Maybe I'm getting old. Maybe I'm just looking for something to complain about.

"What did you do in the Navy?",,,,,,,,,well, lol,,,,,,,,,,"I did whatever the other Jarheads told me to do"

Couldn't resist typing it that way.

I was USMC from '75 to '79,,,,,,,aviation ground support equipment,,,,,,but, not as good as it sounds because I was active duty at a MARTD,,,,,,,Glenview NAS for almost all my 4 years,,,,except temporary detachments all over the Conus

which means we died of loneliness most of the time,,,,,,,,and were overrun by Reserves on weekends and for their summer weeks (I still managed to like our Reserves through it all, ha)

so, most of my time was spent fixing equipment,,,,,,and towing stuff around,,,,,,since the Gunny knew I was "born a tractor driver"(farmer's son),,,,,that's how he used me, lol (note to kids thinking of joining the service,,,,,,serving under your Uncle is NOT a good idea,,,,,trust me)

the TDY's were fun, though,,,,,going out to Yuma for two weeks to be the newbie,,,,or El Torro, etc,,,,,,,I used to volunteer to pull the duty in the new Hangar guard shack, to spend 48 hours watching out for Michigan to invade across the lake,,,,,and build models uninterrupted

anyway,,,,,,about agreement/disagreement,,,,,,on the net,,,,it seems as if almost no one agrees with anyone, but,,,,,I don't think it's really true,,,,,,,it's just hard to "have a discussion" without opposing views in text format,,,,,,,,,in person,,,,,say, at the Nats,,,,,,it's easier,,,,,if we agree, we change the subject,,,,and go on,,,,,,,,in text, we try to "stay on topic" in a thread,,,,,,,,,,so, from the outside it looks like "he doesn't like him", or etc,,,,,,when really,,,,,,tanks, ships, planes, cars,,,,,,we're all part of a pretty small group overall,,,,,,that gets lost when discussing things like "Hasegawa messed up by molding both the AF and Navy refueling panel lines on it's Phantom models"

talking to people on the net in two ohh ten is a lot different that what we had in '69 when I was 12 with 4 years modeling experience,,,,,,back then, we never dreamed there would be a place to ask for and receive color shots of the "chaff/flare buckets firing on an F-4B Phantom",,,,zapped right into our email inboxes.

If the "net negativity" ever seems to get you down some,,,,,,just remember you get to talk to people like one in this thread, that has the best paint line for natural metal out there for our hobby,,,,,or shake hands at the Nats with the reviewer that either made you want a kit,,,,or saved you money by telling you it's faults

and I've gone on the "rant tangent" again, haha

keep gluing and typing

Rex

I see your point Tarn. Through all the words I believe we actually agree more than not. I will concede your points, especially about todays cost vs "yesterdays" mold quality and features.

It loooks like you are a Navy type. What did you do in the Navy?

oh, HK,,,,,I think we are much closer than this discussion might look

I'm not back pedaling here,,,,,,if Academy gets something big wrong on that F-4B that requires a razor saw and putty to fix,,,,,,,I won't like that one small bit, for sure

but,,,,,,sure, we are modelers,,,,,we all have old kits that we still enjoy building,,,,,ill fitting or not correctly detailed, etc,,,,I'm not the kind of rivet counter that looks at the 14th rivet on the panel line along the port side and sees that it's not the same size as the rest in the line,,,,,,,,but, release an F-4B with thick wheels,,,,or large J type cans,,,,,I'll be mentioning that

heck, I'll be happy with either nice, sharp assembly with a few little details wrong,,,,,,or the absolute best shape and detail with a little more work to assemble,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the kit I don't want to waste my money on is the one that doesn't fit and has shape issues,,,,,and bad details, too, and costs the same as the current "champ kit" in that scale,,,,,,,,if I'm going to get 1970's kits in 2010,,,,,,I just don't want to pay 2010 prices for it

there are many different modelers out there,,,,with an equal number of "ways to do this",,,,,,but, all of us deserve "something for our money",,,,,,assembly fit, details, basic shape or cost,,,,,,hit 2 or 3 of these and I'll buy it, hit the first 3,,,,,,,and I'll pay whatever they want for it

