Jump to content
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. :)

Mike

Brand Focused negativity

Recommended Posts

Precisely. Those of us brought up on ancient toolings from the '50s and '60s are used to working magic on what is available. I have stuff in my stash 30 years and more old. For what it cost, tons of aftermarket at today's prices are not cost effective, and will not do much for ancient tooling. It might make a pretty cockpit, or enhance the wheel bays, but when it's sitting on a shelf gathering dust, it doesn't make that much difference. So far, I have built 3 Hasegawa toolings and none from Tamiya, but I have built many ancient Revellofix and Mach 2. Trumpeters are in the stash and I will treat them in the same manner as the rest. The only stuff I would slag off as a matter of course is some Pegasus and Andy Pack.

Those who have seen such offerings will understand. I could do better from scrap sprue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is, thank goodness for the internet. I can find out ahead of time that the kit I desperately want isn't good enough to bother, thus saving me from spending money I don't have on a self-centered activity that does nothing for the rest of my family. So why is it that my stash keeps growing like unsupervised bunnies (including some of the Eduard variety)? Oh, I know, it is because the Negative Norberts are killing the hobby. Hmm, I wonder if the Jaundiced yet Jocular Jonners has posted again on his latest joust?

bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I wonder if the Jaundiced yet Jocular Jonners has posted again on his latest joust?

bob

Lightly Liverish Larry signing in Sir!! Your Sunday night update is ready to view :)

Jonners, the Happy Hunter Honer ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grumpy Old Men? Amongst us? Here on this haven of passionate model makers? Jeez! We'll be seeing posts from women next!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just spent 10 minutes reading through this and come to a couple of conclusions

1. I have been harsh on airfix based on one too many bad experiences I have had personally and for that I apologise.

2, the Trumpeter and hobby boss kits I have built are generally a relatively easy build and I'm careful about what I buy. The dauntless and the me 262 in 1/32 are lovely kits but others are definitely suspect.

3, the choice is up to others who buy kits. Personally I like the challenge of a tricky kit to build and other manufacturers vary I built the tamiya beaufighter and tbh it left me cold. The I built the eduard 1/48 bf 110 and loved every minute of it. And trumpeter and hobby boss fit right in the middle ground for me.

4, finally some other naysayers have got to me on here I was all for buying their westland whirlwind and tbh to me it looks like a whirlwind but I got caught up in all the discussions on wing roots windscreens and the rest. Next thing I know I'm bidding on ebay for a classic airframes one (I stopped bidding at 60 quid when I gave myself a talking to). And bought and built the Trumpeter kit and it sits in the display cabinet looking like a whirlwind.

Nice one Mike you gave me a push to reflect

Darren

Edited by dazdot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there has to be a compromise, and we all have our own acceptance level for errors. I will lose absolutely no sleep whatsoever if I buy a kit and it is a millimetre or three short in wingspan or the curve of the fuselage is not quite what it should be. If, to my eye, it looks like the subject it is purporting to be then that is sufficient. To hold a company's entire output against the fact that one of their models is deficient in accuracy does not make much sense. And neither does doing so authoritatively when all you have to go on is a couple of CAD images and a stock photo being used as temporary box art.

Oh, and Jonners, I am very glad we put Awfully Angry August behind us long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Monkeys as well :shrug:

I thought that was just guys who drive big cars ,4x4s, Bmws ,audis :hmmm:

Thanks Mike learn something new everyday on BM :thumbsup2:

Excluding BMW motorcycles, of course... :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't there a little more to this? If a manufacturer has produced a series of bad kits (and I will keep this neutral), then we have a problem. The worsest thing in out hobby is the inaccurate kit--not when it is about minor issues but serious misrepresentations. A bad kit can prewent good kits to appear. My favourite subject is the Academy Spitfiree Mk.XIV which has been around for close to twenty years. Technically it is fine or was fine for its time, but it includes a series of serious faults. However, no newer kit of this important variant has appeared. We have even seen resin versions of rare Spits and Seafires like the F.21 and the Seafire 45 which are based on Academy's kit and incorporates the same mistakes as the Academy one. We may say that the Academy rendering blocks the way for a better version.

Another example could be Hobbycrafts AR 234, which was hopeless. Happily some ten years later Hasegawa came with a fine rendering. So a bad kit may be worse than no kit at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This probably doesn't exactly fit in with the Brand-focused negativity, but what about the old kit focused negativity?

I like to work on older kits, and like to see what I can do with basic modeling & plastic (no aftermarket) to "tart up" a kit. Plus, I am a frugal (read POOR) modeler, so I can't always afford the latest & greatest kits. It really irks me when someone asks about an older kit, and what need to be done to fix it up, and the first (of many) responses is to "toss it in the bin, and go out and buy the latest Uber Kit".

