Based upon your experience

QUOTE: Originally posted by renarts Matt, An apprentice? That has to be one of the more positive and constructive steps I have seen in this hobby. To establish an apprentice/journeyman relationship with someone to help a neophyte is a wonderful experience. I applaud you.

I was about to say no he isn't my modelling apprentice, as he is actually my electrical apprentice, but he sort of is my modelling apprentice too. I have helped him through each stage of his first kit, lent him tools etc and every couple of weeks he comes around and we have a long modelling session together. My main goal was to ensure that his first couple of kits were something that he was proud of and inspired him to continue with the hobby. I will be sure to post pictures of his M24 Chaffee when he finishes it soon.

It is funny, but I learn a lot by answering his questions too, as saying things aloud often forces me to put my money where my mouth is and not cut corners!
I sort of wish someone was around to help me when i started too, as the fact that I had nobody to share the hobby with contributed to me giving up in the first place.

No bench cleaning or indys though Mike, he figures he has to do enough of that sort of stuff during the day!

Personally, a review has never really been something that I'll look at BEFORE I buy a kit. I buy kits strictly out of personal interest. If there is a choice of kits, I'll generally go for the more detailed, and this is one forte of the review. Even then, it's mostly an informative comment to me rather than a decisive word of kits.

Hmmm.. this is a tough one for me cuz I am forever reading reviews of a kit before I buy.
I guess I was to buy a kit without checking into it first I would go for name recognition first. I know I have passed a lot of good kits because I never heard of them. That being said there are exceptions... of which I am still a little miffed about. I bought the Ardennes King Tiger a while back and to my suprise, tucked inside were copies of the 1970s tracks from Big T's original tiger.......shame...

Subject matter has a handle on it too. I buy stuff that looks cool. I have been building off and on for 10 years and have not built one single Panzer IV mark anything.... (excluding stugs) Not because I don't like them but because there are other models that appeal to me more.. (ps I have a several Pz IVs in my stash so don't think they are out of mind.

What do you get for the money? Apples to Oranges.... Take Tamiyas and Dragons Tiger IIs. I have both. Will I buy another Tamiya Tiger II .....no! Not unless I just want to spend 50 bucks on a kit and then run out and spend 30 more on tracks. I prefer Indi links anyway so DML kits are a natural choice for me. Plus they are cheaper...

Off the soap box now.... Great topic Mike....

Matt,
An apprentice? That has to be one of the more positive and constructive steps I have seen in this hobby. To establish an apprentice/journeyman relationship with someone to help a neophyte is a wonderful experience. I applaud you.

Kind of where I was going with this, and hoping that as newcomers read these responses they will have an understanding and some info unavailiable sans a mentor. To be able to go somewhere or explain what to look for is always much more valid than brand loyalty. (Ref: ausf's post regarding the M4. )

Now...does he do all the cool apprentice stuff like clean your bench and assemble indy's for you?

Oh how I wish I had someone like that to help me along. The trials and failures I could have avoided......

Mike

To me certain things the manufacturer has gone out of their way to do make all the difference...If one has detail options as opposed to the other, that leads me to believe more time was spent in design and I would chose that, even if that kit required more cleaning or prep.
Nothing I have encountered in my return to modeling has cheesed me off worse than Tamiya's 1/16 M4. Spend close to five bills on a model and I would expect some working hatches. Nothing that can't be overcome, I opened them, but it just doesn't tell me they went the extra mile for my cash.
I think most of us, experienced or not could just 'sense' the quality of kit in it's presentation, look and feel of the plastic and overall condition.
You open a Revell AG 1/72 and can't wait to start, You open an Airfix 1/72 and wretch.

Great question Mike. You always post interesting stuff!

I can comment from a unique perspective on this, as recently I was in a very similar posistion to what you described. My apprentice and I recently bought some kits off a collector really cheap. Among the kits we bought were two T-34/85's, one was from Lee, and the other was from Maquette. I am a reasonably experienced modeller, particular compared to my friend, who only started two months ago, but I have only just returned to the hobby, and my previous experience was with Tamiya only. Both kits cost the same, and we were to have one each, which we plan to build together. I had heard of the brands, but knew nothing about them. So we sat down and looked at the kits. despite being the very same vehicle, they were very different beasts. The Maquette had impressive detail, including nice cast texture, movable suspension, an engine, nice weld seams, but the detail wasn't very crisp in places, and the parts had a lot of flash, and the mineroller it came with had bad mold seperation movement. The Lee seemed a simpler mould, nice and crisp, but lacked some of the finer details. The hull was in two parts, where as the Maquette was in six, a trend that continues throughout the models. The Lee had some quite reasonable one piece tracks, whereas the Maquette had some tidy indys, nicely moulded. Both had some options, and few accesories. The Lee had adequate paint and decal directions, and clear instructions.The Maquette was rather abysmal in these areas.

