SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Best Plastic Ship Model - Your opinion

43300 views
69 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Best Plastic Ship Model - Your opinion
Posted by Big Jake on Thursday, May 12, 2005 10:34 AM
I was talking to a neighbor the other day and he asked me what I though was the best plastic ship model was and/or why. We talked for a while and got to thinking about that, it's a pretty hard subject to cull down. Here are my thoughts, let me know what you think the best model is/was. I figure there are two main topics, one is #8220;Historically Accurate#8221; vs. #8220;Historical Important Ship but a bad mold#8221; I know that it does not sound like they would be close but they are, example.

There have been many editions of the USS Constitution, Revells#8217; 36#8221; being the best for a 1956 mold/technology. However, the smaller version by Revell has the #8216;current correct#8217; gun ports molded in the model. So how does one judge? Revell, I believe was first in at least trying to get the accurate details right on many of their early models, not just punching out kits to sell. The Revell Cutty Sark to this day is stilled considered to be the very best rendition of the clipper.

I wonder why Heller did not invest in one. Can you imagine the detail and number of parts? Both Heller and Airfix made smaller versions of the Cutty Sark but I think they are the same mold? The Heller HMS Victory is what most modelers consider to be the #8216;Gold Standard#8217; in plastic models. Is that because of the number of parts, detail or size of that famous ship? I think all can agree that no one has ever come close to topping that model in plastic. I believe however that almost all of Heller#8217;s larger kits were better than the previous one, (yes, I know each has a mistake somewhere) but in general each of Heller#8217;s larger 1/100th. #8211; 1/150th. scale monsters are outstanding, Royal Louis, Reale de France, Prussian, Pamir, etc.

When Heller merged with Aurora they produced a kit of a Chebec in 1/50th. this I rate as a Historically Important Ship model because it filled a gap of ship design. The level of detail is outstanding. However, with that being said the cannons are not as accurate as they could be and the rigging for them is completely left out of the instr. manual as well as the parts needed to make them look accurate. Go figure?

In my opinion I rate the
Heller#8217;s Victory 1st. 1/100
Revell#8217;s Cutty Sark 2nd. 1/96
Revell#8217;s USS Constitution 3rd. 1/96

What do the rest of you think?

 

 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Connecticut
Posted by DBFSS385 on Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:17 AM
My Vote Revells 1/72 Type Vllc U Boot. Their 1/72 S Boot is not far behind.
Be Well/DBF Walt
  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: 29° 58' N 95° 21' W
Posted by seasick on Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:22 AM
Revell's 1/426 USS Arizona. Big Smile [:D]

Chasing the ultimate build.

  • Member since
    December 2003
  • From: 37deg 40.13' N 95deg 29.10'W
Posted by scottrc on Thursday, May 12, 2005 1:56 PM
Despite having weak masts that were easily replaced, the Royal Louis and the Pheonix by Heller were my favorite builds. I could contest their "historical accuracy", but then again, I could also get a PHD in maritime history.

Two others that I really liked building were the CSS Alabama / USS Kearsarge (Not as much rigging hee hee) and the America by Revell. Both are relaxing builds, clean moldings, and a wealth of flexibilty to add detail.

Scott

  • Member since
    December 2014
Posted by bigjimslade on Thursday, May 12, 2005 2:19 PM
Big fan of the ICM Konig.
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Thursday, May 12, 2005 2:23 PM
I think I'd vote with Jake, with one small difference. I'd rate the Revell Constitution second and the Cutty Sark third. My reasoning is that the Constitution is a newer kit, and the detail of the era when it originated is a bit better than that of the Cutty Sark. The deck winches of the Cutty Sark, for example, are pretty crude, and the "carved" detail on the trailboards and transom takes the form of decals - whereas the carving on the Constitution is beautifully done in three dimensions.

Other contenders that I'd nominate for any short list would be the Imai 1/125 Cutty Sark (arguably more accurate than the Revell one), the Airfix Wasa (some of the best "carved" detail ever - but let down by the phony gunports), the Revell Golden Hind, and the Revell Mayflower.

