Kit Quality

[Jazzy Jase]

Back when I used to make models as a kid, they were almost always Airfix and the occasional Matchbox and Revell kit. I'd heard about Tamiya, but they were too expensive for my pocket money.

Now though there are loads of manufacturers to choose from, but knowing Airfix the best I've bought a few cheap kits from ebay. Last night I started on an Airfix 1/72 ME262. I was mightily surprised however, at just how bad this kit is: No cockpit, appaling fit, and an engine piece missing.

Every joint is poorly fitting, with gaps of upto 2mm. Now I don't mind a bit of filling and sanding, but this kit would take a lot and isn't my idea of fun. I shall throw it together and use it to test my new airbrush.

This got me thinking. The Revell Spitfire I made didn't need much filling at all. Did I get lucky with the Revell? Or unlucky with the Airfix? Which kit manufacturers are the best? Which are the worst? Does quality vary from kit to kit?

I want to build a collection of 1/72 WW2 aircraft, so should I be looking at certain manufacturers? Or only certain kits from all the manufacturers? How do I find out which are good kits and which are bad?

I don't mind spending a bit extra for good quality and detail. Any thoughts or recommendations would be welcome.

[Gwart]

The Tamiya 1/72nd Warbird series -Mosqutios,Corsairs,Thunderbolts ,Spitfires +Mustangs in the range all fantastic little kits.

One of their Mustangs i built recently,no filler,no aftermarket parts-a really nice kit to build

[Test Graham]

There are no perfect manufacturers. Tamiya is generally the finest tooled, but has been known to go astray on accuracy, and generally has a smaller range. Academy is currently fine, but their older kits are not so good and they seem to be a bit hit-and-miss on accuracy of shape. There really is no escape from knowing the history of each manufacturer, and type. The Airfix Me 262 goes back to about 1960, whereas your Revell Spitfire (which lacks the characteristic inverted gull wing at the rear) is only some 10 years old, and for Revell was the first of a series of new tooling of old favourites. For accuracy of shape the Airfix Spitfire Mk.1 has not been beaten, but has fit problems, lacks detail, and has raised panel lines - which some modellers find unacceptable nowadays. On the other hand the Tamiya Spitfire Mk.1 has too short and too fat a fuselage, a mis-shapen wing, and odd spinner/propellor blades/exhausts. However the tooling is superb, the fit excellent and some modellers swear by it.

So there is no escape from having to learn the history of each type. Keeping an eye on the main modelling sites will give you a guide to which subjects cause problems, or generate likes and dislikes. It really very much depends upon what subject you want to make, and your own preference for accuracy and/or fit.

If you want to play as safe as possible, avoid re-releases. Watch the internet for comments - avoid reviews and reviewers for they rarely criticise and quite major faults are often ignored. There are exceptions. Search the sites for the individual example you want to model.

If all else fails, ask directly on this or any other board: how good is the Matchfix Hurrispit? But there are just too many kits to give you the kind of simple overall answer you are looking for: the hobby is too complicated.

[Jazzy Jase]

Gwart, that Mustang looks awesome.

Graham, that's some interesting information. I just assumed that most kits would be fairly accurate. The Tamiya Mk.1 Spit for instance, is it massively innacurate, or just seasoned modellers being picky?

So what is the best 1/72 Spitfire?

[Alan P]

The Tamiya Mk.1 Spit for instance, is it massively innacurate, or just seasoned modellers being picky?

Ah, there's the killer question!

If it doesn't matter that much, and you are happy with something that looks like a Spitfire or whatever you're building, that goes together with minimum filling and sanding, then the Tamiya warbirds collection is for you! They are close enough for most of us.

Edited February 13, 2008 by PHaTNesS

[Test Graham]

Ah, "fairly", that's a pretty slippery term, there. Yes, generally, most models are fairly accurate, but they do differ strangely from one another, and there are some aspects of the engineering of the real thing that tends to leave model companies baffled. Having an engine cowling wider than the engine seems to have defeated most manufacturers of Hurricanes, for example. They seem to get the Spitfire wide enough across the top of the engine, but don't realise that logically the 109 has to be equally wide underneath, and that engines are wide at the front as well as the back; the same width, in fact -amazing thought, isn't it?.

Given the generally high accuracy of Tamiya kits, the Spitfire really is a disappointment. Yes. it really is wrong in almost every shape. Yes, it does look like a Spitfire (you may have to squint a bit) but then so does a Wrenn caricature, and the Daily Wail cartoon does look like the intended politician. It takes amazing effort to get a model not to look like its original.....but it depends how much you care about such things. If you liked the Revell Spitfire despite its flat bottom, you probably don't too much.