Interestingly enough, the choice was easy. I had to build the Maquette, as with my experience, I should be able to make a good looking kit out of it, albeit with a lot of hard work involved, and I think it will challenge me, whereas my friend would have quite likely got frustrated with it. The Lee, with it's one piece tracks, simplified construction and good instructions, will be a lot more enjoyable for him, and will still build into a nice tank, but perhaps not quite as impressive as the Maquette.

I found the whole procedure quite interesting, as did my friend, and even though I get the shudders looking at the sprues of mine (I hate cleaning up parts!) I think we will have fun.

Hope you found this insight.....well, ......insightful. And not too boring.

funny had this discussion with a potential newbie last night. a coworker wants to begin building and has been picking my limited knowledge as to what to look for. i gave him my opinion on armor kits and a/c kits and gave him what i thought are some good kits that will let him enjoy his first build without too much trouble. i also told him, based upon his questions, which kits and companies i thought he should avoid for a while. i used many of the points above to pick the kits.
funny how i didnt even think about it, i just relied upon a basic knowledge of the products available and went from there. btw he says he should be purchasing the kit and supplies soon. "another one bites the dust" plastic dust that is.

joe

Thats exactly what I'm asking J-hulk.
The idea here being that this is a question of what criteria you would use to make your selection based upon your experience and not knowing anything about the kit other than what you see laid out before you. Sort of a foundation of criteria for those to come who do not have the benefit of your experience.

If I wanted to do a ship model, I couldn't tell you if tamiya was better than skybow or revell and have no experience in that media to know what to look for to make a good build vs a life long quest to make two seams line up. Thus I am on common ground with the new modeler when it comes to choices.

We take for granted the depth of our own experiences and trials and tribulations that have developed the skills that we have today that allow us to select how much or not, work and effort we want to put into a piece. We have pre-conceived notions or expectations of waht obstacles we may have to overcome and what if any additions we will have to make. Something that someone new to a genre or new to modeling does not have the benefit of.

To make an educated and informed decision based upon real criteria and not base it upon slick box art or clever marketing rhetoric is half the battle. Certain characteristics will obviously point to a kit that is well designed and ultiimately a joy to work on. i.e. if there is little flash and crisp accurate detail, with comprehensive, clear and concise instructions it may be a good indicator that this kit is well designed and will result in a positive, rewarding expereince. Where as if there is poor detail, lots of flash, structural and material defects, poor instructions and little or no info, I just paid my monies worth to pay for an artist to sell me an attractive piece of box art containing plastic garbage. Might make some hesitate to delve into model building again.

But besides all that it also lets us find lilttle known treasures where we might not expect them. If we knew what to look for. Allowing us not only to advance the hobby but our own expereince and repetoire as well. Look at Tasca for instance. A relative newcomer in armor but with a gem of a kit in their Panzer II Luchs. Pricey but an informed consumer, knowing what to look for may justify that price because of the wealth of detail and accuracy available to him.

It is not to say that guys like Blackwolf, or myself for that matter, will not enjoy the "old school" method of model building, back when model building meant just that, but that we (or anyone) can have the knowledge to make the decision and make it on sound principle to have a more complete kit. It is the lessons learned and techniques aquired as experienced modelers that allow us to look at any kit and come up with something worth while (or not, there are always failures) but to insure the future of the hobby and to continue to garner neophytes they must have positive experiences up front. It also lets us know what to demand of our dealers to improve our own commodity of plastic and resin.

Thanks for the input guys, keep it comming. There are some very good points and valuble references being presented here.

Mike

nicholma, i believe you have hit the nail on the head. your summarization of what to do is well done.

joe

OK so "ModellingforReal" of Ubecistan and "Styrene Unlimited" of China have just produced a kit of the 2004 McLaren MP4/19 in 1/20th what do I look for?

Firstly what is the box art like? Does it have actual pictures of the real car, does it have a cutaway sketch or is it just a stylisated drawing ?