The sad thing about all this is that all these kits are so old (the newest, the Heller Victory, has been around for more than twenty years), and most of them are unavailable. The Heller Victory and Revell Constitution are the only ones one would be likely to find in the typical hobby shop. The Revell Cutty Sark is in the current Revell Germany catalog, and the list on the Airfix website does include the Wasa. But most of the old sailing ship kits that folks like Jake and me grew up with are only to be found at flea markets and on e-bay. The serious plastic sailing ship kit seems to be just about dead.

I have the impression that when Jake started this thread he was thinking primarily about sailing vessel kits. Twentieth-century steel ships are another world entirely. My personal list of best warship kits, for what little it's worth, would certainly include the Tamiya 1/700 Yamato and Missouri, the Sealsmodel Mikasa, and the Dragon Arizona. The big difference between this realm and that of the sailing ship is that the warship business is alive and well. On the basis of the reviews on the Steel Navy site I rather suspect the new Dragon Essex-class carriers are going to raise the bar several feet - and in a few months some manufacturer will figure out a way to raise it even higher. This is a great time to be a modern warship modeler.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, May 12, 2005 2:44 PM
I'll second ICM Konig..She is a great build.I also like Nichimo's 1/500 scale japanese carriers and their battleship lines..Believe it or not, I liked Glencoe's OREGON model.and revell's Yorktown model..wow, there are too many choices...LOL.Out of the ships i build i thought Heller's RICHEALIU is a great ship that i thought i did a great job on.
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Posted by Big Jake on Thursday, May 12, 2005 2:45 PM
John,

I suppose that you're right about the tech. improving with a few years. I just looked at the winches on my model of the Cutty Sark in my office and checked out the web site they look very cloase to me, but just a touch heavy.

I too like the America and several others in the Revell line. Bounty, etc. In the Airfix line I have the Wasa, and man that some carving! I just recently picked up a copy of the Cutty sark by Imai.Monogran. Looks O.K. but do you really think that one is better than the Revell version? How come?

Jake

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Thursday, May 12, 2005 4:02 PM
Jake,

There's plenty of room for debate about those two Cutty Sark kits. I don't have either of them in front of me, so I'll have to base this on memory.

Please note: the Imai one I'm referring to is the big one - about two feet long, on about 1/125 scale. It was issued in the late seventies; I bought mine on a trip to England. I have the impression that it was only in production for a short time - and Imai, of course, has since gone out of business. I subsequently sold mine, dammit; when I moved from Ohio to Virginia I had to get rid of lots of stuff. I wonder if the kit you're looking at is the little one with the one-piece hull that Monogram distributed for a while. That one obviously isn't in the same league.

Anyway, here are my recollections. Take them with a grain of salt; I haven't looked closely at either kit in a long time.

In favor of the Imai kit:

- Main deck molded in one piece. (The three pieces of the Revell deck are pretty awful.)
- Countersunk planking seams. (Revell's are raised lines.)
- Three-dimensional molding of some, at least, of the carvings. (If I remember right, the bow carvings are molded and the stern ones are decals. I may be wrong about that.)
- Better representation of the paneling on the deckhouses. (Imai molded the panels in relief. Revell just put raised lines around them.)
- Slightly better rendition of some deck fittings, such as the winches.
- Better rendition of the deadeyes and chainplates. (The Revell versions are pretty bad. They're way out of scale; those wide pinrails to accommodate the deadeyes are nothing like those of the real ship. I don't remember just how Imai handled that problem, but they did at least a little better.)

