Opinions of the Imai/ERTL Cutty Sark and Constitution?

Interesting to see what comes up here. Those Revell kits are hard to beat.

cs.finescale.com/.../106700.aspx

cs.finescale.com/.../119293.aspx

Reading through these, I would vote Revell for the Constitution. Although it has a multi section weather deck, it also has a gun deck. And the cannons while impressive as single parts, are not going to build up nearly as nicely as the multi part Revell ones.

I know the Imai Constitution only through photographs. It looks to me like it's pretty simplified, and represents the ship as she appeared well after the War of 1812.

The Imai Cutty Sark is one of my favorite plastic sailing ship kits. I've expounded on it several times in the Forum; here's an example: cs.finescale.com/.../650801.aspx . You'd probably want to shave down the upper sections of the mast, and, of course, get rid of the plastic shrouds and ratlines. And for heaven's sake fix those crazy mistakes in the cargo winches and booby hatch. That will take about fifteen minutes.

If you do decide to take on that kit, spend a little money and buy all three sheets of the George Campbell plans. They're among the biggest bargains in modeling. You can get them through the ship's gift shop: shop.rmg.co.uk/.../cutty-sark-plans.html .

I have a strong suspicion that the kit issued by Academy is the same one - and might be easier to find.

Good luck.

Dave,

For what  it is worth, I have both the Cutty Sark and Constitution as well as the United States kits by Imai under the Monogram label. All are 1/120 scale. And as mentioned above and on the links, are nice models. They are not molded like the Santa Maria, etc, but more like the Susquehanna. Strong plastic but not as thick.

The Constitution, has nice molding but is configured as previously stated under it's present rig, not like the Revell 1/96 model.  Two piece hull. One piece deck, and no lower gun deck. The lower guns are exactly like the Golden Hind guns. One piece molding, carriage and gun together, inserted into small intended boxes. Once the gun lids are on, it does not look too bad. 29" long 28" high

The United States is a bit different than the Constitution, in that it has two gun decks and a stockier one piece hull. The lower gun deck has the rigged carriages molded onto the deck. Although seen through the grating, they do not look so bad. 29" long 28" high

The Cutty Sark again, has nice molding, two piece hull, one piece deck. The deck houses are separate. As John stated the booby hatch and winches need some work. 28" long 18" high

The issues I see with all three models are easily fixable. The windows are all molded, so you either paint them or drill them out and reframe them. All the masts are one piece and the yards all have the stunsails yards molded in the out position, so you either rig with sails or cut them off and reposition them.

The links that Bill and John have provided are great and provide a more in depth view of the models.

I can post pictures of the kits if anyone wants.

Steve

I did a review of that Imai Cutty Sark when it was new. (That was a long time ago.) As I remember, my biggest criticism was that the upper masts were too fat. I was, however, impressed with the ingenuity that went into casting them integrally with the lower masts. If my memory is correct, they could be fixed by some careful scraping of excess plastic.

What I don't remember - and this may be important to Dave - is how Imai handled the carved ornamentation. I think the bow carvings are three-dimensional, but the ones at the stern are in the form of decals. (Steve - can you help me out here?) Those stern carvings present a big problem for the injection-molding process, because they go right around the stern. They're also quite small, and pretty elaborate. As I remember (beware my memory), Aoshima's stern decal was really nice - but a decal just doesn't look quite as nice as genuine relief carving. (Some of the finest lettering on the stern, as I remember it, was almost but not quite legible - namely the family motto of the ship's first owner, John Willis. The motto is "Where Theres a Willis A Way." I'm just as glad it disappears at such a small scale.)

One kit often gets left out of Cutty Sark discussions: the larger of the two Airfix ones. It's listed as being on 1.130 scale; I'd be willing to bet it matches the Campbell plans, which are on 1/128. I haven't seen one for a long time, but my recollection is that it's a fine kit. The planking seams on the hull are countersunk (if a bit over-done), the deckhouse sides have nice, countersunk detail, and all the carvings are three-dimensional. (Airfix solved the problem at the stern by molding the carvings onto three pieces - port, starboard, and center - that are cemented to the bulwarks of the hull halves. How well those three parts fit together I'm afraid I don't remember.) Unfortunately that kit seems to be pretty hard to find at the moment.

