Jump to content

Worst model quality?


Neil.C

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Neil.C said:

As I started this thread I thought I'd add another.

 

I've just started a old Novo Hawker tempest, talk about fits where it touches! :o

It will be a repop of the Frog kit from about 1967-68. A lot of the ex Frog moulds have suffered from abuse and neglect and done of the plastic used is of dubious quality. Back in the day it was not considered a bad kit. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Martin T said:

Back in the day it was not considered a bad kit. 

That's something to consider.  We are all so spoiled these days with such amazing kits, some of which have 3D printed parts, so detailed, such smooth fit, photo etch,  etc...

I can be be quick to disregard the sows ear that I can tailor to be my own silk purse and in the process improve my own skill in doing so.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the 1/48 (Model Craft?) F-82 Twin Mustang mentioned in this thread? It surely warrants an honourable citation here. Better men than me built it and survived to publish photographs of it, I tried to build one about 15 years ago and eventually gave up, it ended up on the Shelf of Doom from where it eventually progressed to the trash can (perhaps it was a bad idea to want to do a NMF fighter-bomber version). That was after cannibalizing TWO Monogram P-51 kits for canopy & cockpit parts, undercarriage etc. I still have an all-black night fighter version kit somewhere in my stash, next time I see it I'll just have to go chuck it into the recycling before I get it into my head to make another attempt.

EDIT:

Dammit, I should never have reminded myself of this "baddie". Now I WANT an F-82 in 1/48 - and just checked, seems like it STILL  is the only Twin Mustang in that scale. Off to my stash I go - why oh why do we do this, I have a cr*pload of very good (unbuilt) kits but Oh No, the Ugly Duckling always wins...

(One day I'll publish a few pics of my 1/32 Ju87B-2 Stuka - 21st Century Toys fuselage and wings, Revell lower nose section including radiator bath, divebrakes, wheel spats, canopy etc. Was such a fun Hack Job but took 3 months out of my life)

Edited by jannie
Thought about it again :(
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jannie said:

 

Dammit, I should never have reminded myself of this "baddie". Now I WANT an F-82 in 1/48 - and just checked, seems like it STILL  is the only Twin Mustang in that scale. Off to my stash I go - why oh why do we do this, I have a cr*pload of very good (unbuilt) kits but Oh No, the Ugly Duckling always wins...

 

That's because these sorts of kits are often the only one available and they are aircraft that are interesting rather than simply variations of things that we already have or that are readily available anyway. A few years back I went through a phase building the SH 1/48 kits of aircraft such as the Anson, Oxford, Skua, Roc etc. Why? well I like a bit of a challenge and these actually were important aircraft in their day. Having done that I continued with my quest of kitbashing all the Spitfire and Seafire variants in 1/48 scale.  The degree of difficulty is what makes something interesting to me - not the ease. Although I'll not turn down an easy build of something in preference to a difficult one there are times when the only solution is a difficult one.    

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for me the old Revell Heinkel 111 Bomber , the fuselage halves did not fit at all , and I ended up leaving the hobby for 5 years due to the stress of that damn kit ( was it 1/48 scale ?? )

another honorable mention , the Revell 1/32 Hawker Typhoon = I ended up throwing mine in the bin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2018 at 11:25 AM, FAAMAN said:

Revell 1/72 scale N.A. P-51D Mustang, kit H-47,

38484107892_dbc10dde56_o.jpgDSC09506cropS by Neil, on Flickr

 

I have always wondered exactly what plans Revell used to produce this masterpiece! I bought my first one way back in 1981. Even then, I was so amazed at the accuracy in the box that I had to show my best mate, another keen modeller, who said that the prop was probably the only bit in the box that looked like it came from a P-51D. We were only 11 years old then, and it didn't even fool us!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, fightersweep said:

I have always wondered exactly what plans Revell used to produce this masterpiece! I bought my first one way back in 1981. Even then, I was so amazed at the accuracy in the box that I had to show my best mate, another keen modeller, who said that the prop was probably the only bit in the box that looked like it came from a P-51D. We were only 11 years old then, and it didn't even fool us!

