New German Destroyer...price gouging?

Wow, you actually registered to make that as your first post??

Gawd yer a git. Are you the Brit version of Marty Shay? If you can't afford the price of the kits complain to your country's distributors, it's THEY who are bending you over the barrel and rectum raping you. If the kits are beyond your ability either improve your skills or piss off chump. Constantly screaming like a three year old throwing a temper tantrum just makes you laughable. While very complex with lots of itty bitty parts I find Dragon's Scharnhorst to be MUCH LESS DEMANDING than what I do for a living. I'll take Dragon's level of very fine detail and excellent fit over Trumpeter's usual cockup any day and Dragon is competitively priced in the US...probably because the US distributor isn't as rapacious as your Brit distributor....oh WAIT! It just occurred to me, your silly assed European VAT is probably the root of the rectal rape problem.

warshipbuilder

The general rule up to now has been that as soon as one kit manufacturer brings out a certain subject, you can be pretty sure that none of the others will also bring out that same subject because the perception - rightly or wrongly - is that there's no money in it for them.That is why much secrecy surrounds new releases etc.

 

The Dragon 1/350 Scharnhorst is undoubtedly a good kit. But not £120-worth, especially as the etched set included only includes part of what you need. There are still plenty of ships to build without paying these prices.

As to the former, most of us would prefer Dragon to Trumpeter based on quality. I don't know about you but I'll always take a nicely grilled porterhouse over lukewarm plastic ***.

As to the latter, then shut the hell up and build those other kits.

warshipbuilder

No one has yet come forward to explain how Revell's 1/350 Bismarck + a set of WEM PE (made in relatively high-wage Poland, and paid for in Euros)  is cheaper than Dragon's 1/350 Scharnhorst.........

Easy , made in EU vs. outside of EU, VAT, Duties, Tarriffs.

Jester75

Wow, you actually registered to make that as your first post??

Actually re-registered after a couple years not following this forum and the quote function is different than it used to be.

Gonna need some of this in the economy sized cans looks like........

Stone...

ROFL

Foldable chair, check; Popcorn, check; Music, rolling

My inner politically incorrect self tend to agree with many of IOF's points, and manner of delivery a fresh breath of air!

There's only one way to settle this:

A grudge build off - the opposition camps each nominate a champion - with a set amount of time - the output to be voted by neutral folks on the sci-fi board!

And the loser, pays for the cost of the winner's kit, tsk tsk tsk

Edit:

As to why one manufacturer churns out kit cheaper than the other (mind you, SOME of the time), well the answer is....drum roll... THEY CAN. Your power as the consumer is limited, you can choose:

Buy it

Or not.

Regardless of your decision, the company will make a profit, or not. Not your problem, either.

Each kit is a business decision, with an estimation of the market and hence what's the appropriate price. Revell may have produced a beauty (price-wise) with Bismarck because it's bloody Bismarck every man and his dog will buy one, so initial capital expenditure is spread out amongst the high number of expected sale. I'm glad business man not modelers are manning the companies, seriously I'd rather companies stay afloat and keep producing kits than going belly up after a few years due to mis-management.

Bottom line, grab'em when it's cheap, skip when it's expensive. If you really like it, money is likely no object. And finally, they wound up on ESTATE SALES at discount prices anyway if you don't build them, and I expect most of us here already have more kits than they can build in a life-time. So, stop complaining, start building.

"In general Trumpeter ship kits suck. Overscale and soft detail is the norm. Many egregious errors due to piss poor research. Fit on a par with 1960's Lindberg/Hawk/Revell/Airfix kits. For every half-decent kit (they never rise above that level) they release 2 plastic equivalents of steaming piles of fetid ***"

How very eloquent.

I take it you have not checked out their HMS Hood, HMS Repulse, Prinz Eugen & Admiral Hipper kits then?

"....made in EU vs. outside of EU, VAT, Duties, Tarriffs."

Yeah, and even overseas it's STILLCHEAPER than Dragon's Scharnhorst isn't it.

Tracy White

 I was comparing one aspect of the two kits. Dragon's better fit meant I was able to get through that part of my Scharnhorst build without burning out on it. I have issues with burnout, but that's not Trumpeter's fault. It just means that the kit has less value to me due to the increased work I need to do.

But you didn't fill and fair the depression on the bow of the Scharnhorst, so you had much less work to do.  You didn't mention it in your w.i.p. either.  I hate filling and sanding large areas and filing plastic,  which is why I am not buying Scharnhorst.

See here to see some of the work involved. 

http://www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/viewtopic.php?f=59&t=68145

Nice link Cerberus - and even nicer links within, you're a veritable font of knowledge Please post links to Z class zerstorers if you have any, particularly late paint schemes.

That guys a fanatic, I wouldn't have the nuts to chop the hull just to add 7mm to a +60cm model. Interesting though, all that attention to detail yet he's happy to compromise on hull and prop colour (wouldn't it be easier to just paint his other props correctly?).