I guess we'll see what happens with the next new kit to come out

happy building

Rex

I could see someone complaining about a kit that may have major fit issues, but many modelers look to those challenges! I just like to know that the kit goes together well, and looks good. I don't care if the tail fin is 1.7 scale inches too tall. I at least like to know that it is somewhat accurate, with the right exhaust cans and whatnot. My builds may not be 100% accurate, but I built something that pleases me and makes my friends and family go "Oooooo!" and "Ahhhhhh!" A prime example is my recent build of my Italeri SU-27. The markings I used are totally wrong for the color scheme I used, but it looks great to me!

And BTW, we need a new tool 1/48 SR-71.

Insightful reply, Tarn.

But as you said in your reply, I'd expect someone to gripe about "major" mistakes in a new kit. Afterall, how hard is it to find good refs on a Mustang or 109?
What gets me is the small stuff. One to many rivets in that line. Length off a scale inch. Something about the nose just isn't right. (love that one. can't tell me what's wrong with it but you just know something is).
What put me over the edge and therefore got my rant started was the fact that someone was complaining about a perceived error in a cad drawing of a sprue in a kit that wasn't even molded yet, not to mention on the market.

Eduard recently sent out it's lovely looking 190 D-9. I saw sprues at the Nats, good looking mold, yada, yada, yada. Will I buy one? Maybe in a few years, I got Dora's comming out my ears already. Is the kit the greatest thing since sex? Don't know. But I bet it will build up to be a fine example of the prototype when done, right out of the box.
But not a week ago I was reading about how the lower wing was molded wrong. OMG!!! They should have gotten that detail right, refs and resources are everywhere!!!
After a few minutes of research I figured out what all the hooplah was about and decided that it might take ten minutes to fix. Big deal. But someone out there had to be the first to point it out, make a big tadoo about it.
This company puts money and effort into making molds and offers what seems to be impossible, a kit better than the ones already avalable for the subject.  And folks have to focus on that one tiny bit that's supposed to be wrong with it right out of the gate. Kits hadn't even shipped at that point.
Are we modelers or not? I say it all gives more weight to the argument that some of us are mere "kit assemblers" and therefore expect the manufacterer to get everything perfect so we can actually build a correct model.

I'm with others who've posted here. If I don't like it I'll fix it. My big hang up is Mustangs and I've corrected many wheel wells. But do I go online in search of the next kit so I can be the first guy in line to scream "oh jumpin gee willikers, they didn't get the wheel well right!!!"
I've got way more important things in my life to stress over. So does everyone else. And this is only a hobby.

I still don't really get this idea.

If a new kit comes out,,,,and we heap praise on it,,,,,,,isn't that a quality judgement?

or when someone types one of the many "we need a new tool _______ , to replace the FujiFix kit"

anytime says "great model, Rex" (mythical quote, lol),,,,,,,compared to what?

and, some of the guys that worked on the real things did do so with their eyes open, I know I would spot SuperFox intakes on a new A-4 Charlie model from even pre productions photos

I think in a hobby where it's okay to heap praise on a new tooling or someone's build,,,,,,it should be okay to comment on someone designing a new tool with major mistakes

if there is a "top",,,,,there has to be a middle and a bottom,,,,,,,,or we would all still be happy with Aurora and Starfix kits,,,,,,,,instead of waiting for the new Academy F-4B to come out,,,,,the Revell and very oldddd Hasegawa* would have been good enough

*added,,,,,and if Hasegawa themselves thought their F-4 kits were okay in quality,,,,,,,they wouldn't have released 3 different generations of molds,,,,one would have been "good enough for modelers"

Unlike Doog, I will take a look at the reviews to see it 1) the kit is worth buying or is it a piece of junk; 2) if there are different companies making the kit, which one is a better; 3) what are the issues with the kit and are they ones in which I can fix or don't care about it issue.

