What has happened to this site?

I think everyone has posted a valid point or two, in this thread. There's no right or wrong way - it's all individual. One of the key things we all need to acknowledge, is with every chosen field of modelling, there is a certain level of faithfulness to the chosen subject. SeaBee, you touched this point perfectly. Like you, I too model F1, WRC & the odd bike (I feel slightly embarassed about you mentioning the difference between roof scoops on 01/02 Focus' ). For all intents & purposes, most people would look at a gravel spec rally car & think there isn't any difference. However, if you modelled the same suspension setup for a Safari car as say Finland or NZ, then technically, you'd be wrong. As 1000 Lakes & NZ are faster, less bumpy rallies, you could actually get away with using tarmac struts with the gravel tyres/rims. I have countless kits of Subes & Evos without suspension bits, just so I can get this little detail truly right. Of course street/stock is different. That's not my chosen area of modelling, so won't even touch that.

Wickeeed!

We don't scare easily, no sweat... Look forward to seeing some more of you over here.

i came and everyone ran away

Aaronw wrote:

I don't think what you see on this forum is really representitive of auto modelers, mny of the really hard core auto guys spend time at dedicated auto modeling sites.

I'm the "chain guy" from the MotoGP GB.  I spend most of my time at my workbench elbow deep in detailing. If I'm lucky I might complete 3-4 models a year. My fellow GBers may think I have fallen off the earth (no update in a while) but I've been too busy building.

 

Darren

 

I think the site is alive and well, but some things have an ebb and flow to them and the autos are in an ebb.  Plus a lot of folks are wrapped up in the holidays and doing more shopping and wrapping and tree decorating and visiting, so their time is being pulled away from here for a while.  Now .. AFTER Christmas, when all the gifts are unwrapped, just watch the postings pick up as those new kits start getting glue and paint all over them.

The redesign of the site might have slowed a few things down, but it will come back bigger than ever once the model fans adjust their paradigms and jump back in.  After all, there is no other modeling magazine in the world on the same caliber of FSM and this site is their portal to the builders.

And that's all I have to say about that .... 

Um guys... has anybody else noticed about htis thread? It has gone a little to the left of ! I know somebody mentioned it earlier, but man, when did we start arguing over detail rivets and counting bolts

Ummmm, I said several posts ago that the exception was WWII and battle field modifications. Not much armor to model for in 'Nam 'cept for Bull Dogs and M113s. The Bull Dogs were too heavy. No nothing could stop you from building a "what if " tank we covered that a few posts earlier too. The point is the atmosphere of modeling military is just differnt is all. You can what if a tank all day but there would be no chance of seeing it in the real. I can what if a car and depending on the degree of modification I could build it in the garage. Building cars is more like building a dream. It is very nature of custom car building. It is an art . Building military is more like building hardware and as such you build it as it is. Not arguing just stating that there are different motivations behind the two generes most of the time. 99% of the time you are building a replica when it comes to military rather than an example of a subject from a group.

 

Okay, I've allready said a lot on this topic. Maybe way to much. But healthy conversation never killed anybody! The fact that we've wandered waaayyy off topic is besides the point!

Okay, I am starting to see the point Joe made initially through a part of Martian's last post (please excuse shortening of your name...). This might have just been my small-worlded thinking. I have not once built a road car, which may be why I missed the point. Yes, on road cars and "funny cars" you can go bananas. The sky is the limit, true. I think in that aspect Jeff pretty much nailed it. The genres are so different, you simply can't really compare them.

My history in modelling is relaively narrow. I have build A/C, then saw one race car. It was a 1:12 Tamiya JPS Lotus Mk iii. After building that, I was converted. I loved it so much, I recently bought the 1:20 version of the same kit, just to make up for how terrible an injustice I did to the 1:12! I will most likely end up doing the 1:20 one stacks better, despite less detail in the kit.

And yes, I do have a few a/c still in the to-do box. An extensive list of Jolly Rogers planes through the years are still waiting to be built, for the simple reason it happens to (don't laugh!) carry our family crest. I also recently bought my first armour kit. Just to see what it's like. And I have a few wooden boats (Artesania) in the cupboard as well. Have done one smallish one, two big ones waiting...

At this stage on my workbench, I am working on a WRC Subaru and a Ducati, both Tamiya with detail sets, as well as my first resin F1, a Studio 27 Renault R25. What draws me to it: simple - I have an interest in auto racing and I love the challenge of building a good model. Living in SA, I do not have the exposure to armour and A/C most of you have. Otherwise I might have done much more of that.