The best 1/72 Spitfire? For accuracy, still the old Airfix Mk.1. For fit of parts, probably the Tamiya, but the Hasegawa Mk.IX manages to be more accurate and very nearly as good a fit. With a replacement prop, the Italaeri is probably the best of the Mk.Vb kits. The new Xtrakit is the best Mk.XII (no real choice) and Fujimi do a good Mk.XIV. If outline accuracy is overwhelmingly important, then the Ventura series of kits are what you want but they are a lot of work and lack detail. Or you could just throw money at the CMR resins, which I have not tried myself but are certainly highly acclaimed.

Airfix are doing a new tool Mk.IX this year......I live in hope, but they fouled up the last Spitfires they did so there's a fair bit of dread in there too. There's no real excuse for them this time.

[Mike S.]

In terms of overall quality in a kit i.e. Fit, detail, execution. subject matter, accuracy etc., I would vote Tamiya for aircraft, and DML for Armor. This vote is for the big makers only, and not the smaller or cottage industry sort.

There are a number of fine kits being produced by the latter category, but are not as plentiful, consistent, or readily available world wide to be a major contender.

As far as value for money in a quality kit, Academy and Revell Germany rate high in my book, but the latter is for their new mold kits only. There reissues of old Frog/Matchbox dogs...ahem... do not count. These should be marked as such within the box description (or Warning in this case).

[thx6667]

There reissues of old Frog/Matchbox dogs...ahem... do not count.

Matchbox made some fine kits - they might be not enthusiasts kits but that hardly qualifies them as dogs either.

As to who makes the best... depends what subject you are after. Company A might make a better F-4 than Company B, but Company B might make a better Me 109 than A. No kit company makes the best of everything.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Jonathan Mock

[Mike S.]

I've made my feelings known about Matchbox kit quality, or lack there of, many times before on other forums. I am always amazed at their defenders.

Like many on this board, I grew up building those as well as Airfix, Heller, Revell, Monogram etc., so I owe Matchbox for cutting my teeth in my youth, and the nostalgia angle. Other than the fact that some subjects are only available by that manufacturer, or were until recently, I can't share that view today.

I'm especially chagrined to open a Revell box hoping for a new mold release, only to find one of them instead.

Never the less, you pay your money and make your choice. If you are happy with them, cheers to you.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Mike S.

[LotusArenco]

In recent years, I've been impressed with the newer 1/72 Revell kits.

I have on my shelves Hurricanes, Me262's, P-47's, some Luftwaffe'46 thinggy, and am currently spraying up a f-16 - all Revell.

Ok.... I'm no rivet counter, and maybe some of these kits aren't 100% accurate. In terms of build enjoyment and value for money and availability, Revell kits are hard to beat!

(Although I was stung by the Lightning rebox)

Mart

[Test Graham]

I find it a shame that Revell do not choose to rerelease the best Matchbox kits. However, given the likely popularity of the Heyford, Stranraer, Seafox.....I can understand why. They are not just rare subjects, they are also significantly better kits than the Victor, Halifax etc. Let's not mention the Alpha Jet, Hurricane and other crudities....

The best 1/72 WW2 fighter kit in my collection is the Tamiya Shiden. The best Fw 190A is the Hasegawa: Tamiya is supposed to be as good. The best P-51A is the Academy. The best P-51D is the Hasegawa - but I'm told the Tamiya is better. The best (later) 109s are the Fine Molds. The best MiG-3 is HobbyBoss. The best Oscar is Fujimi. The best Hurricane is a toss-up between Hasegawa and Revell, Hasegawa by a slim margin. All of which is really to point out what Jonathon said - no company is always the best. Buyer beware.

[thx6667]

I've made my feelings known about Matchbox kit quality, or lack there of, many times before on other forums. I am always amazed at their defenders.

Like many on this board, I grew up building those as well as Airfix, Heller, Revell, Monogram etc., so I owe Matchbox for cutting my teeth in my youth, and the nostalgia angle. Other than the fact that some subjects are only available by that manufacturer, or were until recently, I can't share that view today.

I'm especially chagrined to open a Revell box hoping for a new mold release, only to find one of them instead.

Never the less, you pay your money and make your choice. If you are happy with them, cheers to you.