If I just have the urge to build a Panther tank in 1/35 scale and don't care which Ausf. I chose, I will research the available kits, search the buy/sell forums or eBay and get the one that will give me the least hassle at the best price (or deal if a trade). Reviews help me out in this instance.

For an Abrams tank, I know just about everything regarding the available models both past and present. I would search for the one that best suits my needs. I wouldn't need a review to help me decide.

the doog

if they look the part, I'm beaming!

Well said, my sentiments exactly!

hkshooter

 believe there is a certain small minority of folks who feel like there is some kind of unspoken competition to find the first problems or error in a new release. They think if they find it first and post it first then they are somehow the *REPORT ME!!* of the rock, to be awed by everyone around. They feel they must demonstrate their higher intellegence of the subject in order to prove themselves. or maybe they are compensating for something else...

I was reading through these posts and thinking "I don't see 'keyboard courage', becauseI don't think it's arrogance; it's the manifestation of that weirdest of human quirks which says to oneself "I must be the best at SOMETHING!" It's the ol' competitive nature, the need to be seen as an authority on something in the community.

I honestly don't even pay attention; in fact, I alomst never read reviews before I buy. I may read them AFTER I own the kit to see if there's anything that I WANT to correct or muck around with. But I could really care less about that slight turret bulge on the old Firefly tank kit, or the "correct" type of tool latches on my Tiger--if they look the part, I'm beaming!

The need for perfection is a curse and a huge cross to bear. We should pity these people who cannot enjoy something which falls short of that brass ring, and marvel at those who make something spectacular out of a "flawed" project.

I do look at the occasional "In the box review" but dont really pay much attention to them other that what variant does the kit produce & what decals it has.

I do look at build review in the same way as others have stated, so that I am aware of any big issues or stumbling block's during construction. I find this pretty handy on the occasion when the kit instructions have construction in such an order that it make things more difficult than needs be.

Not such a big deal in the US, but here in the UK the Airfix TSR.2 has suffered quite bady from many severe bashings, with the bashers quite openy asking why Hornby purchased Aifix to continue to pump out "crap". Sure the intakes dont align, the wing doesn't sit properly, the nose profile is incorrect, some lower scribing has been placed the wrong way round, some scribing is imaginary, the nose has an imaginary mid length taper, the canopies are slightly to wide.......................... SO WHAT - most of this is correctable. Even if it wasn't correctable, with the exception of an exotic & expensive rare resin kit, what choice is there - none.

I for one am delighted that Airfix chose to release the TSR.2, the rapid sell out of the 1/72 (damn) kit suggests that there are plenty others just like me. The 1/48 version I am finishing at the moment had the "huge issues" the bashers pointed out, but for me it has turned into an enjoyable & nice build - so Airfix & all the rest, please continue on & produce kits, even if some do have warts!

I belive many of the bashers are just sad gits trying to prove they know more about a specific subject than the the next guy. On occasion I have seen bashers buying a flawed kit, buying a load of PE & resin to correct & superdetail the kit - but still turning out fecal matter - you have to laugh.

These "kit pickers" are the same people who sit down at a $4.00 breakfast buffet and complain the hashbrowns aren't seasoned properly.  My guess is modeling kits are not the only things in their lives that fall short of their impossible expectations.  I feel sorry for these over wound people.  I feel very  sorry for their children.  My 2 pennies.

Static.  

I agree with Hans, having served on, in and around modern US armored vehicles for the last 27 years, I notice errors, but I either fix them or live with them based on how much I "care" for the subject I'm building.

I'd pick a well-fitting, nicely engineered kit with some inaccuracies over a dimensionally accurate kit that was a bear to build and fit like crap. Another modeler may feel just the opposite and enjoy detailing the more accurate kit.

That leads us to my original analogy that just because we have different tastes, doesn't mean we do it wrong.

This might be like cuss'in in church but, I want a model to be as accurate as the next person but that is not why I build them.  I enjoy this hobby because of where my mind goes while I am at the bench, totally concentrating on what I am building.  Memories of air shows and who I attended them with, aircraft that I have always loved or maybe movies that I have seen all come to mind.  So it is not just the depiction of an aircraft, it is the journey I take to get there.     

unless you ate, slept, or otherwise were intamate with that particular subject , ya don't have a leg to stand on.

