do you thing parts count on some models is too high

After resting in peace for six months, I command you o-thread....Arise!  Hehe thread necromancy.

I think the parts count in most models is just right, being an armor builder myself I can't relate all that much. I think that models should be more detailed and all kits should have at least a partial interior.

O ye, i save mine to. And my spares box is huge. I have used the odd parts, such as i plan on useing left over Dragon 251 parts on Tamiya 251's. So they come in handy now and again.

Bish

I don't mind a hight parts count if i use them all. What i don't like is the kits that come with lots of parts you don't use because they are for other versions. Surely these could be removed, especially when its a large part of a sprue.

Yes, it agrivates me, too, when I have to pay for plastic that's not needed. But, I often save those extra bits for a kit-bash or two. That's just me, and I'm sire other opinions will rise.

I don't mind a hight parts count if i use them all. What i don't like is the kits that come with lots of parts you don't use because they are for other versions. Surely these could be removed, especially when its a large part of a sprue.

I don't mind a high parts count unless the parts in question are just ridiculously impractical.

The biggest PITA parts I can think of were seperate armor blocks on the commanders cuppola of a 1/72 PST German KV-1.The parts needed to be trimmed,but there was no way to secure them for filing/sanding.Too damn tiny.

Hi,DURR; I will probably be tarred and feathered and run out of town ,but, I think in some cases there are not enough seperate parts in some kits .There are kits where the addition of seperate parts lends a greater look of authenticity to someones work.I for one DO agree that 1/700 scale is a difficult one to work in. I did part of the P.E. for a GLEAVES class in 1/700 ,what a nightmare. I had a headache for two days after that one.There are armor and aircraft as well as autos that could benefit from a higher parts count only if it enhances the finished product and does not interfere with a smooth build. I did "TESTORS " DODGE CHARGER and some of the under hood parts could,ve been molded on. As it was ,they did,even though they were in the right place ,interfere with final assembly.I do believe that somewhere a line should be drawn.Better moldings,or,more parts.I go with the first .      tankerbuilder

Durr: I like a lot of parts the more the marrier it helps old farts like me (63) keep a sharp mine and good eyes so my doctor tells me.      ACESES               

tankboy51

 I work on a concrete basement floor, so no carpet to fret over. The few parts that drop just bounce a little then are recovered in quick order.

I really need to take your advice. the carpet monster has been stired up lately, and it's caused me some lost time trying to find a part (or trying to scratch-build a replacement. Not fun when I'm working on a 1/350 scale aircraft, where I could loose the whole wing)

No, high parts counts don't bother me at all.   Small plastic parts are cool, now small photo-etch is very different.  Some is okay, but some of these little buggers is just overkill.  Track links aren't a problem usually,  I can get a set on an average tank in about 2 hours, more if I have to cut them off the sprue and then clean them.  I think the most challenging set I've encounterd is the  Bronco A-13 cruiser kit indies.  Very small and fiddly, but I got 'em on!   I don't mind extra parts and as long as the fit is good "Overengineered " kits don't phase me. If I'm paying over $50 for a kit, I want my monies worth.  I work on a concrete basement floor, so no carpet to fret over. The few parts that drop just bounce a little then are recovered in quick order.

  I remember the line from "Amadeus" when Mozart  is criticized for "having too many notes" in his opera.  His response is "it has as many notes as it needs.  No more, no less."  So let us enjoy the work of the artists who design these model kits.  Let not our impatience detract us from the joy of kit building, and take no umbrage at the quest for model detail and the opportunity to sniff glue!

Keep on snipping,

Double D

for me?  the 100 part kit would win, 100 times over

A because its to easy to place pieces in the wrong place, or upside down, or slight asque when you have a thoulsand little pe pieces and such.

I also would never finish a kit that large because those small pieces are so frustrating I end up just saying screw this. 

the smaller one would go alot faster and be more fun, and thats a big thing ot, atleast for me.

Heck im doing an Emhar 1/35th whippet 3 sprues worth of parts and its a nice kit.  BUT when I got it it didnt have the tracks it was suposto have, it had a box of after market tracks, instead of, like the instructions, being 3 pieces, it was 2 pieces per track link, im not looking forward to putting them together, let alone cleaning them up...

smeagol the vile

Which do you think should win, knowing our respective skill levels.

And that is the key - the respective skill levels of the modeler.  Your analogy does not work because you are comparing yourself to someone who you seem to feel is the superior modeler.

How about this... you build two kits... the one with 100 parts and the one with a 1000 parts.  So skill level is irrelevant.  Which do you think would score higher?

Don't get me wrong, Smeag.  On the face of it, I agree with you.  Parts count, per se, should not matter.  However, one of the benefits of a kit with a higher part count is that it will tend to be more detailed.  So, for example, it might have photo-etch tool clamps rather than the molded on kind.  Or fender skirts, or whatever. 

All that being said, I do still agree that there is a 'fine line' between detail and overkill...

What I am saying is that the number of parts should not have anything to do with it, it should be the skill of the builder.  part count construction is only one thing.  Lets say I put a tank up there I spent months on cause of a billion little parts.  Its clean, not weathered cause im not that good at it yet but it looks nice, then Doog enters one of his tanks that lets say, was a kit that only had 5 sprues of parts.  Which do you think should win, knowing our respective skill levels.

smeagol the vile

The complexity shouldnt matter at all, the end result is what should count.

With all due respect, in a previous post you said: "if anything more parts makes the assembly more difficult and gives chance for more mistakes". Which means that a properly built complex kit should earn some credit to the builder besides other things. Also, I tend to think that someone who loves modelling to the degree of building a 1000 pcs kit must be an ok painter too, else s/he can always get a friend to do the painting for her/him; opposite wouldn't be that easy; building a 1000 piece kit for a friend?