Another thing I agree with Jeff is the "closed" nature of an auto. With armour, a lot of detailing is done on the outside, maybe the "cockpit" inside, I know not. (Excuse my ignorance if I am incorrect.) With aircraft, there are cockpits and wheel wells that can get more detailed (and engines for prop a/c) that might get missed by the casual observer. With autos, as you could see on the links I provided earlier, most detailing are hidden. You work days and night to get a bike engine looking "just right"... then you slap a cowling over it! A superbly detailed cockpit in a DTM or WRC car gets lost, as does F! engin detail, etc.

We are all here because we love modelling. You don't come out to a place like the FSM forums (or any other) for another reason. I come here to learn and to share what I've picked up if I can help. I have huge admiration for all types of models. Be it a spacecraft, a battle-worn tank, or a new one, for that matter, ships of all sorts or an aircraft. I simply love a good model.

Different genres, different challenges...

MartianGundamModeler wrote:

I agree with you Jeff. I think some of  you guys may have missed the what I was pointing out. No one is denying  that each genre has it's bolt counters, the point is auto modelers have options military does not. There are no "choices". You can choose nationality, division or unit markings but that'ts it. The only criteria you can judge a military kit by is accuracy and detail. It's the only thing that distinguishes one from another. There is litte room for "originality" in military. As I said before, unless you are building a race specific vehicle or a replica of a specific stock or custom vehicle, the sky is the limit. You can add all the plumbing, seat belts and what nots you want for detail on an original custom model creation but no one can tell you that it's "wrong" because autos by nature are all unique. I am not arguing or anything its just you guys went into a lot of detail on a point that was already acknowledged and that was detail/accuracy. That is what modeling is. All I am saying is there is unlimited flexibility in auto building options while military options are few and rigid.

I disagree whole heartedly.
Depends on what you are doing. There is nothing stopping anyone from a "what if" piece of military hardware, just like there is nothing stopping one from doing a "what if" car. The options are there, you just have to be willing to take the step. So what if some rivit counter comes along and sez that's impossible or incorrect - the point is moot. besides whose to say that some soldiers didn't make similar modifications to thier vehicle but never documented it. The Russian front is a classic example of field modifications and so is the current stage in Iraq. Vietnam is another case.

There are variations of color on monochromatic fiinishes, especially on military hardware that has been in field for awhile. It's one thing to model factory/depot fresh, it's another to model used. You also may want to look at some of the West German F4's and tornados. Some real gorgeous art work there,
same can be said of the NATO tiger meets.

I mainly model AC, it's the shapes and  markings that keep me attracted as well as usage. I also like to lurk here in autos for alternative solutions to typical modelling demands. It always pays to keep a fresh perspective.

I started out building cars whe I was younger and then I went to scifi and planes. Two years ago i while building  a kit at my dad's request (retired military) i found i liked tanks.And it wasn't just the vehicles but the history you learn while researching them. About a month or so ago came back to cars while trying to build a mustang based on a sci fi movie. Now I have the car bug. I have grown to love the freedom of choice and options that you just don't have with military kits. I just hate trying to get the paint right!LOL So I pretty much model everything but I think all modelers branch out from time to time to "cleanse the pallet". I have probably bought 5 car kits in tha past 2 months. There's a zip lock baggie full of  '69 galaxie bits on my office desk right now!LOL

I have to agree with you both Jeff and MartiangundamModeler,
It is not the genre of models that you make on this forum it is all of the friendly/helpfull and sometimes just to the point of all of the advice and help that you get from everybody here ,it goes to show anybody will answer a question no matter what they model,this thread proves that point with some military modelers  reading what happening in an auto forrum thread

I agree with you Jeff.

I think some of  you guys may have missed the what I was pointing out. No one is denying  that each genre has it's bolt counters, the point is auto modelers have options military does not. There are no "choices". You can choose nationality, division or unit markings but that'ts it. The only criteria you can judge a military kit by is accuracy and detail. It's the only thing that distinguishes one from another. There is litte room for "originality" in military. As I said before, unless you are building a race specific vehicle or a replica of a specific stock or custom vehicle, the sky is the limit. You can add all the plumbing, seat belts and what nots you want for detail on an original custom model creation but no one can tell you that it's "wrong" because autos by nature are all unique. I am not arguing or anything its just you guys went into a lot of detail on a point that was already acknowledged and that was detail/accuracy. That is what modeling is. All I am saying is there is unlimited flexibility in auto building options while military options are few and rigid.

