What do you look for in a kit review?

I want an honest up front opinion of the kit, built as-is from the box.  I build a lot of different things from helicopters to large scale resin girls, so an objective and experienced opinion of whether I should plunk down the cash means more than "you really need this in your stash" type reviews.   For example, if a limited production kit is fairly accurate in shape and takes moderate skill to work with, thats what I need to know, but if the vacuform canopy that comes in two to three seperate pieces (special hobby,Anigrand and FM) simply will NOT fit at all, thats what I need to know too.  I'm far less interested in what kind of paint, PE or decals the reviewer used, and more interested in whether or not the kit is a fairly accurate representation, and if the manufacturer put enough research into getting things right (IE the rotor blades on Italari helicopters that run the wrong direction).

If resin is crumbly and seems to repel paint (Coree),  I want to know that so that at least I know going in, if this is a one of a kind peice that no one else is or has offered, what to expect.

That's my input

David

 

Iwant to know about any fit issues and if there are any major clean up on the parts that need to be addressed. I do not worry about the accuracy of the kit. Most of the kits I build I build OOB and do not worry about correct any of the missing details.  Also was it a fun kit to build- meaning did not get frustrated with any of the sub assemblies.

Thanks for all the feedback gentlemen, very helpful to me.

Thanks Phoenix, appreciate your post.  I may need to take you up on the blueprint offer one of these days. 

fit and flash is most important to me

2 things I hear most often from my first few review feedbacks were is the kit worth the price they are ask for it? and what building tips or tricks did I use or learn to make this particular kit go together easier or better?

 I have also heard complaints that alot of reviewers using aftermarket parts. This can make it hard for a beginner or even a intermediate modeler unfamiler these items to get a good take on what there finished product will look like OOB (or assume the kit it's self has these parts). Me personally when I build a kit that is for review or to display as a example of a particular product in a LHS I try to use only what is provided in the box. This way anyone buying the kit I built should be able to get similer results. basically what out see is what you get type of thing. 

Experienced modelers are usually interested in how many add on goodies are in the box. Is the model have good detail for the scale it's in, and is it accurate enough to get past 2/3 of the modeling community. hard core accuracy hounds will check EVERY detail themselves anyway.  I have had people measure the distance between panel lines and wing thickness in 30 diferent places and Email me telling me that the wing is the right length and shape but that some of the panel line spacing are off by a FULL 1.0 MM (No joke). 

 I see you are exploring new ground espin, you are very knowledgable in the luftwaffe dept. You also have excellent modeling skill (better than some reviewers I've have seen) give it a try you may like it.  I did a some model reviewing and alot of contest judging in the past, but now I'm taking a break from it. Just remember you can't make everybody happy.

Somewhere I had accurate scale blue prints for several 109's 190's and I think me262. If you believe these might be useful to you and can not find them anywhere let me know, I may still have them lying around here.   

I agree with what's been said, but I think what it really comes down to is the reviewers history. Nearly every review that I've read by Brett Green has almost exactly parallelled my experience when I built the same kit. There's another prominent model site that the reviews aren't as helpful for me, because when I build the same kit, my experience may differ drastically.

Now, it's not because Brett is right and the other guy is wrong- far from it. It just seems that Brett Green's perceptions, expectations and feelings about a kit he's built will be a fairly accurate predictor of what I'll experience. (Now if I only had his talent! )

So I guess what I'm trying to say is I like reviews from a reviewer who "thinks" like I do (there's a scary thought). 

I wish reviewers would have a statement like "I never met a kit I didn't like" or "Every rivet has it's correct place", or so forth, so I could gauge that going in.

Of course, the only real way to figure out which reviewers are going to be helpful to me is to continually read them.

Now, I still read other reviewers. Whether they look at building the same as I do doesn't matter when they say "the wing to fuselage join leaves about a 2mm gap." That's always helpful.

I do dislike "trashing" reviews.... keep it objective.

