discussion What do we want?

[Guest]

Grahams latest bike kit has raised an interesting thought. When I was young kits were very basic, quite often withy flash, poor fit, little detail and raised panel lines etc...

Tamiya changed all this and addressed all the points above and took things to a new level.

Nowadays we have the 1/32nd Tamiya fighters with masks, PE, multimedia parts etc. all of which fit together so well we joke about them falling out of the box ready made however are we loosing our model building skills as a result? If we have such a perfect model that slots together what bit are we doing?

One thing I have noticed over the years I have been a member here is the shift from traditional scratchbuild modelling to a higher percentage of kits and we are not happy if they do not fit together easily.

I think it would be interesting to hear from the membership just what they want from a kit nowadays and are we concentrating on plastic and forgetting scratchbuilding and traditional materials. Who remembers Greyheads SE5A on here only a couple of years ago? Probably the best model we have seen put together on here yet it was entirely scratch built.

 

[Guest]

Indeed a very good question, I do like a well detailed kit. plus a good fit is important to me, nowadays kits are top priced, therefore I think we expect the basics ie, good fit as standard.Nothing worse than spending £40-£50 on a kit, and it been poor quality,fit flashing etc.

Like most things we buy, certain companies set the standard, as Tamiya have with their kits.

We where all happy with dial up internet connections a few years ago, now we demand high speed and top service, this is the same attitude we carry on to our models.

I dont think we are loosing our skills when it comes to scratch building, I think we just scratch build little extras for our kits now.

Nowadays I wont buy Airfix or Revell, agreed their cheaper kits, but are very sub par compared to others, and we expect the basics as standard these days.

 

[Guest]

I have raised similar points when someone has said they are having problems with kits. Yes, some kits require building rather than putting together. I, for one, do not mind this and to some degree expect it. I do get a feeling of satisfaction when I have finally got a kit together that just didn't want to be built however, as Ray has said, we have higher expectations these days and we are paying for them.

The MV Augusta is a 1:9 scale kit costing around £35. At this price and at this scale I should not expect such poorly shaped pieces of plastic. It is one thing to say that we have the skills to scratch build something but when you have the basic parts of an engine block at this scale that just do not fit together (not talking gaps here I am talking pieces so badly formed that I have had to re shape them to get flat surfaces) I do not think it is within anyones expectations of a kit this size and price to be like that.

There is a front and rear, what I assume to be camshaft covers, that fit along the length of the cylinder block. The mating surfaces for these flat covers first of all did not line up, so a step of about 1mm was between the front and back of each one. To make it worse, they also sloped up to the middle, like a roof. This meant that not only did I have to remove a big step but to take out a pointed surface and get it as flat as I could without cutting away all the plastic. There are many other things wrong with this kit, the handlebars cannot be put where they should be or you could not fit the fairing. Thankfully I noticed this and left them lose until the fairing was superglued in place. It is supposed to be held on with two screws so that you can drop the front wheel out and take it off for display. Well, not only can't I get the front wheel as removable but the fairing has to be forced into its correct position and tacked there with glue or it drops down at the back where it has no other support. This is not too bad a thing as the engine is so poorly represented that it is best f the fairing covers it anyway. If I had better scratch building skills, I could possibly have re made some of the engine parts to make it look better, might have been easier than re shaping the kit parts.

I repeat, I do not mind a challenge in fact, kits that are too good are too quick to build, the Tamiya 1:48 Tilly was a fine example. Total building time was less than one hour and if I had bought it to wile away the winter evenings, it would have been a bit of a bummer.

I don't want it all done for me, that is what diecast collectors do, but I do expect, for my money, at leas a fighting chance. OK, the bike has gone together and, in the cold light of day looking at it in the cabinet, it is passable which, given the problems I had with it, does give a sense of achievement. However, I expected better and I believe that I was not expecting too much. It simply is a poor kit that is showing it's age and I believe that given the deterioration of the moulds (so bad that the two sides to a moulded piece are offset rather than a flash line) Italeri should accept that the value of the kit is reduced and price it accordingly.