The Imai kit is not without its problems. The upper spars are a little heavy, and there are two funny goofs in the deck furniture. The kit is obviously based on the beautiful plans drawn by George Campbell, which show just about every conceivable detail of the ship - but not quite. He only showed the side and top views of the "booby hatch" just aft of the mainmast. Imai's designers, probably not having any idea what the real thing was supposed to look like, made it match the plans from the top and side - but it looks ridiculous from any other angle. And Campbell made one detail drawing do double duty for the two winches. The forward one is supposed to have a gadget called a "cable lifter" on each end - a heavy iron fitting that grabs onto the anchor cable, to haul in the slack more quickly (though with less force) than the windlass. (I guess the windlass was used to break the anchor loose from the bottom, and the winches to haul it in.) The after winch, of course, has no such fittings. Campbell did a drawing of one winch with a cable lifter on one end, and a note underneath reading "cable lifters on both ends of forward winch." The Imai designers apparently didn't read English. Each of the kit's winches has a cable lifter on one end.

In favor of the Revell kit:

- Bigger.
- Those wonderful crew figures and the figurehead. (Revell's "Nanny the Witch" is a better looking female than the one on the real ship.)
- Slightly more refined in some details (e.g., the railings around the forecastle deck).
- More accurate rendition of the trailboards. (Imai cast them integrally with the hull halves; the Revell ones are separate parts.)
- More individual parts for the top hamper. (Imai, if I remember, molded the studding sail booms integrally with the yards - not bad, but the Revell ones are separate pieces. On the other hand, Revell didn't make much of an effort to represent the studdingsail boom irons.)

If, heaven forbid, I were to tackle a model of the Cutty Sark, I'd try to find an Imai kit. But if I couldn't find one I wouldn't hesitate to use the Revell one. It is, by any standards, a nice product and a sound basis for a good scale model.

I wish some of the Airfix kits were more widely available. I have pleasant memories of the Endeavour, Prince, Sovereign of the Seas, and Revenge. (On the other hand, the Airfix Bounty is dreadful - one of the worst plastic sailing ship kits ever. It came out more than twenty years after the Revell one, but the Revell one beats it on almost all counts.) The ones I'd really like to see reappear, though, are the Revell Golden Hind and Mayflower. I don't know that I'd actually buy either of them, but they were terrific kits.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Posted by Big Jake on Thursday, May 12, 2005 5:31 PM
John,

Can you email me direct? jbgroby@cox.net I'd like to get some information to you.

Thanks,
Jake

 

 

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:44 PM
IMHO, as a neat package (sailing ship), the small Revell Golden Hind/Spanish Galleon/Mayflower/Elizabeathan Man-'O-War is one of my favorites. The Heller Thonier Armor, although a small package, is also a real beaut. The thing about Heller kits though is the lack of rigging instruction. I haven't built any of the great big ones, but that seems to be an omission on the smaller kits.

For steel ships....there's so many great ones coming out, I don't think I have seen enough of the new ones to make a call.

ERic
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Friday, May 13, 2005 7:30 AM
Micronaut - I agree, but remember that string of 16th/17th-century Revell issues is really two basic kits. Actually three.

The bible on the subject, Thomas Graham's Remembering Revell Model Kits, tells the story this way. The Golden Hind first appeared in 1965, with the kit number H-324. It was reissued under the same name in 1972, then as a "Spanish Galleon" in 1974 and 1978. It reappeared under its original name in 1978, and the same year as (arrrrghhhh) "Pirate Ghost Ship." In the latter guise it came with a bottle of phosphorescent paint, to make it "glow in the dark."

My recollection of it is that it was a beautiful little kit - as a representation of the Golden Hind. The designers clearly worked from the Matthew Baker Manuscripts at Oxford University, the best source we have on Elizabethan naval architecture and shipbuilding. It correctly depicted the Golden Hind as an extremely small ship. (Mr. Graham gives the scale as 1/96; my recollection is that it may have been on a little larger scale than that.) In every way it looked like it had been designed for serious modelers. Even the vacuum-formed "sails" were better than usual: they didn't have "reef points" and other pieces of "rope" molded into them. I suspect the original designers barfed when they saw the label "Spanish Galleon" applied to it. The ship it represents is far too small to be called a galleon - Spanish or otherwise - and the lines are distinctively English.

