This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Andre B

Matchbox kits...

41 posts in this topic

What Machbox kits do we want to build again? Still there is some moulds out there not used by Revell that would be nice to be used again?

Kits that would be simple and fun to biuld. Kits as the A-4 Skyhawk, P-51D Mustang or the Tempest Mk. II...

 

/André

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Building mainly flying stuff I strangely mosly recall Matchboxkits like their 1:32 cars or 1:72 (76?) tanks which I would like to see again. The tanks came with nice little dios and the cars add nicely to the slot track. Regaring the plane kits I would hope on a new tool than a repop. Worked great with the Victor...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much Point in the P-51D, though it's lightyears better than Revell's own fossil. The Tempest II/VI is still without Long-run alternative and IMHO one of Matchbox's best kits anyway. Not sure if Revell has re-released the Siskin, it's another great kit. The ones I'd consider (regardless of what Revell has already re-released over the years:

Fury

P-12E

Lysander

Gladiator

AH-1G (Revell could think about if there's enough space to provide an alternative tailrotor Pylon; I do not know the Monogram kit that Revell also owns)

F-5A

Me 109E

Mirage IIIC

Tempest

Buffalo

Siskin

A-4M (it has been dscribed as utterly inaccurate, but it fits the Huntley drawings like a glove - which is the make or break, though probably irrelevant for a pocket Money target market anyway, if that still exists...)

Provost

SBC-4

Dauphin

Buckeye

BK-117

Mystère IV

OH-58

 

Walrus

Do 28

Me 410

HS 125 (though the tool is possibly lost)

Viggen

Wellesley

Norseman

Twin Otter

Meteor NF

Skyknight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, I'd rather have Revell issue new moulds of some of Matchbox's unique subjects, like the G.91Y or the Hawk 200, or of those subjects of which no "mainstream" kit is out yet.

While I have several Matchbox kits in the stash, the only ones I'd buy today at a full price are probably the biplanes, the Provost, the Tempest and the Mystere. Maybe the Viggen..

I'd buy some others if I can find them at bargain price. And then there are some for which the seller would have to pay me to take them, like the F-16 and the A-7

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

And then there are some for which the seller would have to pay me to take them, like the F-16 and the A-7

For me, the Strikemaster, YA-10, A-20 and the utterly terrible Ju 188.

 

Let's face it, I'd rather have Revell do new Long run Tools for many of those on the list above or of the unique kits not mentioned (the Y-Gina is terrible), but that won't happen, or at least only for a tiny part - the Y has, as far as I can see, no potential for a reasonably different second boxing (not sure if they could make a Y with a new fuselage to their R), and many others above haven't, either. Besides, it appears they cut Corners on the smaller kits, like the new -4B Corsair, which uses the same Basic wing as the -1...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am trying to build a full collection of Matchbox WW2 aircraft, and may possibly extend this collection to the full range.

While I am heavily biased towards Matchbox I can accept criticism of some of their kits, for example the JU-188 kit already mentioned. The first thing with Matchbox is that they are always fun to build and mostly fit together nicely.  The other thing is that it is up to the builder how much trouble they want to put into building them, you can either build them straight out the box or go to town with after market parts and rescribing etc either is great.

 

The only thing I might add is that if you want to build a nice model of a well known aircraft like the He-111 then it would seem a lot of effort to use a Matchbox kit when there are so many better alternatives available at reasonable prices. With less well known aircraft of which kits are only produced by cowboy outfits such as Azur then I would save myself time and expence by rescribing a Matchbox kit and adding scratch and even aftermarket parts.

Edited by old thumper
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a boy I really enjoyed building the 1/32 historic cars. Chrome parts and "rubber" wheels - very exciting! 

I don't build cars any more, but could be tempted for a trip down memory lane.

Edited by davidelvy
Spelling.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a mystery why in 2010 Revell re-issued their ancient 1/72 Bf109E kit, which is not only quite inaccurate but not much fun to build (especially with the dreadful 3-part canopy), when they (in theory) have the MB Bf109E kit still up their sleeves.  Although very simple by today's standards it's pretty good in outline.  Doesn't really stand up to modern kits of the 109 of course (heck, it struggles against the 1977 Airfix kit) but outshines the old Revell clunker like a torch in the darkness.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really love a Do 18. It's such a pretty thing.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has not Do 18 been reissued by Revell a year or so ago? I remember seeing boxes of this kit on shelves and although I did not check what is inside, I cannot imagine Revell would make an all-new kit with old Matchbox tooling still around. Otherwise, my favorite MB kits are those with predominately fabric cover. Wellesley is high on my wish list, although it would be probably better to build the one I already have in my stash first. Cheers

Jure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought the Hawker Fury was a cracker of a kit, and I have soft spots for the Provost and the Tempest.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/2/2017 at 0:51 PM, tempestfan said:

For me, the Strikemaster, YA-10, A-20 and the utterly terrible Ju 188.

 

Let's face it, I'd rather have Revell do new Long run Tools for many of those on the list above or of the unique kits not mentioned (the Y-Gina is terrible), but that won't happen, or at least only for a tiny part - the Y has, as far as I can see, no potential for a reasonably different second boxing (not sure if they could make a Y with a new fuselage to their R), and many others above haven't, either. Besides, it appears they cut Corners on the smaller kits, like the new -4B Corsair, which uses the same Basic wing as the -1...

 

Have to agree, some of Matchbox's more exotic subjects are not likely to have the potential market for a mainstream kit. And no, Revell couldn't do a G.91Y starting from their R as both wing and fuselage differ too much between the two variants. Revell' G.91R is not a great kit anyway and suffers from several inaccuracies.