 99% of the folks that have lived with 'em probably wouldn't notice...  For example, crew chiefs don't rivet-count, they just look for empty rivet holes...  Pilots don't even look for that much.. They don't care if an intake's shaped wrong, just that it ain't blocked and nothing's living in there... They don't care if the wings have the wrong slats, they just care that there's two wings...

The other 1% are modelers and they pull out the personal photos, & the handbook copy they stole, and  just fix the kit problem, they don't b*tch about it.. 

i think part of it may also be attitude of the person(s) complaining about the model

if a person states as simple facts they see them

ie         this is not shaped right or this part is too big etc...         rather than the all out attack attitude   (look another disaster from x co nothing fits etc)

every kit has  neg side but   the attitude of the commenter  in my mind has a lot to do with how the post goes        

as some of you me remember the submarine issue of early 2009

hkshooter

A note here about reviews. I believe there is a need in the industry for the review as long as the review is honest and straight forward, provides correct info and points out areas of the kits to watch for while building the kit. IMHO, in box reviews are worthless as I don't care what it looks like in the box, how many bags the sprues are in, how big or well printed the instruction sheet is. I want to know how well it's molded, how it fits together and what problem areas to look out for when I build it. And to provide that info someone has to build it. 
A good review is a valued resource but I don't have much faith in them in general. It's been my own experience that reviews can be outright worthless at times and at their worst, lip service to the manufacterer. I don't believe for a second that if a kit sucks and the reviewer says it sucks and tells you why, that said reviewer is going to keep getting free samples for long. So I tend to think most of them are sugar coated to a point.
There are some folks who put right in their reviews that they paid for the kit out of their own pocket and I find that respectable.I tend to give those reviews more merrit.

So, I'm done now.
That's all I've got to say about that. Now where'd I put that DA sander???

I actually like in box reviews because they tend not to get bogged down in subjective details (one reviewers minor clean up is anothers gallons of putty needed). They tend to be short and to the point, this kit offers 3 decal options and can be built as an early or late model xyz. Parts are crisp and well molded, test fitting of major parts appears to be good overall. It includes a moderately detailed interior and a pair of nicely detailed radial engines.

That is really about all I need from a review.

Rob Gronovius

I've often used this analogy, but the level of detail a person is willing to accept is often like the guys who take care of their lawns. You may like to keep it cut, adding those cross stripes with perfectly manicure edging, etc. Your next door neighbor may just cut as quickly as possible, rarely edges his sidewalks and doesn't weedwhack along his chain link fence. Neither one of you is cutting your grass wrong, you just like to do it to different degrees.

Good example. At the end of the day, isn't the opinion of the purchaser/builder the most important any way?

I've often used this analogy, but the level of detail a person is willing to accept is often like the guys who take care of their lawns. You may like to keep it cut, adding those cross stripes with perfectly manicure edging, etc. Your next door neighbor may just cut as quickly as possible, rarely edges his sidewalks and doesn't weedwhack along his chain link fence. Neither one of you is cutting your grass wrong, you just like to do it to different degrees.

i myself have several kits in my stash that don't meet the approval of some die hard rivet counters and haven't built them for fear of the "oh thats the wrong tail shape "or "the glacias plate on that version has 14 button rivets not twelve bolts" and of course we all know that the internet never lies and the pictures posted of historical subjects are the absolute truth and the particular varient shown was the one that went into production with thousands rolling off the lines.face it( I MEAN NO DISRESPECT FOR THOSE FOLKS)unless you ate, slept, or otherwise were intamate with that particular subject , ya don't have a leg to stand on.personally i'm amazed at the technology this hobby has come to and simply overwhelmed with the choices that are now available,i look forward to all the stuff to come and if its a kit with issues i'll wait for someone to produce a better kit. long story short  joe public eyeballing the contest table at the LHS isn't going to care or possibly know the difference,if it makes you happy build it,if it's wrong fix it,if ya can't fix it live with it,if ya can't live with it leave it in the box and let thoseof us who aren't concerned with absolute accuracy enjoy the hobby for what it is.  a great way to spend the afternoon dreaming about activities we couldn't take part in(jet fighter pilot,racing across the dessert in a 60 ton behemoth). KUDOS to the companys and engineers involved with just simply making 500+ pieces fit together close enough for someone to bellyache that there is a 1/1600th gap in a tough spot to sand. we're modelers its what we do. 