It doesn't seem to happen a lot on Britmodeller, as it does on other sites, which is why I like this forum, there are always a LOT of threads by members, showing what basic modeling skills can do to fix up old, or even just new but inaccurate kits.

Any thoughts on that?

Larry

Yes there is. I would rather pick up a Monogram F-106 than say maybe the new tool F-106. Just because a kit is old does not mean it is no good, and a modern tool is not always better, take the Monogram F-80 over the new Hobby Boss? every time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was my dilemma on another site. As far as I know, no one is producing a correction so I started researching what must be done. Before I could do that, I asked people to let me know what they see was incorrect.

As it stands, the small errors of the previous MiG-23 kits (asymmetrical air brake outlines, too small an upper radius on the intakes, missing weld (yes, weld!) lines, and many more) , are compounded with an incorrect canopy (the sill is too deep at the front and slopes upwards to the correct level at the rear) windscreen is workable but the nose is 'Romanesque' instead of mostly straight.

  1. Airbrakes, if modeled shut, an easy fill and scribe task. Use stretched sprue tree as the filler.
  2. Correcting the intakes is tedious but possible. Aires and Ciro Models make replacements if you prefer to pay and save time.
  3. Weld lines... stretched sprue trees but I used Gunze Sangyo's liquid putty.
  4. Canopy & cockpit sill. Two approaches but I took the harder one. A) Glue shut, fill sill line and rescribe at the correct height from the rear to the front keeping it parallel to the thrust line B) build up sill with plastic and replace canopy with one from the MiG-23M kit (which lacks the periscope brace).
  5. Nose wheels should be larger, Armory makes them.
  6. Nose wheel mud guard needs to be made from lead foil as the kit one is nowhere near that used with the ground attack variant.
  7. I will (haven't started this yet) cut off the top of the nose and build it back with wood and skinned in sheet plastic.
  8. Of course I can go on but you might not be reading this far!

Regards,

Which kit are you talking about? I'm very interested in the Mig-23 series... as I'm going to build a series of these soon. :winkgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Criticism is good, so long as the producer is aware of what's been said (and that they are willing to take comments onboard) so they can either correct said issues, or look at other options when bringing out a new kit, what gets me is when people just slate a manufacturer just becuase they want too... (becuase they have issues with them maybe?). It's boring, every time something from the far east is brought out, it's the same broken record.

I won't bother commenting on anything in the future of this nature...... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a fine line between criticism of a kit, and venturing into a vendetta against a kit or indeed a manufacturer. There are some folks that will go out of their way to destroy the reputation of a manufacturer or kit at every opportunity, spouting bile on all the popular forums (often a straight cut'n'paste), with exaggeration the watchword. The old faithful "unbuildable" or "they really didn't do a very good job" are trotted out over sometimes minor aspects of accuracy. Sure, it's irritating when a kit isn't quite up to standard, but you'd think that the world was coming to an end the way some folks berate these harmless lumps of plastic (and yes, some of them are best described that way! :lol: ).

I suppose my outlook on it all is that it's not worth getting your underwear bunched up about, even though it's disappointing. There are more important things we could ALL be venting our frustration about that actually would make a difference to the world, but that's not for discussion here. You know of what I speak though. Begins with P. :tapedshut: I'm as guilty as the next man on that score.

Let's try to focus on a kit for its own merits, not because they're produced by some "goddam commies", or any other racial, political or personal bias. Not everything from almost any manufacturer is rubbish, and we need to operate with a sense of perspective. Instead of crowing that you've spotted something wrong, inform people in a fair and balanced manner, then suggest practical work-arounds to correct these issues. With that information, people can make their own informed decision whether to leave the kit as is and build it, try to correct it with modelling skill or aftermarket (or both), or just walk in the opposite direction. :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add my own experiences with various kits and manufacturers, for me it is simply a case of whether or not I am familiar with the subject and how well I know the dimensions, shape, number of wheel nuts holding the wheel on etc. of the real thing. To be really honest, I actually don't know much about the real things anyway! I wouldn't have had a clue that the 1/48 Hasegawa Spitfire Mk.IX was flawed or that the 1/48 Trumpeter F-100's nose intake was the wrong shape, or that the Kitty Hawk Jaguar's wing profile was wrong. I am not an aircraft recognition expert but when I do find out that the kit is dimensionally wrong (usually on here) then the kit tends to go cold on me and just get's left on the shelf of doom. My 1/72 Italeri Tupolev 'Blinder' is a case in point where I was really happy trundling along, way outside of my comfort zone with a subject I know nothing about, only to learn that the thing does not represent the real thing from any angle at all! So I gave up on it.

I think that my new year's resolution will be not to listen to you lot! And yes, boss, that includes you! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be really honest, I actually don't know much about the real things anyway!