I'm glad to see some info and opinion on these (and other) kits.  Thanks for sounding off, everyone!

Some of the best info I could hope for about either of those kits would be...how they compare to other Imai kits (with regard to quality), and how they compare to the big Revell kits (with regard to everything!)...

There's been some good info toward both of those questions!

GM, thanks for the links!  (it's funny, the search function on this forum seems to work well, but almost TOO well...I often search for specific subjects before I create a post to ask a question, but usually the several hundred results I get are too vast to wade through when trying to find specific responses)...the posts you linked do offer some good insight!

Steve, would you mind at all sharing some pics of the 1/120 Cutty Sark, and maybe highlight some of your impressions of the kit? Especially as compared with Revell?

John, it seems you've had some experience with these kits as well, and I appreciate your thoughts.

There's probably not much chance that I'll be tackling another major build for awhile (I think my modeling plate will be full for a while!), but I certainly like to learn about kits that I might find to be *exceptional*...I'm going to keep my eyes peeled for one of the Imai/monogram 1/120 Cutty Sark kits, and maybe add one to my stash if the price is right...then perhaps compare it to my Revell CS before choosing one to build...but again, a Cutty Sark of any brand will be at least a few years down the road...

Thanks again, guys!

Dave

When it comes to the Cutty Sark, I can think of only two reasons to prefer the Revell 1/96 version: its upper mast proportions are better, and it's just plain bigger. The latter point is important; bigger models are more impressive (to most people), and a good deal easier to rig. Oh - and the Revell one as those wonderful crew figures. Otherwise the Imai kit, to my eye at least, wins hands down. (Let's be fair, though: the Revell one is twenty years older.)

Like I said earlier, I've never seen the Imai Constitution. On the basis of what Steve said, though, it sounds like the big Revell kit is the clear winner.

Dave,

I'll take some pictures tonight and post them.

There is an Imai 1/120 Cutty Sark sealed kit on evilBay right now for $75.00 USD + shipping which is a better deal than the Aoshima kit running anywhere from $120 to $160 + shipping or even more. The Aoshima kit is just a repop of the Imai kit.

As much as I love the quality of the Imai kits, I have to agree with John that the Revell Constitution is a better overall kit, even with the quality of the newer plastic being less than stellar.

I plan on building both the Revell version and Imai versions of Cutty Sark and Constitution down the road. It is not like I don't have enough going on right now. The one big issue I had with the Revell kits, the three part decks, has been alleviated with the ScaleDeck aftermarket decks.

I'll go further into my impressions of the Imai Cutty Sark when I post the pics you asked for Dave.

Hope this helps a bit,

Steve

Alright, here are some pictures of the Imai/Monogram 1/120 Cutty Sark. As you can see, the molding is up to Imai standards. Not as thick as some of their kits, such as the Golden Hind, Santa Maria and the Catalan Ship I am working on now. However, beautiful and delicate in places such as the riveting.  As John pointed out earlier, his memory is still up to snuff no matter what he says, the bow scrollwork is engraved but the stern is flat and uses a decal for the scrollwork and name. I wonder if you could make PE from the decal?

Overall, a really nice model and worth getting if you can find it. There are no blocks included so one would have to purchase either wooden blocks or paper blocks to outfit the rigging. The ratlines are molded, but are much more delicate than say, Revell's and the ratlines themselves have a bit of droop to them. If you wanted to rig your own shrouds and ratlines, then again, you would need fairly small deadeyes to accomplish this.

As I have stated before, I still plan on building the Revell 1/96 Cutty Sark but this one is also in the building queue. One issue I see is the caulking lines on the deck are indented a bit too much and when either using a wash or oil, they will stand out prominently. The cargo winches and booby hatch will need some work but that is minor.  All in all, a great model if you do not have the room for the Revell 1/96 Cutty Sark.  The Aoshima 1/120 kit is a repop of this kit and the Academy 1/150 and 1/350 are just smaller versions.

Steve

jtilley

Like I said earlier, I've never seen the Imai Constitution. On the basis of what Steve said, though, it sounds like the big Revell kit is the clear winner.

And as Bill said waaaaaaayyyyyy back at the beginning in post #2, the Revell Connie is a winner, age and all.

