Who Made The 'worst Kit Ever' ? My Vote Goes To...

[sjordan]

Yes, they are really really dreadful. How do you mean the Gullwing being a lot easier to get right? I think in order to get it right, you need to scratchbuild each and every part new. OK, the bodyshell is halfways there, but the entire front is all wrong. Fit is atrocious to say the least. All the innards are just plain rubbish. I'd say melt it and inject the plastic into better molds.

It's hard to believe that this rubbish was stoically reissued time and again over the past five decades in disturbingly regular intervals. If I was a kit manufacturer and had this kind of skeletons in the closet, I'd do everything I can to avoid them reentering people's memories. And that my fellow modellers is done by releasing newly tooled kits of them. Or don't you think nicely made Gullwings and 275s in 1/12 would be hot sellers? Hotter than a Neoplan bus, that's for sure. Wakey, wakey, Revell!

Okay, I was generous about the Gullwing kit's potential – it takes a LOT of adaptations and corrections to get it right, but the result can be quite nice. A purist will argue that the seats are overscale, the engine is too short (that's probably unfixable; seems like they did that to accommodate workable steering), there's no firewall, fender liners, air filter, no trace of the famous spaceframe (most of which couldn't be seen anyway due to the 1:1's full-length bellypan), they oddly placed the water tank on the radiator and not where it should be behind the exhaust manifold, and the side windows are not large enough or positioned correctly. There are adequate but time-consuming workarounds for a lot of that, however. If you're crazy enough to try.

[Ken]

The Monogram '56 and '57 Chevies - they look more like a Trabant than Revell AG's Trabant kit.

That one had me rolling

The AMT 50 Chevy PU snap kit - just plain dreadful.

Are we thinking of the same one? Cause the one I have is based off of their excellent full detail kit. You might have gotten a bad run of it, but I don't think that this comes anywhere near 'worst kit ever'

The AMT new tool 58 Edsel and 60 Starliner kits - ok, actually quite good kits, but compared with the originals they are oddly soulless. Dunno, I just don't like them. Got a repop of the original Starliner in resin now and hope to find a leftover Holthaus '58 Edsel.

The Edsel while not I car I like, is a great kit along with the Starliner. Both have great proportions and detail. The engine in the Starliner is one of the best FE engines in scale. Again no where near 'worst kit ever'

The Arii Eldorados. Not all bad, but rather 1/20th scale. They just don't blend in next to the Monogram '59, which I don't find too good either but not bad enough to put it on this list.

I will support you on the Arii Caddies, but you have got to go and look at the Monogram 59 caddy again. Once more, a model that when it came out was ground breaking. It changed the way most people thought about Monogram models. It was the peak of a run that started with the musclecar kits like the 70 Chevelle and continued on through the NASCAR craze. Monogram brought out the Caddy to rave reviews and stunning success. It firmly placed them on the same scale as Tamiya and Fujimi in the car market. The detail and molding in the 59 caddy were unheard of from an American model maker at the time. AMT had just started its own run with the introduction of the 66 Nova and the like. Have you built the 59 caddy. It goes together very well. Almost too easily. I still have one left from the original pink run and several from subsequent runs. Heck, it spawned the 59 coupe, the 59 impala and the 60 impala too. This was a kit of the decade contender and no where even in the same room as some of the other kits you have mentioned. Sorry to get on the soap box...

[FactoryStock54]

Sheesh! That makes ANYTHING Pyro ever did look positively Tamiya-like!

[Frank]

Worse kit? There's a lot

All bodies from JAYMAR.

I have to agree here, although the detail on the bodies is good.

He should use Polyurethane resin instead of fibreglass resin.

[jbwelda]

its already been mentioned, but:

>The Revell AG Trabant - their first effort in CAD designing a kit and it went all wrong.

>The Monogram '56 and '57 Chevies - they look more like a Trabant than Revell AG's Trabant kit.

hilarious and undoubtedly true!

always liked how a trabant kind of resembles a squished and mangled stovebolt!

but all is relative and relative to that porsche undercarriage, at least they presumably resemble the car they are meant to model!

i cant even come up with anything comparable to whats in this thread, carry on...

[HotRodaSaurus]

I will support you on the Arii Caddies, but you have got to go and look at the Monogram 59 caddy again. Once more, a model that when it came out was ground breaking. It changed the way most people thought about Monogram models. It was the peak of a run that started with the musclecar kits like the 70 Chevelle and continued on through the NASCAR craze. Monogram brought out the Caddy to rave reviews and stunning success. It firmly placed them on the same scale as Tamiya and Fujimi in the car market. The detail and molding in the 59 caddy were unheard of from an American model maker at the time. AMT had just started its own run with the introduction of the 66 Nova and the like. Have you built the 59 caddy. It goes together very well. Almost too easily. I still have one left from the original pink run and several from subsequent runs. Heck, it spawned the 59 coupe, the 59 impala and the 60 impala too. This was a kit of the decade contender and no where even in the same room as some of the other kits you have mentioned. Sorry to get on the soap box...

Did anyone ever produce a better shaped hood for the Mono Cadillac?

I too thought it a great kit but the fluting of the fenders is too shallow(I had a 1:1 1960), tried out the Ghost Buster hood but the fluting was too deep, that is it goes too far towards the screen end of hood

John

[Harry P.]

While I've owned and built some truly horrible kits in my time, the worst ones were not only poorly molded and engineered, they were also lousy replicas of the original. For consistently useless kits you just can't beat the flock of turkeys released under the Palmer brand!

As an example, I submit the following built-up Porsche that was part of a small collection I purchased to get a '58 Ford convertible. As I recall this kit has the same chassis, reversed, that was in the Palmer '60 Olds convertible I had when I was a little kid. At the tender age of seven years old, the Palmer Olds was my first experience with scale modeling disappointment. At least the "Porsche" has a one piece body!

Is this goofy, or what?

Wow, I never knew that Porsche offered a front-engine Briggs & Stratton model as an option

[bobcrozier]

ME!

[Guest rick r]

If 'Worst' Can be taken to mean 'least favorite' I have to go with the Monogram 69 Camaro in all its guises.

The body looks like it was mastered from a crayon drawing done by a 7 year old.

The company kept tossing it out as a reissue t$ime after time after time. It became a favorite at mark-down tables at hobby shops worldwide.

No doubt put modelling as a hobby at risk when first-time builders stepped back from their efforts, took a critical look, and replied with a collective 'Blecch!'

A close second would go to the MPC 69 Camaro, most recently foisted off as a 2fast 2furious POC. More media-branded easy money BS from the wizards at RC1.1.

Body was maybe even worse than the Monogram because it wasn't as obvious that it was just 'wierd'.

[7000in5th]

Wow - I didn't know there was so much bad stuff out there, and I've been building since 1949.

As a Corvette fan, I hate to even show this one but here goes:

I had it listed as a Doyusha 1978 Corvette 1:24 kit. However, as bad as it is, it doesn't seem to have a '78 "bubble back" rear window but it does appear to have a "Stingray" nameplate and rubber front bumper guards so, for the sake of argument, let's call it a '75 or '76. And, in fairness to Doyusha, I seem to remember faintly that it was tooled by someone else and Doyusha produced it for a while.

I also remember some Arii C3 Corvette 1:24 kits that were badly rendered. Anyone have more info on any of this?

[Modelcarjedi]

Revells Henry J kit drove me mad as a kid !! I have one now but i'm scared to open the box. A lot of the 1/16 minicraft kits are kinda rough but i love those kits!!!!

keith ross

[Jason Rothgeb]

If 'Worst' Can be taken to mean 'least favorite' I have to go with the Monogram 69 Camaro in all its guises.

The body looks like it was mastered from a crayon drawing done by a 7 year old.

The company kept tossing it out as a reissue t$ime after time after time. It became a favorite at mark-down tables at hobby shops worldwide.

No doubt put modelling as a hobby at risk when first-time builders stepped back from their efforts, took a critical look, and replied with a collective 'Blecch!'

A close second would go to the MPC 69 Camaro, most recently foisted off as a 2fast 2furious POC. More media-branded easy money BS from the wizards at RC1.1.

Body was maybe even worse than the Monogram because it wasn't as obvious that it was just 'wierd'.

