why can't they make accurate models

Well, IMHO, I think it has a lot to do with engineering. Maybe one company could go out and actually use the real thing to measure, find details, and study, while another company had to rely on pictures or measurments that had already been recorded and might be off or be a typo? They probably end up re-using old molds for what parts they can, and if its close enough, then they go with and figure most people won't notice, or it won't matter because they won't know until after they have bought the kit and put it together, so then its to late to take it back and complain.

Joe, is there some particular kit that blanks you off?

Joe, They can make accurate models, they just choose not to!
Companies like Accurate Miniatures (the name says it all) go out and measure and re-measure and re-re-measure the actual prototype and then box up a model kit that says TBF-1 and sell it. then they change molds and stuff  remeasure another prototype and sell another kit as the TBF-2. They sell the product to make a profit, and have to charge more to do so because of the work involved.
Another company, say company X takes measurements from a print or other sources, completely accurate, and then make a kit and sell it as a TBF "as flown at MIDWAY". Then they may even rebox the same kit and sell it as a TBM or later or earlier model. Accurate, not really, but the price is resonable and there is all that after market stuff to buy and add.
My advice is to check the box, if it says the model is a Me 109 G 11/a, the company probably did their homework, if they are selling an Me109. . .well, buyer beware.

Don

tigerman wrote:

Joe, is there some particular kit that blanks you off?

 

i was just speaking in general  terms

dkmacin wrote:

Joe, They can make accurate models, they just choose not to! Companies like Accurate Miniatures (the name says it all) go out and measure and re-measure and re-re-measure the actual prototype and then box up a model kit that says TBF-1 and sell it. then they change molds and stuff  remeasure another prototype and sell another kit as the TBF-2. They sell the product to make a profit, and have to charge more to do so because of the work involved. Another company, say company X takes measurements from a print or other sources, completely accurate, and then make a kit and sell it as a TBF "as flown at MIDWAY". Then they may even rebox the same kit and sell it as a TBM or later or earlier model. Accurate, not really, but the price is resonable and there is all that after market stuff to buy and add. My advice is to check the box, if it says the model is a Me 109 G 11/a, the company probably did their homework, if they are selling an Me109. . .well, buyer beware. Don

But don't we generally compare the kits against the drawings that they probably used to determine whether or not the kit is accurate?

Yes we compare the kits against the drawings, but what is an "accurate" B26 A the company took their measurements from is not an "accurate" B26J we have or want to make, especially if the company just starts reboxing their original "accurate" kit in later versions.
You find this alot when you decide to model a certain aircraft and your "Me109" is an old E and not the G your pilot flew.
This is why you will read reviews that state the model is a certain version and not the one depicted on the box.

Don

In my opinion, it all boils down to how much $$$$$$$$$$$ a company is willing to spend in making a new model kit

Companies have to reach a balance between retail profits and production costs. The more complicated a model is, the more costly it is to produce. More man hours have to be placed in research, then more man hours in the production of the master, then more costs and fees associated with making a more complex mould, then more costs for greater parts count, and so on, and so on, and so on.

Personally, I think for what we get in the box, we should all be very happy. I'm kind of sick and tired of people constantly complaining that a model is 2mm too long or 1mm too narrow, or this detail is not 'just right'. We need to broaden hour horizons to make sure the hobby survives, and lower prices is always a good way to do that. For those of you who are so analy retentive, or just love to have as accurate a piece as possible, fix it. This is a modelling hobby. We shouldn't just expect "shake-and-bake" out of the box builds. Get to enjoy scratchbuilding and improving, and be thankful for such a wide variety of realily available kits in styrene, resin, photoetch, and a variety of other materials and manufacturers. We have it pretty good. Stop complaining. It's a sign you're old, and no one cares. lol, I'm just joking with that last remark

I think that in some cases it has to do with when they measure somthing to depict.  There is only one m48a3 patton out there it's by Tamyia and it sits to high.  Why?  because they took the measurements when it was empty.  And, also it has to do with money.

