwork? How are/were the original models upon which the plastic kits we all enjoy made? I understand some of the process, the making of molds, etc. But the kits themselves consist of many little subassemblies, often intricately detailed models in their own right. Who makes those models? In what form? Fantastic kits were engineered and produced when CAD and CAM and 3D scanning weren't even being discussed as a possibility, let alone a reality. I know that larger scale models are sometimes produced and then scaled down, in the past using a device called a pantograph. Where can I find more information on the history and the current state of this, to me, mysterious process (for example, how is Moebius developing its impressive new kits)?.

Inquiring minds want to know! :lol:B):):huh:

Edited by Bernard Kron
Posted

This should be an interesting thread with all the intimate knowledge possessed by the members here.

I can't add much, but I have seen it mentioned that Moebius uses 3d meshes. This recent post by Dave Metzner mentions it, but he might tell us more.

Posted

Great topic! It would be nice to have some of the industry veterans chime in, especially given the advances in recent years in rapid prototyping.

I remember interviewing for a product manager's job at Revell in the mid 90s and as it was explained to me then, there was a lot of work in researching and measuring the subject matter before submitting it to the engineering department to begin a scale buck. Didn't get the job, someone with airplane background did, but it was interesting seeing the inner workings of Revell and how models were developed, along with meeting some of hobby's longtime product people like Ed Sexton, Roger Harney and a few others.

Posted

Fantastic kits were engineered and produced when CAD and CAM and 3D scanning weren't even being discussed as a possibility, let alone a reality.

and now, with all the computer and 3D advancements, we have what ? :huh:

Posted

One would believe that with today's advancements in computer aided design, rapid prototyping and CNC machines, they would be making all kinds of stuff. But it appears that is not the case. At least with U.S. kit makers, and if I am wrong, please, somebody correct me!

I have seen a trend with some foreign kit makers to actually use computer generated images on the sides of their boxes and most likely they are from the computer generated designs of the kit. And they are sharp and very clean kits.

We may have started it, but man, they perfected it.

Posted (edited)

Thanx for the replies so far.

The link to the article on Tom West on The International Model Car Builder Museum website is is great. While it's mainly about how generous West was in donating a large amount of highly significant memorabilia, it still provides a glimpse behind the scenes in the 1960's. It leads me to wondering about the making of these large scale prototypes. I'd assume that the wooden model of the bodywork for the Mickey Thompson Attempt I in the Tom West articles was produced by a professional pattern maker based on working drawings generated by the team at Revell. This would have been common practice at the time. Highly skilled wooden pattern makers were an integral part of industrial America in those pre-computer times, notably in the foundry industry. So that got me thinking about the divison of labor. Presumably folks like Tom West were the creative force in the work, the educated eyes that made sure things were accurate and true to the subject, and who made the decisions on what the kit would actually be. Were all the subassemblies produced by industrial prototyping professionals (like a pattern maker) or did guys like West also make prototype bits (perhaps things like chassis and engine details, for example, where their subject matter knowledge would be invaluable)?

Regarding my comment about the pre-digital days, it is simply to point out that, whereas we would assume exceptional levels of quality as the result of the tools we have available today, the techniques used in earlier times often proved to be no hindrance to creating exceptionally highly detailed and accurate kits on a level with what we see now. And if the number of releases coming out at the time is any evidence, time-to-market and productivity weren't a problem either!

I hope to see more comments, insights and memories from the community on this fascinating subject.

Thanx,
B.

Edited by Bernard Kron
Posted

One would believe that with today's advancements in computer aided design, rapid prototyping and CNC machines, they would be making all kinds of stuff. But it appears that is not the case. At least with U.S. kit makers, and if I am wrong, please, somebody correct me!

I have seen proof Revell uses 3D printing technology for some kits, but the process is not completely done on the computer.

Posted

Presumably folks like Tom West were the creative force in the work, the educated eyes that made sure things were accurate and true to the subject, and who made the decisions on what the kit would actually be. Were all the subassemblies produced by industrial prototyping professionals (like a pattern maker) or did guys like West also make prototype bits (perhaps things like chassis and engine details, for example, where their subject matter knowledge would be invaluable)?

I think (my opinion, based on what I've read and seen) is Tom West's experience is a bit unique in the industry, having worked for Revell and Aurora (and maybe others?) as a designer, but maybe others had similar experiences.

The Striaghtline Modeler's 'site (seems to be down now) has some great info regarding the development of the Aurora Racing Scenes kits, including reference photographs and detailed part drawings, which at least show part of the design process.

JO-HAN followed much the same process, too, it seems:

jhsuperbirdbuck.jpg

Posted

I have seen proof Revell uses 3D printing technology for some kits, but the process is not completely done on the computer.

Which, I feel, is significant in itself. Frequently, subjective decisions based on subject knowledge and insight into the model kit business itself must play an important role. It probably influences how specific sub-models (is this a concept worth pursuing...?) are created. Digitalization allows significant improvements in accuracy and turnaround times, but it isn't intended to address fundamental conceptual and design issues.

