Based upon your experience

General Discussion General Modeling Discussion
1

This is a question more for the experienced modelers on the forum. But geared to provide info to the neophytes (either to modeling in general or to a new subject matter).

Given your experience and “portfolio” of builds. Without reading a review, talking to your friends, lurking the forum, what would you look for in a kit that would make you buy or build it over any other similar kit.

i.e. 2 companies produce a panzer IV, Focke Wolfe, F4, Bradley, whatever. They are 2 companies you have never heard of and are new players in the field. What do you look at in those kits, never seen before or built that would satisfy your urge to buy one kit over the other? Store owner gladly lets you examine the contents before you buy. (stop laughing, its a hypothetical) You have to choose one or the other.

Mike

2

First of all, I am not what you may consider as an “experienced” modeler.

1.) Subject - Normally the first thing that draws me into buying a kit is the subject of the kit. In my mind I already have a list of kits that I want to have.

2.) Preference of Model Company-If two or more companies offer the same kit then my preferences as far as model companies would set in say I always believe that Tamiya is the best so if I have two kits of the same subject from two different companies, I would normally get the one from my preferred company.

3.) Price in relation to Quality- In case the kit from my preferred comany is much much more expensive but the quality of both kits are almost the same, I may go with the other

[quote]
Originally posted by renarts.

4.) Quality - In case I really don’t know the companies and the LHS owner allows me to check, I would look into the quality of the molding and of course the level of details.

BTW, our LHS here allows us customers to check the kits before buying.[:)]

3
  • nil to very little flash
  • recessed panel lines
  • adaptablity to PE parts (esp in ships)
  • detail of cockpit (esp for a/c cos I dont do cockpit replacements)
  • the thickness/sturdiness of the main parts (eg hull, fuselage, warped/brittle/etc)
  • detail of little parts (eg BB gun barrels, gun ports, landing gear struts & wheel wells)
  • kit modifications (eg waterline v full hull ship; movable flaps, etc)
  • colour and detail or flaws in the decals (do I need to buy aftermarkets or do I want a subsitute pattern)
  • past experience with similar model company (eg Tamiya vs Revell)
  • cost (eg which ones cheaper? Can I buy both? Can I buy one now and lay-buy the other?)
  • what paints are needed (eg Do I already have those.)
  • am I interested in this model (eg subject? do I have the time to build it now or can I wait?)

there’s heaps more, but others probably want to answer this [:)]!

dont ask me why I bolded my answers [;)]

4

Good Question!

Let’s say two companies that I’ve never heard of before both release brand-new, retooled US M3A2 Halftracks in 1/35 scale (it’s my fantasy…let me go with it!). First, they better be released on the same day because if they’re not, the first one gets my bucks! But let’s assume they both come out on the same day.

If I can afford them (and oh, how I can!), I would buy both unless one looked just plain bad! So we have to further assume that I can only buy one…period (the pain, oh, the pain).

Provided that both kits are the same price, the bottom line is details! Which kit provides those little extra’s that make a great value-to-cost ratio. When I say details, I’m speaking of clean, crisp bolt heads and rivits, clean joints and seams where they should be, proper thicknesses on parts, excellent tracks, maybe some photo-etch thrown in and of course, no obvious major problems. Even if the kit with the better details has some minor problems with injector pin marks or a little flash, it will still get my money over the kit with no marks or flash and poor details.

That being said, if this really does happen, I’ll have four more kits to add to my stash pile…TWO of each!

Robert

5

That’s what I would look for also.

6

It’s the model subject your doing, every kit manufacturer use different systems to manufacturer their kit range, besides how would you improve your modelling skills. I built a 48 B-1b Lancer once, when I took it out of the box it had more bows the Robin Hood, . After building it I got hassled for 6 months to sell it.

Not all model kits fit like a glove.

Rob.

7

For me, it always comes down to subject first. Two 1/35 Leopolds? Meh. A 1/48 CH-46? Now I’m interested. If some one started cranking out modern USMC kits, or a Stryker kit, I’d probably grab it up even if it was junk, just to have something resembling that piece of gear. After subject, then quality, then price. But that’s just me.

8

The only things you can really tell about a kit just by looking in the box are:

  1. The quality of the molding (this includes level of detail).
  2. The quality of the decals.
  3. The quality of the instructions.
  4. The quality of the “contents” (optional parts for variations, etc)

Assuming that the subject is exactly what I’m looking for and I have never heard of either company, those would be the four deciding factors for me, with the quality of the molding being the most important.

9

as i give my opinion please remember i am not an expert on this.

i look at kits for these factors:

  1. subject-is it something i want to do. how bad do i want to build it.
  2. history of company-my knowledge of different companies is limited to what i have heard but i would choose a kit from a higher quality company rather than a low end mfg.
  3. satisfaction-this is complicated. when i choose a kit i want to find something that i can gain the satisfaction i have done something worthwhile. example - soon i will be purchasing four models to be built for others. a sherman, a corsair, a b-17, and a beechcraft v-tail. i want to find the kits that will aford me the opportunity to build a satisfying replica. not every time is a “shake the box remove built kit” type of model the best. i am considering the revell 1/48 b-17g because it will afford me the opportunity to do more detail work. to me this is a big thing as it will be for a friend to give to his aunt.

but that is what i look for.

joe

10

Lots of great advice here fellas, but I think most of ya’ll might be missing Mike’s main question.