Actually, I think it is a form of jealousy. Having lived the life of an unpaid online reviewer, I think a lot of guys who have more expertise in various subjects wonder "why is this guy getting to review a hot new kit for free and not me?"

Many feel they do not have the writing skills to write reviews (have you seen some of the posts folks write, they border on illiterate). A well written substandard review is more likely to get printed than an expert review written by Mr. Can't Spell who thinks grammar is what Yankees call their grandmothers.

Likewise, I have seen hot new kits passed off to modelers who know so little about the actual vehicle that the review seems like a waste of electrons.

I've even been in rather inane heated arguement with a person asking me to review an item that I politely turned him down. It was a 1/72 scale Tiger or Panther resin engine set. I tried to tell the person that 1, I didn't have the kit that the item would be used for (no way to see if it fit), and 2, that I had no personal knowledge of the subject nor did I have any references that I could even base an opinion on.

After he tore into me (accused me of having an agenda against him and called me some choice names), I mentioned the above reasons for declining again and basically told him that other than giving an opinion that it looked like an engine to me and commenting on the quality of the casting, I would have no other useful information to provide in a review. I told him I wouldn't know the difference between a Tiger, Panther, Panzer IV, or King Tiger engine or if any of them were even the same or all different.

Embarrassed, he slinked off and I've not heard from him in years.

Perhaps the "kitpickers" are merely fulfilling a need to project an image of themselves as "History Heavyweights", whose knowledge of a particular subject is over and above that of mere mortals.

That, or they have too much time on their hands.

Folks want to be the first. The first to point out an error. No one wants to give a kit the thumbs up only to have a Johnny Comelately expert point out an obvious (to that Johnny) mistake. Therefore, everyone wants to be able to find a fault or two so that when Johnny points out an error, the other Johnny can toss an error in his face that he missed.

After thinking about it for a while and reading the posts here I think I have figured out what bugs me so much about the kit picking (get it?? hehe)
Like some have alluded to, I believe there is a certain small minority of folks who feel like there is some kind of unspoken competition to find the first problems or error in a new release. They think if they find it first and post it first then they are somehow the *REPORT ME!!* of the rock, to be awed by everyone around. They feel they must demonstrate their higher intellegence of the subject in order to prove themselves. or maybe they are compensating for something else...
In a nutshell it's arrogance. And I loathe arrogant people. In the end it's not the act of the nit picking, it's the arrogance of the picker. "Hey! look at me! I just found 57 stiches in this 1/35 scale figures ruck sac instead of 56! Where's my medal?" I wonder how long it's been since that guy built a model anyway?

It's to bad others stress about the pickers follies. And it's to bad a manufacterer may delay a release and spend a few thousand more to fix something tiny and then charge us another $10 on that $100 kit. Know what? Like Gerald said, if a company made a perfect kit it would cost hundreds if not thousands of $. And the first thing someone would do is complain that nobody could afford it.
I have to chuckle sometimes.

A note here about reviews. I believe there is a need in the industry for the review as long as the review is honest and straight forward, provides correct info and points out areas of the kits to watch for while building the kit. IMHO, in box reviews are worthless as I don't care what it looks like in the box, how many bags the sprues are in, how big or well printed the instruction sheet is. I want to know how well it's molded, how it fits together and what problem areas to look out for when I build it. And to provide that info someone has to build it. 
A good review is a valued resource but I don't have much faith in them in general. It's been my own experience that reviews can be outright worthless at times and at their worst, lip service to the manufacterer. I don't believe for a second that if a kit sucks and the reviewer says it sucks and tells you why, that said reviewer is going to keep getting free samples for long. So I tend to think most of them are sugar coated to a point.
There are some folks who put right in their reviews that they paid for the kit out of their own pocket and I find that respectable.I tend to give those reviews more merrit.