Cem.

smeagol the vile

The complexity shouldnt matter at all, the end result is what should count.

If I see someone with a modern kit with a billion little Pe parts and everything, and then see someone that had a 1980s vintage kit, and they both were done up and looked about the same, Id give it to the older kit.

But I think that is the point, Smeag - if you have a kit with PE and a kit built OOB (one of those early 80's ones) odds are they won't look about the same (assuming the builders paint skills are comparable).  Simply because of the fine detail provided by a PE part, that kit will look 'better'.  So, for some builders, PE is a must.  If you go to a show and see an 80's kit built OOB that looks as good as a 'modern' kit with PE and aftermarket, I'd suggest the difference is the skill level of the builder and that person should be given the edge.  But for people serious about competing, where the skill levels are already pretty high, I think PE and other aftermarket doo-dads become important.

smeagol the vile

Complexity has going out of control.  Its not even the tank kits that bugs me its like...  Figure kits where you have sub assemblies for the head and torso and stuff.  Thats NOT required and doesnt do anything except make us work more, alot more.

I'm not sure which figure sets you are talking about, but are people buying them?  If they are selling, then the feedback the company is getting is that the builders like what they are offering.

The complexity shouldnt matter at all, the end result is what should count.

If I see someone with a modern kit with a billion little Pe parts and everything, and then see someone that had a 1980s vintage kit, and they both were done up and looked about the same, Id give it to the older kit.

Complexity has going out of control.  Its not even the tank kits that bugs me its like...  Figure kits where you have sub assemblies for the head and torso and stuff.  Thats NOT required and doesnt do anything except make us work more, alot more.

smeagol the vile

You could spend all day putting them on, but someone who spent that much time painting and weathering it to perfection is gona have a nicer kit.

Hi smeagol,

I'll have to disagree with you here; for me, if you don't have a reasonably solid basis all your weathering is just a waste of time ... paint tin in gold and it's still tin ... or, paint a Mazda all you want; it's not going to be a Ferrari.

Last week I started building a Trumpeter 15 cm. Howitzer, a very modest kit with about 200 parts. On the other hand the Griffon PE detail set have way more parts (6 sizeable frets that is) than the actual kit. In the beginning I thought "ok then, I won't use some of the PE" but after I started the job, man, what a difference! You just cannot beat that with fewer parts no matter how well engineered the kit is.

On the other hand, especially in a competition the complexity and difficulty of the kit should matter. But if you're not going to enter your kit in a competition and you are happy with the result, that's all it matters. All in all, its a personal preference; some might like fewer parts and some might like more.

Cem.

smeagol the vile

It also depends on what the parts are for, if the whole thing is going to be painted in the same camo who cares if the little hook or whatnot is molded in, but if it is something like the tools on the side of a tank they shouldnt be molded on for ease of painting.  but on that note they shouldnt all be seperate items either.

Totally agree!

I build for fun and relaxation so I prefer simpler models BUT in some instances more pieces make the job easier. Like in the 1/72 Wyver from Trumpeter I just finished the main wheels are made of 3 parts and makes painting them very easy

Yea, thats nuts, I couldnt imagine trying to put together all o those track links

Are kits over-engineered, now that may be an understatement. Thankfully most kit brands realize that the majority of modelers don't want something that has a part count hitting the 4-digits. And for those who love the high part counts, their are the AM parts and some kit brands that still love to really cram those sprues in the box. Case in point, Cyber-Hobby.

Awhile back I purchased a 1/35 Cyber-Hobby Raketenwefer auf Fahrgestelle Pz. IV thinking it would be a neat one of a king build considering I hadn't seen anyone build it. (That probably has something to do with the fact the kit has an extremely high part count I only learned about after I bought it.)

Long story short, here are the numbers.... total 1,339 parts (728 parts in grey styrene, 293 photo-etched metal, 288 "Magic Track" tracks, 25 clear styrene, 4 pre-bent brass, and 1 twisted steel wire). Yes, it's still sitting in the stash.

I wouldn't mind giving the kit a shot (I can't afford any of the high-tech kits, so even if it's more complicated, I dream of being able to get a kit or two like that)

Ya know, whats even the point?  You could spend all day putting them on, but someone who spent that much time painting and weathering it to perfection is gona have a nicer kit.  In a competition Id put money on them not giving you an award just because the kit was complicated, if anything more parts makes the assembly more difficult and gives chance for more mistakes

Only individual nuts will attempt that kit!

Someone in the armor forum is putting together a Pz. IV B and it has individual nuts too attach.

Overkill.

Phil_H

Try HobbyBoss's 1/48 T-34s - there's about 400 parts in something just slightly bigger than two packs of cards.

You know Phil,it might have had a lot of parts,but I didn't find that kit to be over engineered or cumbersome,I guess a lot of the parts were the tracks.That was a pretty good kit to build.

AKA Raiderfan2779  TnT

In all honesty, I don't think I've ever taken notice of actual parts count.  The only time I notice is when I go from building a 1/48 plane to a 1/72 plane.  It goes from taking two months to build, to two days.  I don't mind that, so much .  Otherwise, I'm just assuming they're giving you the number of parts to build the kit you purchased.  I enjoy scratchbuilding, but if I don't have to scratch every piece of missing detail, I'm not going to be upset.

Another time I noticed is when I built an Eduard FW-190.  There were so many parts left over, I thought I did something wrong.  Turns out, they include parts that will work on future releases, but not necessarily on the kit you're building.

-Fred

Try HobbyBoss's 1/48 T-34s - there's about 400 parts in something just slightly bigger than two packs of cards.

Meh... high parts count helps keep me out of bars and out of jail.  

Agree big time! Some models have way too many parts. I have been scared off by many Dragon kits when I see over 600 parts.