Grizz

molding pieces separate isn't necessarily a sign of cost.  generally molding pieces in one piece is more expensive than molding them separately.  You ahve fewer sides and angles to contend with in the molds, and it's easier to cast many separate pieces that are relatively flat (a seat cushion, support rod, or even wheels) than to go through the process of making casts which have to be fairly thick, and include complex compound shapes that have to mesh.  thats one reason why dragon does things the way they do.  China doesn't have the best mold making equipment.  Computers to design parts yes, but it takes a whole different set of tools to make molds, and generally they don't have to tech yet.

you see more solid casts from western producers becase we they have that tech, and have had it for a while.  but designing individual parts with all they're sides costs more from the standpoint of paying workers.  its actually cheaper to just works parts together.  less man hours.  in China, its the opposite.  labor is cheap, so the producers can afford to hire several guys to sit around and design the different parts.  its the metal  and cutting tools for the molds that are expensive. 

i kno, off topic.  sorry

gringe88 wrote:

China doesn't have the best mold making equipment.  Computers to design parts yes, but it takes a whole different set of tools to make molds, and generally they don't have to tech yet.

umm...  slide molds are starting to get entensively used by dragon and as far as crisp detail is concerned, the new dragon armors and large scale trumpeter aircraft kits is making anything made this side of the shore looking like toys.  Fitment is generally a design issue.  what in the world are you talking about.

zokissima wrote:

Companies have to reach a balance between retail profits and production costs. The more complicated a model is, the more costly it is to produce. More man hours have to be placed in research, then more man hours in the production of the master, then more costs and fees associated with making a more complex mould, then more costs for greater parts count, and so on, and so on, and so on. Personally, I think for what we get in the box, we should all be very happy. I'm kind of sick and tired of people constantly complaining that a model is 2mm too long or 1mm too narrow, or this detail is not 'just right'. We need to broaden hour horizons to make sure the hobby survives, and lower prices is always a good way to do that. For those of you who are so analy retentive, or just love to have as accurate a piece as possible, fix it. This is a modelling hobby. We shouldn't just expect "shake-and-bake" out of the box builds. Get to enjoy scratchbuilding and improving, and be thankful for such a wide variety of realily available kits in styrene, resin, photoetch, and a variety of other materials and manufacturers. We have it pretty good. Stop complaining. It's a sign you're old, and no one cares. lol, I'm just joking with that last remark

I think zokissima nailed it. Yes, it would be nice if they could make 100% accurate models. However, if all we had to do was paint and glue, where would all the research and skills be? I get more pride out of constructing a model with scratchbuilt parts or certain modificiations than I do building an already-accurate kit. I'm not always happy with the detail provided in some kits, but hey, you get what you pay for most of the time, and detailing those cheap kits will definitely improve your skills.

you all have some valid points and opinions

thank you

I think it comes down to how much the company wants to spend on it and how much they think they can make on it.  The more accurate a model is, the more expensive it is in research, design, moldmaking, etc., etc.  If the company doesn't think they can get their money out of all that, they won't make it as accuarte to save costs.  It all comes down to dollars.  They are in business to make money.

China doesn't have the best mold making equipment.  Computers to design parts yes, but it takes a whole different set of tools to make molds, and generally they don't have to tech yet.

Ummm, pretty flawed logic.  China can produce Nuclear missiles and bombs, but is too low tech to make accurate molds for plastic models.  I think not.  They are just as capable as any other nation in their manufacturing capabilities.

HeavyArty wrote:

China doesn't have the best mold making equipment.  Computers to design parts yes, but it takes a whole different set of tools to make molds, and generally they don't have to tech yet. Ummm, pretty flawed logic.  China can produce Nuclear missiles and bombs, but is too low tech to make accurate molds for plastic models.  I think not.  They are just as capable as any other nation in their manufacturing capabilities.

 

Gino is absolutely right. Chinese companies like Dragon and Trumpeter are right on the cutting edge of modern molding technology, as can be seen by their extensive use of slide mold technology.

