DoogsATX
I think all the replies so far kind of prove my point. There's a lot of affection on these forums for the Revellogram kits, so I don't really get where this perception that so many hate them comes from.
Yet, in every thread that invariably turns to singing the praises of Revellogram stuff, there's always some permutation of "everyone bags on Revellogram stuff, but...".
This thread isn't intended to bag on Revellogram. Far from it. More to point out the disconnect between that perception that so many people hate them, and the reality as I see it on the forum, which is pretty much the exact opposite.
I don't think it's so much that Monogram and Revell get bashed immediately and frequently here in this forum, Doogs. Rather, it's more of a feeling that those of us have, who are old enough to have built those kits when we were kids, and it's built over the past 30 years, as developments in the hobby have produced really nicely engineered kits, of subjects that neither Monogram nor Revel ever did (though some other companies did, eg, Lindberg's F11C and Aurora's F4B-4, in 1/48). It's natural, of course, for people who embrace new things to discard the old, just as it's natural for those who like the old things to defend them.
And I concede, when I was a kid, in the 70s, building models, I became aware of Tamiya and Hasegawa, but they were out of reach for my paperboy wages, and a little intimidating, with their finer details and higher parts counts. And they were only available to me at the hobby shop, while Monogram and Revell were sold elsewhere. Almost all of the Revell and Monogram kits that I built, I received as birthday and Christmas presents. So, the upshot is that I built a lot of Monogram and Revell kits, and Aurora, fewer Airfix, and no Japanese-made kits, back in the day.
Fast-forward to 2000 and a rekindled interest in scale modeling, encouraged because my toy soldier club merged its meetings with the local IPMS club. With the Internet, I was able to see the great variety of kits and info available, so much broader than what I had in 1982, and I was excited by Accurate Miniatures, and Classic Airframes, and I have a stash of kits in the subjects I like to build. But I also found myself looking longingly at the kits I built as a kid, too, and thinking--as so many nostalgia builders do--that I'd like to tackle those kits again and apply techniques I'd learned since the first time around. So, I have a pretty good stash of Monogram aircraft in 1/48, and Revell aircraft in 1/72 (haven't really gotten back into 1/32, because of a lack of space), both used kits bought on the secondary market, and new boxings still available from Revell-Monogram (for the record, it was Monogram that bought Revell, but because of the international recognition, Revell got first billing in the newly merged brand. Cf Thomas Graham's books on Monogram and Revell).
As to looking down at those who prefer kits with all the detail, and aftermarket, to scratchbuilding, well, I like to think that I have a healthier attitude about it, that we each should build what we like, the way we like. Personally, I like to see if I can reproduce the detail with scratchbuilding, especially because of guys like Shep Paine, who achieved such results in a time before there was aftermarket. And I believe in stretching and exercising those skills. But I recognize that it takes skill to work with resin, and PE, and, I still can't use an airbrush to save my life. So, for those who think they're better than the others because they use one or the other, well, shame on them, because it's a hobby, after all. But I think the number of those folks is relatively small, though, too, even if one or the other might be relatively loud. Most guys in the hobby recognize it for what it is and enjoy seeing all kinds of work.
Good topic, Doogs, and good thoughts from the respondents!
Best regards,
Brad