What I'd Like To See When I Open A Box

General Discussion General Modeling Discussion
1

At the risk of opening another can of worms. This is what I would personally like to see when I first open a box:

  1. Trees in a bag i.e.
  2. clear pieces in one bag
  3. chromed in another bag
  4. tires in another bag
  5. decals in another bag
  6. and the rest of the trees in a bag or in separate bags.

In the instructions themselves. I would like to see a parts list/inventory. I would also like to see clear and concise assembly and painting/finishing instructions. Such as none of this “Refer to box art photos for painting details.” When they leave MUCH to be desired as far as painting the finished build.

Case in point the AMT 2009 Corvette Coupe that I am working on alongside of the Revell 1964 Ford Fairlane. The “painting instructions” for the Vette are the above “refer to the box art photos for painting details.” And then depicts several bodies each with a different body color, no clear pictures of the interior. Whereas the 1964 Ford Fairlane has excellent painting instructions at every step of the build.

I also think that it might be a nice idea to include all the parts for a particular subassembly on the same tree, i.e. using the 1964 Ford Fairlane as an example. Have all the peices for engine and transmission(s) on the same tree. So that one doesn’t have to go rooting through every tree looking for each little piece. They would all be on the same tree or trees depending on the size and number and easily located. And of course all have numbers in the same series.

If the kit is military, maybe include masks to do the camouflage pattern(s). For cars, leave the body color up to the builder but include the colors for the engine, exhaust, etc.

As for the decals, not saying that every car has to have a set of license plates for every state/country, but it’d be nice if there were more choices in the states provided with the kit. As I think that most builders would like to have a model car with license plates for their state/country. I’d also like to when it comes to military craft more than just one or two pilots/campagin. Mabye given that any given tank or aircraft was used in different campagins/theaters of operations. Give decals and painting instructions for different campagins/theaters of operations. And/or nationality again given that it isn’t uncommon to find different countries using the same craft/equipment.

Just what I’d personally like to see inside of a box.

2

I think if you tried a Fujimi car model kit, you would like the packaging.

Fujimi’s Phantom kits came bagged the way you want, with the canopy parts, the decals, and the aircraft parts in separate bags. The actual aircraft had a bag for each sprue and those bags were put into a larger bag, and the editions that came with rubber tires had them in a separate bag.

and that whole thing was then stapled at one end of the bags to the inside of the box bottom.

If they do their cars the same way, then someone is already doing it the way you want.

Now, I will grant that Fujimi kits aren’t/weren’t the cheapest kits on the block,but, it wasn’t always just the shape of the plastic pieces that made kits cheap vs expensive.

Rex

3

Rex,

The thing that had prompted my post is that I’ve opened too many boxes only to find that the tires have gotten stuck ot one or more of the decals and removing the tires or other vinyl part from the sheet damages the decal(s) that it was stuck to.

4

Now days AMT cars that are the “Retro Kits” which a lot of them are, are packed with the chrome in one bag separated by a piece of tissue paper so nothing gets scratched. The tires, body parts, decals, clear parts, are all in separate bags. Usually comes with goodies like a bumper sticker, booklet, or mini display box just for fun. They do it well now. Semi trucks by AMT do the same now days. They also have expressed that they have cleaned up certain molds and I have to say its true. The old corvair kit was a flashy mess with distorted parts. Saw the re-release and its actually very nice. AMT, MPC, Polar lights have bragged about better molds and fixing issues their first releases have. While many may assume its just them blowing hot air, its actually true.

Revell Limited edition and brand new releases are packed well. Their re-releases are packed crappy.

Agreed as far as your ideas though. Some military stuff I bought from Italeri were not even in bags. People wonder why the parts arrive busted!?!?

5

This is just a case of “getting what you paid for”. I have cheap kits too.

One of the things that separates the cheap kit from the “better” kit is the packaging, not just the mold quality.

Cody mentions Italeri,some of their kits were in flimsy end opening boxes that can’t even be stacked at the hobby shop without squashing, and no inside bags. When Testors sold us the exact same plastic, they were in an end opening box, with a box bottom tray inside that slid out, with the kit in a plastic bag inside.

Rex

6

Heh - I think you already did open that can of worms.As a couple of posters mentioned - nowadays most newer kits have chrome parts, clear parts, and the main parts (sometimes in two bags) are in separate plastic bags - including decals and photo-etch sheets. Find product reviews of a certain kit you may be interested in to get a better idea of their packagings.

7

Tamiya, Hasegawa, and Kitty Hawk do exactly as you’re wishing with their aircraft kits (the majority of them, anyway) - great instructions, with a list of parts AND an outline/silhouette of each tree in the instructions; bagged parts, with separate bags for the clear parts; and decals sometimes in a bag, sometimes not. When they’re not in a bag, they’re usually tucked inside the instruction booklet.