But I'd still prefer new moulds than the reissue of these oldies. The only reason I'd buy a Revell reissue would be because of the decals, that are generally very good.

 

5 hours ago, Jure Miljevic said:

Has not Do 18 been reissued by Revell a year or so ago? I remember seeing boxes of this kit on shelves and although I did not check what is inside, I cannot imagine Revell would make an all-new kit with old Matchbox tooling still around. Otherwise, my favorite MB kits are those with predominately fabric cover. Wellesley is high on my wish list, although it would be probably better to build the one I already have in my stash first. Cheers

Jure

 

Yes it was reissued by Revell but IIRC it was several years ago.

As for Revell not issuing a new mould, that would depend on the subject. If it's a subject for which they can make more money with a new tool, they'll do one. They had Matchbox's Me.262 (itself quite a good kit)  but made a new one and the same happened for other subjects.

Even more interesting what they did with the He.70 as they had the Matchbox mould, that had been reissued by Revell in the past, and then preferred to rebox the ICM tool last year (to be honest a much better kit)

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/2/2017 at 5:00 AM, Deacon Bill said:

Bit of a mystery why in 2010 Revell re-issued their ancient 1/72 Bf109E kit, which is not only quite inaccurate but not much fun to build (especially with the dreadful 3-part canopy), when they (in theory) have the MB Bf109E kit still up their sleeves.  Although very simple by today's standards it's pretty good in outline.  Doesn't really stand up to modern kits of the 109 of course (heck, it struggles against the 1977 Airfix kit) but outshines the old Revell clunker like a torch in the darkness.

 

 

The Matchbox Bf-109E and for that matter the P-51D will not be reissued by Revell because the tooling (along with others) went to Alanger in Russia.

Said manufacturer is apparently no longer in business??? :unsure:

 

On 23/2/2017 at 1:51 PM, tempestfan said:

(the Y-Gina is terrible)

 

Why? The canopy is all wrong but other than that I thought it was OK, is it not???:hmmm:

 

Answering the OP and discounting the ones that have already been reissued the ones I would like to see again are:

P-12E

SBC-4

Siskin

Percival Provost

Lightning T.55 (can't see Airfix doing a newly tooled kit for an export only variant)

HS-125 (which is probably gone forever :()

 

Some others were decent: Bf-110, Me-410, Wellesey etc but there are better alternatives nowadays...:whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Panoz said:

 

Lightning T.55 (can't see Airfix doing a newly tooled kit for an export only variant)

Do you want a T.55? I have 3, and I might build one only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Panoz said:

 

Why? The canopy is all wrong but other than that I thought it was OK, is it not???:hmmm:

As I remember it,  it is incredibly crude, similar to the Tunnan and EA-6B. If you want the trenchest of trench, look no further. IIRC it also has the cannon barrels moulded integrally with the fuselage, as ugly solid strips. All probably fixable, of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Panoz said:

 

Why? The canopy is all wrong but other than that I thought it was OK, is it not???:hmmm:

 

 

The canopy is the worst culprit, other parts need some tweaks, for example the wingtips and the stabilisers. Being flat parts it's not too hard to sort them.

The kit is overall very crude, a lot of details must be scratchbuilt while others could be taken from the Revell G.91R (wheel wells, cockpit). Mind, the Y and the R have fuselages of different width, it's not guaranteed that the wheel wells will fit, but at least it may be better than building from scratch.

Of course there's no representation of the vortex generators at the base of the tail and none of the auxiliary intake is open. Even the engine exhausts are moulded solid.

It's a kit from its days, and a very basic one. I've seen a couple of masterpieces built from this kit, but the modellers who built them could probably create a masterpiece from a box of plasticard sheets..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Matchbox stash:

 

Match.jpg

 

 

Chris

11 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Giorgio N said:

 

The canopy is the worst culprit, ....

 

Just as several early Hornby-era Airfix kits suffered from Weedy Prop Syndrome, some Matchbox kits suffered from Shallow Canopy Syndrome.  Apart from the G-91Y the F9F Panther and Gladiator also suffered.  No idea why, whereas with Airfix I think it was simply not using the developed profile of the prop blade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dogsbody, I must say I envy you that Siskin kit. Anyone knows, how does Matchbox SBC-4 Helldiver compare to Heller kit? Cheers

Jure

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matchbox produced some really lovely kits despite their shortcomings. Their Fury was a joy to build - which Revell promptly re-released the following year. Looking at the stash (no even close to dogsbody's though) currently my main favorite for re-release is the Wellesly. I especially like the way Matchbox used to recreate the geodetic structure.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jure Miljevic said:

Dogsbody, I must say I envy you that Siskin kit. Anyone knows, how does Matchbox SBC-4 Helldiver compare to Heller kit? Cheers

Jure

 

I have both but haven't built either. Haven't looked at them for a long time so it's hard to compare. From memory, I'd say Both have their pros and cons. Matchbox looks the easiest to build but Heller seems to have a bit more finess.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks, Chris. Sounds much like comparison between old Matchbox and Heller Gladiator kits. Cheers

Jure

Edited by Jure Miljevic
missing word added
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jure Miljevic said:

Thanks, Chris. Sounds much comparison between old Matchbox and Heller Gladiator kits. Cheers

Jure

 

Yeah, about the same. I have both of those, too. The new(ish) Airfix kits blows the doors off both of them.

 

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seafox.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now