What is your favorite type of kits?

QUOTE: Originally posted by woodbeck3 Now thats the Hulk I know!!!

I took a chill pill!

Now thats the Hulk I know!!!

QUOTE: Originally posted by woodbeck3 Why did you start a second thread and why did you go off topic Hulk.... hmmmm

Off topic? Me? I think everything in my post was in response to the questions raised in the topic...well, kinda, maybe. Perhaps my focus was not quite as sharp as it could have been. Or maybe I'm just nuts?

I gotta get more sleep...

Hopefully this is on topic:
Chris, the base color on my M41 was Tamiya's OD in the spray can.

RustyFord, I see your point about the M41 (as far as it "sucks!"). Sorry for the snappy comments! (That's seems to be happening a lot lately...do I need a vacation??) The mantlet cover is a resin part from Ordnance Models, as are the PE bits. The Tamiya kit and both Ordnance Models sets together still cost less than AFV Club's or Skybow's M41 kits. So, I guess it goes along with the spirit of what RustyFord was talking about: turning a rough kit into something nice.

And thanks for the nice comments, folks!

I like challenges and in terms of quality of kits, I'm usually an OOTB builder (I'm a sucker for indy links and tiny pieces!). Don't have the cash reserves or inclination to spend a lot of money to upgrade a kit so I go with known manufacturers that I've built previously such as Dragon or Tamiya that deliver a fine level of detail from the outset in general. Sometimes you get a bad kit in terms of fit or design, but that's all part of the hobby in my view. I don't have any problem with sanding and filling but it can be somewhat of a detour when they put ejector pin marks on large, clearly visible areas.

Why did you start a second thread and why did you go off topic Hulk.... hmmmm

Well, let me restate my original statement, , it's not that the kit "sucks" so much and I understand the idea of using even the basic modelling skills of filling seams and gaps etc etc... Overall its not a bad kit you are right about that.. I just hate when manufacturers leave seams that you end up working on in plain view. Makes me feel like one of those shoddy carpenters who generally does crappy work on the structure itself, but can cover up his mistakes good enough so that you don't notice the shoddy construction underneath?

Brian, nice job on your M41 Walker Bulldog btw, wondering what you used for the "gun cover"?

Brian, that is truely a cool build friend!! and hand painted to?!! say it ain't so!! thats a better finish than i can achieve with an airbrush!!LOL later.

Although not a big fan of Tamiya's, mostly because of the price of their stuff, I have to echo Brian's comment here above. The M41 from Tamiya is a neat little kit, a great first kit even because it's not overly complicated. There are a few areas that I do not like, but those are mostly connected to the fact that the kit was originally motorized. For a kit that must be nearly 30 years old, it is still a very good model.

As to quality in general, if I have to build, say a 1/72 Me-163 Komet, well I'll simply take the Academy kit over the much older Lindberg, Airfix or Heller offerings... No need to re-invent the wheel, is there!

However, for more obscure subjects, well, I'll take whatever is on hand. t's still something to start me up. It's all about what you want out of scale modeling!

Why do I get the feeling this is going to turn into one of those "good kits are bad for your skills" threads?

To be honest, I've never been able to understand that rationale. No matter how "good" a kit is, there are always plenty of areas on any build for a modeler of any level to "develop" his or her skills, be it the detailing, painting, decaling, weathering, or whatever.

To be even more honest, it is in fact primarily the most basic of modeling skills (filling seams, cleaning flash and parting lines, gluing pieces on straight and true) that truly bring the lesser kits up to the same level of quality as the better kits, at least as far as first impressions go. To varying degrees, these same skills must be employed in even the highest quality (and priced) models, so I don't see how a good kit robs of us anything.

As far as detailing goes, it's up to the individual how far they want to take it. You can look at it two ways: work your butt off just to bring an undetailed kit up to the standards of a higher-priced but better detailed kit, or take that same well-detailed kit, apply the same amount of effort, and turn it into a stunning, intricately detailed masterpiece.

I choose to attempt the latter.

By the way, I have to disagree with the statement that the Tamiya Walker Bulldog "sucks"...it's a great little kit! Old and simple, but not "bad" at all.

Here's mine, built 6 years ago, before I even knew what an airbrush was:




"Suck" is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose!

boy, i love tamiya kits, the ones i've assembled are top notch with just a small amount of time invested with seam repair. but, i love all kinds of subjects and thats where tamiya's down fall lies, they have a limited selection of kits. hasegawa kits are cool as well and the variety is alot better. but Classic Airframes has alot of novel birds that i find simply irresistable. i have one on the bench and i figured for $50 bucks, the thing would practically assemble itself.........not so. i have a tube or 2 of squadron green invested in it, and a half a can of krylon brown primer applied to it, the thing is warped, no locater pins to speak of, the cockpit...........well, i could never get it in correctly, flash out the ying yang, the canopy don't fit, the engines dont fit....................well, nothing has fit properly as of yet!! but, its a mighty cool subject that i instantly fell in love with when i saw her on the shelf. now, i just applied the camo job and am on the home stretch, she don't look too bad for a rookie with some putty and seam repair!! i'm kinda proud of my effort because it may enable me to buy cheaper, less well known kits of subjects and actually make them look ok. for example, take a revell kit of a P-40 and actually make it look like something besides a warped up, non fitting, raised detail piece of crap when its finished. i'm thinking hard of purchasing another one just to give me the challenge of trying to make a decent display out of it. so, i guess what i'm trying to say is, get out of the tamiya comfort zone and buy a few cheap, crappy fitting kits and see what you can do with them. if you don't like them, you can always use them for airbrush fodder!! later.

QUOTE: Originally posted by dubix88 [I like a model that will give me a challenge but isnt gonna be too hard to build good. I dont want to spend 10 bucks to buy the kit but spend a hundred to make it look nice.

I agree. I would prefer to spend my time adding extra detail onto a good base rather than spend heaps of time, energy and money bringing up to scratch a cheap poorly manufactured or inaccurate kit

.....anything where what skills i have are challenged, reinforced & nurtured.

I usually follow the "Murphy's model building law". If the kit goes together perfectly, the paint job will be a mess. If the kit has bad fit and is hell to build then the paint work will be flawless.

I much rather prefer the later. If there are no seams to fill I get very worried.

HEY,
see thats funny.

Randy

hehhe I call the real hard models that end up looking like crap "Parts" hehehhe

HEY,
I like a model that will give me a challenge but isnt gonna be too hard to build good. I dont want to spend 10 bucks to buy the kit but spend a hundred to make it look nice.

Randy