You kinda answered your own question there - a lot of us Britmodellers here grew up making Matchbox stuff and that's the perspective they should be viewed from, i.e. they were/are great, simple kits for kids to have a bash with. Sure they are not "enthusiast" quality, but then they never pretended to be. I "defend" Matchbox stuff in the same way I would say Hobbyboss these days. There has to be the simpler stuff for kids to cut their teeth on, they don't pop out of the womb "expert" modellers able to make a 1/48 Storch. The enthusiasts end tends to thin the whole hobby is there for them, the whole hobby rotates around them, when they are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of overall sales volume.

I daresay Lance Armstrong would not be impressed with a £50 mountain bike from Halfords, but then its not being made for him.

[dahut]

Who makes the best kits? Periklis, of course!

[Mike S.]

You kinda answered your own question there - a lot of us Britmodellers here grew up making Matchbox stuff and that's the perspective they should be viewed from, i.e. they were/are great, simple kits for kids to have a bash with. Sure they are not "enthusiast" quality, but then they never pretended to be. I "defend" Matchbox stuff in the same way I would say Hobbyboss these days. There has to be the simpler stuff for kids to cut their teeth on, they don't pop out of the womb "expert" modellers able to make a 1/48 Storch. The enthusiasts end tends to thin the whole hobby is there for them, the whole hobby rotates around them, when they are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of overall sales volume.

I daresay Lance Armstrong would not be impressed with a £50 mountain bike from Halfords, but then its not being made for him.

You don't have to have grown up in the U.K. to savor the memories.

As I mentioned, I grew up building them here in the U.S.A. too. Strange that I remember the easy availability of the Matchbox, Heller and Airfix kits so vividly, given the fact that they are rare to find in the local hobby shops stateside (short of mail ordering) these days. I especially loved the Airfix 54mm and 1/32 Figure kits. They could be had here in just about every neighborhood druggist, dime store, toy store etc. Those days are gone alas.

I wish I still had multiples of those originals (loved the softer, white plastic used on the figures) in my stash today.

[Mike V]

You kinda answered your own question there - a lot of us Britmodellers here grew up making Matchbox stuff and that's the perspective they should be viewed from, i.e. they were/are great, simple kits for kids to have a bash with. Sure they are not "enthusiast" quality, but then they never pretended to be. I "defend" Matchbox stuff in the same way I would say Hobbyboss these days. There has to be the simpler stuff for kids to cut their teeth on, they don't pop out of the womb "expert" modellers able to make a 1/48 Storch. The enthusiasts end tends to thin the whole hobby is there for them, the whole hobby rotates around them, when they are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of overall sales volume.

I daresay Lance Armstrong would not be impressed with a £50 mountain bike from Halfords, but then its not being made for him.

I love the way you stereotype so called “all” Expert Modelers who tend to value quality and accuracy as “assuming” they all think the hobby revolves around them. That’s just a bogus and a narrow view.

The fact is, there are many SMEs, Experts, or what ever you want to label them, that are very knowledgeable modelers in certain subjects and may be sticklers for detail, accuracy and quality, That makes them no less a part of the hobby, than one who just slaps a kit together over the weekend and calls it good.

This hobby lends itself to all types of modelers, from beginners, nova, expert, all with differing levels of standards and values in modeling.

In my club alone, there must be at least 10 “advanced” modelers who are well versed in varying subject matter. They all have high standards in kit quality and the build to a high degree of accuracy. They also have a lot of fun doing it, plus share their reviews and techniques with the rest of the club, including our young novas builders.

Our club also host “make-n-takes” for the local community. The kids love it and while most of us are picky as far as kit quality, we’ve all taken a crack at some of the “simple” less accurate and detail kits that the kids will be building. We build it OOTB, with no modifications an show how a simple model can be built into a nice one.

Son contrary to your view on “enthusiast”, that’s rather bold and prejudicial statement to assume they “all think the hobby revolves around them.” I've yet to meet a SME or so-called expert modeler that actually thinks the hobby revolves around them. I think there's enough "common sense" to know that the hobby revolves around the "selling of a product", not any particular sect or group.

So called expert modelers have “a lot” to offer in this hobby, despite your view of them in whole.

Mike V

[thx6667]

And you have totally misinterpreted what I was saying, mainly that Matchbox's stuff has a place in the scheme of things.

Besides, its one thing to disgaree but its another to do it with the personal edge you seem to bring to these dicsussions which then end up being locked down.

There are other forums for you do carry on this kind of stuff.

[Test Graham]

And you have totally misinterpreted what I was saying, mainly that Matchbox's stuff has a place in the scheme of things.

Besides, its one thing to disgaree but its another to do it with the personal edge you seem to bring to these dicsussions which then end up being locked down.

