What Revell Monogram Aircraft Kit Re-Issues to Avoid?

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.

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.

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

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.

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. 

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.

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

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.

i dug out my Lindberg ( Skokie Illinois ) TBF plans to check.

The kit is similar to the Monogram P-51 in that it is motorized and on a stand.

The cockpit control stick moved wing ailerons and elevators and the rudder pedals moved the rudder.The landing gear retracted.

The assembly photos show a detailed pilot's  cockpit tub made up of sub assemblies as well as a basic turret interior and torpedo bay. a tractor was included.

Hmmm. now that I am viewing the old plans I may look for an old Lindberg kit just to pose next to

my Monogram Phantom Mustang  P-51

What did the old Monogram 1/48th TBF kit have regarding interior details?

The interior was pretty weak. The cockpit is essentially one large tub with seats and side consoles molded in place. It is just waiting to be detailed up. Eduard actually made some PE sets for the kit(dont know if they are still in production).The bomb bay doors operate and when openend (inaccurately as a single piece rather than the split folding doors of the real bird) would allow a torpedo to drop out off its mounting/holding pegs. The turret was simplified. The landing gear and tail hook also could be operated, as well as the wings folding. The wing folding portion was semi accurately done (much better than on the F4F and F6F kits).

The Lindberg kit sounds high tech next to Monogram.

Probably was priced accordingly at the time (  Lindberg instruction booklet says send 15 cents for a catalog )

I'm now wondering what version the Lindberg kit was.

BTW...my Monogram catalog ( included with a kit I owned )  gives the TBF  kit PA31 as $1.49 and the Phantom Mustang as $4.98.

LOL! Love those prices! I think the Lindberg was a -3

Sprue-ce Goose

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.

 

Yeah if you like a canopy that's open I could see where that's a problem, but I didn't worry too much about it and built it OOB canopy closed.

I cant resist a Monogram kit when I find one. As has been said, most of us older folk grew up with Monogram, many of the classics first time issues!  The price just cannot be beat on a new Revell re-pop of one. Someone on here coined the phrase "Biggest bang for the buck".

I am hip deep in the middle of a Revell/Monogram B-25 J Mitchell in 1/48 scale. Has copyright 1977 molded on the starboard wing. Paid $22 and some change for it brand new. Right now the cheapest price I can find on  Italeri's B-25 C/D  in 1/48th is $75.99 on sale at Tower. MSRP is $102!

Someone please show me where the extra $60 worth of plastic is in the kit? That doesn't mean I haven't bought an Italeri kit, or Tamiya, or Hasegawa, and I will again, but the price is usually heavily discounted when I do.

And they are nice. It all boils down to this..... If everyone liked the same thing it would probably be a pretty dull world.

kustommodeler1

 

Sprue-ce Goose:

 

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.

 

 

Yeah if you like a canopy that's open I could see where that's a problem, but I didn't worry too much about it and built it OOB canopy closed.

Even if I were to build with the canopy closed, I'm concerned about filling gaps between the clear canopy and frame. If not for that canopy feature, I'd build a more than the one kit I have in stash.

BTW....looks like a nice, neat build.

Did you add putty for a wing faring to blend in the elevator assembly with the fuselage?

Sprue-ce Goose

 

 

 

Even if I were to build with the canopy closed, I'm concerned about filling gaps between the clear canopy and frame. If not for that canopy feature, I'd build a more than the one kit I have in stash.

BTW....looks like a nice, neat build.

Did you add putty for a wing faring to blend in the elevator assembly with the fuselage?

No, no putty anywhere.

As for the gap on the clear part of the canopy and the frame molded to the fuselage, I just used Testors clear parts cement and window maker. Of course there wasn't much gap to fill anywhere. Not only around the canopy but the whole kit, it fit so well putty never got near it.

Yeah, that's the bare grey plastic.

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.

kustommodeler1

 

No, no putty anywhere.

 

As for the gap on the clear part of the canopy and the frame molded to the fuselage, I just used Testors clear parts cement and window maker. Of course there wasn't much gap to fill anywhere. Not only around the canopy but the whole kit, it fit so well putty never got near it.

I hate to say it, but my recent return to the hobby means i am still unfamiliar with much of the model building  aids currently available to the modeler.

I will check for the Testors products you mentioned.

If I understand correctly from your post the Testors window maker is intended ( or can be utilized ) to fill any gaps between clear and opaque styrene with little or no discernable seam?

kustommodeler1

 

I cant resist a Monogram kit when I find one. As has been said, most of us older folk grew up with Monogram, many of the classics first time issues!

Right now the cheapest price I can find on  Italeri's B-25 C/D  in 1/48th is $75.99 on sale at Tower. MSRP is $102!

Someone please show me where the extra $60 worth of plastic is in the kit?

And they are nice. It all boils down to this..... If everyone liked the same thing it would probably be a pretty dull world.

i missed many of the kits first time around ( was building Airfix  1/72  aircraft  / 1/600 ships and Airlines, Testors   1/72  aircraft )   which is why I asked about the old Monogram kits.

I bought the Revell F4U re-pop as the kit was one I wanted back then but didn't have at the time.

Italieri kit prices are insane.

If everyone liked the same things there would never be any bargains on ebay.

none

Yeah the clear parts cement will fill gaps if they are fairly small. what I did was put the canopy in place and ran a small bead around the edges. When it was dry, I simply painted right up to the edge of the kit part. As it says in this link, it dries crystal clear, and is very versatile.

http://www.testors.com/product/136633/3515C/_/Clear_Parts_Cement___1_Oz.

kustommodeler1

Yeah the clear parts cement will fill gaps if they are fairly small. what I did was put the canopy in place and ran a small bead around the edges. When it was dry, I simply painted right up to the edge of the kit part. As it says in this link, it dries crystal clear, and is very versatile.

http://www.testors.com/product/136633/3515C/_/Clear_Parts_Cement___1_Oz.

Thank you very much !

I will look for it.