A lot of good points, but it's like comparing apples to oranges.

Personally, there's only a handful of street cars I'd ever build, a '69 GT500 (because I owned one awhile ago), a Superbird (because they look so cool), and my first car, a '66 Impala. Maybe an odd exotic here or there, old Ferrari's and Jags are pieces of art in my opinion.

Other than that, my auto-modeling passions lie in Formula 1 and GTP racing. Sorry, can't stand NASCAR or Indy, call me a snob.

Although I truly build just about everything (I AM the original mutt modeler) I have my personal preferences within each vertical, whether it's based on the scale, nationality, or whatever.

I build different things for different reasons. I build cars because I like racing, but I've always been intimidated by gloss paint (especially on an aftermarket-loaded 1/12 F1 car). So my approach to cars is different than armor or tanks, and it's usually based on my mood at the time.

Saying that cars aren't as detailed as armor or aircraft is also a jaded statement. Sure, a curbside auto model lacks the fine details of a tank or aircraft cockpit, but once you open the hood and doors, it's a different beast altogether. Open wheeled cars are even more complex.

Anyone who considers another group of modelers inferior to another because of what they build is just plain ignorant. I can build ships, armor, and aircraft with the best of them, but I'm humbled by some of the car models I see on the tables. There's something to be learned, no matter what you build, from guys who build thing you might not be interested in.

That's the best part of the hobby in my opinion...learning something new and improving your own skills.

Jeff

SeaBee I agree with eveything you are saying.
When I started modeling about 26 odd years or more ago all I made Was Tanks 4 about 12 years and got sick and tired of using the same paint (khaiki Drab desert yellow,etc,etc)+ they all started to look the same from a distance, So I started planes thinking that they would be better made them 4 a couple of years then got married had kid work got busy(even more so now)so stopped models all together for a few years.
Then spotted a moto gp bike by Tamiya 1/12 scale tryed my luck mainly since have been a motorbike racing nut for quite a few years now and if you follow a certain rider and they are in one team one year you do that bike,then they change sponsors the next year there will most likey be a very diff colour scheme for that.
Or lets take Rossi and Colin Edwards this year 4 times they have had a diff paint scheme or you get a one of bike like Marco malandri's Spiderman scheme from Estrol in 2003.
So here is a challnage for all of the non auto modelers out there,
 get two of the new duke models from Tamyia do one as factory team then get the D'Antin decals from 2004 version and build that one then get two sherman tanks do one as U.S.A  and one as British,
or get two mustangs (planes ) do the same stand back and be honest and say which one stands out best
Bet it will be the D'Antin duke

Joe (and the rest of the military guys), I don't want to argue for the sake of it. Let's just say you get a Tamiya F1 kit. First off, you can build it OTB. As you say, same as with your panzer, it would look fine, but rather dull compared to anything around.

I (for one) think I have spent more on detail kits this last year than on models! And I build in "isolation", it is not even as if I enter competitions or such things. Most of us, as you eluded earlier, do actually at times add 3 kits together to "create" one... But that is where the supplied kit has a wrong aero package for the race (or driver, because Schumi and Rubens runs different setups from each other in the same race) you want to depict, you then have to get correct wings (be it scratch-built or aftermarket). I recently ran across somebody who bought a very expensive resin kit, found the wheels not to be 100% correct, then went out to buy a whole Tamiya F1 kit just to get the correct wheels!

Have a look over at the MotoGP GB, there one guy out there building up a whole chain link by link (all the layers) to get a more realistic chain. There are other guys scratch building the tiny wire hooks that braces the exhaust system. A lot add extra see-through piping, flushed with the correct colour paint to simulate whatever kinda liquid runs through it. You simply can't come up with a statement saying we don't "do anything different".

And talking about rigid rules, I think the FIA beats the military hands down...

If you want to see how "different" things can be done, check out these sites and compare it with OTB versions... You can have a look around at their other models on the site as well, just to see. Maybe the level of detail entices you to venture down this ally! (I will be the first to welcome you!)