Steve

And that plank pattern on the Imai Cutty is all wrong too.

I'm going to be sleezy here and propose the Revell 1/96 until I can be out-fought.

One piece masts, hmm.

I'm back with really accurate Muntz metal plates with nails.

Thank you Bill for pointing that out, I thought it was just the chalking lines but you are right, the plank pattern is off. If you do a Google search on the Imai 1/120 CS you'll find a very nice finished model by Len Roberto that has a picture of the deck. Again, I just thought it was the just the lines, but I agree, the planking also throws off the look.

I agree with John about the thickness of the upper masts, but I think that was to stiffen the masts enough for rigging but it also could be because they are one piece and tend to bend more at the top. If you look at the photos of the masts and yards, you'll note that they are a bit warped on the sprue tree already.

Accurate Muntz metal plates with nails no less? Dang and I thought my AMS was bad........... I would love to see an example!

Please don't get me wrong, I still feel the Revell 1/96 CS is a great model and it will probably be my first BIG sailing ship model. But as I said before, I really need to finish up all the projects I have before delving into something that long term. At least for my beautiful wife's sake, if for nothing else.

Steve

Thanks for the excellent pictures, Steve.

The pattern of the butt joints in the Imai deck planking is certainly wrong; the butts are too closely spaced. And there ought to be some indication of the bunged bolts on the intermediate planks. And there are no margin planks, joggled or otherwise. To most people's eyes that's pretty minor stuff, though.

The hull planking looks fine to my eye - except that the detailing of the iron framework under the trailboards is simplified. (You should be able to see the actual wood-planked bow structure between the pieces of framework.)

The detail inside the bulwarks is perhaps a little better than the Revell kit. The latter has those big triangular gussets, which are fiction. The real ship has vertical iron straps over the joints between the plates, and iron a-shaped stanchions running from the tops of those straps to the inside edges of the waterways. Those stanchions are best made of wire; they wouldn't be difficult, or very time-consuming, and would improve the look of the finished model quite a bit. The waterways molded integrally with the hull halves, incidentally, are more or less authentic. In the real ship they're iron, covered with cement, and painted red.

Both companies missed the decorative molding inside the panels on the wood monkey rail. Each panel should have an elongated oval shape countersunk in it; the oval is painted white, and the surrounding wood is varnished teak. That one would be tougher to fix.

The Revell version, being larger, does do a better job of representing the spikes in the metal sheathing.  And most of the deck fittings on the Revell one are pretty blobby by comparison. (Take a look at the two big cargo winches.) And the deckhouse sides are pretty hokey by comparison with Imai's.

Imai's literature laid great stress on the firm's determination to make its kits accurate but robust and easy to build. If you look carefully at those one-piece mast assemblies, you'll see that virtually all the components are there all right; when the tops, crosstrees, cand other fitings are added, the results are pretty impressive.  But the topmasts and topgallant masts are definitely too fat.

In terms of detail and accuracy I give the nod to the Imai kit. But it's a close call. If I were contemplating the choice, I'd probably be guided as much as anything by how big a model I wanted to build. My lousy closeup eyesight would be another factor - and in that department the Revell kit wins.

Dang.  Just got home from a night of drinking and dancing with the Lady, and I find about 15 new posts on this thread!  I'm a little fuzzy right now, but I'll have to read through all of them in the morning...btw, you guys are all awesome!  Did I ever mention how I wish we could all hang out and have a drink sometyme?

Dave

What's nice about this thread is that there's virtually no disagreement. We're talking about some good, sound kits, any of which is perfectly capable of being turned into a fine scale model.

Hear hear. I was out last night too, her Birthday!

Really true about the CS kits. And that hull half for the Imai kit really does have a certain pleasant quality to it. It's hard to know without an overlay comparison, and it really doesn't matter.

But I'd bet the Imai stem is just a tad more perpendicular, or something that makes it quite rakish, to abuse the term.

Ill never build the Revell one again, or the Imai one, due to time and space constraints, so have at it David and I'll be following with pleasure.

You haven't posted a metal sheathed ship yet, correct? Very interested to see what your choices will be for finish.

May get an onshore gale here yet

Very cool and informative thread this turned into...