So, I'm done now.
That's all I've got to say about that. Now where'd I put that DA sander???

I'll ease back, no problem

joined 4 1/2 years ago, less than 40 posts,,,,'back' is where I normally am

but, I also have almost all of the plastic I "need" for my collection, too

I only need one more Fujimi A-7 for the intakes, and one more Falcon conversion for the Canopy,,,,,,then I'll have what I need to fix both of the TA-7's I was soooo happy to have ordered,,,,,,and soooo sad to have seen when they got here,,,,,,,the parts to fix those are the same parts I could have used in the first place to do the conversion

but, that's not what's important,,,,,,it's only money,,,,,,,,it sure would be cool if someday there was a "peer preview" system for new kits,,,,,ironing out things ahead of time, before the final molds were cut,,,,,,that would eliminate most of the outcry at release time

Its one thing to say a kit has a problem with the shape of this or that. But its another to rail on the manufacturer and shout to the world this kit is fatally flawed and unbuildable. Dragon's P-51 though not perfect still was a bargain kit. It was big, it looked like a P-51 and they sold out more than one production run of it...and release other variants which also sold. It was a fun build.

I think what upsets most people is the choice of words used to describe the overall quality of a kit. Fatal is just that dead...can't be revived. DOA. Even the Sham Wow guy isn't as blatant as some of the posters we see posting their opinions of quality and what manufacturers should do to satisfy a small minority of consumers.

All those kits from the 50's, 60's, 70's and on are still in demand. Whether they are being requested as rereleases or just finding a long OOP kit on eBay to satisfy a craving for them. If they are so bad then why do they still appeal to so many, flaws and all?

I agree a review should point out mistakes, but remember these are still in the category of TOYS. If you want museum quality then one needs to look into building some of those expensive and exact museum grade models...that is if they are willing to shuck out hundreds of dollars to finally get a kit that is indeed accurate.

I met a modeler who has only ever built Tamiya kits. He says kits like Revell and Monogram are not quality  models. What he really said in volumes to me was (and he actually agreed later) that his skills as a modeler are not sufficient enough to build them. The other fact he admitted to was he wasn't doing it for fun, just something to do. When I queried why then does he do them, he again admitted he doesn't do anything crafty well at all and he hates fishing. He is of the type of personality that only works with the [ ] .

I think what is best is that everyone ease back on both sides.

I would be tempted to agree except for one thing

the Wildcat was corrected

the Bf-109 got a new canopy and people can get the corrected part if they already bought the kit

Kinetic attempted to fix the F-16 nose

and just today, there are new pics of the Dragon Bf-110 with the correct slats for the leading edge

so, the companies have/do listen, and sometimes fix the parts

kinda funny in a way, always reading that everything is "close enough",,,,,and then buying mags with cool builds of how to do a sub type of plane from an existing kit or kits,,,,,,,that -6 Cougar, for example,,,,,I really enjoyed seeing how to do one for my shelves,,,,if "close enough" was my only option,,,,,,,a -8 with -6 decals would have done it well enough,,,,,,,instead we got treated to an article to "do it right"

reviews aren't supposed to be shill adds for products,,,,,,they are supposed to point out mistakes,,,,or they are not credible

I call it "Keyboard courage". People are a lot braver when they can hide behind a nickname on an anonymous forum. I've always tried to conduct myself as if the person I am communicating with can reach over and punch me on the nose.

People who only complain, do so as it builds up their esteem, or so they think. It's one reason I just scan reviews. I'm looking for obvious and gross errors in construction, I don't really care if the wingspan is off by 2". In the scales I prefer to build in it is quite moot. I care if there are gigantic warp and fit issues.

Bernie,

Looking back how many of those imperfect model won contest and are proudly displayed that were built essentially OOB? Probably most of them even if they were so badly flawed. I guess people don't appreciate what they have as much anymore. Sad isn't it.