What Revell Monogram Aircraft Kit Re-Issues to Avoid?

Want to post a reply to this topic?
Login or register for an acount to join our online community today!

What Revell Monogram Aircraft Kit Re-Issues to Avoid?

  • I just read a comment about a "hopeless interior" in a thread on the Revell re-issue of the old Monogram SBD kit.

    I have only seen are the old Monogram Me-109E, Fw-190 and F4U.

    As I never viewed many of the Monogram kits first time around, I am curious about what re-issues to avoid.

    I'd appreciate member suggestions, though I am less concerned about interior detail than major surgery on the exterior such as required on the F4U and Me109E.

     

    Replies to this thread are ordered from "oldest to newest".   To reverse this order, click here.
    To learn about more about sorting options, visit our FAQ page.
  • If you are looking for full cockpits, gear wells, etc. and no working features beyond a propeller that spins the list includes but not limited to: F4F, F4U (not to be confused with the Pro modleler re box of the Hasegawa F4U-4). F6F, SBD, TBF, SB2C (not to be confused with the later Pro Modeler release), Bf-109E, Spitfire IX, and Zero 52. All the ones I listed are fun beginner builds, but are more meant for younger modelers who will be playing with their buids. Most feature operating landing gear, folding wings if they did on the real bird, simplified cockpits and landing gear. In the case of the TBF, it is the only early TBF-1 kit out there in 1/48.

    F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

    U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

    N is for NO SURVIVORS...

           - Plankton

    LSM

     

  • stikpusher

    SB2C (not to be confused with the later Pro Modeler release)

    Thanks, you saved me from wasing money.

    Question:SB2C Pro Modeler release was a completely different manufacturer's kit or were the molds reworked ?

  • The Promodeler SB2C was a completely new kit. All current standards there done by Monogram (recessed panel lines, photo etch and crew figures!). It was re issued by Accurate Miniatures as both a later and with new parts earlier variant.

    F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

    U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

    N is for NO SURVIVORS...

           - Plankton

    LSM

     

  • IMHO, the only "hopeless interior" is one where the modeler doesn't have either the willingness to develop their modeling skills, or more importantly, the patience required.

    Then again, I'm biased since many of my all-time favorites are the 1:48 Monogram aircraft kits from the 60's.  

    Personally, I get a lot more satisfaction by doing some research on the subject and then using plastic sheet, wire and other miscellaneous bits (old watch parts, etc), to detail cockpits.     

    Mark

    FSM Charter Subscriber

  • While many of those old Monogram kits do feature "playable" features and very basic interiors, these are among some of the finest kits ever produced.  I recently bought most of them over a period of a couple of months via ebay, spent a lot of $$$ to get all those old Blue Box kits, and will eventually build each of them with scratch-built interiors where needed.

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

    Gig 'em, Steven

     

  • Thanks stickpusher for the info on the ProModeler Helldiver.

    I will stay away from the kits you warned about.

    Regarding cockpits:

    as I stated in my initial post, I am not concerned about  the interior.

    I've scratch built cockpits before and I am just beginning a 1/32 Revell CF-104 cockpit build.

    I want to avoid major surgery on the exterior of the kit.

    One example is the Monogram F4U cockpit canopy frame molded as part of the fuselage- requiring cutting off the canopy frame and rebuilding the fuselage along with making a new canopy; not worth the trouble.

     

  • 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.

     

  • stikpusher

     In the case of the TBF, it is the only early TBF-1 kit out there in 1/48.

    I built the Lindberg TBF kit as a child and was very impressed at the time by the detail in the kit.

    I've never seen the Monogram kit and I presume the Lindberg kit was as much a toy as the Monogram kit.

    Question for the TBF fans out there: how do the two brand kits compare on accuracy?

    Or,  perhaps the question should be how much work is required to re-build each version?

    If the Monogram is the only early TBF-1 kit out there in 1/48, is it worth re-building vs. reworking a latermodel TBF in a more modern kit?

  • RedCorvette

    IMHO, the only "hopeless interior" is one where the modeler doesn't have either the willingness to develop their modeling skills, or more importantly, the patience required.

    Then again, I'm biased since many of my all-time favorites are the 1:48 Monogram aircraft kits from the 60's.  

    Personally, I get a lot more satisfaction by doing some research on the subject and then using plastic sheet, wire and other miscellaneous bits (old watch parts, etc), to detail cockpits.     

    Mark

    Since I made the "hopeless interior" comment about the SBD, perhaps I should elaborate.

    First, the cockpit "tub" is incorrect. The Dauntless had all manner of instruments, levers, radio gear, etc tucked against the fuselage walls, not raised "counters" to either side. 

    Second, there's no pilot's seat. There's a vaguely square-ish shape molded directly onto the back of the included pilot figure. Since I don't like putting pilot figures into cockpits, this wasn't a happy discovery. 

    Third, and not applicable to the interior, the size of the aircraft is noticeably off from the Accurate Miniatures kit. The surface detail is also somewhat random. Some parts of the aircraft are fine, but the checkerboard of raised rivets all over it? Not as much.