There are other forums for you do carry on this kind of stuff.

This is what you said: " The enthusiasts end tends to thin the whole hobby is there for them, the whole hobby rotates around them" Your words. Which bit has been misinterpreted? You started the namecalling - stop wriggling and trying to pin blame elsewhere. Which other forums do you mean? The ones where people get called out for contradicting themselves, and falsely claiming high moral ground?

To get back to the point: There is indeed a place for simple kits for beginners, or indeed for enthusiasts (I have three HobbyBoss kits so far), even enthusiastic beginners if you want to chop the market up finer, but the place for crude inaccurate kits in the bin. Beginners deserve better. Everyone deserves better. Given the wide range of kits available nowadays, we do not need old rubbish from worn moulds that no longer fit. Well, ok, maybe a bit for nostagia......but newcomers to the hobby do need the encouragement that comes from parts that do not need carving from flash and which fit other than "where they touch". An accurate kit can get sales from everyone, simple or not.

[thx6667]

This is what you said: " The enthusiasts end tends to thin the whole hobby is there for them, the whole hobby rotates around them" Your words. Which bit has been misinterpreted? You started the namecalling - stop wriggling and trying to pin blame elsewhere. Which other forums do you mean? The ones where people get called out for contradicting themselves, and falsely claiming high moral ground?

That's not name calling Graham, merely an opinion - people are welcome to agree or disagree, but for yet another thread to start bordering on personal abuse is just getting a bit lame now. And no offence, but if you're looking to kick off yet another pointless argument, sorry to disappoint you.

Let's try and keep BM civil shall we?

[denstore]

I can tell that the first two kits I built was the Matchbox Hawker Fury and Boeing P12, and I´m quite convinced that they are the reason why I´m still in this hobby 30 years later. Wonderful kits, both of them.

[thx6667]

I can tell that the first two kits I built was the Matchbox Hawker Fury and Boeing P12, and I´m quite convinced that they are the reason why I´m still in this hobby 30 years later. Wonderful kits, both of them.

For me it was their Spitfire, FW190, Hurricane and Tempest - I made the latter recently as a SFTB pure nostalgia build, great fun, which is after all what this hobby is about.

[denstore]

For me it was their Spitfire, FW190, Hurricane and Tempest - I made the latter recently as a SFTB pure nostalgia build, great fun, which is after all what this hobby is about.

Yeah, all of them where nice kits as I remember. The FW190 was my first attempt at doing something except of OOTB. Cut out and placed the canopy in an open position. Voilá, enter the future AMS!

Edited February 14, 2008 by denstore

[thx6667]

Yeah, all of them where nice kits as I remember. The FW190 was my first attempt at doing something except of OOTB. Cut out and placed the canopy in an open position. Voilá, enter the future AMS!

The Tempest and the Spitfire set off my first case of AMS when I could not decide which version to do. The Radial engine Tempest or the pointy finned Spit..? Decisions, decisions when you are seven!

I think I must have worked my way through most of their Purple Range, anything above that was either birthdays, illness or broken bones - the Skyservant was the result of a football injury!

[Guest Drewe]

First model I ever built myself? Matchbox P-47 in 1977. Second was the Matchbox Tempest and the third was the Matchbox Strikemaster. And here I am, 31 years later!

[denstore]

The Tempest and the Spitfire set off my first case of AMS when I could not decide which version to do. The Radial engine Tempest or the pointy finned Spit..? Decisions, decisions when you are seven!

I think I must have worked my way through most of their Purple Range, anything above that was either birthdays, illness or broken bones - the Skyservant was the result of a football injury!

The pricing of the Matchbox kits where really perfect here in Sweden. My weekly allowance was about 10kr, which was quite generous of my mother back in 1976-77, and the price of the single engin kits (purple) was 8,75kr and the twin engined was about 14kr. I remember as if it was yesterday the joy I felt when my mother asked me If I really didn´t rather want the Me 410 than the Zero I had picked out, and offering to pay the extra so I could have what i wanted. Much later she told me that she had seen me fondling that box for half an hour, and that she felt hurt herself when she saw that I had to pick out a smaller one that I could afford. Dear mum!

Anyway, I´ve always had a hard time to accept the critics about the trenches and so on in the Matchbox kits. They where nice, buildable and affordable. Sure, todays kits are much better, but also a lot more expensive. And as Stalin said, "Quantity has a quality all its own", which was totally accepted by this 8-year old 30 years ago.

[Jazzy Jase]

Well I've taken the plunge and ordered a few Tamiya WW2 aircraft kits. Including both their Spitfires!