Bill Attridge:
http://members.shaw.ca/bil_attridge/F1_Gallery.htm

William Chan:
http://www.formularacingminiatures.com/f2001/index.php

Johnson Tang:
http://www.johnsontang.com/gallery/107.htm

Cifenet: (here you'll see 4(!!) different versions of the same car, the F2000... all slightly different, built by the same guy AFAIK)
http://www.cifesystem.com/mgallery.html

I do not mean to offend anybody by not adding their link in here, just gave a few examples...

I think if somebody wants to go nuts on a tank, why shouldn't they? I mean, why not have a supercharger sticking out the top, some chrome 22" road wheels, and a flashy paint job? I know that would NEVER happen in real life, but why not, I bet that would get more attention than olive drab I am not trying to belittle anybody here, please don't take it that way, I am just saying, I think I would be more impressed with a tank that somebody did that to, than a box stock, just because you have to adapt all those things and make them work, not just put it together and add some AM and PE parts. I understand there is more to most of these than just PE and AM parts, but I guess my way of thinking is why not? Lord knows its not going to see action anytime soon, and if it does, its so small they can just hide it under something

Oh, sure I can agree with that, the reaction of car modelers to DURR's before mentioned Ford, Buick, BMW combo would be quite different than I would get posting my zimmeritt covered Cromwell / Sherman hybrid.

Military modelers are modeling a subject governed by fairly inflexible rules (the military), the only real modifications without just going off on a tangent is pretty minor crew modifications, while auto modelers are modeling a subject that by its nature is individual (personally owned cars), I mean you see 1-1 4x4 Pintos so if you build a scale Cadillac Coupe DeVille Monster truck people will just take it for what it is, strange, unusual and possibly pretty neat. But just as you find with armor & aircraft builders (not familiar enough with ship or sci-fi to comment on them), I've seen quite a few pretty in depth rivit counter type discussions from auto modelers too. I don't think what you see on this forum is really representitive of auto modelers, mny of the really hard core auto guys spend time at dedicated auto modeling sites.

Before the armor guys get upset I have seen that armor modelers can be pretty creative too, over at armorama they have had several what if group builds that were pretty wild, I've seen a few in the group builds here too, I've even seen a few of the aircraft guys slip out of rivet counter mode once or twice .

I am an armor builder to and I understand what Durr is saying. i just strted back car building about 2 months ago. Armour and militray builders are detail/accuracy obessess because they have to be. It is the only way to differenciate on model and model bulder from another. When you build military vehicles (esp modren ones) they all look identical!lol So you hvae to add extra details and nick pick the accuracy in order to stand out. my out of the box desert Abrams will look just like the next guys unless I add extra details. I don't have the option of picking another color. Now with WW2 vehicles you have a litte more leeway in color schemes and markings because a lot of changes and mods were made on the battle field. So I will not say that cars are easier persay but there is lot more room for creativity and originality. You can build how you want if it's not factory or pinned down by competition rules. Accuracy is the primary outlet of being creative in armour building while and it only seems to be of primary importance in competition and factory stock autos. I get creative with a tank and it's just wrong, I get creative with a car and it's cool. I feel mixing and matching is a major part of the charm to auto building. You dont' get to that in other generes except maybe sci fi kit bashes. Just giving my 2 cents. I have been going to BMC, Brian's Model Cars and I just signed up on scaleauto about a week ago.

no guys every thing is cool

but i do feel though that car modeling is MORE creative using more imagination that the ALMOST robotic building of aircraft and armor

you can mix parts from 20 different kits and people will say

hey that is cool

do that in armor or aircraft and you will get mostly attitude

i know i opened my mouth again and the aircraft guys are gonna bomb me

 

You do...?   But at least it shows the (questioned) passion is there!

But agreed, nothing personal...

Seabee, we posted at almost the sametime, now I feel a little bad like we're ganging up on DURR

 

Sorry DURR, you just opened the the jar, nothing personal

DURR wrote:

true armor and aircraft there is more history involved the need (desire) for accuracy is greater too cars are different you can get an engine out of a ford kit wheels out of a buick kit and body of a bmw  and put it together no need for references just a desire to create so no talking is nessary

 

Yeah that pretty much sums it up, try this one, then say that again, looks alot like some of the armor threads I've read.

http://www.scaleautomag.com/sca/community/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=26414