It matched very closely the 3 view drawing in 'Famous Fighters of WWll' by William Green published around 1957

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/01/2018 at 11:25 PM, 73north said:

for me the old Revell Heinkel 111 Bomber , the fuselage halves did not fit at all , and I ended up leaving the hobby for 5 years due to the stress of that damn kit ( was it 1/48 scale ?? )

another honorable mention , the Revell 1/32 Hawker Typhoon = I ended up throwing mine in the bin

Never built the He111 or the Typhoon, but I remember when the Typhoon came out in the early 1970's Scale Models gave it a positive review, although standards were different back then. I seem to recall that Revell seemed to have a fondness for dark green plastic that was a bit brittle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another vote here for the Airfix 1/72 Mk.IX JE-J. I was super excited to build mine as a XVI after seeing a real one fly, then - as a 15-year-old - being intensely disappointed at the accuracy and quality. I ended up putting it on a stand, then hacking it up to become a Transformer.

 

On ‎12‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 12:25 AM, FAAMAN said:

These are some of the worst, and yes I've built them no matter how bad, So are these Mfr's lazy or stupid or both?

Revell 1/144 scale Lockheed F-117A Stealth Fighter, kit 04037,

36100664431_dd9169fdff_o.jpgDSC07154 50. 56200s by Neil, on Flickr

To be fair to Revell, wasn't this one of the kits produced very quickly after the single, grainy, misleadingly-angled image of the F-117A was released? Or did this come out after they properly declassified the aircraft?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎03‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 11:44 PM, Eric Mc said:

I've got an Albemarle in my stash. Where can I get a Colt 45?

LS did a lot to suit your needs, but they may be hard to get.  (Hope no one else did the joke in the meantime. ..)

One that qualifies is the Merit/Artiplast /Smer copy of the Aurora Albatros "D.III" which can't make up its mind about which version it wants to be. Bad fit, hopelessly inaccurate, but in fairness the Aurora is 60+ and the copy mould not much younger. 

As the Lindberg Stiletto is about the same age, I'd be a bit more generous as the focus was more of an educational toy. Knowing a few of their prototype kits from the period, I'd be surprised if it wasn't at least reasonably accurate, shapewise.

The worst kit I think I ever had the displeasure of wrestling with is the PM Floatfire. A terrible base kit with some hopelessly inaccurate version parts that I don't know how they are supposed to fit. But then the base kit seems to be "inspired " by the ancient Frog Ia/Va.

 

Reading Grandad870's remark above, I think the HObbycraft Vampires should not go unmentioned (unless someone already did), and the I even fits under the WW II banner.

Edited by tempestfan
Adding the Vampire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, trying to improve upon my posting frequency here..

 

The Valom Sukhoi 6 kit is pretty crude. To their defence it was the first kit these folks made (2002) I`ve come a ways on it but the chin area has got me scratching my head. Reconstructive surgery is a key word. Even ordered a vac form kit to see if it holds some clues to my inquiries. I like the idea of taking something ugly and make it look nice.

 

...that`s why i picked up the Beechnut CW 21 kit. It`s looking nasty but i have the skillset to make it look alright (you`ll just have to trust me on this)    

 

The old Airfix Blenheim canopy still is firmly attached in my harddrive. Always trying to suppress the bad memories, but don`t always work hahaha.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like the first post of this thread, I too binned the Revell Fw 190... terrible wing fit and just generally iffy all around. Horrible canopy as well. I was excited when the Airfix kit came out and lo and behold, even more awful. Binned it as well. Then built the Hasegawa and it was a dream (haven't done the Eduard yet).

 

The Xtrakit Sea Harrier is probably the most horrible kit I've ever built to completion. Everything about it was a nightmare, even excusing its short-run nature.