Looking inside what are the instructions like? How comprehensive are they, do they clearly show where prices go together or are there just arrows vaguely indicating where pieces glue to each other? Are there body or decal options and are there clear instructions as to where they are used and in what combination? Are there actual photos of the car to assist in determining decal and part placement? How comprehensive is the decal set (ie in this case does it have the cigarette decals or the PC decals)? Does it have decals for the carbon fibre areas of the car? How is the dash represented - decals or raised detail for painting?

Now we get to the collection of bits. Is everything bagged aprropriately? Is it a multi-media kit and if so is the "multi-media" appropriate (eg p/e is not always the best medium as some parts need to be in 3d not the 2d that p/e conveys)? How much flash is there? How extensive are the mould lines, how crisp is the casting, how thick are the feed tags? What are the tyres like? Are parts moulded in scale eg are the wing end plates thin or the suspension the right section? How much detail is moulded in and how much is to be built? What are the painting references like (how extensive) and what model paint do they refer to?

Do both look the same size or is there a size descrepancy (assuming that its possible to compare say the chassis or bodyworks)? And which just looks nicer and more buildable? Finally how would it compare to Tamiya or Haseqawa which are the industry benchmarks as far as I'm concerned (I haven't built any Trumpeter yet) in quality and price. And of course all this would take about 3-5 minutes!!!

I would buy them both....if I know nothing of the two companies, what do I have to go by to judge? I give them both a shot....if the parts have good detail they are in.....if the fit is decent, it's in.....if the directions are decent enough then the company is in......oh look at me, I just described Tamiya.....hehehe...silly me!! LOL

Seriously though, if I know nothing but what everyone says about a company, I tend to pick up a cheap kit from that company and thumb through it myself and form an opinion based on my own skills and techniques. Tamiya, so far has nailed it down pretty good for me, though Trumpeter is right there with them on certain levels. Revell Monogram frustrate me to know end, because the kits never seem to work right.......Tamiya is awesome, 'cause I find that it is me who never seems to work right!!! LOL

with that stipulation, two unknown companies, i would agree the detail would be the selling point.

joe

I guess fidelity of detail and aesthetics is my thing. A good example of a comparison of two like-kits would be the Hasegawa and Tamiya P-51D's.

They both have their pros and cons, but for me the pros of the Hasegawa kit outweigh those of the Tamiya kit; even though the Tamiya kit is, overall, a much easier build.

I feel that the Hasegawa kit, built SOB, has better detail than Tamiya's, especially in the areas of the cockpit, gear legs, gear wells and gear doors. (even though the wells are too shallow) And the canopy and windscreen on the Tamiya kit are, in my opinion, a damn shame. They're entirely too thick and although the idea of the two piece hood is good in theory, in practice it's a joke and looks horrible. This alone ruins the kit for me. If only I got along better with vacuform canopies...

The main issue I have with the Hasegawa kit is the fact that the flaps cannot be dropped without a bit of cutting and reconstruction. But that's not a problem for me, as will become apparent a bit farther down this post. (If anyone gets that far...)

For me, unlike many folks, price is a non-issue. I do tend to grab stuff inexpensively whenever I can, but I have no problem in picking up a kit for retail if it's something I want to build.

As to buildability; ease of assembly, fit problems and what not, I'm really not daunted by a whole lot out there. I've been building for twenty years and I know my way around an aircraft model kit and, to a lesser degree, a military vehicle. So that's not much of an issue for me either, and I'll explain why...

When I first got into the hobby, the hot-sh** kits were Monogram. Recessed panel lines were still the exception, and the so-called norm of the shake-'n-bake kit was a long way off yet.

Don't get me wrong, there are no perfect kits, even today. But those which were available over the course of my first ten years of modeling are what many of today's newer modelers scowl at as being obsolete, ill-fitting and, for some, simply not worth the time. That's the kind of stuff I 'grew up' with, and 'matured' with as a modeler. You had to really work on most of those kits to get a good result. Things didn't always line up as well as they do on some of today's kits.

Nowadays, kits seem to be judged largely by whether or not you're gonna need to use a tiny bit of filler here and there. OH MY GOODNESS! YOU HAD TO USE FILLER?!?!? Back in the day, as the kids say, (HEY! I was a poet and wasn't aware of the fact...) we took it for granted that we were gonna need some filler on almost every kit we built.

We also didn't have the proliferation of brass and resin fixins which you see today, either. White metal was the thing back then, and the selection was pretty limited. If you wanted to have a superdetailed cockpit, you had to scratch it.