And without further ado here is my rendition of that kit. A guy in our club (the board's own Ariel) listed some kits for sale and this was one of them. I assumed that a 69 Camaro was going to be Revell's world beating 69 Camaro and not this kit. Imagine my disappointment when I saw the Monogram kit. Thing is...I had this kit as a kid. In fact it was one of the first I built. With that, I decided to hop in the time machine and give the kit another try with my improved skills. So is it an ugly purse and half deaf pig? I'll let you decide.

[jbwelda]

has anyone ever actually finished an orange crate?

i think its the newest issue of rodders journal has an article on the real car, recently unearthed i guess, in which it says the model was one we all built as kids.

we did? i know i tried but no cigar. ive yet to see one built well and rarely one even build although a friend named kurt did in fact do a rather nice job of one some years ago but he said it was a total b*tch and he wasnt happy with it even though i thought it was far better than any i had seen before.

to me that is kind of a definition of "worse": a kit so complex and so fiddly its near impossible to build yet it is a continual temptation to try, only to likely end with almost guaranteed frustration and failure.

[Jason Rothgeb]

has anyone ever actually finished an orange crate?

i think its the newest issue of rodders journal has an article on the real car, recently unearthed i guess, in which it says the model was one we all built as kids.

we did? i know i tried but no cigar. ive yet to see one built well and rarely one even build although a friend named kurt did in fact do a rather nice job of one some years ago but he said it was a total b*tch and he wasnt happy with it even though i thought it was far better than any i had seen before.

to me that is kind of a definition of "worse": a kit so complex and so fiddly its near impossible to build yet it is a continual temptation to try, only to likely end with almost guaranteed frustration and failure.

The only one I ever saw (in print) was the one Drew Hierwater build for his Bench Racer column in that "other" model magazine so years back (1999 if I had to guess). I don't remember him listing any building difficulties but it has been years since I read it. I have one of the reissues with the resin hood, but I still haven't broken the seal on it. I'll let you know how it builds 30 years from now. Maybe

[John Goschke]

While I've never built the Orange Crate, I did attempt the SWC Willys kit from the same period when I was about ten years olds. Miraculously that experience didn't scar me for life (or maybe it did since I've never tried it again!).

Another Revell kit from the early '60s that I did succeed in building was the '56 Chevy two-door sedan, with all those "working features" and sloppy fit that made their kits of that era such a nightmare to build.

Built in trade, in about 1980, the model represented the owner's real six cylinder, Powerglide Belair. As if the basic kit wasn't fun enough I installed the six and tranny from the AMT '53 'Vette with a scratch single carb intake, aircleaner and exhaust manifold. What did I get in trade? About six restorable builtups, including a '58 Ford hardtop (brush-painted Testors pink!)

[Bainford]

I think the worst kits made were Revell tools of the mid-late 70s, or at least they were the most forgettable. I'm thinking of those custom Courier pick-ups with out-of proportion squared off bodies and generic features, including the engine. No technical accuracy whatsoever. The custom Chevy vans also, such as the Charlies Angles Van, etc. Every release was the same except for decals, and they were all bad, again with generic engines and features. The Pontiac Sunbird, the custom Mustang II, the Sneaky Pete. Just about everything new Revell produced during this period was junk. I've also noticed since joining forums several years ago that they are the only models that are never seen. Some pretty obscure stuff shows up from time to time, including Palmers, but nothing was so forgettable as these Revell offerings.

[Rob Hall]

I think the worst kits made were Revell tools of the mid-late 70s, or at least they were the most forgettable. I'm thinking of those custom Courier pick-ups with out-of proportion squared off bodies and generic features, including the engine. No technical accuracy whatsoever. The custom Chevy vans also, such as the Charlies Angles Van, etc. Every release was the same except for decals, and they were all bad, again with generic engines and features. The Pontiac Sunbird, the custom Mustang II, the Sneaky Pete. Just about everything new Revell produced during this period was junk. I've also noticed since joining forums several years ago that they are the only models that are never seen. Some pretty obscure stuff shows up from time to time, including Palmers, but nothing was so forgettable as these Revell offerings.

Yeah, I remember building their '79 Mustang kits (Monroe Turbo, MacLaren) and '79 Trans Am...the chassis and engine detail was very generic... the tires were wierd and squishy. After the 1:32nd scale snap kits I built as a kid in the mid '70s, the first glue kit I built was the Revell 'Bad Dream' '56 Chevy around 1978, followed by the aformentioned Mustangs and Firebird.