The Mayflower kit, according to the book, first appeared in 1966, with the number H-327. It was a completely different kit from the Golden Hind. I'm pretty sure the only parts the two had in common were the rigging blocks (which were recycled from the old Cutty Sark kit). It was reissued under its original name in 1970, 1972, and 1975, and with the name "Elizabethan Man-o-War" in 1975 and 1977. (It may have reappeared once or twice in the eighties as well; Mr. Graham's coverage stops in 1979.)

This one was a scale model of the Mayflower II, the full-size replica that sailed across the Atlantic in the fifties and has been moored at Plymouth, Massachusetts, ever since. As such, the kit reproduces one big, deliberate error: the replica ship, in deference to twentieth-century tourists, has too much headroom between decks. But as a scale model of the Mayflower II it's excellent. According to Mr. Graham, the "Elizabethan Man-o-War" reissues deleted the shallop and added a dozen guns - and decals for the sails. That tactic doesn't bother me quite as much as what they did to the poor Golden Hind. At least the Mayflower and Queen Elizabeth were both English.

I do think Mr. Graham missed part of this story. He lists kit no. H-366, "Mayflower with sails," dating from 1970, as a reissue of the original. I'm 99% sure it wasn't. It was in fact part of a small series of medium-sized kits that Revell, in a desperate effort to build up a market for sailing ship kits, called "Quick-Build." The others in the series were a Cutty Sark, a Constitution, and the yacht America (all of which went through their own contorted careers of reissuing later). They sold (in the hobby shop where I worked) for $6.00 or $7.00 - as opposed to the $4.00 standard Revell sailing ships and the $12.00 or $15.00 big ones. They were touted as being easy to assemble; they had one-piece decks and no rigging blocks. The Constitution and Cutty Sark were smaller, simplified versions of the 3-foot kits; the America was new. But the Mayflower was an enlarged version of the original. The first Mayflower was about 18" long; the new one was about two feet long. My recollection is that it was in fact virtually identical to the original except for size and the omission of the rigging blocks. All the wood-grain planking detail and everything else - even the crew and passenger figures - had been scaled up with Revell's amazing pantograph machine. I built that one, and it came out really nice.

I haven't seen any of these kits in the flesh for years. I think Jake has both Mayflowers in his collection; maybe he can confirm that the ship came in two sizes.

Revell tried the "Quick-Build" approach several more times, apparently without much success. The last attempt was the "Quick Build Viking Ship," in 1977. We've discussed that one in this forum before; in my opinion it was the best plastic Viking ship ever. It was a scale model of the full-size replica in Chicago, which was in turn based on the Gokstad Ship, which is preserved in the Viking Ship Museum in Norway. The Revell designers did a beautiful job on it - far superior to Heller's hideously distorted "Oseberg Ship" of a few years earlier.

Unfortunately the Revell Viking ship was the last new sailing ship the company produced. Every sailing ship kit that's appeared under the Revell label since then has been a reissue of some sort.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Posted by Big Jake on Friday, May 13, 2005 9:12 AM
Here is a list of my collection: I left off the scales because I'm not sure and really don't feel like pulling every model off the shelf. I put in a few inches to give you an idea.

AIRFIX
HMS Victory 18"
Discovery 18"
Wasa 18"
HMS Endeavor Bark 18"

AMT
Leonardo DaVinci's Self-Propelled Boat 11"

HELLER
HMS Victory 1/100
Le Soliel Royal 1/100
Pamir 1/150
Chebec 1/50
Preussen 1/150
Amerigo Vespucci 1/150
Royal Louis 1/200
Le Gladiator 1/200
Navire Viking 1/60
HMS Bounty 16
Leif Eriksson Viking Ship 1/60

IMEX/IMAI
Santa Maria 1/60
Chebec 1/75
Pirate Ship 1/60
Chinese Junk 1/75
Cutty Sark 1/120

LIFELIKE
America Cup Racer
Gouda

LINDBERG
HMS Soverign of the Seas
Capt. Kidd
Jolly Roger
Burmese River Pirate 1/75