I think that my new year's resolution will be not to listen to you lot! And yes, boss, that includes you! ;)

LOL ....remind me to fly BA next time... (although just noticed the 'ex' on the moniker, so perhaps that's not an issue!)

no seriously, good points...completely lost my desire to build that (unbuildable) kit - after reading about it here- but persisted and now I'm very pleased with the finished result. Taking it to club night though..probably not a good idea!

Edited by FalkeEins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike i think this is a great post, at the end of the day its down to everyone's personal choice, either buy it or don't. At the end of the day if only one manufacturer makes a kit you wan't then you either buy it or don,t.

its each to their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true, this is a great post and one that has made me think beyond sprues, paint and decals.

'ex'-Busdriver refers to my old moniker here, I'm still 'driving' busses though, for everyone's favourite Orange airline!

I'm an aviation fan, not a fanatic (I really doubt I could tell the difference between a Tornado GR.1 and a GR.4 let alone obscure MiGs and Sukhois...) and there are things that really worry me about the hobby, that never worried me when I was an excited 14 year old getting that 1/24th Airfix Superkit for Christmas! What I mean is that, I still get that excitement, but now, as a 50 something year old, with a few more tools and techniques to be able to do a half decent job of the kits that are available, I get a bit downhearted when I find out that the latest Superkit I just spent a large amount of money on is flawed.

Maybe I should just stick to building Eduard's Spitfire Mk.IX kits, as I believe that they are as perfect as perfection gets in 1/48th.

Or are they? :confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which kit are you talking about? I'm very interested in the Mig-23 series... as I'm going to build a series of these soon. :winkgrin:

My post quoted Mike's referring to the Trumpeter MiG-23BN he recently reviewed. Of the series, the BN is the least accurate out of the box. It is buildable but you'll need to look at that list and decide what you're willing to do and/or ignore.

Regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, well - tonight I'm being "Devil's Advocate Dave", so bear with me here Boss. :)

I still maintain that the consumer, ie US, WE, "the modeller" whether we be average "Joe stick it together and add decals", "Mr Assembler & painter" ( Not GSI's new robotic modelling friend), or "Professor I've airbrushed the pilots eyeballs" have a right to expect that when any mainstream company releases a scale model kit that the parts should assemble well, and the finished article should have a reasonable likeness in facsimile to its 1/1 scale original.

By reasonable I mean that allowing for the tolerances of whats mouldable in plastic, it should be a decent match for the overall shape for real thing, so that in fact when someone comes out with that old line of, "well it looks like an XXXXXX to me", it actually does. Not a vague semblance.

I personally count this as being on a par with expecting cookers to be able to cook food, cars being driveable, and pens being capable of being written with: Its an intrinsic feature of a "scale model", otherwise we should call them "artistic representations".

So when a "scale model" does not resemble the original in this way, I don't think its being unreasonable to ask why, nor do I think it's unreasonable to actively criticise the manufacturer if these errors seem avoidable ( such as there's plenty of real ones around to measure, or the errors are so glaring that a casual glance at Google images would reveal them). Further more I think that if any manufacturer repeats this type of error on several models, it's not beyond the realms of reasonable behaviour to be rather guarded about the potential of any upcoming release to suffer from the same problem. Call it "form", "track record", "reputation" or whatever you will. And to my mind, nor is it unreasonable to question the potential accuracy of upcoming new releases based on this track record of previous releases.

Finally, and again I put this up for discussion, consider this: If accuracy in a model does not bother you, but you actively feel the need to be upset or offended by those for whom it does, and who will say it does to the point of "dissing" a manufacturer, then why get so upset? If your starting point is that you don't care about accuracy, how can "any" argument about this bother you? - you will build a kit regardless. To be succinct - How can you be upset by something that you don't care about?

Cheers

Jonners

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd forgotten about those of us that complain about the complaints about accuracy, who can be just as tenacious in their obsessive rebuttals are the "other side". I think I kind of tacitly covered it with the below pic though:

dullpost.jpg

TBH, my whole thrust hasn't been about the fact that people do or don't complain about accuracy issues, but the WAY in which they do it. i.e. without balance, manners or a sense of perspective. Sure a company can have several crap kits with squiffy noses, but when it can also release models of very good standard, it seems unfair to tar their whole output as rubbish, sometimes even before it's seen the light of day.

It would probably be very difficult to prove that we have a right to expect accuracy from model kits in a court of law, as models are seen as a toy in many people's eyes. If it was something actionable, there wouldn't be a model company left in existence, so in effect we don't really have a right to expect accuracy, but a reasonable facsimile. The only real right that we have is to choose whether to spend our money on the item in the first place. I think we sometimes forget that model companies produce products for a WIDE spectrum of modellers, not just us more "serious" modellers that obsess over small details while ignoring 6" thick canopy glazing and 2" deep panel lines (well, most of us do anyway). They make kits for people that don't really consider accuracy too, and I wonder how important (or more likely unimportant) our bleating about this being wrong, and that being 3mm too short is to them. Are we a large percentage of their target market? I don't think so, and the fact that the kits are still coming would back that up to an extent.