    Could you scratch up an accurate cockpit? I certainly couldn't. I guess it's possible, though it'd take major surgery and probably require ditching every single piece of the cockpit that's in the kit. Personally, I'd love to see someone pull it off. 

    Again, personally, I'm not too interested in scratchbuilding, at least not at this point. I've got plenty of other skills I need to work on first. 

     

     

    On the Bench: 1/32 Trumpeter P-47 | 1/32 Hasegawa Bf 109G | 1/144 Eduard MiG-21MF x2

    On Deck:  1/350 HMS Dreadnought

    Blog/Completed Builds: doogsmodels.com

     

  • unless you're crazy (like me) avoid the Revell 1/32 BF-110 kits like the plague!

    The old 1/32 Corsair isn't bad and is quite easy to work on.

    I love the smell of plastic in the morning

  • Where is Hans Von Hammer when you need him?  The old Monogram kits do fill that reasonable price void.  If you don't mind building the whole cockpit and detailing the landing gear and bays the kits are acceptable.   If you don't mind some small inaccuracies and raised panel lines the kits do build up into some wonderful shelf pieces.   And really, with a little photo etch and/or scratchbuilding you can produce a very nice representation.  The old Monogram kits probably aren't winning many contests any more, but they have long provided an important niche in the industry.  Just look at the interest they still create.  We really need to get Hans back on line, to give us the full Monogram sales pitch.  Rick.

     

  • Shawn M.

    unless you're crazy (like me) avoid the Revell 1/32 BF-110 kits like the plague!

    I've got to admire your patience !

    I bought the re-issue Bf-110 C as I didn't want to pay the extra for the Dragon kit, however, I don't intend to do the hard work scratch building the detailed interior you did.

    Oddly, the Revell decals are much more complete than the Dragon kit.

    Long time ago I bought the Brazil Revell Bf-110G without knowing about the inaccurate engine cowlings;  I probably won't build that kit due to the extra work.

  • RedCorvette

    IMHO, the only "hopeless interior" is one where the modeler doesn't have either the willingness to develop their modeling skills, or more importantly, the patience required.

    Then again, I'm biased since many of my all-time favorites are the 1:48 Monogram aircraft kits from the 60's.  

    Personally, I get a lot more satisfaction by doing some research on the subject and then using plastic sheet, wire and other miscellaneous bits (old watch parts, etc), to detail cockpits.     

    Mark

    Hear, hear, well put!

    I can understand, if you're not interested in trying to add details yourself, because scratchbuilding isn't for everyone.  And I understand, too, if you're not a geezer like those of us born when these kits were new, so you don't have a nostalgia about them (ironic that "nostalgia" contains "-algia", pain, isn't it?).  So, if you want to get a kit where everything you need is included in the box, I can appreciate that.  But I'd still recommend any of the original Monogram kits, as good exercises in stretching your modeling skills by adding some details.  I think you'll find that it is rewarding.

    Also, whether you buy new pops from those old molds via a retailer, or if you buy old boxings on the secondary market, I think you'll find that it's very budget-friendly, compared to some of the contemporary offerings out there now.  If you're on a budget, you might want to get that Monogram SBD and detail it, until you're in a better position to get the Accurate Miniatures kit.

    Best regards,

    Brad

    The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.

     

    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/HansvonHammer/Humor/th_MonogramMafia.jpg?t=1296972087

  • Sprue-ce Goose

    I built the Lindberg TBF kit as a child and was very impressed at the time by the detail in the kit.

    I've never seen the Monogram kit and I presume the Lindberg kit was as much a toy as the Monogram kit.

    Question for the TBF fans out there: how do the two brand kits compare on accuracy?

    Or,  perhaps the question should be how much work is required to re-build each version?

    If the Monogram is the only early TBF-1 kit out there in 1/48, is it worth re-building vs. reworking a latermodel TBF in a more modern kit?

    Monograms kits, even their old ones, were leagues ahead of Lindberg in terms of accuracy. I too really love their old kits. I have an SBD that I am every so slowly (read glacier pace) fixing up to a proper SBD-3. Why? Well when I started, there was no Accurate Miniatures SBD and the Hasegawa kit was a let down. Also, the raised rivet surface detail- see a real one in an air musuem and those raised rivets are quite noticable. The exterior, interiors, and canopies of the Monogram kits is superior to their Lindberg counterparts.

    The same goes for all the other early Monogram USN carrier warbirds, TBF, F4F, and F6F. They did not call them the Grumman Iron Works for nothing. As I have learned it is not too difficult to add detail to a cockpit. so when coupled with the proper surface detail, those old Monogram kits can be made to really shine with patience, skill, and innovation. I have seen that done and it has been the inspiration for my SBD.

    As far as rebuilding the Monogram TBF-1 into a -1C or -3? Well for surface detail reasons I say yes, but since Accurate Miniatures makes beautiful kits of both those variants now, why would one want to? Backdating a -1C to a -1 in the Accurate  Miniatures kit. Nothing too complicated. Mainly elimination of the wing guns and adding a single cowl mounted gun instead. The choice is yours. As for myself I am opting to improve the Monogram kit.

    F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!

    U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!

    N is for NO SURVIVORS...

           - Plankton

    LSM