MINICRAFT
RMS Titanic (New Edition) 1/350

MONOGRAM
USS United States 1/150
Cutty Sark 1/150
USS Constitution 1/150

PYRO
Joseph Conrad

REVELL
USS Constitution 16"
Cutty Sark 16"
HMS Sir Francis Drake 16"
Spanish Galleon 16"
Spanish Galleon 24"
Santa Maria 16"
Mayflower (2) 16"
Flying Cloud 18"
C.W. Morgan 18"
Chinese Junk 18"
Stag Hound 18"
Sea Addler 18"
USS Constitution 36"
USS Constitution 24"
Cutty Sark 36"
Cutty Sark 24"
Thermoplae 36"
Thermoplae 24"
Nau San Gabriel 18"
"Half-Hull Wall Mount Plaques" 18" sized
USS Constitution
Cutty Sark
Spanish Galleon

RUSSIAN
God's Predicta "Who knows but looks like about 1/150

ZEVESDA
Trireme 1/72nd.


 

 

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Friday, May 13, 2005 6:35 PM
To answer jtilleys question.Yes there are two Revell Mayflower kits.One considered 1/96 scale( approx.16" long).the other about 1/75 scale or so (approx.24" long)At the time they were orginally issued it was box scale model.They are identical right down to the figures that come with them.I have both kits under my bench.Thats where they will probably stay till I want to do a lot and I mean a lot of sanding and filling.

When it comes to whats the best plastic ship model.It depends whether you are a gray ship builder or a sailing ship builder.Being the latter heres my 2 cents worth.Any Imai sailing ship kit is a real joy for me to work on .Crisp detail,part fit very good.sanding yes but very little filling .The best of there ships was the 1/50 Catalan to me.Next would be most Heller kits. The two big kits HMS Victory & Le Soliel Royale being the best of the lot.I haven't finish either one yet but have them in different stages of build.Then Revells two 1/96 scale kits The USS Constitution & the Cutty Sark.Their biggest problem being the three piece deck systems.Hard to hide the seams without planking the decks.Zvezda two kits.The GreekTriera & the Roman Trireme are nice kits to build. Maybe not historically correct but good kits to build.
Rod
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, May 14, 2005 12:19 AM
Thanks to millard for confirming that I'm not crazy - at least with regard to my recollections of the Revell Mayflower(s).

I agree totally about the old Imai ships. I don't think I ever built one completely, but I remember them as being beautifully molded and ingeniously designed. That Cutty Sark was a real beauty. And even those little 1/350 sailing schoolships, some of which have recently surfaced again under other labels, are very much worth building.

My big complaint with Heller sailing ships has always been that the company put aesthetics first and history a long, long way second. I spent a long time on the Heller Soleil Royal when it initially appeared, back in the seventies - and I admit the result was, in terms of visual impact, pretty spectacular. The "carvings" on that kit are a match for the very finest of the old British Board Room models. That's the highest compliment I can pay to such things. But when I found some pictures of the contemporary model on which the kit was based (in those days I didn't do my research adequately in advance) I was furious. The Heller designers made an utter mess of the stern structure, and distorted the proportions of the underwater hull almost beyond recognition. They also made the decks perfectly flat - which virtually no sailing ship's decks ever were. Most of the other Heller kits of that period have similar problems - or worse ones. A company that produced airplane or tank kits to that standard of accuracy would, even in those days, have been laughed out of the business.

With H.M.S. Victory, it seems, the Heller people started getting serious about scale ship modeling. That one is, in terms of accuracy, on a different planet. It has some amusing problems (the Heller people apparently didn't realize that yards are supposed to be fastened to masts, and somebody on the design staff thought belaying pins were supposed to have sharp points), but the hull is a near-perfect representation of the real thing, the decks have camber (and curved deck beams to make sure they keep it), and in general it's a serious scale model.