Potchip, while you might consider IOF "resfreshing", I think most would say it reeks like some putrid mix of vomit, human faeces and immaturity.

cerberusjf

But you didn't fill and fair the depression on the bow of the Scharnhorst, so you had much less work to do.  You didn't mention it in your w.i.p. either.

Just because I didn't mention it doesn't mean I didn't do it. I'm not out to list every flaw I find, just have a fun build and blog about it a bit. I've mentioned the problems that *I* have caused (with the best of intentions) and some instructions gotchas that I thought would be useful to others, but I'm not trying to write a "let me hold your hand and tell you everything you need to do..." piece either. She's a good looking ship, with an interesting history, but not one I "care" about so I'm not investing a lot in the kit either monetarily or emotionally.

Gentlemen,

Like I've said before, I appreciate everything that today's model companies have done for ship modelers, including Dragon, Trumpeter, Revell, Academy, et. al.  All this bellyaching and personal acrimony are not what this forum is about.

My modeling began at six years of age in 1960.  The only things available were a handful of Aurora, Revell, Renwal, Hawk, Pyro, Lindberg, and Airfix kits.  The best of the bunch were the Airfix 1/600 scale ships, their HO scale tanks, and their 1/72 scale airplanes, if you could find them.  Otherwise, you were satisfied with Aurora, Lindberg, and Revell.

By the early 1970's, the Japanese began their 1/700 scale lines of ships, which had varying degrees of mediocre detail. Heller also became more common, also with mediocre detail.

The 1980's witnessed a revolution in tank and airplane modeling with outstanding detail and aftermarket products. Ship modelers were left envious. Our hobby was seen as one for children only.

Then along comes the late 1990's and 2000's, and ship modeling is finally catching up and much of what I hear is griping and complaining.  I am simply grateful to not only have the ever-growing selection of ship kits but the availability of after market products.  Detail, while not perfect, will never be so.   But, it is far, far, better than was available when I was a kid.  Cost is also a problem, but so it is for tank and aircraft as well.  We as a group need to appreciate that fact and enjoy our hobby as it is intended to be enjoyed!

Now, if only some manufacturer will pay some real attention to the needs of sailing ship modelers!

Bill Morrison

That builder is extreme, very few go to those lengths. I'm happy to be somewhere inbetween him and an OOB maker, else nothing would get completed. But it'll be a good one to follow - provided he doesn't give up (or die!) because it'll be a long, slow build.

Yea, a look at Model Warship is always both enlightening and humbling. Some of those folk really take their hobby seriously. I don't think I have the discipline to ever do what some of their fans do.

But this thread, especially all of the stuff about price and detail has made me think again about resin. It's kind of mystery land to me. But with styrene kits well over $100 it's almost tempting. Scale Hobbyist has a 350 Gambier Bay from Yankee for $180 which includes PE. Add PE to Hasegawa's Gambier Bay and you're talking the same cost. Some of the resin DDs are in the $60s. Not sure if there are any unique advantages to the material, but I've seen some fantastic resin kits on the Ship Model gallery and it would be fun to try. 

Of course I've got a 50 year old rendition of USS Oregon inbound that I have to deal with first (not to mention Mikasa and Konig). Sure there will be a lot of scratch building there. Now if Dragon would come out with a WWI 350 scale RN battlecruiser I'd pop $200 in a second. Ditto for a CV6. Overall I don't think you can fault Trumpie for their choice in ships to model - better than Dragon's I'd say. But as long as Dragon is producing ships you can't send mail bombs. (Although has anyone noticed how many new Dragon German tanks are now coming with DS tracks instead of or in addition to Magic Tracks? That tells me someone there is concerned about part count. Either that of the mortals are buying Tamiya and the detail fanatics are buying metal tracks anyway.)

And to our UK pals. Nobody really likes paying taxes. I buy cheaper from British sites than citizens do and use them a lot. But I think there's something to be said about paying taxes if the voters want things like medical care instead of charging it all to the national credit card. Oh well, if the US goes broke, I'll still have enough kits to keep me busy for ten years.

Eric

Did I mention the Tirpitz is cool?

Eric,

If you like Royal Navy WWI subjects, check out Iron Shipwrights 1/350 offerings. They are resin with PE included, brass gun barrels, etc. They also have an excellent selection, exellent detail, and immediate shipping., Also, the kits are fun to build. Plus, they have a lifetime replacement policy . . . lose or damage a part, they will replace it with no questions asked.

Interestingly, their kit prices, which range in the $250 to $350 range, are little different than styrene kits when all the after-market detail sets are added.

Check them out. I believe that you would be impressed.

Bill Morrison

Tirpitz...

What happened to Zuiho? Has she been replaced?

Yes, by Tirpitz!

Got my Trump destroyer today...

Tracy White

Just because I didn't mention it doesn't mean I didn't do it. I'm not out to list every flaw I find, just have a fun build and blog about it a bit. I've mentioned the problems that *I* have caused (with the best of intentions) and some instructions gotchas that I thought would be useful to others, but I'm not trying to write a "let me hold your hand and tell you everything you need to do..." piece either. She's a good looking ship, with an interesting history, but not one I "care" about so I'm not investing a lot in the kit either monetarily or emotionally.

