How can Revell's new 1/32 Spit be so affordable?

Wow! I love it when my poor old memory turns out to be right. That happens less and less frequently these days.

Those ribbed areas represent the fabric skinned areas on early model F4Us. It wasn't until later variants of the F4U such as the -4 (I think) were designed when 5" rocket use became widespread that those areas received metal skin. That surface detail was not a quick fix.

I'm glad to hear about this kit and will definitely be grabbing one when I see it on the shelves.  The Tamiya 1/32 Spit retailed for anywhere between $130-$150 over here, and was way out of my price range.  As for kits that Revell needs to re-release, 1/144 C5 Galaxy.  'Nuff said.

It's economics. That simple. The Revell Spitfire is a perfectly nice kit. However, it doesn't touch anything from Tamiya. Not in engineering, not in fit, not in accuracy due to extensive research, not even in the quality of plastic. All those this add up and all the cost of kit development must be recovered in kit sales.

You get what you pay for. If you want the ultimate building experience go Tamiya. If you want to buy 3-4 kits for the same monetary outlay that's fine too. There's nothing wrong with either. Supply and demand. Simple. Nothing on this planet is priced solely because the maker feels their stuff is worth more than someone worse. The market has determined it is.

Injection molding price of petroleum how many molds it took to make a run of models are certainly points to consider. Rat Rods are coming back at a trickle from molds they felt they could fix.

Ofcourse I'm a wood worker what would I know? LOL  

Rigidrider

Chuck... your entitled. We all have good and bad experiance with certain things... I (way back in the early 70s) worked for MPC models who at the times also owned and distributed  Airfix of England. Man... what a lousy kit that "could" be. Not all of them, but we had many thousands of returns and complaints at that time period.  Left a real bad impression on me. Now however I have built a few Airfix kits at the recommendation of a friend and have now found them (for the price range) to be some pretty darn good kits both in design, scale and detail.

Take care...

Doug

While most of us have an idea of what Airfix kits are like, they did do some really nice kits back in the day. I thought their Type 97 Chi-Ha was a pretty nice kit and I've built the reissue; it still holds up well.

Another round of their kits that are pretty good are their 1/32 scale armor kits. For a long while their M3 Grant and Lee tanks were the best kits in the larger scale. Their Crusader tank was pretty good too. They were new in 1976, but are still respectable kits today.

I have to disagree with Whistlingdeath. Tamiya is a good company, but it makes mistakes of accuracy just like anybody else. Take a look at its 1/700 Yorktown. It was promoted as a "new" kit two or three years ago. In fact the molds are about 35 years old, and the entire model is too small for the scale, its proportions are off, and the level of detail doesn't come close to current standards. Several of Revell's 1/700 kits are demonstrably better in just about every respect.

Then there are the Tamiya 1/350 battleships. The Yamato is a genuinely new kit (i.e., just a couple of years old). The Bismarck, King George V, Prince of Wales, Missouri, and New Jersey are 35-year-old kits, recently reissued in glitzy boxes - at much higher prices. Anybody who compares the Tamiya and Revell 1/350 Bismarcks will tell you the Revell Germany one fits together better, is much better detailed, is more accurate - and costs a heck of a lot less.

I'm no armor builder, but it's widely known that some kits from companies like Dragon, Tasca, and Zvezda have the edge on their Tamiya counterparts. It's also worth noting that Tamiya markets quite a number of kits that are made by Italeri - and some Italeri kits have appeared in Revell boxes.

As for aircraft, I haven't bought any of the Tamiya 1/32 kits (can't afford them),  but I can testify that Eduard has quite a few 1/48 kits that are at least as good as their Tamiya counterparts - and quite a bit cheaper. And Academy's 1/72 P-51B can stand comparison with any 1/72 Tamiya kit.

Another comparison that's worth noting: the Tamiya 1/32 F-14 (which was originally issued about 30 years ago, but is still on the market - with no outward indication of its age) vs. the 1/48 Monogram one (which dates from around the same time). The big Tamiya one has flat instrument and console panels; all the details are in the form of 2-dimensional decals. The smaller Monogram one has genuine, 3-d instrument panels. 