The other Heller kit that I really, really like is the galley La Reale. I've got one of them in the attic awaiting my attention. (It's been awaiting my attention for quite a few years now; it's a rather intimidating project.) I'm no expert on French galleys, but according to the drawings I've looked at this kit is a masterpiece. About the only way I can see to improve it would be to replace the handles on the oars (quite a project, in view of their numbers). Several other recent Heller kits (the chebec and the Gorch Fock, for instance) seem to be on the same level, though I haven't built them.

I share Millard's and Jake's enthusiasm for the good ol' Revell Constitution. It's showing its age by now, but at the time it was released it represented the state of the art - and to my eye it still holds up pretty well. It must have taken some nerve on the part of the designers to represent the ship in her 1814 configuration, knowing that tourists who visited the real ship would notice lots of differences. (The transom decorations, for instance, don't look anything like the kit's - but that's because they got altered after the War of 1812.) The three-piece decks of the Revell Constitution and Cutty Sark do present problems. (Three cheers for Heller, for figuring out that the right way to make a big deck in several pieces is to split it lengthwise, along the planking seams.) But they represent a genuine effort by knowledgeable people to reproduce sailing ships accurately in plastic.

Looming over this whole discussion, though, is the sad, overwhelming fact that all these kits are so old. The numbers are sobering. Revell has been producing plastic kits since 1953 - fifty-two years. It released its first sailing ship kit, the 18" Constitution, in 1956, and the last one, the "Quick-Build Viking Ship," in 1977. (The Heller Victory also appeared in about 1977, if I remember correctly. How many aircraft or armor kits dating from that time are still taken seriously?) So Revell made new sailing ship kits for twenty-one years, and quit twenty-eight years ago. That company, in other words, has been out of the sailing ship business longer than it was in it - and for more than half of its lifetime. And more than half of mine. And the Heller Victory has been around for more than a decade longer than the college freshmen who will be showing up in my classroom next August. I feel old.

If companies like Tamiya, Dragon, and Hasegawa were designing and producing sailing ships today, what might they look like? Imagine a Tamiya 1/96 Flying Cloud - and a set of Verlinden aftermarket parts for it.

Some people would argue that sailing ships don't really make good subjects for plastic kits, and maybe they'd be right. Styrene, as most participants in this forum seem to agree, is not a good material for such things as masts and yards. (Let's not talk about vac-formed "sails.") But it does seem like the plastic kit industry has turned its back on a significant phase of model building. Those old kits may not have made much money for their manufacturers, but they stirred the initial interest of some young people (including this one) in ship modeling and maritime history. The world of model building is the worse for the demise of the plastic sailing ship kit.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, May 14, 2005 2:13 AM
As a cure for insomnia (probably induced by the depressing subject matter of my last post) I just drew up a list of Revell sailing ship kits. I started by trolling through my defective memory, and checked it against Mr. Graham's book. The list is surprising short - especially if the reissues are omitted.

I haven't listed scales; I don't have most of the kits in front of me, and I have doubts about some of the scales Mr. Graham lists. I do have complete confidence in his dates, though - with the one small exception of the Mayflower. (He missed the fact that there were two kits, on different scales.) Here goes.

"Fit-the-Box" kits, between 15" and 18" long; originally selling for $3.00 or thereabouts.

1. U.S.S. Constitution. 1956. Reissued many times, with and without sails.

2. H.M.S. Bounty. 1956. Reissued many times, with and without sails, including an appearance in slightly modified form under the name H.M.S. Beagle in 1961. (The alleged "Beagle" is on this year's list of "new" releases from Revell Germany.)

3. Santa Maria. 1957.

4. Flying Cloud. 1957. Reissued several times, including appearances in slightly modified form under the names Stag Hound and "Yankee Clipper."

5. U.S.C.G.C. Eagle. 1958. Reissued with modifications under the name S.M.S. Seeadler.

6. H.M.S. Victory. 1959.

7. Golden Hind. 1965. Reissued as "Spanish Galleon" and (gawd help us) "Glow in the Dark Pirate Ship."

8. Mayflower. 1966. Reissued with modifications as "Elizabethan Man-O-War."

9. Charles W. Morgan. 1968.

10. Cutty Sark. 1976.

11. Viking Ship. 1977.

"Big" series - about 1/96 scale. Originally sold for $10.00 - $15.00.

