Mounted it to the display board 
I have pleasant memories of the old Scientific kits too. But I also have some not-so-pleasant ones.
The big problem is that some of the kits had nice, basswood hulls and some had balsa ones. When I was a little kid my mother bought me a Scientific Flying Cloud. Not only the hull but all the other wood pieces (other than the round spars, which were birch) were made of balsa. As I imagine everybody in this Forum knows, balsa wood is just about the worst conceivable material for ship modeling. The kit was a box full of hopeless trash.
That one balsamic experience turned me off to Scientific kits for a long time. Years later, though, I took a careful look at a Scientific Golden Hind that was for sale in the hobby shop where I worked. This one had a nice basswood hull, basswood strips and sheets, and a handsome set of plans by none other than George Campbell. It was, as I remember, quite comparable to what Model Shipways, Marine Models, and Bluejacket were making at the time.
I don’t know whether Scientific switched all its sailing ships from balsa to basswood at some point, or whether some particular kits were balsa and some were basswood throughout their history. Maybe somebody out there in the Forum knows. (A balsa Soleil Royal? The mind recoils at the thought.)
For the modeler of today, I guess my best suggestion is to find out what the wood material in the kit is before you spend any money on it. If the hull and other wood parts are basswood, the kit probably will be a keeper (especially for a less-experienced modeler.) But I wouldn’t recommend a ship model kit with a balsa hull to anybody.
I know that many of their kits were originally released with balso hulls but were later switched to pine or basswood. For example, their Sea Witch was a horrible kit with the balsa, but it builds into a nice display piece with the pine hull (and a little effort with detailing!).
Bill
This is pretty interesting, Philo.
I pulled out my Scientific CS and it’s a completely different kit. I see yours is listed at 27" long. Mine’s about 15". It’s kit no. 174 of the “Collector’s Series”.
I bought it for $15 some years back at a church thrift sale. As soon as I opened it I closed it right back up and stuck it on a high shelf.
You did a great job, and being bigger is a good thing.
Here’s the box:
The hull. I can’t tell if it’s pine or basswood, pretty sure it’s the former.
The deck:
Linen sail sheet:
A nice little bag of fittings:
Gum backed flag sheet. Includes the cabin siding too:
Bow and stern:
I think the nicest thing is the big instruction sheet, “designed by Walter A. Musciano”.
Walt Musciano is a “god” in the r/c and control line airplane model world. Here’s his bio:
https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/MuscianoWalter.pdf
He was a draftsman at Brewster Aviation, and the instruction sheet shows it.
As I say, I’d rather watch you build yours! Nicely done.
Very interesting I am pretty sure the hull is basswood.It sanded nicely and took the finish very well.It looks like your smaller version might have a balsa hull which may complicate the finishing and assembly sequence.
Out of curiosity, I looked up Scientific on www.oldmodelkits.com. The computer won’t let me post the specific page, but if you go to that site and scroll down to “Scientific” in the “Manufacturer” drop-down box, you’ll get it.
Quite an assortment - and the prices aren’t as outlandish as many others on this site. The site manager is, of course, technically wrong in describing the hulls as “hardwood.” (Basswood and pine are both technically hardwoods.) But I think the ones that are described as having “hardwood” hulls aren’t balsa.
This thread just inspired me to buy Scientific’s Thermopylae on eBay.
Bill
Funny that, Bill. I have my eye on the “Robert E. Lee”.
I’m pretty sure the hull on my kit is pine. Which brings up a minor side topic. It used to be that the availability of different species of wood was a pretty regional thing. I suppose this isn’t so true any more, esp. with smaller pieces. But if I were to buy framing lumber to build a partition in my garage here in California, it’d be Douglas Fir. Whereas if I was on the East Coast, I wood buy pine (?). Pine is almost impossible to find here except for pre milled shelving.
Further diversion. I always thought hardwood vs. softwood was deciduous vs, evergreen, but it’s apparently anglosperm vs. gymnosperm; flowering vs. naked seeds. Close to the same thing.
But buying maple or cherry or walnut etc. is hard to do here and requires going to a specialty yard, whereas oak and fir are easy to get.
There’s quite a few Scientific kits on eBay, despite my fear that it would be a hard search they all came up pretty quickly.
There are several kits of the Golden Hind, but the starting prices are astronomical, except for one. There is also an interesting box for one of the Cutty Sark kits listed that I have my eye on.
Bill
I don’t have any advice per se, but the Scientific HMS Bounty was my first wooden ship kit. It was my dad’s and he gave it to me when I was 12. I made an utter mess of it and led me to my dislike of solid-hull ship models. Still, it was a good learning experience. I kept it around until I moved into my new house a couple of years ago.
Now that I think of it, maybe I’ll try to find a Scientific Bounty kit online and try my hand at it again.
Tim
Belay my last about the Cutty Sark . . . the seller just informed me that the hull is balsa. And, Timothy, good luck on your future rebuild of the Bounty!
Bill
One question about the build . . . why did you decide to paint the copper plates below the waterline instead of using copper tape cut to size and shape? It would have provided a more realistic look.
Bill
Reviving this thread…
I just saw a Scientific Cutty Sark on my local craigslist site, and am considering it (the price is right!)…
it’s the 23" model, previous owner has apparently glued the deck onto the hull…I can get it for 20 bucks…I guess I should ask the seller if it’s Basswood or Balsa…having no experience with wood, what are the main differences between the two?
Any recommendations?
I like the way Philo’s is looking…and it might be a good introductory kit to help me get over my xenophobic apprehension of woodbuilding! haha
Thanks!
David- I would strongly suggest you save your money. I have one in my stash that I bought at a church rummage sale for $ 15 and I don’t ever see building it. The hull piece is about 75% shaped, theres a lot of material left to remove. The cast fittings are pretty crude.
It will be a frustrating and in the end unrewarding task, and you’ll get all the wrong idea about wooden ship kits. Much better to spend twice the money and get a Model Shipways kit on sale.
IMO balsa has no place in model building, unless it’s meant to fly. It’s soft, hard to shape well, has a very pronounced grain, and is hard to paint. It tends to crush easily.
Well it certainly is not up to modern standards but it does build into an attractive model.The decks are inked basswood on mine that i clear coated with Minwax PolycrylicThis is my current project…
I agree with GMorrison. Dave, you’re a fine modeler who appreciates the subtleties of ships. Those old Scientific kits were a great introduction to the hobby in their day, but it would take an enormous amount of effort to turn one into the caliber of model you’re used to producing.
If it has a balsa hull, avoid it like the plague. Pine isn’t much better. Some, at least, of the old Scientific kits had basswood hulls; that’s ok, but I think G. Morrison is also right about a Model Shipways kit being a better choice for you.
If you want to make the leap to wood kits and want to start with a solid hull, I’d take the liberty,in view of your interests, of suggesting the Model Shipways Sultana. Model Expo lists it as out of stock at the moment, but plenty of web dealers seem to have it. The ME website does offer a detailed practicum, by the fine modeler Chuck Passaro, that shows how to turn it into a plank-on-solid model with all sorts of detail.
Another good choice would be the Model Shipways Phantom, but it lies outside what seems to be your period of interest.