I better stop now I'm rambling...... LOL

 

I read the reviews, but tend to not lend too much weight to them. Almost all the reviewers can build kits with no putty, then there I am filling in some spots. Accuracy isn't that important to me. Overall looks mean more. A kit with a wrong shape outline that I could see from four feet away is one thing vs one that I need a micrometer to see it. It's the ones that say this kit has some fit issues that I pay attention to. Reviews are good, don't get me wrong. I just don't need to hear how the rivets should not bee seen in this scale or they are the wrong type.....bla bla bla from the whiny folk that can't actually build anything and just complain about everything.

A couple of things I have noticed about some of the Review/Preview sites, is that once a kit is reviewed, it isn't ever updated when a new version of the kit comes out.  For example, how many different versions of the F-4 has Hasegawa put out in 1/48?  And most of those were just decal changes I know, but I would still like to see a built up kit of it, or a review of the decal sheet.  Another is, sometimes there just isn't a review or preview of whatever kit I may be looking for, which can be frustrating as well.  I had thought about doing reviews before, but usually by the time I think of this, I'm halfway thru the kit.

Anyway, thats my take on it

Henry

I guess there are different types of "Reviews".  First looks, build articles etc.  1^st looks are not my favorite but I still read them.  They don't really tell much besides what's in the box and maybe that there is little or no flash.  Not that I care that much about accuracy.  I am in the "if it looks like a Tiger its OK" group. Unless I am building a Spitfire.

I prefer a review by someone that has actually built the kit.  I want to hear about fit issues and places that extra care in alignment etc is needed.

Excellent feedback gentlemen, thank you. 

Really depends for me as well. If its just an inbox review so its just comments around whats found once you open the box, i generally just like to read about how crisp the moulding is and the amount of detail it provides. Whether its accurate or not, i really couldnt care less.

If its a build feature, i usually pay attention to how the author documents the adding of AM parts and also the painting and weathering process. There's been many times while reading a build feature and the author just summarises the painting and weathering part which typically leaves me with more questions on how they achieved the end result. 

Yann Solo wrote:

Foster7155 wrote: Bottom line...comprehensiveness. I personally want it all; fit issues (or lack thereof) if doing a build review, engineering details (ejector pin marks, flash, out of scale parts, etc), references to accuracy or inaccuracy (with documentation), sprue shots, markings offered, everything... IMHO, there is no such thing as too much information.   and most important, it must be a honest, objective review.

Yes.

I too am not a complete accuracy freak, so if the build is better than accuracy, than I might be swayed in that direction. I guess I'm to lazy to fix things.

It all depends on the kit subject to me. With some kits that I only have a passing interest in so I want to know about fit and assembly issues.

Some kits that I am more interested in, I like to know about accuracy and detail issues.

Some kits that are age old reboxes, just tell me it is the reboxed Monogram kit, mention the added or changed details (new decals, retooled parts) and I'm good.

While I enjoy build articles, I do not like to hear that I need the Dragon kit, add the Tamiya turret, take Academy hatches and scratch build the engine deck to get the most accurate version of the tank.

Foster7155 wrote:

Bottom line...comprehensiveness. I personally want it all; fit issues (or lack thereof) if doing a build review, engineering details (ejector pin marks, flash, out of scale parts, etc), references to accuracy or inaccuracy (with documentation), sprue shots, markings offered, everything... IMHO, there is no such thing as too much information.

  and most important, it must be a honest, objective review.

Bottom line...comprehensiveness.

I personally want it all; fit issues (or lack thereof) if doing a build review, engineering details (ejector pin marks, flash, out of scale parts, etc), references to accuracy or inaccuracy (with documentation), sprue shots, markings offered, everything...

IMHO, there is no such thing as too much information.

I want to know especially about fit issues,excessive flash,sharp details,intelligent design as far as assembly goes.Accuracy is good,but to me if it looks like a tiger it is ok for me.And overall experience was it enjoyable to build or frustating at every turn.