It may be true that "nothing on this planet is priced solely because the maker believes their stuff is worth more than someone worse." But plenty of manufacturers are able to get away with charging higher prices because their advertising convinces consumers that there's something extra special about their brand names. Anybody who's into photography knows that the great German company Leica has been trading on that phenomenon for many years. (On the other hand, I don't think Leica has ever stuck a 35-rear old camera in a new box, doubled the price, and told the public the camera is a "new release.") In my book, Tamiya is in the same category: good products at the time of their introduction, but not without serious competition. And I'm sorry, but in the cosmos of scale modeling you DON'T always get what you pay for.

Returning for a second to the old Revell Corsair (I know this thread has drifted off course - but this is fun stuff) - I think I got the story of those "boards" inside the wing a bit wrong. I originally said they were there to make the wing panels thicker. After looking again at CN Spots' photo, I think I got it backwards.

The "rib" detail on the exterior obviously is correct. But there was no reason (at least none related to realism) to put those strips on the inside. And certainly no reason for them to have wood grain engraved on them.

Here's my theory (which probably matches what that former Monogram employee told me all those years ago). The original masters had the rib detail only on the exterior. A test run established that the raised areas (the "peaks" over the wing ribs) were too thick, resulting in sink marks on the exterior. So somebody glued those strips of wood to the master, thereby making the molded parts a little thinner and eliminating the sink marks.

I don't know that for a fact, but it makes sense. I'll be interested to see if the "new" Revell kit still has the "wood grain" detail. I'll bet it does, (And I'll bet the Tamiya one doesn't. I suspect the new CAD kit design programs don't allow mistakes like that.)

Utter trivia. But kind of interesting.

In the armor world, Tamiya are thought of as very well engineered kits that are usually accurate. Often called "box shakers" they are easy to build and give a good representation of the subject. They are also very expensive.

Dragon produces "graduate level" models that are often highly accurate and extremely complex with error filled instructions.

I often think of them as being aimed at different types of modelers. Tamiya seems to market towards casual modelers with a good deal of disposable income who value ease of build. Dragon markets towards the super accuracy crowd and knows many of them won't build the kit straight out of box and will make good use of the extra parts many Dragon kits include. Dragon Smart Kits are their attempt to grab some of the ease of build modelers.

In all of this, you're missing one basic fact; Revell and Hornby (Airfix) sell direct to the retailer, Japanese and Chinese manufacturers have to go through an importer/middle man. This adds an extra layer of cost to the product. If you don't believe it, look at the price of Tamiya and Hasegawa kits in Japan, and compare with what you're being asked to cough up.

I always shake my head, sadly, when I read comments about "arrogant" manufacturers over-pricing their products because they can get away with it; companies who think like that will always go under. They set a price at which they can make a living, and you'd be surprised at just how small the margins really are.

If you're looking for scapegoats, look for the middle men, because some of them add obscene amounts to the price of a kit.

I used to work in a hobby shop; that was a long time ago, and I'm sure some things have changed in the business since then. But one big fact is unchanged, so far as I know. Model kit manufacturers do not sell direct to retailers.

With a tiny handful of exceptions (e.g., some aftermarket parts that were made by customers), everything in that hobby shop came through a distributor. We regularly did business with three or four domestic distributors, who carried Revell's, Monogram's, and other big American manufacturers'  products. Then there were American distributors of European kits (Heller, Airfix, etc.} and some bringing in kits from East Asia. I don't think that situation has changed much.

Scarcely any plastic kits are made in the U.S. any more. The vast majority are made in either China, Japan, or the Czech Republic. I'm not sure about Airfix, but almost all of the big names have their actual molds and manufacturing machinery in Asia.

There are plenty of middle men in the hobby business, and they undoubtedly add to the prices of the merchandise. And I imagine Revell does send cartons of kits to retail giants like Squadron (which also sells wholesale to hobby shops). But hobby retailers don't normally buy their stuff directly from manufacturers.