8

Several aspects of this post apply pretty much just to cars. Most aircraft and armor kits that I build do not have separate tires from wheel rims, or chrome parts. But, most model companies today bag their sprues, and I can’t think of any “high end” kit makers from Asia that do not bag pretty much everything separately… Heck, just about every new tooled kit I have looked at in the past 10 years or so is packaged that way, with maybe Italeri being the most likely exception. Although I must say that I really miss older sturdy boxes. Only Trumpeter/Hobby Boss, Tamiya, and Academy still package their kits consistently in good sturdy boxes over that past 10 years…

9

Cody,

After looking at some of the AMT kits at my LHS, I would have to agree with you. And even though they were of cars that I like and want to build I’m pretty sure that I am going to pass on them.

Exactly, if the company can’t even take the time to properly package their product so that the consumer gets it in (no pun intended being as we’re talking about models here) one piece. I mean who wants to get 3/4’s of the way through a build only to find out that a critical piece is either boken or worse missing.

Most of the kits in my stash are Revell, I’ve got a couple of Minicraft and Italeri, one Tamiya, one Trumpeter, a few Testors, and three AMT/Ertl/Polar Lights/Round 2 models, two of those are Star Trek models, one of which was given to me by a friend that upon later inspection was found to have been missing several key parts.

10

Rex,

I’m sorry, but I am going to have to disagree with you there. Just because to one person this or that kit is a “cheap” kit doesn’t mean that it’s going to be a “cheap” kit to everyone. And it may be all that that person can afford for whatever reason.

And as such they deserve to be able to purchase a kit that they have the confidence that their investment was well spent. And not to be told “you got what you paid for.” As I am sure that there are plenty of members here who are for whatever reason on a fixed income and as such cannot afford to go out and buy the “high end” and “most expensive” kits in the shop. But again that doesn’t mean that they should get “ripped off” either or be told “you get what you paid for.”

The three Italeri kits that I have pretty much fall into that category. They’re in boxes with end uping flaps, but at least the trees are in plastic bags, just no tray.

11

BlackSheep TwoOneFour,

True, and I’m not saying that all of the kits that I have in my stash are so “poorly” packaged. Some are and some aren’t. It’s just that if a kit isn’t properly packaged then the manufactorer shouldn’t be suprised if they receive a number of complaints about missing and/or damaged parts.

And let’s not forget that they need us the consumer far more then we need them. And if enough people demand better quality kits and packaging it will come to pass. It just may take some time.

12

DD,

I’ve gotta say that about half of the Revell/Monogram kits are packed exactly what I’ve wished for and about half of them aren’t. And that if I recall correctly the majority of them do have excellent instruction sheets complete with detailed painting instructions.

And despite what some might think, being as we are putting down our hard earned dollar for these kits no matter how “cheap” or how expensive they are. I think that everyone has the right to expect to be treated with respect when they purchase a given company’s product.

The thing that I think is/should be nice of about a parts list is that given that in several instances companies will “save a buck” and use the same mold(s) for different kits. And as such kit “A” will have “extra” pieces that are used in kit “B’s” build. That by listing the parts and their sprue numbers then the person building said kit knows what parts to look for, for their build.

13

sorry, but, “you get what you pay for” is exactly the phrase that fits here

If you pay the lowest price for something, you don’t end up “deserving” anything better than what that lowest price vendor puts into their product

I buy cheap kits too, sometimes. I just know going in that I am not going to get a Tamiya Skyray model in the box when I buy the Testors/Hawk Skyray at rock bottom prices.

A person is only “ripped off” when they pay hi quality prices and get low quality kits. Paying the lowest price for any product that has variable price and quality doesn’t entitle anyone to automatically get the best in packaging and presentation. People choosing to buy really low quality kits and having to pay extra for high quality packaging would be the ones getting ripped off, because they would essentially be paying for gold wrapping on a low quality kit. Then when he gets through all the “gold leaf” packaging and finds that he paid for a Cadillac and only got a Del Ray,he would be even more upset.

Disagree all you choose, but, there is a reason that a Lincoln costs more than a Ford. I am a long time Ford and Mercury driver, so I know that I am not going to get Lincoln quality for Ford/Edsel prices.

Before this gets turned into “Rex is some kind of elitist” crap,I have Starfix kits, IMC kits, Matchbox kits, Revell kits, and first generation Airfix kits here, not just Fujimi and Hasegawa.

So, “you get what you pay for” works both ways,if you don’t pay a lot, you don’t get a lot, and you don’t expect a lot, because you knew the price going in. The other side of that is that if you pay a lot, you should get a lot,and then you would have a complaint if you didn’t get what you paid extra for. But, if you don’t pay for Steak,you don’t get to whine when you only get hot dogs. That is Economics 101 stuff.