This is not an unusual topic at SA, lots of questions about what was available from the factory, which kits can be used to get the optional engine offered in a car or where to get the parts to back date or return a custom kit to stock. Even the custom guys ask questions about whether or not a certain things would have been available for a custom built in the 50's. Many want to build the car they have in the driveway or saw at a show, they can't buy a kit of a hot rod built up from various sources, they need to know where to find the parts they need (like a 34 Ford coupe with a 426 Hemi and seats from a Porsche 911). Often its questions about which kit has the best -fill in the blank- or just in general which kit is better of 2 or 3 of the same subject (who makes the best, or most accurate 65 Corvette), kind of like aircraft or armor (how many "is the Tamiya Late Tiger I as good as the Academy Late Tiger I" threads have you seen). Thats not even getting into the big stuff, some of the big rig builders really get into the details, easily as much detail as your average armor or aircraft modeler. Then you have techniques, auo modeling uses very different painting and weathering techniques, just as an aircraft modeler doesn't use all the same methods as an armor modeler, auto modelers don't either. Alot use the same techniques as 1-1 car makers even using real auto paint, polishing compounds and waxes. 

Someone can put a Cromwell turret on a Sherman and cover the whole thing with zimmeret, but that isn't how everybody builds armor, and not everybody builds autos just however the feel like it either.

Sounds like alot of stereo typing of auto modelers going on here.

Hey-hey... just cause you have tanks no need to get "aggro" - you will get nailed for a statement like that...

I almost exclusively build autos. Not street cars, but racing cars (rally, DTM & F1) and racing bikes. There is such a need for accuracy it gets rediculous at times!
Have a set of decals on a car with wrong aero package and you will get ever-so-delicately get told so! (And I am talking about same year, different race...)
Have a 2000 Suzuki exhausts stained in a more golden tinge and you will get nailed, they did not "burn" golden...
And (ask me) somebody will spot a 2001 air intake on a 2002 decalled rally car!

And there is no place to hide mistakes by splashing on a bit of mud or other weathering...

DURR, nothing personal, but with a statement such as you made, you were looking for trouble. If you feel there is no desire for accuracy, go check out one of the auto GB's.... you will be surprised.

Back to the topic. What is also the case, is that quite a few of us are participating in GB's. So a lot of talking and asking of questions is being done over there. And at this stage we are covering F1, MotoGP and WRC in GB's...

true armor and aircraft there is more history involved

the need (desire) for accuracy is greater too

cars are different you can get an engine out of a ford kit wheels out of a buick kit and body of a bmw  and put it together no need for references just a desire to create so no talking is nessary

DanCooper wrote:

I'm mainly an airplane- and armor modeller, with the occasional car/or motorcycle going, and I have always noticed from the very first time I came here, that carmodellers are by far not so talkative as plane and armor modellers same goes for the ships though So I really don't think there is something new under sun here.

 

I think if you look at Scaleauto you would find that is not really true, there are all kinds of blabbermouths over there. I think the reason the autos section here is slow is Scale Auto is the sister publication which deals completely with autos, here you have autos as one section of a larger site, there you have a section for each segment of auto modeling, tuners, hot rods, trucks / commercial, stock etc.

 http://www.scaleautomag.com/sca/community/forum/

I regularly visit both sites but I don't spend too much time in the autos section here because there is much more activity on that subject over there. Probably why they have two magazines and you don't see alot of cars in FSM or Tanks in SA.

 

I'm sure the change requiring people to re-register didn't help, but I've seen that with other sites and it is usually just a temporary slow down.

I think you hit the nail on the head Dan. There just doesn't seem the need for refrence material and things like that that there is on an aircraft. I model cars and planes, but most of the time, if I need to know something about a car, I can find it in a magazine I have laying around, or just put it in how I want it, cause you can do that on a real car (for most things anyway). I think there is less worry about matching the 1:1 car than there is with aircraft or armor, so there ends up being less talk on here. If I really need to know something I will post here and in scaleauto's forum. Hopefully we will get some more people in here soon!

I'm mainly an airplane- and armor modeller, with the occasional car/or motorcycle going, and I have always noticed from the very first time I came here, that carmodellers are by far not so talkative as plane and armor modellers same goes for the ships though

So I really don't think there is something new under sun here.

i see many no longer like it here with the new format

this forum  (autos) has a GREAT choice

the sister site to here  same company  www.scaleautomag.com

also it is in the old format  the best part

howdidyoudothat wrote:

Can anyone post sites that may be more active?

There is a good site related to Mostly Auto, but has some military and Plane builders.Its in my signature.