 

The most awful kit I have ever seen (but not owned or built) is the new(ish) Airfix Bf 109G-6. If in the 1980s you would have thought that a kit like that was to be produced 30 years later you'd have shot yourself.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fun thread - I can't resist coming back to it! When I think of worst quality, three 1/72 kits immediately come to mind:

  • Magna resin Firebrand TF5 - the first version, one of Magna's earliest kits from the 1980's or 1990's, a horrible lump of a thing which caused me to swear I'd never buy another Magna kit.
  • Beechnut P-51H - the (bagged) kit was awful, but the header card showed what appeared to be excellent scale drawings, so I wrote to the producer of these kits to ask about getting a full set; he replied, "Sure - send me $100, and they're yours.". I really didn't want them that badly...
  • Merlin Spitfire Mk XII - I attempted to convert it to a Seafire Mk XV, but it was hopeless; I think I still have it somewhere, along with parts robbed from other, better kits (Airfix Mk Vb, FROG Mk VIII) which I had hoped to use to improve it!

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, John Thompson said:

Fun thread - I can't resist coming back to it! When I think of worst quality, three 1/72 kits immediately come to mind:

  • Magna resin Firebrand TF5 - the first version, one of Magna's earliest kits from the 1980's or 1990's, a horrible lump of a thing which caused me to swear I'd never buy another Magna kit.
  • Beechnut P-51H - the (bagged) kit was awful, but the header card showed what appeared to be excellent scale drawings, so I wrote to the producer of these kits to ask about getting a full set; he replied, "Sure - send me $100, and they're yours.". I really didn't want them that badly...
  • Merlin Spitfire Mk XII - I attempted to convert it to a Seafire Mk XV, but it was hopeless; I think I still have it somewhere, along with parts robbed from other, better kits (Airfix Mk Vb, FROG Mk VIII) which I had hoped to use to improve it!

John

I have a Magna Firebrand, mine might be later as does not look too bad. Magna did get better, although never to CMR/SBS standard. For Christmas treated myself to the CMR version of the Firebrand l, amazing piece of moulding, the one piece wing has integral wheel well detail with undercuts into to wing. Do not think I ever got the Merlin Spitfire XIIm the Scimitar and Meteor 8 were enough for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎04‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 5:51 PM, Artie said:

Well, it depends on the subjects......Their kits come from varied sources....in 1/72 scale, you can find ex-Heller, for example, wich are not bad at all....

If we talk 1/48, things get complicated.....their origins are weird, from Merit to who knows......the amount of removed flash, plus the oversized parts tree, leave more plastic behind tan the actually used in the model....

 

Indeed - they own a number of ex-Heller moulds including good ones (Musée French types, some of them...) and not so good ones (Spit Vb), Kovozavody Semily/Vista (the excellent Fulmar, P-40K, which is an improved clone of the ancient Revell E), Antares (?, Curtiss SC-1)...

In 1/48/50 they have ex-OEZ (MiG-17), ex-Merit (some of which are copies of Aurora, some Merit's own toolings, like Avro 504 which is actually not that bad, Walrus, Swordfish, and Bulldog, which is infinitely inferior to the Merit/Pyro/LifeLike/Lindberg), ex-ATMA-Paulista (Fokker S.11, which probably came to Merit as ATMA moulded some Merit kits in Brazil - but seems to never have been issued as Merit), ex-Plastic Toys (1/40 CR.42) and ex Artiplast (who also seems to have taken over the Merit stuff and then sold them on to Smer some 40-odd years ago), some of which are actually not at all bad - the G.55 has a very good outline, for example.

On ‎06‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 12:22 AM, MilneBay said:

 

When Academy first entered the 1/72 market they didn't have much to offer so they obviously hired some cheap moulds from other makers. Two kits that stand out for general cruddiness was their first attempt at the Grumman Hellcat (not the later kit which resembles the Hasegawa). This kit combined poor fit, a half cylinder engine mounted on a flat piece of plastic, a cockpit that offered moulded pilot and seat that plugged into the back and wheels that looked like buttons. Come to think of it perhaps they were. The problem was that it came in a lovely box that completely disguised the bare disaster that was within. Then there was their first attempt at issuing a FW190A. Dunno where they borrowed the mould from but this kit made the FW190's fuselage resemble a shoe box. And who can forget their much hyped Vampire. 

       

Do you mean Hobbycraft, perhaps, as you refer to the Vampire ? HC had a ghastly copy of the ghastly Revell H-615 Fw 190, and I think also a copy of the Fujimi 1/70 Hellcat, which was possibly earlier sold as Idea.

 

What I find interesting is that it's always Merlin who takes the deserved bashing, not Vagn Espensen's earlier brand Veeday, who was much more of a pioneer of short run kits. May that be due to the fact that Veeday's kits (or some of them) seem to have been mastered by Chris Gannon, while much of Merlins output seems to have been clones of old Frog and Penguin kits (e.g. Scimitar) and allegedly Rareplanes ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/01/2018 at 2:06 PM, alancmlaird said:

 I do now have a Mach Dragonfly still in the box - I'll let you know if I still have a smile on my face when I get round to building it :D

 

If yours is like the one I've got you won't.

 

Of particular interest are the clear parts, which come with built in deployed nuclear anti flash curtains.

 

Oh, sorry, on closer inspection, no curtains, they are made of frosted plastic (think bathroom windows).

 

You'd be better off with the whirlybirds vacform/resin dragonfly in 1/72, though I do intend to have a go at the mach 2 dragonfly.

 

The whirlybirds kit is much dearer than the mach 2, though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tempestfan said:

 

What I find interesting is that it's always Merlin who takes the deserved bashing, not Vagn Espensen's earlier brand Veeday, who was much more of a pioneer of short run kits. May that be due to the fact that Veeday's kits (or some of them) seem to have been mastered by Chris Gannon, while much of Merlins output seems to have been clones of old Frog and Penguin kits (e.g. Scimitar) and allegedly Rareplanes ?

 

Guess one reason may be that Veeday kits are much rarer and many here may not ever had one.

In any case my main complaints with Merlin kits come from having bought one where one fuselage half was 5 mm longer than the other and the two had totally asymmetrical sections, something that I believe was more a problem of moulding raher than of where the master came from.

Speaking of early short run kits, I had bad luck with Pegasus as well: the Spitfire Mk.22 I have is terrible, accuracy is quite off, the moulding quality pretty awful and the plastic used for most parts is like soap. Then there's the plastic used for other parts like the tail, a clear plastic very hard and rigid that is very difficult to remove from the sprues without cracking. I know that latter copies of the same kit were better but this put me off Pegasus for a good while, so much that I never bought any other kit from this company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I built the original issue of the Pegasus Spitfire 22 when it first came out, (1984?). I think I cannibalised a Heller 16 for bits like interior and undercarriage. The main problem I remember about it was a very flat underwing section and having problems with early Extracolour paint not drying. Don't know what happened to it, probably succumbed to a cull during a house move. Mind you I am a bit of a masochist,  having built the Pegasus EAP, a truly dreadful kit in the fit department with wings that were not quite the same profile on either side and a fiendish complicated fuselage construction to fit his moulding machine. Damaged beyond repair a few years back and I have Colin's resin version to do that looks a lot better. For a start it is accurate. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, it would be the Trumpeter 1/32 Mig-15. It was one of their first kits and the wing/fuselage joint was an absolute nightmare. I think I used an entire tube of Tamiya putty on it trying to make it work. I gave up and just binned it. 

 

Carl 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, tempestfan said:

 

Do you mean Hobbycraft, perhaps, as you refer to the Vampire ? HC had a ghastly copy of the ghastly Revell H-615 Fw 190, and I think also a copy of the Fujimi 1/70 Hellcat, which was possibly earlier sold as Idea.

 

Yes you're right - it was the later HC Academy link that must have thrown the old brain cells out of focus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No mention of the "British Battle Fighter" for sale in The Works a few years back?

 

Snap together, fit wasn't too bad, prop spun when you blew it, wings back to front....

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bonhoff said:

No mention of the "British Battle Fighter" for sale in The Works a few years back?

 

Snap together, fit wasn't too bad, prop spun when you blew it, wings back to front....

Oh lordy - I just looked that up.......

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...