Rex

added: And if you had someone listen and you got your way, and they took their $10 kit and packaged it up all nice and great,and had to raise the price to $15 retail to pay for that,you would have helped price that kit out of the reach of the people that “don’t have any choice but to buy the cheap kits”,which really wouldn’t help them all that much, now would it?

14

SP,

Given that I really do not build too many military kits I’ll take your word for that.

I do know that as I’ve said it appears that I have an equal number of kits that are “well packaged” as well as those that are “poorly packaged.”

And as I said to Rex, it shouldn’t matter how much or how little a person paid for a kit. Because if they were willing to plunk down their hard earned money to purcahse said kit they do have the right to expect that when they receive it and open it and inspect it that everything is there and intanct.

As I am sure that as the majority of people here the first thing that I do when I get a kit home is to open it and to inspect it to make sure that everything is there and that nothing is damaged and/or missing. And if there is and depending on how much is damaged and/or missing I’ll either take the kit back where I purhcased it, for either an exchange or a refund.

If there are only a few pieces that are either damaged and/or missing I’ll contact the manufacturer directly to secure replacement parts.

And also as I said to Rex (sorry that was Black Sheep TwoOneFour not Rex), the manufacturers need us more then we need them. Because if say “Acme Model Company” produces say 3,000 kits a week and 1,600 - 1,700 or more kits are either being returned each week to where they were purchsed or they are receiving phone calls/letters/requests for damaged/missing parts they are not going to stay in business for very long. Because word is going to get out that “Acme Model Company” is not making a quality product and people will stop purchasing their kits.

15

I agree with Rex on all counts. Yes you do get what you pay for regardless of kit brand. Take the recent Eduard brand Bf-109 kit that was the topic of controversy of being too long/too short/out of scale.

Poor packaging can be the quality of the kit boxes - yes. However, I had received an Italieri kit via mail and found it was packed in a padded envelope. The kit box was not the best of condition when I got it. The kit box was a bit crushed but the contents were fine. I emailed them back and voiced my concern of the order received. I asked that my other order from them be packaged better. It did and I was more than pleased with it. This time around they sent my second order in a sturdy box. Perfect. This shows how much they care about their customers. Just so you know, it was Hobbylinc.

16

Rex,

I’m sorry, but as I’ve already said. I am going to have to disagree with you. As sadly there are people out there who are on a fixed income and because of that they have to scrimp and save in order to be able to purchase that “cheep” kit. And as such they DO have the right to expect a quality product for their money.

An excellent example of people who are on a fixed income and have to “scrimp and save” are a large number of Diabled Veterans. There are WAY too many Veterans out there whose only source of income is their VA Disability. And after they’ve paid their monthly bills and buying groceries, they have little if anything left over for recreation/hobbies. That does NOT mean that they have to or should accept a subquality product just because they can’t “afford” a “high end” model kit.

Manufacturers get away with producing substandard products at whatever price point because we the consumer allow them to do so. IF we as the consumer insisted on getting a quality product for the money we’ve spent then the manufacturers would have to produce a quality product.

And look at it this way to use my aforementioned example. “Acme Model Company” produces a moderatly priced model of whatever subject. But half or more of them keep getting returend either to the shop(s) that sold them or directly to the “Acme Model Company” becuase of damaged and/or missing parts. How long do you think it will take (especially with The Internet) for word to get around NOT to buy “Acme Model Company” models?

IF on the other hand “Acme Model Company” produces a model kit that “everyone” can afford, and less then 1% of them are returned for damaged and/or missing parts then agin (thanks to The Internet) word will get around that “Acme Model Company” produces a quality product and it is worth it to purchase their kits.

So I am sorry, but saying “You get what you paid for” IS a cop out, and gives manufacturers an excuse NOT to produce a quality product at a reasonable price.

17

BlackSheep TwoOneFour,

Again, as I said and attempted to explain to Rex, I have to disagree with that. As I said, the person who has to scrimp and save in order to afford to purchase a “cheep” kit has just as much right to expect to receivce a quality product as does the person who can plunk down $300.00 for a single kit. And as I have already said, the only reason that manufacturers get away with producing a substandard product is because we the consumer allow them to do so.

IF we the consumer insisted that manufactorers produced a quality product regardless of the price point they would have to produce a quality product. And as I said if too many of say “Acme Model Company” models are returned and word gets out that “Acme Model Company” is producing a substandard kit. How many kits do you think that “Acme Model Company” is going to sell?

I’d bet that they would end up selling far fewer kits and losing more money then if they produced a quality product for the same price point. Because again IF “Acme Model Company” is producing a quality kit at a price point that “everyone” can afford, again word will get around and people will be willing to purchase their kits, and thus they will be making a profit.

