1930fordpickup Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 The Kits are all made overseas now . They are all using the technology in above Video. This only counts for the new kits. The old kits are a different story, but it does not mater what machine you use to cut the metal you first need good dimensions .
Lovefordgalaxie Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 I was talkin with a fellow member and he was mentioning the scale fidelity of MOST jap kits. BUT we BOTH noticed that they are almost double the cost of OUR kits. So REALLY maybe it's WHY they cost more than ours, simply because the add the cost of PROPER research to the final cost. But are WE willing to pay 40 bucks for a new Vette or Mustang to GET that scale fidelity? not me.I'm easy. as long as it LOOKS like it SHOULD to me, I'm happy, but thats just me. If those who WANT that kind of fidelity are willing to pay for it,maybe they can petition the jap company's to offer MORE of a variety of AMERICAN cars that would be good sellers. I call them toys because to ME no matter HOW well you build it, ANY kid will play with it as a TOY. ME I appericiate the work that goes into them, but in the end, they're JUST plastic little cars, no matter WHO'S ego say's different. I saw you talking in this very forum about how bad it was the Revell or AMT (now I don't recall) Chevy Nova's rear panel and bumper, that had to have a inward curve and it didn't, and if one would like to build a correct model that would had to be corrected. It looks like a lot of care for just a toy. Are you telling the toy story just to disagree with Harry or did you change your opinion?
Lovefordgalaxie Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 All in all I think the kit's age don't matter. The AMT 1957 Ford is still a great kit, and it's a 60's tooling. AMT 1966 and 1965 Galaxies, both are great kits, with very accurate bodies. The AMT 1949 Mercury is better than Revell's butchered version. Revell had the nerve to put out a '49 Mercury woodie WITHOUT the original engine, but making it to look like a factory original car. Many mistakes happen from tooling from restored cars. A restored car is worthless as a reference, and I think has no value whatsoever as an antique. There are unrestored original cars out there, with factory paint, factory upholstery, untouched undersides and engines. THOSE are the cars to be used as references.
Tom Geiger Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 It's not a Pocher or any other big bucks kit. It's an old kit of as brass-era car made by a company that doesn't even exist anymore... it's not a kit most of the members here would have any interest in or ever even come across. It was tooled in the '70s. But the problems with the kit, like I said, have nothing to do with technical limitations... they have to do with brain freeze and a "good enough" attitude by the manufacturer. For example: just one of many things... the body is made of several separate panels–sides, front and rear panel, and a couple of interior bulkheads. Each panel is basically flat, with some fine raised detail (moldings and very delicate "pinstripes" engraved on them). And each panel has two ejector pin marks on the front of the panel. Because of where they fall, removing them means destroying the molded-in raised details on the body. And that means–if I want the body to look right–removing the pin marks, sanding the panels flat (because parts of the raised detail will be destroyed when I fix the pin marks), and then going back and trying to recreate the moldings with styrene strips. A lot of extra work. I see no reason why the body panels couldn't have been "flipped" on the tree, so that the ejector pins left their marks on the backs of the body panels instead of the front. Does this mean my world is crashing down around me? No. Does it mean I don't "enjoy life?" No, Andy... life is fine. It just means I enjoy my hobby a little less. If that's ok. Harry, that's why I posted earlier and said the "how" and "why" are all dependent on the era that the kit in question was tooled up. Things that you describe about this kit were very acceptable in the 1970s, just as a Ford Maverick was very acceptable as transportation in that same era. Back then us kids didn't even notice that the funny car kits had factory stock bodies in them. It was the state of the market at that time and place. I do agree with you on the problems with kits like this. I'll mention one, the Heller Citroen Hotel Bus.. the bus body has so many ejector pins and sink marks that it would simply be easier to use it as a pattern to scratch build your own from plastic stock. And it hails back from that same era. The hobby wasn't matured just yet. I like a nice model as much as anyone else. I do a lot of research on what I build and will correct major issues and add missing details as best I can. But a long time ago I realized that it's just a hobby and in the grand scheme of things, it's just not worth getting all upset. Now granted there are guys whose hobby is finding faults with new model releases. Some are real dry engineering types who just manage to suck all the fun out of the hobby. Some are guys who just love the smell of their own gas and post non stop to impress themselves. Some of these guys haven't built a model in years. And there are those who truly don't have anything more important in their lives.
sjordan2 Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) Just back at the forum after a nice day at The Big Sit hosted by the Delaware Valley Modelers and then off to dinner to celebrate my wife and daughter's birthdays... Wow! Talk about panties in a wad! First, anyone who starts a post "Stop buying Revell's junk toy kits and buy Asian and German imports. I know, they don't make Mercs and pick-ups and such. But Revell would get a message if adults stopped buying their trash" is pretty much the arrogant elitist and almighty sports car fan who looks down on all us lowly US auto model builders. And you call me arrogant? Pretty darn funny! And you post "I see I have 1000+ posts here and not one 'lookin' good' 'attaboy' or entertainment post." And that's sad. You haven't become a member of the community. It's not all about fiddly little details. Now with a quick swipe of the mouse I pulled up the cover of MCM 156 and the cover article car is a Trumpeter Ford GT40 built by Charlie Amodeo. If that indeed is your model it's very nice, but it means that you are posting on the board in violation of the rules that you cannot post with an alias without posting your real name. So why are there some pretty obvious fake names on the board without the moderators enforcing the rules on everyone evenly? I missed the part in the general rules where we all need to go through you to get approval for our credentials and what certain people are permitted to post on what subject, or why you should be allowed to show such disrespect to people who have been valuable contributors to this forum. Have I shown disrespect? Emphatically yes, but only to people who make comments like this. Edited February 23, 2014 by sjordan2
Tom Geiger Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 I missed the part in the general rules where we all need to go through you to get approval for our credentials and what certain people are permitted to post on what subject. I know our current moderators get fatigued with a lot of the BS on this forum, so maybe you'd like to become a moderator and REALLY stink up the place. Skip. rule number one per Harry, not me. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=33252
Aaronw Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) The problem is they don't really know the subject from personal experience or depth of study. That is definitely an issue, would be nice if they took the kind of time as the more perfection oriented modelers to get to know the subject before they went out to measure the subject. At least read a book or two, but I suppose that would be cost prohibitive paying people to read books. I think many of us imagine the employees of model companies are modelers themselves, but in all probability for most it is just a job, making molds for a plastic model as routine as cranking out baby bottles. As far as the Mustang, I actually kind of like it, I never noticed how boxy the real car was until I saw Revell's sleek chopped top next to it. I'll get my hat. Edited February 23, 2014 by Aaronw
Modelmartin Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 . BUT we BOTH noticed that they are almost double the cost of OUR kits. So REALLY maybe it's WHY they cost more than ours, simply because the add the cost of PROPER research to the final cost. George, It is the distributors who make them seem like they cost twice as much. In reality they only cost a bit more than our kits ......In Japan! I just got the Tamiya 934 kit from Hobby Link Japan for $23.00.
Ju Ju Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 I was talkin with a fellow member and he was mentioning the scale fidelity of MOST jap kits. BUT we BOTH noticed that they are almost double the cost of OUR kits. So REALLY maybe it's WHY they cost more than ours, simply because the add the cost of PROPER research to the final cost. But are WE willing to pay 40 bucks for a new Vette or Mustang to GET that scale fidelity? not me.I'm easy. as long as it LOOKS like it SHOULD to me, I'm happy, but thats just me. If those who WANT that kind of fidelity are willing to pay for it,maybe they can petition the jap company's to offer MORE of a variety of AMERICAN cars that would be good sellers. I call them toys because to ME no matter HOW well you build it, ANY kid will play with it as a TOY. ME I appericiate the work that goes into them, but in the end, they're JUST plastic little cars, no matter WHO'S ego say's different. Dear Mr. Hernandez, The country you spoke of is properly called JAPAN, and the people that inhabit that country are properly referred to as JAPANESE. Much like the country of Mexico where the people are referred to as Mexican-not a slang term. Name calling is even more immature. Maybe its time for Casey to do his thing and dump this thread. jus sayin.......