I remember reading somewhere a couple weeks ago that the Chinese government had given Trumpeter a lot of money in an effort to help them become the "Premier" model making company, so I would imagine they have the latest and greatest technologies at their disposal.

first, at the bottom of the post, it says quote "off topic."  second, I wasn't saying that they couldn't or weren't producing good quality kits.  what I was talking about was how you seem more component parts in kits from companies like dragon than from other western companies.  take for instance a seat for a gun/ tank, whatever.  ive noticed that in a DML kit, it would be composed of that seat cushion, that back rest, the back frame, and the mount.  in a kit of the same subject from a western company, the seat would include the seat, back cushion, and frame as one piece, and the mount as the only other part for that assembly.  what I was getting at was that they were breaking up the assemblies into relatively flat pieces, the seat cushions, the frame and the mount, rather than mold the seat solid with its compound curves in the upright position like the western company.  All that I've heard, and granted I'm not in weekly meetings with Beijing, is that their molds weren't up to doing that yet.  they were great at the precision they could get, but they had to break down their assemblies to ease the mold making process and/or deal with problems molding compound parts.  thats all I was saying.  That too may well be wrong but thats just what I've heard. 

Breaking down parts is a bad thing??!!  that's the compliment we gave to Dragon when all their detail pieces came separately molded and in large quantities, as they are in real life.  it helps with the painting, part clean up, and even the use of aftermarket PE add-ons so nothing has to be shaved off.  one piece molded cockpits will never be better than one that has a three piece chair, multi-piece levers and controls, and individual cushins plus add on seatbelts, unless they are resin.  slide molds can do hollowed muzzles and one piece gun barrels that needs minimal clean up time, i personally think if they'd wanted to waste the money to do a slide mold for a as detail as possible chair in one piece, they can, as impractical as it may sound to a manufacturor or a modeler.  I don't know if others would agree with me, but I for one as a detail freak, loves it when a model is made to help minimize masking time just to paint small piece by allowing you to paint them separately and separated to a point that makes one feel like he 's close to building a real tank and only charges 30 bucks for it.  have you once compared their new Gen2 figure sets' multi-piece MG42 machine gun with those from any other manufacturer?

back to the topic of accuracy being concerned, most of the dragon's recent 6 or 7 year old kits are still by far the most accurate ones of whatever it depicts.  it all comes at a price.  their price tag is going up as we speak.  and look at those panzer IVs from Tristar, argued as the most accurate ones, but at what cost?  one that I wouldn't blow my money on for a 1/35 lil tank.  accurate miniature's kits can get you 2 or 3 academy ones for the equivalent price.  the scale model market is still affected by the basic law of demand and supply.  we want lower price kits, they give less investment into making the molds and man hour.

I'm not saying that they're a bad thing at all.  Once again, it was an OFF TOPIC remark, I was just noticing it.  the multi-piece parts certainly provide more lee-way than the standard solid casts in many cases.

A lot of model manufacturers design their models from actual "blueprints" that they acquired from the 1:1 source. They then of course scale it down and in doing so, some details become so small that they get left out (too difficult or expensive to make tooling/molds for).

The original blueprints that are sent to the model companies, don't always show the "final" version of the 1:1 product. Sometimes revisions were made to the plans during or just prior to construction and those revisions don't always get included in the plans sent to the model companies.

Humm... I can only image a bunch of model company field technicians traveling the globe looking for all the real 1:1 products, and crawling all over it with tape measures and micrometers. WOW, what would our models cost then? 

It would be nice though if model companies actually fixed or made new tools and molds so the quality of the kits would be better (take AMT car kits for example). But then, they might have to charge what Revell charges, and who'd want to spend and extra $1.00 for a slightly better quality product. 

jhande wrote:

Humm... I can only image a bunch of model company field technicians traveling the globe looking for all the real 1:1 products, and crawling all over it with tape measures and micrometers. WOW, what would our models cost then?

I think Tamiya did that with their 1/35 Leclerc 2.  Sure is reflected on the price as well though, aside from the almost pointless diecast wheels, but definitely a good example to answer your question there.

Sometimes it doesn't pay to go out, look at, and measure the real thing.  Tamaya did that with their 1/32 scale F-4C/D and molded on all of the scab patches from the aircraft they looked at.  Even their E and J model had the same scab patches.  Then you are given a choice, sand them off, loose surface detail, rescribe, and add screw heads.  For some, they just leave them alone, while others remove the scab patches.   

Was it accurate?  Yes, by looking at an aircraft that had the patches.  No, because not all aircraft have the patches.  Six of one, half dozen of another.