So when I hear or read some folks today complaining about kits from companies 'X' and 'Y' because they didn't fit all that great or the detail was sparse, I just laugh to myself and am glad that I grew up as more of a model builder and not simply a model assembler.

I've become lazy, though, and will often times ditch an older kit if a new one becomes available. In some cases, as with the Monogram and Tamiya Do 335's, it's a no brainer. With others, like DML and Tamiya Fw 190's, it's a tough call. So, in the end, I wound up keeping most of my DML/Dragon and Trimaster 190's because they're good kits. Still grabbed a few Tamiya 190's though.

So, after all that, when it all boils down, my answer, in a nutshell, would have to be:

I'll build just about any kit so long as it's something I want to build.

And so long as it's 48th. Although I'm slowly making an allowance for braille scale...


Fade to Black...

QUOTE: Originally posted by Foster7155 Provided that both kits are the same price, the bottom line is details! Which kit provides those little extra's that make a great value-to-cost ratio. When I say details, I'm speaking of clean, crisp bolt heads and rivits, clean joints and seams where they should be, proper thicknesses on parts, excellent tracks, maybe some photo-etch thrown in and of course, no obvious major problems. Even if the kit with the better details has some minor problems with injector pin marks or a little flash, it will still get my money over the kit with no marks or flash and poor details.

That pretty much covers it.
With that being said the only other factor that may sway me is the extras like figures and stowage.

I am not a "more experienced" modeler, though I have been building them for a number of years.

I agree with J-Hulk's list, but I would add one more. I really like having each sprue in a separate bag. I hate scratches on clear parts! [I do enough damage myself.] All else equal, I'd take the one that is best protected.

Like Foster7155, I'd probably end up buying one of each kit anyway.

To me, if I want to model the subject bad enough, then I will find ways around the defects in the kit. However, I will not pay large sums of money for mold defects, and do go by what the general concensus has about the kit. I also look at the instructions for any weird assemblies.

Lots of great advice here fellas, but I think most of ya'll might be missing Mike's main question.

Unless I'm completely mistaken (entirely possible), the hypothetical scenario here is that you are presented with two kits, and you know NOTHING about either manufacturer. Never heard of 'em. Subject is not in question. It's definitely a subject you want to build. So, just by examing the contents of what is contained in those two boxes (and the boxes themselves, I suppose!), what criteria would be important to you in making the decision to purchase one over the other?

Mike, is that what you were asking?

By the way, I'm not an expert, either.

as i give my opinion please remember i am not an expert on this.

i look at kits for these factors:
1. subject-is it something i want to do. how bad do i want to build it.
2. history of company-my knowledge of different companies is limited to what i have heard but i would choose a kit from a higher quality company rather than a low end mfg.
3. satisfaction-this is complicated. when i choose a kit i want to find something that i can gain the satisfaction i have done something worthwhile. example - soon i will be purchasing four models to be built for others. a sherman, a corsair, a b-17, and a beechcraft v-tail. i want to find the kits that will aford me the opportunity to build a satisfying replica. not every time is a "shake the box remove built kit" type of model the best. i am considering the revell 1/48 b-17g because it will afford me the opportunity to do more detail work. to me this is a big thing as it will be for a friend to give to his aunt.

but that is what i look for.

joe

The only things you can really tell about a kit just by looking in the box are:
1. The quality of the molding (this includes level of detail).
2. The quality of the decals.
3. The quality of the instructions.
4. The quality of the "contents" (optional parts for variations, etc)

Assuming that the subject is exactly what I'm looking for and I have never heard of either company, those would be the four deciding factors for me, with the quality of the molding being the most important.

For me, it always comes down to subject first. Two 1/35 Leopolds? Meh. A 1/48 CH-46? Now I'm interested. If some one started cranking out modern USMC kits, or a Stryker kit, I'd probably grab it up even if it was junk, just to have something resembling that piece of gear. After subject, then quality, then price. But that's just me.

It's the model subject your doing, every kit manufacturer use different systems to manufacturer their kit range, besides how would you improve your modelling skills. I built a 48 B-1b Lancer once, when I took it out of the box it had more bows the Robin Hood, . After building it I got hassled for 6 months to sell it.

Not all model kits fit like a glove.