 

[stona]

I'd like a well formed kit that is well engineered,ie it fits together well. Ideally it should be a reasonably accurate version of whatever it represents. After that it's up to me how much (or little) I want to do to it in my ham fisted efforts to represent a particular machine at a particular moment in time.

Most of us use kits as a basis for our models (if not an end in themselves) and nowadays can expect them to be of a reasonable standard. We do have to accept that short run,specialist kits,manufactured without the resources of a firm like Tamiya, will require significantly more input from the modeller and that's fine too.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Guest]

I refer the honourable gentleman to my post about the PCM Hurricane! I don't want to have to wrestle with a model, and there's no real excuse to manufacture them with poor fitting. I don't mind filling and sanding; to me, that's all part of modelling, to make it look realistic. But I do object to paying good money for a kit that just doesn't go together without major surgery.

 

[Guest]

If I want an easy life I buy a kit that's spot on and I expect to pay a premium price for it

If I feel like a bit of a challenge I go for an older kit that needs some work and a bit of extra creative input

It's when manufacturers try to sell me a poorly researched or manufactured job for a high price that I get a bit miffed but there are plenty of reviews in the magazines and on various websites to prevent this happening

 

[stona]

It's when manufacturers try to sell me a poorly researched or manufactured job for a high price that I get a bit miffed

Like Trumpeter's Bf109"F" with intentional inverted commas LOL.

Steve

 

[Ian M]

When I buy a kit I expect what I pay for.

If I get hold of an older airfix, I dont expect it to be perfect. I dont have expectations of a kit where each part simply falls onto or into the next. BUT I expect it to be a fair representation of the subject.

If I buy A Tamiya kit for more double the prise of some other kits, I expect it to Accurate, Detailed and a good fit.

Most of my purchases are nothing to do with the manufacturers. I go after the subject I want to build.

I have built Tamiya, Airfix, italeri, Acadamy, Dragon, Kinetic, Revell, Matchbox, Monogram (ok that one was a mistake) and Hasegawa, and would just like to make a few comments.

The old Airfix, of say 25 -30 years ago where actually rather good most of the time. I recently built a 30cwt truck and 6pound gun. the truck was very good and the 6 pounder was better detailed than the one from Tamiya that I had build just befor!!! The New tool Airfix kits are IMHO blood good and I hope it is a sign of things to come. Just look at that ruddy great mossy they have just done. Its the nuts! Rivet counters will probably find fault, but thats what they do.

The Hasegawa was pretty good to with detail where you would expect it and not over done.

The kinetic was to all intents and purpose a tamiya copy. frighteningly so alike they could of been cast the same place!!!

Revell are ok. some of the detail is a bit thick or just not there! Overall a good likeness and thats what counts most for me.

It is really a bummer that some kits just have to be built and dont fall out of the box 'just add glue'. But then I think it will be time to find a new hobby.

Ian M

 

[Guest]

Ive been building kits since I were a lad, bout 34yrs or so, Back then it didnt matter what the fit & finish was like cause most of them met their maker at bonfire night:exclaim:, now I've matured I like a good fit if not perfect for the parts & the really small bits not breaking when trying to remove from sprue, mainly built cars so top of the pile is Tamiya of course, some of their latest kits are amazing with PE parts and decent paint to finish, next is Revell for their wide selection of modified & custom vehicles, I have tried Airfix, Monogram, Italiari & a few Academy, these are all pretty much the same with parts that need a lot of work to make them fit, I wouldnt mind this if I had more time to spend on them, but the space & time I have It needs to be very detailed and easy to fit together but still with a brilliant finish, Tamiya fit the bill every time, I have never had a faulty kit or RC car from them:grinball1:

 

[Guest]

The Ju88 build reminded me how spoiled I'de become. I think its okay to have to do a bit of surgery now and again to keep the skills sharp as long as its not too excessive. Part of the enjoyment for me is overcoming some challenges in the build ,although they can be frustrating at the time it is even more rewarding when you pull it off just my .02

 

[Gern]

Here's a little quiz for you guys.