It wasn't until the late '80s and the Revell-Monogram era that I paid attention to Revell kits again... ('69 Camaros, '89 T-Bird & Cougar, '88 Grand Prix, etc..)

[Jason Rothgeb]

While I've never built the Orange Crate, I did attempt the SWC Willys kit from the same period when I was about ten years olds. Miraculously that experience didn't scar me for life (or maybe it did since I've never tried it again!).

Another Revell kit from the early '60s that I did succeed in building was the '56 Chevy two-door sedan, with all those "working features" and sloppy fit that made their kits of that era such a nightmare to build.

Built in trade, in about 1980, the model represented the owner's real six cylinder, Powerglide Belair. As if the basic kit wasn't fun enough I installed the six and tranny from the AMT '53 'Vette with a scratch single carb intake, aircleaner and exhaust manifold. What did I get in trade? About six restorable builtups, including a '58 Ford hardtop (brush-painted Testors pink!)

Beautiful build John. Especially since this kit was one of the "scarring" kits you mention in your post. The version of the kit I bought started to build and failed at was the one with the white car with the chrome pieces done in a copper color. IIRC it was part of the "Hot Rod" Magazine series.

Did you ever "clone" this build? It looks strangely familiar. All the more shame that I don't have one completed Tri-Five in the collection. Was the participant in this trade a club member? Just curious Jason.

[John Goschke]

Thanks, Jason. Nope never did another '56. This was before I joined DelVal Scale Modelers, during my dope-smokin' layed-off steel worker days (daze?)!

If I remember correctly the owner lived in Riverside, NJ and, strangely enough, his name was Mercury!

[Jason Rothgeb]

Thanks, Jason. Nope never did another '56. This was before I joined DelVal Scale Modelers, during my dope-smokin' layed-off steel worker days (daze?)!

If I remember correctly the owner lived in Riverside, NJ and, strangely enough, his name was Mercury!

I must have been thinking of one of the many 56s done by John White then. Either that, or you did your 55 Chevy in the same color scheme. Maybe we can get a Tri-5 building project going in the club. I guess I should get my movie car done first though huh?

[Casey]

On 2/13/2008 at 11:25 AM, bob paeth said:

The kit itself, couldn't even be used for parts.

That's when you know the kit in question is a ?

I'm not sure any one, single person would be able to determine the worst kit ever, because you'd have to build every kit made, then compare them all...and nobody wants to build that many Palmer kits. ?

[89AKurt]

1 hour ago, Casey said:

That's when you know the kit in question is a ?

I'm not sure any one, single person would be able to determine the worst kit ever, because you'd have to build every kit made, then compare them all...and nobody wants to build that many Palmer kits. ?

Nice archeological dig here my man! ?

I discovered what has to be the worst kit ever, when I helped with a Make & Take.  It was donated, had been started.  Whoever at AMT was tasked with the Batmissile should be drawn and quartered.  I would bet every kid who tried this, abandoned model building forever.  Snap together, right...... ?

[DukeE]

2 hours ago, Casey said:

That's when you know the kit in question is a ?

I'm not sure any one, single person would be able to determine the worst kit ever, because you'd have to build every kit made, then compare them all...and nobody wants to build that many Palmer kits. ?

Casey, you proudly earned this. More fun laden threads found. Props, brudda.

My nominee for worst kit is Arii C111 Mercedes. Makes Palmer look like a Pocher. 

[Sledsel]

Interesting thread and views. Leaving Palmer out, I have been able to make something that I was pleased with out of every kit I bought except one: The Revell 49 Mercury. There is so much wrong with the entire body that there was no fixing it. I was able to remove the rear 1/4 window frames for future use, but the remainder of the body went in the trash.

[Snake45]

Since we're excluding Palmer....

I recently dug a reissued MPC '69 Firebird out of the Snakepit and thought I could slap it together without too much trouble. After spending two evenings looking carefully at the body and doing some starter work on it, I threw it back in the box as "unbuildable." Yah, I know, a lot of these have been built, but not to my standards. And my standards are pretty darn low.