Posted

One would believe that with today's advancements in computer aided design, rapid prototyping and CNC machines, they would be making all kinds of stuff. But it appears that is not the case. At least with U.S. kit makers, and if I am wrong, please, somebody correct me!

I have seen a trend with some foreign kit makers to actually use computer generated images on the sides of their boxes and most likely they are from the computer generated designs of the kit. And they are sharp and very clean kits.

We may have started it, but man, they perfected it.

Yes they do have all the "tools", but the main reason kits are not produced is licensing. It costs alot of cash to get the "rights" to a manufacturers product. Just an example of what goes on to produce a Nascar kit. The manufacturer(Ford,Chevy...) wants a cut, then the Nascar guys want their cut. And don't forget about the driver of said subject(Jimmy,Dale,Tony...) they get a cut. The kit without the licensing fee would cost the average model company about $9 ea. for a run of 5000 kits. Add all those costs and then another 20% for the hobby reseller.

Posted

Tom West has worked for Revell, Aurora and MPC. He has done work for Action, AMT and Accurate Miniatures with the McLaren ktis. He went on to do quite a few killer cars and bikes with his Milestone Development group. And to top it off, he is one of the top Drag Racing Photographers of all time and very well known for his X-Ray drawings of famous racing subjects.

He told me about how they turned the Charger 500 kit into the General Lee, how the McLaren kit was perfect until Accurate Miniatures go their hands on it. How the guys at Aurora took the funny car prints of the real car seriously and ended up doing the engines with the rotating assemblies! And many other cool stories from the modeling world.

Posted

Simple solution to the NASCAR dilemma. Don't make them anymore! I would be totally fine with that! :lol:

There are tons of them on the $5 dollar tables at the kit shows to last a lifetime! We actually once got a request from the Military to please stop sending them to the troops! They where tired of building the same thing!!

I think Round 2 has the right idea of re-issuing kits with updated parts in them. As for new kits, use the licensing you have already and keep making new kits with them.

As for the how kits are made, there was a really nice article in National Dragster a few years back showing the process for the production of the Revell Racing Team back in the early 70's. It might be available on the NHRA website still. And, for some reason, I remember once seeing an episode of Mr. Rogers where he visits Revell and shows the process of making a kit. I remember the Convoy van on the production lines.

Posted

Nice to see that Tom West article again - brings back memories. Yes, it's not so much an article about how kits are made, but it was a real insight for me to see that Attempt 1 buck after having spent so much time with the plastic kit. Meeting Tom West and seeing that buck "in the flesh" made me realize that there are real human beings behind these plastic kits that we so often take for granted.

Posted

Aurora took the funny car prints of the real car seriously and ended up doing the engines with the rotating assemblies!

Wouldn't you love to see these again ? I would. 392.gif417.jpg

Posted (edited)

This is the work of a friend who carved wood masters for the model car companies. It's carved from different exotic wood, the wheels

and engine are carved from deer antler. He now carves smoking pipes.

For some reason the image wont load.

Edited by bill w
Posted

How the guys at Aurora took the funny car prints of the real car seriously and ended up doing the engines with the rotating assemblies! And many other cool stories from the modeling world.

The three-part "History of Drag Racing Models" series he authored in SAE in the early '90s (1991?) had a lot of good info about his involvement with the Racing Scenes kits and his time at Aurora, too.

Posted

Yes!I read that the tooling costs and failure of the Racing Scenes series were a significant factors that ushered in the demise of Aurora in '77

Posted

I've always wondered how the metal dies are made! How does it go from a wooden prototype to a reverse image metal mold??? Do they make a sand master in the correct scale and pour the steel over it????

Posted

A lot of the process for main stream makers is likely to be done by a rapid prototyping sub-contractor, they can take a male wood buck, 3D image it to then CNC 5 axis machine out a female metal mold, and even injection mold the parts, it's pretty cool to see actually

For smaller independents then the process is still much more hand build still, hand formed master bucks from plastic/resin, and cast either by themselves or outsourced

Posted

I've always wondered how the metal dies are made! How does it go from a wooden prototype to a reverse image metal mold??? Do they make a sand master in the correct scale and pour the steel over it????

Watch this video series:

Posted

Bernard, to answer a question you had, I believe a guy like Tom West is hired as the project manager for a model kit. That does put him front and center on the accuracy of the model and how close it represents the real thing. He's also involved in the design of the kit. How many parts will there be? How will they go together? Will there be an interior tub or separate sides? And then how well it goes together. There's the project budget, milestone date targets and managing the team involved, both in house and contractors.

Now a days, add in the wrinkle of working with people in remote areas like China. You don't see them face to face, nor share a common language. A lot can get lost in the translation. Another interesting thing is as the tooling designers (I'm told the Chinese are brilliant at this) work from drawings, measurements and data supplied to them by people in the US. They probably have never seen that 1:1 car in person!

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...