Don't worry! I haven't lost my marbles (at least, I don't think I have). There's a reason for this post on this particular thread.

Can anyone identify what this is?

Gern

View attachment 27910

View attachment 27911

View attachment 27912

View attachment 27913

View attachment 140436

View attachment 140437

View attachment 140438

View attachment 140439

 

[Guest]

Looks like a Mosquito tail wheel to me

 

[Guest]

looks like a davit wheel..

Tony..

 

[Gern]

OK. It's been a couple of days - everyone who wanted a go at my little quiz could have had one.

Graham is quite right. The object pictured is the tailwheel of a Revell 1/32 Mosquito.

Now. The reason I put this quiz in this post is this - that picture is the finished tailwheel as designed and supplied. There's no extra tyre included in the kit or mentioned in the instructions and there would be no room for it to fit inside the leg anyway.

I can live with inaccuracies on a kit - within reason. The more I pay, the more accurate and detailed I expect them to be. No kit is perfect so if there's 7 rivets on a panel instead of 8, or the radius of a curve is a millimetre too small, or the extended widget wasn't introduced until the Mk IV and they put it on the Mk III, I can choose to live with it, correct it, or not buy the kit.

But to answer Richard's original question of what I want, I expect EVERY manufacturer to be able to make a wheel that looks like a b****y wheel!

That's it! Rant over. Back to my normal cheerful self except for one small thing. Has anyone got any idea how I can get a tailwheel for a 1/32 Mossie?

Gern

 

[stona]

Hi Gern ,I think that your tail wheel is a very poor effort to represent an anti-shimmy tyre which had a rather square cross section. Either that or they completely forgot the tyre!

I never answered your quizz because I was looking for something far too complicated lol.

There are some good pictures of what they were trying to represent here.

http://www.spitfirespares.com/spitfirespares.com/pages/undercarridge.html

just scroll down a bit.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Guest]

So Im going to guess from the look of the scaled down wheel and the pictures from spitfirespares that a clever bit of filling (Milliput?) and a cocktail stick is needed?

(Sorry, taking advatage of a bad situation to try and learn something)

 

[stona]

So Im going to guess from the look of the scaled down wheel and the pictures from spitfirespares that a clever bit of filling (Milliput?) and a cocktail stick is needed?

Something like that should work. The groove on the kit part is way too wide.

Steve

 

[Guest]

I generally don't mind a kit with a degree of difficulty as it is very satisfying to comlete but some kits out there just take the biscuit in my book, take my airfix 1/24 scale P51D mustang nothing fitted at all as it was supposed too.... and yes i know that it is over 40 years old and i paid £50.00 for that kit personally i thinkthese kits should be under the £35.00 mark due to the age of the kit and the mold quality. However i now use little bits of scratch building to enhance my kits and only where i think i need to, like many iam a big fan of Tamiya kits because of there overall quality and detail and they are excellent kits for beginners and i will never pay the money foe PE parts if not already supplied... the only exception to this is seatbelts for aircraft, the challenge for me when building a kit is the finish e.g the paint and weathering.

scott

 

[Guest]

The tailwheel on the Revell 1:48 is just that shape, which is the only reason I recognised it. It is supposed to be that shape, with the groove, but the groove on this is a tad wide. There is certainly not a tyre mounted on it as per the normal sense.

This link show a replacement one for 1:48 kit only as a line drawing but it clearly gives the shape CMK Kits ESHOP

 

[Ian M]

Now I know the tail wheel on a mossy is a bit weird, but that takes the prize!

Have you considered the possibility of chucking a bit of plastic rod of the right size in an electric drill and attacking it with a couple of needle files and a hobby knife.

Who was it that was saying they could do small things in a lathe and mill. If you can find a drawing, maybee they could turn a few off?

Ian M