Italeri fuel servicing truck.

[outrunner]

A change of plan is afoot, I did not make a good job of the black camo so painted it all green again only to find other things that I did not like. The tyres are not what you would call a good fit on the wheels and the holes to fit the mirror bracket on one of the doors were not there. Perhaps I expect too much, but they really should be correct. I do not mind a bit of fettling now and then but as this is the second Italeri kit with silly problems I shall probably never buy another one, anyway I have decided to put it aside for another day and move on to something completely different to be posted up shortly.

Andy.

[Lee Drennen]

Andy. Sorry to hear this I just won one on eBay yesterday thanks for the heads up on the issue of this kit wish you could have stuck with it but I understand.

[Gern]

it would be nice if kit makers made the windows fit from the outside as it would make construction easier,

Absolutely agree with you Andy. I have lots of kits on the shelf for exactly that reason. Masking windows that fit on the inside is a real worry in case you push them loose while either masking or unmasking them. Windows that fit from the outside are a piece of cake. Mask, fit and paint with no need to use excessive amounts of glue. And if the windows come adrift when unmasking, just refit - no worries!

I know there are sometimes limitations due to moulding problems, but I see no reason why this should be one of them. The moulds create recesses around the windows on both sides so swapping the recess for the glazing doesn't sound impossible, and unless the fit is really poor, it would take a real rivet counter to notice the difference.

[Guest]

Dare I say that perhaps people’s expectations are a little on the high side these days? Anything that doesn’t fit like a recent kit from a high-quality manufacturer seems to get called impossible to build, or at the least as too much work …

[Gern]

Dare I say that perhaps people’s expectations are a little on the high side these days? Anything that doesn’t fit like a recent kit from a high-quality manufacturer seems to get called impossible to build, or at the least as too much work …

In my case Jakko it's 'cos I'm just lazy, but I still think there's a point here. Why make the builds more difficult than they need be?

I wonder how many kits are sitting on shelves in a stash somewhere because the buyer didn't realise how tricky they may be to actually build - especially guys in my generation who grew up with the much simpler kits. OK, we had to put up with poor fit and lack of detail, but we kind of expected that back then. There's no excuse for modern kits to be difficult to build because of poor design.

Yeah. Maybe my expectations are high, but I think I have a right to expect something I can build given the high cost of modern kits. If I spend £20 buying an old Revell or Monogram kit, I know I'm probably going to have some issues with the build. But I shouldn't find myself facing build problems if a similar modern kit costs two or three times as much - I'm paying extra to avoid those problems.

[Guest]

we had to put up with poor fit and lack of detail, but we kind of expected that back then. There's no excuse for modern kits to be difficult to build because of poor design.

You seem to have taken my remark upside down as to how I actually meant it I was talking about how people seem to condemn kits that 15, 20 years ago were seen as quite good and very buildable, for being too hard to build to bother with — because their fit isn’t of the standards of the latest releases by current-day manufacturers.

[outrunner]

You seem to have taken my remark upside down as to how I actually meant it :smiling3: I was talking about how people seem to condemn kits that 15, 20 years ago were seen as quite good and very buildable, for being too hard to build to bother with — because their fit isn’t of the standards of the latest releases by current-day manufacturers.

That is just it, why should we pay for 15/20 year old technology when there are kits out there that address old problems. Perhaps I am just to fussy but that's the way I feel, having said that my next project will be an economy sized nightmare if all the reviews are true, but I got the kit cheap, probably for that reason.

Andy.

[Gern]

You seem to have taken my remark upside down as to how I actually meant it :smiling3: I was talking about how people seem to condemn kits that 15, 20 years ago were seen as quite good and very buildable, for being too hard to build to bother with — because their fit isn’t of the standards of the latest releases by current-day manufacturers.

Trust me to read stuff upside down! :upside: :upside: :upside:

[Guest]

That is just it, why should we pay for 15/20 year old technology when there are kits out there that address old problems.

Usually because it’s the only kit out there, or because it’s cheaper than newer kits: if you want a HEMTT fuel tanker or basic cargo truck (without doing major conversion work), then Italeri’s mid-90s kits are your only option. If you want a HEMTT in general, then Trumpeter also has several that are probably better engineered, but if I’m honest, will probably be as much work getting everything to fit correctly — Trumpeter is not Tamiya either

Of course, it’s your (that’s a generic “your”) model and so only your opinion matters. I’m just pointing out that I notice many people appear to have somewhat unrealistic expectations of older kits, then get disappointed and put the kit away when it falls a little short of meeting those.

[Steve Jones]

Sorry to hear about the issues your having on this build. I do hope you manage to get this one completed

[scottie3158]

Sorry to hear about your fit issues. i actually prefer doing the older kits than the high priced newer ones as they give you a challenge and scope to add your own details and make the build your own.
The other thing is as well as a lot of people I build what I like how I like as it's me I am trying to please and sometimes if I'm lucky other people like them too.