Harry P. Posted February 23, 2014 Author Posted February 23, 2014 But a long time ago I realized that it's just a hobby and in the grand scheme of things, it's just not worth getting all upset. I'm not upset. I'm not distraught. Or scarred for life, or traumatized, or anything. And yes, Andy, I still enjoy life. And yes, Tom, it is "just a hobby," and I guarantee you that I won't be losing sleep over this issue tonight. Or ever. I just made a simple observation regarding the stupid mistakes that get past the "professionals" who manufacture these things. I didn't expect all the unsolicited psychoanalysis.
Modelmartin Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 Not everyone wants to rework kits Andy. It's got NOTHING to do with enjoying or NOT enjoying life. Wanna bet!
Modelmartin Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 And yes, Andy, I still enjoy life. I wasn't thinking of you. You are the life of the party, actually! You just correct the problem, get it done and move on to the next one. I know that you were just making an observation that is interesting. It is some of the people who then piled on to the manufacturers who seem to be unhappy. The harping about kits has been a constant background noise in this hobby forever. I find it amusing. I have heard all the arguments pro and con so many times and I don't need them recited again. Buy the good kits and don't buy the bad ones, already! I produced my own resin kits for a while and still dabble in it. I have been an avid and serious model car builder since I was 7 (50 years ago). I have built plastic, resin, metal kits in many scales. I have been around and have seen sublimely awful kits and incredibly good ones. In my opinion people who need to tear down every kit that comes out are not happy people.
Harry P. Posted February 23, 2014 Author Posted February 23, 2014 In my opinion people who need to tear down every kit that comes out are not happy people. Agreed. But what does that have to do with the topic at hand?
Modelmartin Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 Agreed. But what does that have to do with the topic at hand? It has little to do with the topic but it does have something to do with many of the responses! As far as the topic goes - you are right. It is amusing how simple things are badly done in some kits. Oh! The Humanity!
sjordan2 Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 I wasn't thinking of you. You are the life of the party, actually! You just correct the problem, get it done and move on to the next one. I know that you were just making an observation that is interesting. It is some of the people who then piled on to the manufacturers who seem to be unhappy. The harping about kits has been a constant background noise in this hobby forever. I find it amusing. I have heard all the arguments pro and con so many times and I don't need them recited again. Buy the good kits and don't buy the bad ones, already! I produced my own resin kits for a while and still dabble in it. I have been an avid and serious model car builder since I was 7 (50 years ago). I have built plastic, resin, metal kits in many scales. I have been around and have seen sublimely awful kits and incredibly good ones. In my opinion people who need to tear down every kit that comes out are not happy people. Agreed. But in a larger sense, isn't this a website for people who have more than a slight interest in the hobby and see it as more than messing around with toys? I think most of our members are concerned with a high level of craftsmanship that is more than a passing fancy, and look to raise their work to a level of art. Lots of different people here, with different aims, but they wouldn't be here if the subject didn't have an important place in their lives. So the quality of the kits - raw material of the work - is extremely important to us.