Forgive me, I thought you were doing a comprehensive build.  But I don’t understand how you can say it was less work than the Trumpeter Hood.  Perhaps because for me the inaccuracies of Trumpeter’s Hood  are less important than Scharnhorst’s, though it could also be because I care less for Hood in the first place.

cerberusjf

 But I don’t understand how you can say it was less work than the Trumpeter Hood. 

bbrowniii

 

cerberusjf:

 

 

 But I don’t understand how you can say it was less work than the Trumpeter Hood. 

Probably in the same way that some people find marathons a breeze and others could not imagine even attempting one - it's perception...

 

Both perception and actual work. Scharnhorst's hull at the seam is a lot simpler than Hood. That meant I could be more "gross" with my movements; I could use heavy grit sanding sticks to take the epoxy putty down quickly without worry about removing the scuttle (Porthole) detail because the armor belt stood away from the hull, parallel to it. Since Hood's belt bulged and her hull flared, the step I had between the two pieces was harder to take down because I couldn't use the heavy grit so much or use larger sanding motions. I suppose if I'd had some sort of micro-planing tool I could have shaved it down quicker, but I suppose Trumpeter could have worked harder to make a better fit, too. I just did not have the same amount of fit problems and work with Scharnhorst hull that I did with Hood. Note that the hull was the only thing I spoke to; I thought Trumpeter's deck to hull fitting was excellent. But that's not what made me set it aside for a while.....

I think I'm a little lost here. Are we to praise one kit over another because it's easier to remove gobs of putty? In the real world modelers should not expect a perfect fit on every part - they sure wouldn't want to pay for a kit designed to those standards. And this does go back to a point I made earlier that better modelers will find the inherent pitfalls of a complex kit much easier to cope with than a beginner or someone who does one ship in a year. But I do think we can ask companies to do a good job on "mission critical" fits. I've spent a good amount of time getting the wing on an Eduard Fw-190. Other than the fact that the wings don't fit, it's a terrific model: lots of detail, wonderful decals, super instructions. But the wings don't fit. I'm at the stage where I can make them fit without (knock on wood) creating serious trouble down the road. But I've made Tamiya and Hasegawa fighters whose wings fit right on, right away. And it's hard to figure. On my last Dragon tanks the fit on some of the very small pieces was precise - exactly what you'd want if something that fits in one hand has 500 parts. But I had my hands full trying to get the top and bottom portions of the hull together. The model maker and the modeler have a kind of pact: if the maker sells a complex kit it's fair to expect the modeler to have decent skills or the willingness to push the envelope to get good results. However, I think the modeler can ask fairly that the wings fit and that the upper and lower hull sections of a tank fit. 

I would define a good ship as one where you didn't have to break out the putty at all for something dealing with a hull or the fit between hull and deck. Maybe I've been lucky in the slums, but the most any of my 700 ships (or my ancient Iron Duke) required was a very little Mr. Surfacer. I know the Scharnhorst bow is a complex shape (I have an old 700 Tamiya that I got to sit next to Belfast, and they chose to do the bow as a separate piece.) But I really wonder if we shouldn't expect good hulls. And model airplanes whose wings fit.

Eric

When it comes to fits and faults, let's not generalise. Each ship is different, and some problems are harder to fix. 

The root is a conflict of priorities

Builders wants something that is broadly accurate in basic form and fits well first and foremost - there's no point to have extra detail when to fix fitting issues one will have to destroy the detail in the process or have a crack of a grin on the hull.

Companies are designing kits to quick to market and look good in the box. After all the pitfalls will not be known until the model's bought and actually built, and most 'review sites' that companies supply kit to do in-box reviews which are half relevant. 

Make large pieces fit together well is a lot harder to do than mold 4 side walls of a box each with engravings.  I respect Tamiya not necessarily because their research (which can be crap for non-Jap subjects, but then there are very few), but because of quality. Things fit. Edges are sharp. Engineering is smart - there's thought behind the parts breakdown to make the modeler's life easier. 

On the other hand, some companies currently aim at people who like things that look pretty in a box, but hardly build, or are not very particular about quality of their builds. This is a marketing philosophy I disagree with, because I see it as a cop-out.

It's hard if a modeler must resort to carve up the model because the basic shape is wrong.

It's hard to make sharp edges from soft angles (but easy to do the other way around, why I have no idea!)

It's hard to be presented with a bunch of detail that are overscale, which needs to be removed, then proper ones added - I'd rather it be molded plain to begin with.

Oh, and finally, Tamiya Scharnhorst molded the stern in a separate piece, and the reason I suspect is just to fit the hull into the then standard sized box. 

I didn't know the Zuiho blockaded Berlin?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBtNsQYSKIQ&feature=player_detailpage

I love seeing long-lost archival footage....