What I do understand is that us getting hot under the collar about it does no-one any good. Sure we might score some "I know more than you" points in the process, but what good does it do to pillory a company for creating a duff kit? once the initial "Oh, the nose is the wrong shape" is over, it's all posturing, deriding any opposition, and a scramble for the most pithy description of how wrong they got it. A more productive way of dealing with problems like this is to lay out the issues, offer methods for fixing them, and tell the company concerned the same facts directly, which is a lot easier than it used to be thanks to the internet. If they choose to do something about it, then you've made a difference and they may call on your expertise in the future when considering a similar subject. If they don't, at least the people that are considering buying the model will have a good idea what's wrong and can make that informed decision I was talking about earlier. It might also encourage the aftermarket companies to get working on fixing the issues for those that either can't or can't be bothered to do it themselves.

It's the arm-waving and wringing of hands that does our hobby no good. Imagine a new member or lurker reading a bun-fight about how a Spitfire model is wrong, they didn't do a very good job, and anyone that buys the kit is an idiot, followed by the retort "well it looks like a Spitfire to me", and the inevitable descent into name calling and willy-waving. What kind of an image of our hobby and its adherents is that going to project? We're supposed to be encouraging others to join our hobby and give them assistance in developing their skillset etc. Most people would just turn tail and run, thinking all modellers are like that. I've shown some of the crap that happens in the name of pursuing our hobby to non-modellers, and they've been horrified that people behave like that over a few bits of plastic.

If people could just leave their spite/bias/obsession at the door and discuss things like adults, we'd be a lot further on as a hobby. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mike, on 08 Dec 2015 - 4:42 PM, said:Mike, on 08 Dec 2015 - 4:42 PM, said:

They make kits for people that don't really consider accuracy too, and I wonder how important (or more likely unimportant) our bleating about this being wrong, and that being 3mm too short is to them. Are we a large percentage of their target market? I don't think so, and the fact that the kits are still coming would back that up to an extent.

One might then question why a particular company might produce, say, every sub-mark and micro-variant of the PzIV - are there that many non-enthusiasts to support that market? I just imagine granny going into the model store to buy Little Johnny a model and debating the merits of the PzIVD (late) with cast wheels and kettle over the PzIVD (early) with moulded wheels and sledge hammer.....

Edited by Paul Bradley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the problem of criticizing a model company's products, simply because of the country they are located, even if said country has a record of producing sub-standard products.

There used to be an excellent modeler (now deceased), who whenever he mentioned kits coming out of the PRC, called them "Chicoms". I don't think he hated everything coming from the PRC companies, it was just the way he talked. There were however, people on that major forum, who criticized everything from the PRC, simply because of where they were from. It got so bad, that another major forum (from the same continent) had a post awhile back where the poster said ALL American modelers are racist! The sad part is that many people replying agreed with the OP. That thread has since been removed.

Larry

Edit: The same thing is now happening here, IMO.

Edited by ReccePhreak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there is. I would rather pick up a Monogram F-106 than say maybe the new tool F-106. Just because a kit is old does not mean it is no good, and a modern tool is not always better, take the Monogram F-80 over the new Hobby Boss? every time!

Some of the older kits are accurate and you know what you can use a lot of the new after market stuff to upgrade them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So when a "scale model" does not resemble the original in this way, I don't think its being unreasonable to ask why, nor do I think it's unreasonable to actively criticise the manufacturer if these errors seem avoidable ( such as there's plenty of real ones around to measure, or the errors are so glaring that a casual glance at Google images would reveal them). Further more I think that if any manufacturer repeats this type of error on several models, it's not beyond the realms of reasonable behaviour to be rather guarded about the potential of any upcoming release to suffer from the same problem. Call it "form", "track record", "reputation" or whatever you will. And to my mind, nor is it unreasonable to question the potential accuracy of upcoming new releases based on this track record of previous releases.

It is unreasonable to actively criticize the manufacturer if one is aware of the way they do their 'research and development.' Many of these new companies do not send out anyone to the 'real ones around to measure' but reply of information sent to them. This means that each subject should be treated on its own merits. These companies are the perfect example of GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out.

One might then question why a particular company might produce, say, every sub-mark and micro-variant of the PzIV - are there that many non-enthusiasts to support that market?

People who care about a particular subject usually are hoarders and will buy every variant available to them especially if listed as limited run. These particular kits often cost more than competitors that don't get so granular into production batches.

Regards,

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

×
×
  • Create New...