IF I read your example correctly, your beef really wasn’t with Italieri themselves, but rather with Hobbylinc. So in your example it would be unfair to blame Italieri for something that was beyond their control. As from the way you described it, it sounds as if Hobbylinc \used sloppy packing. IF on the other hand you had delt with Italieri directly and they had shipped you a kit the way that you described then yes, your beef would have been with Italieri.

So, again, IF I read your example correctly. Your beef was with a third party entity i.e.Hobbylinc and NOT Italieri.

18

Well more and higher quality materials used in packaging will likely translate into higher costs for kits passed on to the end user-us the model builders. If acme models has to spend more on packaging materials (because that stuff costs them money), they will pass that price on to the consumer. That is simple free market economics. And lets face it, while there are the folks out there on a fixed income,(not me personally) the model companies are not targeting that end of the spectrum, except in a handful of cases. Model companies nowadays seem to be targeting the other end of the consumer spectrum who seems to have no problem with a $100+ price tag (not me either) with new release kits tending to be more intricate, offering more multi media parts (which all up the cost of the base kit), and in shorter production runs. Which also ups the cost of base kits because the producer has fewer products to recoup their investment in. And seeing how model companies are worldwide, primarily out of Asia, the USA, and Europe, different cultural backgrounds will lead to different attitudes by the businesses. Companies that start out with low priced kits on entering the market, up their game once established and leave that behind for the high end market. After all, this is a hobby and for optional “disposable income” and not something supporting essential basic life needs, and hobby companies know that. Lets face it, for the most part, hobby companies are not an overly responsive bunch when asked to give us more for less. Heck, you can look at “most wanted” survey lists and see the same subject listed year after year after year on there. But instead us modelers will be given the umpteenth new tooling released version of another mainstream tried and true subject.

So yes, we do get what we pay for because somebody else out there will pay more for what we wont, regardless of quality & price. Why, because those are very subjective matters to each individual.

19

You probably aren’t old enough to remember when a lot of cheap kits (Airfix, FROG) used to come in small, clear plastic bags stapled to a small cardboard backing that had “box art” on the front and assembly instructions on the back. The punch out for the rack often removed some vital information.

Back then, the kits were cheap and you knew you weren’t getting the best kit because of the cheap packaging. Even the small box scale kits were often a higher quality and cost more because more money was invested into the packaging. You could buy two of the bagged kits for the price of a boxed kit.

Even today, if you want quality plastic garbage bags, you get the type that are sold in a box. The ones that are sold as a roll in a twist tied bag are the same quality as the Hefty ones.

20

SP,

I don’t argee or disagree with that. As yes, the quality of materials used not only to produce the kit but the packaging can and will effect the overall cost of the kit. What I have been trying to say is that at the end of the day IF (to continue the aforementioned example) “Acme Model Company” produces at kit that is 1/2 to 1/3 are returned on a regular basis that that is going to cost them more money in the long run then if they produced a well packaged and reasonably priced kit would cost them.

And sadly, given that there are too many people in this country who are on fixed incomes, again keeping with the “Acme Model Company” example. We have "Wyllie E. Coyotte a disabled Veteran now living on a fixed income who has always loved building models. And continuing to do so is one of the few things that he is able to do that still gives him enjoyment. If he buys enough kits from “Acme Model Company” that he either has to return to the shop where he purchased it or to “Acme Model Company” directly. Not only is he going to feel as if he is wasting his money, but he is going to tell his friends about how poor the quality of the models are from “Acme Model Company.” And it is reasonable that if they see for themselves how poor the quality is, that they will likewise tell their friends. And pretty soon we have people who are refusing to purchase “Acme Model Company” models.

Don’t you think that that is going to cause “Acme Model Company” to lose more money then if they produced a quality product in the first place?

Yes, I agree with you that there are people who, at least until they learn better, are willing to accept substandard products. But again at the end of the day that still probably only accounts for a small amount of their customer base.

So again in keeping with the “Acme Model Company” example, if they’re producing 3,000 kits a week and 1,500 - 1,700 of them are being returned how long do you really think that the 1,500 - 1,300 customers who are not returning or complaining about their kits are going to be able to keep “Acme Model Company” in business?

I mean if half or more of a product is being returned because of damaged and/or missing parts. It’s really isn’t going to take long for word to get around that “Acme Model Company” is not a good company to buy models from. And Wylie E. Coyotte will tell his friend Roadrunner not to buy “Acme Model Company” kits, and Roadrunner will tell his friends and so on and so on.

Whereas IF “Acme Model Company” had been producing a quality product from the start, and even with the best made molds, and the most carefully packaged product there sadly there IS going to be SOME damaged kits. The difference would be how the company deals with it. So that if 1% or less of the product is returned then the company is going to make more money they might lose by improving packaging and other factors.

Again, the bottom line is regardless of how much or how little a person has to spend on any given product that they DO have the right to expect a quality product.