Unless I’m completely mistaken (entirely possible), the hypothetical scenario here is that you are presented with two kits, and you know NOTHING about either manufacturer. Never heard of 'em. Subject is not in question. It’s definitely a subject you want to build. So, just by examing the contents of what is contained in those two boxes (and the boxes themselves, I suppose!), what criteria would be important to you in making the decision to purchase one over the other?

Mike, is that what you were asking?

By the way, I’m not an expert, either.

11

To me, if I want to model the subject bad enough, then I will find ways around the defects in the kit. However, I will not pay large sums of money for mold defects, and do go by what the general concensus has about the kit. I also look at the instructions for any weird assemblies.

12

I am not a “more experienced” modeler, though I have been building them for a number of years.

I agree with J-Hulk’s list, but I would add one more. I really like having each sprue in a separate bag. I hate scratches on clear parts! [I do enough damage myself.] All else equal, I’d take the one that is best protected.

Like Foster7155, I’d probably end up buying one of each kit anyway.

13

That pretty much covers it.
With that being said the only other factor that may sway me is the extras like figures and stowage.

14

I guess fidelity of detail and aesthetics is my thing. A good example of a comparison of two like-kits would be the Hasegawa and Tamiya P-51D’s.

They both have their pros and cons, but for me the pros of the Hasegawa kit outweigh those of the Tamiya kit; even though the Tamiya kit is, overall, a much easier build.

I feel that the Hasegawa kit, built SOB, has better detail than Tamiya’s, especially in the areas of the cockpit, gear legs, gear wells and gear doors. (even though the wells are too shallow) And the canopy and windscreen on the Tamiya kit are, in my opinion, a damn shame. They’re entirely too thick and although the idea of the two piece hood is good in theory, in practice it’s a joke and looks horrible. This alone ruins the kit for me. If only I got along better with vacuform canopies… [:p]

The main issue I have with the Hasegawa kit is the fact that the flaps cannot be dropped without a bit of cutting and reconstruction. But that’s not a problem for me, as will become apparent a bit farther down this post. (If anyone gets that far…)

For me, unlike many folks, price is a non-issue. I do tend to grab stuff inexpensively whenever I can, but I have no problem in picking up a kit for retail if it’s something I want to build.

As to buildability; ease of assembly, fit problems and what not, I’m really not daunted by a whole lot out there. I’ve been building for twenty years and I know my way around an aircraft model kit and, to a lesser degree, a military vehicle. So that’s not much of an issue for me either, and I’ll explain why…

When I first got into the hobby, the hot-sh** kits were Monogram. Recessed panel lines were still the exception, and the so-called norm of the shake-'n-bake kit was a long way off yet.

Don’t get me wrong, there are no perfect kits, even today. But those which were available over the course of my first ten years of modeling are what many of today’s newer modelers scowl at as being obsolete, ill-fitting and, for some, simply not worth the time. That’s the kind of stuff I ‘grew up’ with, and ‘matured’ with as a modeler. You had to really work on most of those kits to get a good result. Things didn’t always line up as well as they do on some of today’s kits.

Nowadays, kits seem to be judged largely by whether or not you’re gonna need to use a tiny bit of filler here and there. OH MY GOODNESS! YOU HAD TO USE FILLER?!?!? Back in the day, as the kids say, (HEY! I was a poet and wasn’t aware of the fact…) we took it for granted that we were gonna need some filler on almost every kit we built.

We also didn’t have the proliferation of brass and resin fixins which you see today, either. White metal was the thing back then, and the selection was pretty limited. If you wanted to have a superdetailed cockpit, you had to scratch it.

So when I hear or read some folks today complaining about kits from companies ‘X’ and ‘Y’ because they didn’t fit all that great or the detail was sparse, I just laugh to myself and am glad that I grew up as more of a model builder and not simply a model assembler.

I’ve become lazy, though, and will often times ditch an older kit if a new one becomes available. In some cases, as with the Monogram and Tamiya Do 335’s, it’s a no brainer. With others, like DML and Tamiya Fw 190’s, it’s a tough call. So, in the end, I wound up keeping most of my DML/Dragon and Trimaster 190’s because they’re good kits. Still grabbed a few Tamiya 190’s though.

So, after all that, when it all boils down, my answer, in a nutshell, would have to be:

I’ll build just about any kit so long as it’s something I want to build.