Rob.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Foster7155 Good Question! Let's say two companies that I've never heard of before both release brand-new, retooled US M3A2 Halftracks in 1/35 scale (it's my fantasy...let me go with it!). First, they better be released on the same day because if they're not, the first one gets my bucks! But let's assume they both come out on the same day. If I can afford them (and oh, how I can!), I would buy both unless one looked just plain bad! So we have to further assume that I can only buy one...period (the pain, oh, the pain). Provided that both kits are the same price, the bottom line is details! Which kit provides those little extra's that make a great value-to-cost ratio. When I say details, I'm speaking of clean, crisp bolt heads and rivits, clean joints and seams where they should be, proper thicknesses on parts, excellent tracks, maybe some photo-etch thrown in and of course, no obvious major problems. Even if the kit with the better details has some minor problems with injector pin marks or a little flash, it will still get my money over the kit with no marks or flash and poor details. That being said, if this really does happen, I'll have four more kits to add to my stash pile...TWO of each! Robert

That's what I would look for also.

Good Question!

Let's say two companies that I've never heard of before both release brand-new, retooled US M3A2 Halftracks in 1/35 scale (it's my fantasy...let me go with it!). First, they better be released on the same day because if they're not, the first one gets my bucks! But let's assume they both come out on the same day.

If I can afford them (and oh, how I can!), I would buy both unless one looked just plain bad! So we have to further assume that I can only buy one...period (the pain, oh, the pain).

Provided that both kits are the same price, the bottom line is details! Which kit provides those little extra's that make a great value-to-cost ratio. When I say details, I'm speaking of clean, crisp bolt heads and rivits, clean joints and seams where they should be, proper thicknesses on parts, excellent tracks, maybe some photo-etch thrown in and of course, no obvious major problems. Even if the kit with the better details has some minor problems with injector pin marks or a little flash, it will still get my money over the kit with no marks or flash and poor details.

That being said, if this really does happen, I'll have four more kits to add to my stash pile...TWO of each!

Robert

- nil to very little flash
- recessed panel lines
- adaptablity to PE parts (esp in ships)
- detail of cockpit (esp for a/c cos I dont do cockpit replacements)
- the thickness/sturdiness of the main parts (eg hull, fuselage, warped/brittle/etc)
- detail of little parts (eg BB gun barrels, gun ports, landing gear struts & wheel wells)
- kit modifications (eg waterline v full hull ship; movable flaps, etc)
- colour and detail or flaws in the decals (do I need to buy aftermarkets or do I want a subsitute pattern)
- past experience with similar model company (eg Tamiya vs Revell)
- cost (eg which ones cheaper? Can I buy both? Can I buy one now and lay-buy the other?)
- what paints are needed (eg Do I already have those.)
- am I interested in this model (eg subject? do I have the time to build it now or can I wait?)

there's heaps more, but others probably want to answer this !

dont ask me why I bolded my answers

First of all, I am not what you may consider as an "experienced" modeler.

1.) Subject - Normally the first thing that draws me into buying a kit is the subject of the kit. In my mind I already have a list of kits that I want to have.

2.) Preference of Model Company-If two or more companies offer the same kit then my preferences as far as model companies would set in say I always believe that Tamiya is the best so if I have two kits of the same subject from two different companies, I would normally get the one from my preferred company.

3.) Price in relation to Quality- In case the kit from my preferred comany is much much more expensive but the quality of both kits are almost the same, I may go with the other

Originally posted by renarts. 4.) Quality - In case I really don't know the companies and the LHS owner allows me to check, I would look into the quality of the molding and of course the level of details. BTW, our LHS here allows us customers to check the kits before buying. Reply renarts Member since April 2003 From: Sunny Florida Based upon your experience Posted by renarts on Tuesday, May 25, 2004 11:26 PM This is a question more for the experienced modelers on the forum. But geared to provide info to the neophytes (either to modeling in general or to a new subject matter). Given your experience and "portfolio" of builds. Without reading a review, talking to your friends, lurking the forum, what would you look for in a kit that would make you buy or build it over any other similar kit. i.e. 2 companies produce a panzer IV, Focke Wolfe, F4, Bradley, whatever. They are 2 companies you have never heard of and are new players in the field. What do you look at in those kits, never seen before or built that would satisfy your urge to buy one kit over the other? Store owner gladly lets you examine the contents before you buy. (stop laughing, its a hypothetical) You have to choose one or the other. Mike Mike "Imagination is the dye that colors our lives" Marcus Aurellius A good friend will come and bail you out of jail...but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!" Reply JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login Register SEARCH FORUMS FREE NEWSLETTER SIGN UP By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy. FORUMS PRODUCT REVIEWS READER GALLERY HOW TO VIDEOS SHOP ABOUT US FREE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER SIGN UP By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy. More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy