What Revell Monogram Aircraft Kit Re-Issues to Avoid?

Maybe that's why I was so disappointed with the Revell Dauntless. I remember fun, pretty well detailed, well-engineered kits. Just looking at what people are doing over in the B-17 GB is a testament to that. But the Dauntless, to me, just felt cheap. The cockpit. The fuselage fit. The laughable decal sheet. It all rubbed me really the wrong way compared to the kit I was expecting to find.

I think this is one reason I decided to find all of the actual old kits (rather than repops) via the secondary market.  It's probably nostalgic but maybe there is something to be said for building the exact same kit I once built in the mid-70s to mid-80s. 

I always loved building that old Monogram P-40B.  When I got back into the hobby in '95, I found a Monogram Spitfire that I thought would be the same kit I had built many times as a youngster; turns out it was not quite the same, as the kit I built in '95 no longer had the retractable wheels.  Did the repop Dauntless kit still possess all the working features that were far more toy-like than model-like?

Aggieman

 

 

I think this is one reason I decided to find all of the actual old kits (rather than repops) via the secondary market.  It's probably nostalgic but maybe there is something to be said for building the exact same kit I once built in the mid-70s to mid-80s. 

I always loved building that old Monogram P-40B.  When I got back into the hobby in '95, I found a Monogram Spitfire that I thought would be the same kit I had built many times as a youngster; turns out it was not quite the same, as the kit I built in '95 no longer had the retractable wheels.  Did the repop Dauntless kit still possess all the working features that were far more toy-like than model-like?

I have the latest P-40 Unchanged from the original Monogram except for the decals which will be normal:

I think what happened with the Spitfire, is when Revell and Monogram became one with the force, is both companies had a Spitfire in 1/48. The Spitfire you are refering to, and the one I have is the Revell version, and not the Monogram tool:

That could explain the non-working parts.

The latest re-pop Dauntless is the original in all respects including movable dive flaps, tail hook, releasing bomb, rotating prop, and retractable landing gear. The decals, although new, are authentic, as I confirmed on Navsource.org, they represent aircraft #4 on the U.S.S. Wasp August  1942, s well as an aircraft from the New Zealand air force of the same time frame. The one I finished is in generic markings however.

I think the best answer to all of this discussion came from bondoman:

Question- What Revell Monogram Aircraft Kit Re-Issues to Avoid?

His answer- None.

Here are a few of my old (pre 1980 molds) Monogram kits. with one exception, all the builds are straight OOB and all I did was replace the kit decals...

Mosquito B.IV, OOB with Aeromaster Decals

Monogram P-51B OOB with MicroScale decals

Monogram P-47D, OOB w/Testors/MicroScale decals

Monogram P-39Q, kit seat replaced, Aeromaster Decals

MiG-15, OOB with Aeromaster decals

As you can see, with time, patience, and basic modeling skills. they look pretty good OOB if you ask me.

Stik every time I see your Fagot I'm turned on, umm, I mean that is a really nice model.I think you've put it up once or twice before, but your job there is a favorite of mine.

When I was a kid the Monogram models cost too much, so I always thought of them as adult models. I used my paper route money to buy Revell 1/72 which were cheaper than Monogram 1/48. I think the first Mono airplane I ever built was the Kingfisher.

Shep Paine made us all see that plastic models could be a form of art.

Careful Bondo, we wil get another thread deleted for the second night in a row...

But thank you... that Mig is certainly a crowd pleaser, and I gotta admit it is one of my favorite camo jobs that I have ever done.

I think once I really got in to Monogram kits in the early to mid 70s and have had a soft spot for them ever since.

sitkpusher  I like your P-51B especially with the Malcolm canopy, looks awesome!!!

bondoman

I think the first Mono airplane I ever built was the Kingfisher.

The Kingfisher was the first kit I ever built a diorama for. Absolutely loved that kit, and was just so overcome by a wave of nostalgia that I placed a bid on one on eBay. 

So much for my determination to keep my stash held down to six kits. But the Dauntless is entering the home stretch, so...

DoogsATX

kustommodeler that Corsair is beautiful! And the fit looks pretty great, too!

I grew up with Revell/Monogram, as well, since they were most of what got stocked at Michaels when I was buying kits as a kid in the late 80s and early 90s. At the time, I viewed Testors kits as the height of luxury. 

Overall, I've got fond memories of those kits. Still love the big B-52, I built three when I was growing up, and remember them as sediment layers of my modeling skills at different ages. If I can ever figure out somewhere to 1) actually build it and 2) display it, I'll pick one up again in a heartbeat. 

Maybe that's why I was so disappointed with the Revell Dauntless. I remember fun, pretty well detailed, well-engineered kits. Just looking at what people are doing over in the B-17 GB is a testament to that. But the Dauntless, to me, just felt cheap. The cockpit. The fuselage fit. The laughable decal sheet. It all rubbed me really the wrong way compared to the kit I was expecting to find.

I think once I work my way through my current backlog of kits I may pick up another R/M and give it a shot.

From what you've said, it sounds like you're from a generation just after ours.  For guys my age, 46, we went from the early Monogram kits to their more detailed second generation, so, from the TBF, F6F and SBD to the P-39, P-40B, TBD and the large multiengine kits.  You're right, compared to the kits Monogram developed in the late 60s and in the 70s, the Dauntless is simple and lacking detail, as is the TBF, the F6F, the Kingfisher, the Zero and the Me-109.  But again, as many of us Monogram veterans have said, we remember them fondly and like the opportunity to stretch our scratchbuilding muscles.

Regarding the Monogram TBF's interior, it is very basic and lacking in anything more than a suggestion of a cockpit.  I've built 2 of them in my second modeling life, and I added the instrument panel and side panels to the pilot's office, added radio equipment to the middle cockpit, and rib and stringers, some radio and panel gear, and the radioman's seat in the aft station.  I also have the AM kit in my stash, but I enjoyed doing the research and adding the details.  Plus, the kit figures are excellent, especially the crewman running across the deck.

Regarding Lindberg, I concede there, too, that the detail isn't what we expect today from model companies, but again, for its time, they weren't bad kits.  Their TBF is a little distorted in shape, though, I think, in cross-section from top to bottom.  It makes the top of the nose seem pitched a little too steep to my eye.  However, their F11C Goshawk is still a decent kit, and until Classic Airframes issued their version, it was practically the only game in town, except for Renwal's kit, with the Aero-Skin feature.  Its shape is pretty accurate, just that it, too, suffers from a lack of interior, but that provides another scratchbuilding opportunity.  I have 7 or 8 of those in my stash, waiting to be built into a flight deck display of the Tophatters.  I also have a couple of the CA kits, though they're hard to come by, they get snapped up quickly on eBay.

One more thought on the SBD kit--I don't think we can categorize it as a re-issue.  If I'm not mistaken, it's been in the catalog in one boxing or another, from Monogram's days of independence and ever since the companies were forcibly merged.  It's really never been out of circulation, has it?

Whatever we all think, let's just say, build what you like!  And DoogsATX, your SBD is coming along very nicely!

Best regards,

Brad (also a Monogram nostalgia builder)

Brad - yep, I'm 30, so for me any first or second generation kits just blend together as Monogram kits. It's interesting that the Kingfisher's included in the same "simple and lacking detail" category as the SBD, since that's one of my three all-time favorite Monogram kits, alongside the P-47 and 72nd B-52.

As I mentioned a few posts above, a wave of Kingfisher nostalgia actually spurred me to bid for one on eBay. Since my scratchbuilding skills are non-existent, I think I may try to track down some of the various Cutting Edge resin kits for it. Already got an idea in my head for a diorama of it being hoisted onto a catapult launcher. Which would most certainly involve developing some of those scratching skills.

Monogram's old 1/48 P-39 is a real favorite of mine. It really is timeless. In the hands of a capable modeler it can still hold it's own against more recent P-39s from Eduard and Hasegawa.

On the other hand, Monogram's old 1/48 P-38 (not the Promodeler one) has given me fits everytime I try to build it. It doesn't seem to matter what I do, how far ahead I plan or how fastidiously I prep parts and dry fit; there is always something in that kit that will not come together properly for me! Even worse if I go for the night fighter variant in the kit.

Sprue-ce Goose

Aggieman:

The ProModeler kit of the Helldiver was a wonderful kit.  I'd love to build that one again.

 

I'm sorry I missed the kit.

From what I am reading, Revell doesn't seem to re-issue the ProModeler kits very often.

 

I recently picked up the ProModeller Helldiver at an IPMS show, factory sealed for $15!  This is a truly beautiful kit.  I also picked up the Eduard cockpit  pe detail set for $5 from another vendor. There was another one  floating around but sold quick. The old Monogram 1/48 P47D and all the Century Series Jets  are  done very nicely and have beautifully detailed cockpits. I specially like the old Monogram F-100.

Is the present Revell 1/48 P-51D the old Revell kit or the re-worked Monogram P-51B/C /

I think that kit is the old Monogram kit, but I stand to be corrected.

If I recall correctly, Bill Koster was the gentleman responsible for a lot of the Monogram kits and their accuracy.  I've fond memories of building a lot of the kits from the 60's and 70's - I do think they still hold up very well and are a great value for what you get.

Sprue-ce Goose

Is the present Revell 1/48 P-51D the old Revell kit or the re-worked Monogram P-51B/C /

i just built that one recently. here is the company stamp I had to sand off:

A good number of the kits I have are Revell/Monogram. That is all the local Hobby store (aka Michaels) carries. I think they are pretty good. Enough basic detail for an OOB build, and enough room for improvements to help build your skills

OWL

CallSignOWL

Sprue-ce Goose:

Is the present Revell 1/48 P-51D the old Revell kit or the re-worked Monogram P-51B/C /

i just built that one recently. here is the company stamp I had to sand off:

A good number of the kits I have are Revell/Monogram. That is all the local Hobby store (aka Michaels) carries. I think they are pretty good. Enough basic detail for an OOB build, and enough room for improvements to help build your skills

OWL

Glad to hear it.

Does the Revell 1/48  scale P-51 D  kit have recessed "engine" detail molded inside an open engine panel?

Sprue-ce Goose

Is the present Revell 1/48 P-51D the old Revell kit or the re-worked Monogram P-51B/C /

The current 1/48 Revell P-51D is a re issue of a Monogram kit that was issued in the late 70s. Owl's pic shows '77, and my memory is hazy on that. I do recall building it. It was a step up from their P-51B with a much nicer cockpit, and some gun bay and engine detail. Also a real nice seated pilot. Revell also did a     P-51D around the same time, but it is not quite as nice.

I took a survey of my completed kits a short while ago, and Monogram is certainly top dog there so far. Especially when you include my fast movers in SEA camo or grays. 

Sprue-ceGoose: "Does the Revell 1/48  scale P-51 D  kit have recessed "engine" detail molded inside an open engine panel?"

 I did not take a picture of that, but yes, it did have engine detail

OWL

Thanks, guys.

I asked about the P-51 D kit because I remember buying the Revell kit  in the mid 1980s but giving up on it because of fit and rivet problems.

If you guys are interested about the detail issue, I have three old Monogram P51D"s that I want to build eventually. I can photograph and post the details since they are unbuilt. They really look very nice with crisp details. The raised panel lines should be easy to scribe to make them recessed. The pilot figure is also very nice.

bondoman

none

Gotta ditto Bondo and the others regarding the kits to avoid... ALL of them are fine kits, when you add the prices into the mix...

Sure, they have their drawbacks, but that's why they cost 12-16.00 rather than 35-60.00...  One only has to look at what modelers here do with them to see it... Monogram kits are far and away the biggest "bang for the buck", followed closely by Lindberg's biplanes...

As for scratchbuilding, that's a  skill that one has to develop... As far as I'm concerned, that's probably, next to finishing, the most important skill to master... No manufacturer gets it 100%... The first time you stretched a piece of sprue for an antenna, you were scratchbuilding... 

Another thing is raised vs recessed details... Many of the older aircraft kits had raised lines simply because those are easier to mold, but some details are indeed raised... The Monogram SBD kit this more or less accurately... The early SBDs did in fact have numerous rivets sticking up all over the place, as well as overlapping panels, rather than flush rivets and butt-jointed skins... And a lot of the high-end shake & bake kits released today have recessesed lines and sunken rivets that are so far out of scale that they're laughable...

Speaking of the Monogram TBF, here's some shots of mine in progress, with a mix of scratchbuilt parts and old kit parts:

In the ones

 below, I remove the plastic behind the front row of jugs and added more cut from a P-61 engine, along with a new vac-formed cowl.

As for scratchbuilding seats, they too are pretty easy...

I took a piece of sheet plastic and cut it, then used a lighter to heat-form it into a seat-pan and armor plate for the gunner.

Holding the part in one hand, I moved the lighter close to the edge of the part, an' it magically turned 90 degrees and I quickly grabbed it with my thumb and finger to form the dimple in the pan for the parachute pack. I cut the armor plate back into shape with a scissors, then sanded it round, adding a small piece of plastic for a mount.

So basically, there's nothing magical about scratchbuilding parts for the Revellogram kits... You just need to set your mind to it, and look around the house for parts & materials..

If you can find one (They crop up on Ebay from time to time) get a Mattel Vac-U-Form machine... I've had one for years and it's absolutely essential for the Creative Gizmologist.  Being able to vac-form canopies, cowls, gear doors, panels, etc, is a Godsend for a scratchbuilder like me...   There's a guy on Ebay that sells the plastic sheets for it as well, both in clear and white.  That's also how I solved the canopy issue with the Monogram Dash 4 Corsair... I cut out the entire frame, glued the canopy into it, the then vac-formed the canopy and windscreen as a unit, then cut the canopt from the windscreen... Took a couple-three attempts, but the plastic's cheap and you can afford to throw way the ones that you screw up, unlike "store-bought" replacement parts.

So go ahead, buy any of the Revellogram kits... 

Oh, one more thing regarding accuracy... That's entirely up to you... 99.9% of the people you who view your work won't know the difference if you use a P-61 seat in a TBF or cut down a P-47 panel for the SBD.  Unless they have the refs right in front of them or actually flew 'em, you'll get a "pass"... "Suggestion", rather than "Duplication" is where Imagineers and Creative Gizmologists shine...  It just has to "look busy" in there, it doesn't need to be bolt-for-bolt, rivet-for-rivet... Those B-25 radios in the center cockpit of the Avenger look just fine under the canopy..

These are reposts, but here are some Monogram classics I've built, since getting back to the hobby:

The P-40N in 1/72:

The TBF in 1/48, with modifications to make it a -1C:

(yes, I need to repair the radioman's tunnel canopy, it doesn't fit)

and the P-47D razorback, finished as Lt. Frank Klibbe's "Little Chief":

I love these kits!

@DoogsATX, I included the Kingfisher with the other USN aircraft, because it's actually contemporary to them, it's part of that generation.  But I'm with you--I built it as a kid, too.  I made the landplane version, so I could put it in my book shelf carrier deck display with the others .  Now I have one in the stash, to finish as a yellow wings BB scout.

@Hammer--Your work is beautiful and impressive, as always!  Well done!

The P-39 was issued in the late 60s, I think, and I remember reading that it represented a new level of detail in Monogram's kits.  I think the P-51B is also from that generation of kits, and if I'm not mistaken, the new issue by Revell includes a retooling of the molds to replace the raised panel lines with engraved lines.  At least, I recall reading that somewhere online.  I haven't picked one up, though, to compare to the original kit boxing in my stash.

And that stash includes the following Monogram kits:

P-40B (4 or 5 kits)
F6F (in progress)
P-47D bubbletop (in progress)
P-47D razorback
2 SBDs (70's white box and a Revell boxing with the Operation Torch markings)
TBD (5 or 6 kits)
TBF (2 more kits) (I'm going to need a 1/48 scale carrier when this is all done)
Me-109 (2 or 3)
Ju-87
Fw-190 (2 kits)
B-24D (the bonus boxing that included another P-40B, but it's an eBay find and the fighter was gone)
P-38
P-39
P-61
A-26
B-26
PBY
A6M? Zero

and also 3 Nichimo copies of Monogram kits, the Dauntless, Helldiver and Spitfire IX.

And technically, the 2 Revell B-17F's that I have are really Monogram kits, since it's generally accepted that Revell copied the Monogram kit.

In short, I love Monogram!

Best regards,

Brad

Yes, my Monogram SBD that is in perpetual build mode has benefitted from lots of canabilization and some creative gizmology in the cockpit to make it "look busy"...

The pilots seat DF loop antenna, and gunners "turret" came from a derelict TBD

Much of the radio detail came from a scrapped B-25 along with a couple .50s for the cowl.

I scratch built an instrument panel overlay for the  kit decal using some thin styrene, and an oil cooler with sprue and brass screen

And removed the kit bomb yoke mount and replced it with a reshaped piece of sprue.

Improved instrument panel placed along with canabilized TBD scope/sight

Working on a P-47 Razorback from Revell/Monogram right now, it looks like it was originally pressed in 1967. It's cleaned up nicely and I had almost no fit issues with it. For $10 I cannot complain, decent detail (mostly all raised), but the price was right. I'm enjoying these cheap Revell kits, if I screw up I'm not all that mad.

Hun Hunter

Working on a P-47 Razorback from Revell/Monogram right now, it looks like it was originally pressed in 1967. It's cleaned up nicely and I had almost no fit issues with it. For $10 I cannot complain, decent detail (mostly all raised), but the price was right. I'm enjoying these cheap Revell kits, if I screw up I'm not all that mad.

Bidding on the Monogram P-47D bubbletop right now. I remember having a lot of fun with it and getting pretty decent results back when I was a teenager. It's one of the maybe 6 or so kits that went along when my parents moved from Dallas to Phoenix once I went to college. Eager to see what I can do with it now, and to do a warm-up before splurging on the Tamiyabolt.

It builds up great! The only accuracy issue that kit has is the allignment of the wing guns. A minor issue that only a Jug lover would catch.

Visited local Michaels during lunch to find the Revell / Testors kits expanded to a 12 foot long by 6 + high section with Revell 1/48 aircraft  (WWII and modern )  , Revell autos and snap tite- lotta Star Wars snap tite gaining.

Now more Revell 1/48th WWII aircraft at Michaels than Hobby Lobby so the 40 pct coupons go there.

stikpusher

It builds up great! The only accuracy issue that kit has is the allignment of the wing guns. A minor issue that only a Jug lover would catch.

That, and apparently, the wings on the bubbletop are 1/8" too far back, because the design team used a slightly inaccurate drawing from a British magazine, when researching.  When Monogram later developed the razorback, they had gotten data from Republic and corrected this error.  I haven't put the kits side by side, though, to see if this bears out.

Both the bubbletop and the razorback are very good kits, in my opinion and acknowledging that there are a lot of very nice 1/48 P-47 kits out there today.  I wouldn't turn my nose up at the newer kits, but I'm looking to build a selection from many different makers.

Can't beat the pilot figure in the Monogram Thunderbolt, either, it's a great little figure.

Best regards,

Brad

The P-61 is a bear of a build from what I hear.  But, I've never had any big issues or complaints with Revell-Monogram kits myself.  Sure, there are minor problems here and there, but, isn't that the case with the majority of models, regardless of manufacturer?  For RM models, I usually find good deals on good kits.

I notice the Mongram Hawker Typhoon is due to be re-released ....

Any comments on that kit?