And so long as it’s 48th. Although I’m slowly making an allowance for braille scale…

Fade to Black…

15

with that stipulation, two unknown companies, i would agree the detail would be the selling point.

joe

16

I would buy them both…if I know nothing of the two companies, what do I have to go by to judge? I give them both a shot…if the parts have good detail they are in…if the fit is decent, it’s in…if the directions are decent enough then the company is in…oh look at me, I just described Tamiya…hehehe…silly me!! LOL [:P][;)][:D]

Seriously though, if I know nothing but what everyone says about a company, I tend to pick up a cheap kit from that company and thumb through it myself and form an opinion based on my own skills and techniques. Tamiya, so far has nailed it down pretty good for me, though Trumpeter is right there with them on certain levels. Revell Monogram frustrate me to know end, because the kits never seem to work right…Tamiya is awesome, 'cause I find that it is me who never seems to work right!!! LOL

17

OK so “ModellingforReal” of Ubecistan and “Styrene Unlimited” of China have just produced a kit of the 2004 McLaren MP4/19 in 1/20th what do I look for?

Firstly what is the box art like? Does it have actual pictures of the real car, does it have a cutaway sketch or is it just a stylisated drawing ?

Looking inside what are the instructions like? How comprehensive are they, do they clearly show where prices go together or are there just arrows vaguely indicating where pieces glue to each other? Are there body or decal options and are there clear instructions as to where they are used and in what combination? Are there actual photos of the car to assist in determining decal and part placement? How comprehensive is the decal set (ie in this case does it have the cigarette decals or the PC decals)? Does it have decals for the carbon fibre areas of the car? How is the dash represented - decals or raised detail for painting?

Now we get to the collection of bits. Is everything bagged aprropriately? Is it a multi-media kit and if so is the “multi-media” appropriate (eg p/e is not always the best medium as some parts need to be in 3d not the 2d that p/e conveys)? How much flash is there? How extensive are the mould lines, how crisp is the casting, how thick are the feed tags? What are the tyres like? Are parts moulded in scale eg are the wing end plates thin or the suspension the right section? How much detail is moulded in and how much is to be built? What are the painting references like (how extensive) and what model paint do they refer to?

Do both look the same size or is there a size descrepancy (assuming that its possible to compare say the chassis or bodyworks)? And which just looks nicer and more buildable? Finally how would it compare to Tamiya or Haseqawa which are the industry benchmarks as far as I’m concerned (I haven’t built any Trumpeter yet) in quality and price. And of course all this would take about 3-5 minutes!!!

18

nicholma, i believe you have hit the nail on the head. your summarization of what to do is well done.

joe

19

Thats exactly what I’m asking J-hulk.
The idea here being that this is a question of what criteria you would use to make your selection based upon your experience and not knowing anything about the kit other than what you see laid out before you. Sort of a foundation of criteria for those to come who do not have the benefit of your experience.

If I wanted to do a ship model, I couldn’t tell you if tamiya was better than skybow or revell and have no experience in that media to know what to look for to make a good build vs a life long quest to make two seams line up. Thus I am on common ground with the new modeler when it comes to choices.

We take for granted the depth of our own experiences and trials and tribulations that have developed the skills that we have today that allow us to select how much or not, work and effort we want to put into a piece. We have pre-conceived notions or expectations of waht obstacles we may have to overcome and what if any additions we will have to make. Something that someone new to a genre or new to modeling does not have the benefit of.

To make an educated and informed decision based upon real criteria and not base it upon slick box art or clever marketing rhetoric is half the battle. Certain characteristics will obviously point to a kit that is well designed and ultiimately a joy to work on. i.e. if there is little flash and crisp accurate detail, with comprehensive, clear and concise instructions it may be a good indicator that this kit is well designed and will result in a positive, rewarding expereince. Where as if there is poor detail, lots of flash, structural and material defects, poor instructions and little or no info, I just paid my monies worth to pay for an artist to sell me an attractive piece of box art containing plastic garbage. Might make some hesitate to delve into model building again.

But besides all that it also lets us find lilttle known treasures where we might not expect them. If we knew what to look for. Allowing us not only to advance the hobby but our own expereince and repetoire as well. Look at Tasca for instance. A relative newcomer in armor but with a gem of a kit in their Panzer II Luchs. Pricey but an informed consumer, knowing what to look for may justify that price because of the wealth of detail and accuracy available to him.

It is not to say that guys like Blackwolf, or myself for that matter, will not enjoy the “old school” method of model building, back when model building meant just that, but that we (or anyone) can have the knowledge to make the decision and make it on sound principle to have a more complete kit. It is the lessons learned and techniques aquired as experienced modelers that allow us to look at any kit and come up with something worth while (or not, there are always failures) but to insure the future of the hobby and to continue to garner neophytes they must have positive experiences up front. It also lets us know what to demand of our dealers to improve our own commodity of plastic and resin.

Thanks for the input guys, keep it comming. There are some very good points and valuble references being presented here.

Mike

20

funny had this discussion with a potential newbie last night. a coworker wants to begin building and has been picking my limited knowledge as to what to look for. i gave him my opinion on armor kits and a/c kits and gave him what i thought are some good kits that will let him enjoy his first build without too much trouble. i also told him, based upon his questions, which kits and companies i thought he should avoid for a while. i used many of the points above to pick the kits.
funny how i didnt even think about it, i just relied upon a basic knowledge of the products available and went from there. btw he says he should be purchasing the kit and supplies soon. “another one bites the dust” plastic dust that is.

joe