It's interesting that the Imai CS has no blocks? I wonder if that's the case for all versions (Aoshima, Monogram, etc.?)....

The parts definitely have that *Imai* look to them....crisply-molded detail, even the sprues are indentifiable.

By all accounts, the Revell Constitution is clearly superior to the Imai, for various reasons...and I think basically that makes it pretty much the reigning champ of plastic Connie kits...I have some older boxings of both, Connie has a 1976 copyright mark, and the CS has a 1974 copyright (or vice-versa)...I hope that they're early enough so the molds are still clean?  They're still in shrinkwrap and I haven't had the heart to open them up yet...the boxes are a little "smushy", I'm convinced that taking off the shrinkwrap would sacrifice the structural integrity of the boxes and they would collapse!

Since I'm such a fan of Imai, I see no reason why I wouldn't pick up their Cutty Sark (or one of the reboxings) and hold on to it until the appropriate time comes to build it.

Steve, I have seen those Imai Connie and CS kits on Ebay...they look immaculate, still wrapped, no dents...and the product description says they come from the personal collection of some former bigwig at Imai?  Not sure if that is verifiable, or if it matters?  In any case, beautiful though they are, 75 is a little high for a kit I won't plan on building for the next few years...but I'll certainly find one along the way, hopefully for a little better price!   (did I tell you guys about the brand new Heller Victory I scored for 20 bucks locally on craigslist?  That was a steal!

Which brings another point:  "Newer" ships.

Since I got into shipmodeling, I've been interested and fascinated by the old-style ships (stuff from super early up to 18th century....and my preferred aspect is for my models to look old and sorta worn...

When it comes to Cutty Sarks and Consititutions, they're still around, and still in clean shape....I'm sure when the time comes that I build one, I'll be learning a very different form of using washes and whatnot, since they would not look right with my standard "shadows and fades" type of weathering.

And GM, I've not built a model of a metal-sheathed ship...Though it looks like the Victory, The Constitution, and the Cutty Sark will all have that in common....as I work my way up "through the ages", I suppose my techniques will be evolving with the subject matter!

Thanks a lot for the info, friends!

Dave

Ya Know ;

   Funny you should mention the lack of blocks . Now I had the direct opposite experience .I built four of AOSHIMA'S kits for a friend and it was a block party ! all sizes all types and even some to new to have been on sailing vessel . They were all sealed in factory plastic and I should mention this was back in the seventies .  T.B.

Tank,

If that was back in the seventies, it must have been when Aoshima was feeling more generous. The newest kits do not have any blocks whatsoever. I am trying to remember when Imai first issued this kit, the Monogram/Imai kit that I have is from 1979.

Steve

I can pin down the date of my first encounter with the Imai Cutty Sark: October 1978. I think it was a brand new kit at that time. I was on my first ever trip to England, and I saw it in a now-defunct, outstanding hobby shop: Maritime Models of Greenwich, a few hundred yards from the ship herself. After taking a look at it I bought it and had it shipped back to Ohio.

My kit had no blocks in it; just the usual hokey styrene deadeyes and lanyards. Tankerbuilder, I wonder if you're thinking of a different kit. I think Aoshima only started reissuing Imai kits in the past few years.

Well my Imai Heller Victory certainly came with blocks, all totally worthless.

I envy you going to see her. I was in Greenwich several times over the years but never made the visit. And I've never been to Portsmouth. Need to mend my ways.

October 1978 I was living in Copenhagen, in my senior year in Architecture School. Not so far away.

Plenty of nautical things to see there, and I did get over to see Wasa.

Good thread and I wont hijack it any further. Have my Scientific CS out though, and putting together plans for a conversion to another subject with her.

Dave..your weathering tech. is amazing and would look well on a conversion of the victory into a prison ship.  With its top mast removes and only lower masts and shrouds with deck houses afixed and such...and the gun ports made into windows.  Your weathering would look good on that.  Even on a Connie and CS if done with less application.

As you know..I use alcohol washes and India ink for my weathering..and it is less pronounced.

Thanks for the compliment, Rob!

I've never heard of a *prison ship* before...that's an interesting idea...

Dave

Or a receiving ship, maybe. A little "happier" though...

Prison ship

Another

Wow, I've never seen anything like that before!