MsDano85gt Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 i just take the good with the bad........ i thought originally that mpc has Boo Booed the interior panels on the early foxbody mustangs 79-82/83 era the doorhandles were molded by the bottom of the doors by the map pockets i thought this was all to wrong and upside down ( i owned a 1985 mustang gt) by 85 they had already moved the door handles to the top of the door panels on the foxbody cars, i had gone and looked at my factory brochures and interior reference internet pictures sure enuff older ford fox body's had door handles at the bottom of the doors!! they did i want to say for sure for the 87-93 interiors changed those parts (retooled)?? with the doorhandles in the correct spot at the top pf the door panels...... so i guess they do their research sometimes??? on the same note onthe foxbody's 84? may have been 85 started the split folding rear seat in the back seat, that part was basically backwards molded9 the rounded part (outside edge) of the rear seats actually faces inside and the square edge of the seat is on the outside i've taken the time to correct this on any of the ones i work on (fairly easy fix) (will post pics when i find them) there may be pics of that on my in progress fox mustangs thread too...... i just in summary go with the flow fix something if its a major flaw anything minor i just roll with it
Stuntman Mike Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) I have accepted the issues with inaccuracies and found a good way to deal with it. Old bodies with new chassis and engine bays. Tons of fun while being challenged to make everything fit perfect. Got some projects going on. Here´s a ´72 Chevelle that I am converting into a ´71 model. Worn out AMT kit with shortened chassis from AMT´s 70 Monte Carlo: Frame in the bumper and just enough clearance under the hood: Shortened chassis and frame. The cut is hidden under the support bar of the transmission: More details under the hood and some inner fenders from Revell´s ´69 Nova: Current state in Tamiya Italian Red and dressed with Keith Marks decals: It took some head-scratching to figure out how to make it all fit together. But now everything fits better than you would expect. It will still take some time to get her done. Need to rebuild the grille and have tons of work under the hood. I decided to build a small collection of iconic muscle cars. Started with the Chevelle and is already followed by a ´69 Roadrunner body by Jo-Han on a ´68 Charger chassis from Revell. A12 spoiler alert: Does anyone know if I can use the automatic transmission from AMT´s ´71 Charger for this build? Hope you enjoyed some pics. I recommend to try it out. Take a cool old body and use modern stuff to turn it into something special. It´s a lot more fun and a lot more rewarding for me to build a model like this. Also keeps the cost down. Money for six kits in a year makes this a very affordable hobby to me. A hobby without inaccuracies... Edited February 23, 2014 by Stuntman Mike
Dexter7713 Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 A really good fix for your problem Harry is to pack up the kit and donate it to your local Boy Scout Troop. I'm sure there will be some happy young man in that troop that would be able to build it and be grateful to you. That's a great idea. Wish I would have thought to do that years ago before my ex launched of the balcony into a dumpster. 20-40 kits smashed and launched. The end wa near. LoL.
Guest Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 Wanna bet! Yes. I enjoy life whether or not a kit is correct. I would enjoy life if kits did not exist, and not everyone wants to correct flaws in kits. How much more simple can I make it Andy???
southpier Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 so if they're not toys, why do we act like children?
Guest Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 so if they're not toys, why do we act like children? There ya have it lads!
jaydar Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 My Revell 1958 Pro Modeler Corvette has tons of detail, like an alternator bracket and such. None of my newer kits Revell or otherwise have that same level of detail. Therefore, we know they have the ability to deliver accurate detail and we can assume they consciously determine not to do it. Why not? I will pay for it. The amount i pay for the kits from Japan areare many times that which i oay for my Revell kits which with FEW exceptions is all i buy for American muscle cars.
Ace-Garageguy Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 so if they're not toys, why do we act like children? Name calling and psychological bashing is childish behavior, granted. Pointing out flaws in manufactured products, made by well-paid professionals in ANY industry is not. It's called "quality control" if it happens BEFORE the product is released to market.
Harry P. Posted February 23, 2014 Author Posted February 23, 2014 My Revell 1958 Pro Modeler Corvette has tons of detail, like an alternator bracket and such. None of my newer kits Revell or otherwise have that same level of detail. Therefore, we know they have the ability to deliver accurate detail and we can assume they consciously determine not to do it. Why not? I'm not an industry insider, so just a guess on my part... but I'd say a combination of trying to keep manufacturing costs as low as possible in these days of far fewer kit sales (fewer parts equals simpler tooling that costs less to make) coupled with the "good enough" mentality that is so pervasive in the business. It was so nice to see Moebius asking for consumer input and listening to consumer input and actually revising a new model based on that input before putting the kit on the shelves.
Erik Smith Posted February 23, 2014 Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) It's odd that sometimes the kit makers do put forth extra effort - and them turn around and skimp on the next product... If the promodeler Corvettes could include so many correct details, why can't the kits made after that (and like 15 years later!) be equal to or better? As stated many times...it's the money. Those model builders concerned with the correct shape of the carburetor bowls are not the main stay of the business in the US...I think Revell's biggest selling kits are snap togethers? Thought I read that... It will be interesting to see if Moebius can continue in the market too - I hope they can, but they are trying a different approach, so... Edited February 23, 2014 by Erik Smith
Recommended Posts