1. Cutty Sark. 1959. Reissued with modifications under the names Thermopylae and Pedro Nunes.

2. U.S.S. Kearsarge. 1961. Reissued in extremely modified form as C.S.S. Alabama.

3. U.S.S. Constitution. 1965. Reissued many times, with and without sails. Also reissued with modifications under the name U.S.S. United States.

4. "Spanish Galleon." 1974. Reissued with modifications under the name "English Man O' War." I hesitate to list this one; it's really an interior decorator's...object...rather than a scale model.

Medium-sized "Simplified" series - about two feet long. Originally sold for $6.00 or $7.00.

1. Cutty Sark. 1968. Scaled down version of the three-foot kit. Reissued under the name Thermopylae.

2. Yacht America. 1969. Reissued under the name "Civil War Blockader."

3. U.S.S. Constitution. 1969. Scaled-down version of the three-foot kit, in simplified form.

4. Mayflower. 1977. Scaled-up version of the 16-inch kit.

There was one other kit that, like the ship it represented, didn't fit in any category: the S.S. Great Eastern. That one came out in 1963.

I've omitted some odd products: the tiny kits Revell acquired from Gowland in the early fifties, the "Peter Pan Pirate Ship" (which, come to think of it, actually is a scale model of the vessel permanently moored at Disneyland), and the "wall plaque" kits from the seventies. I know I've missed several from Revell Germany - the Alexander Humbolt (complete with green sails), the fifteenth-century nao, the Gorch Fock (which I think is actually the old Eagle), the Batavia,and maybe a couple of others. Also some old Aurora kits, like the Chinese junk, that have made their way into Revell Germany boxes. Maybe some other forum participants can think of some more.

Otherwise, I think the above list includes all the Revell sailing ships. That's twenty genuinely different kits, representing (with reasonable accuracy) fourteen different vessels (and pretending to represent about half a dozen others, depending on how one counts). Not much of a list, especially compared to the firm's aircraft and cars. But they are, at least in my senile opinion, a significant part of the history of the plastic model. I miss them.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, May 14, 2005 3:17 PM
I've assembled many ship models and in my opinion the old Ertl/Imai kits were great. These kits were available in the early 80's but Imai may have reissued them. They had excellent detail and went together very good. I painted mine with wood stain and they looked fanastic. They did have their short comings(every kit does) but they were few and were much better than any Revell kit.
  • Member since
    February 2003
  • From: Lacombe, LA.
Posted by Big Jake on Saturday, May 14, 2005 7:24 PM
I have all the wall plaques kits ( 2 of the Spanish Galleon) ther neat but how to keep the dust off them is another matter altogether. Anybody need a wall-plaque Spanish Galleon?

Jake

 

 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, May 14, 2005 8:39 PM
I'm not sure I can agree that all the Imai kits were categorically superior to all the Revell ones - but I certainly agree that the Imai kits were terrific. To some extent we're comparing apples and oranges here, though. I can only think of one case where Imai and Revell competed head-to-head: the Cutty Sark. As I said in an earlier post, I'd probably rate the Imai Cutty Sark a little higher than the big Revell one, but it's a close call. Imai never took on a subject as elaborate as the Revell Constitution or the Heller Victory.

One thing Imai seemed to have going for it: an ability to mold thick pieces. My recollection (which may be defective; it's been a long time since I've seen any of these kits) is that the hull and deck castings of the big Imai kits were remarkably heavy and sturdy - which was one reason why they fit so well. In fact I seem to recall that they were molded in an unusual plastic with a slighly metallic cast to it. I wonder if this type of plastic resisted the shrinkage that normally stops manufacturers from making parts that are more than about 1/16" thick. One of the problems with the big Revell kits was warpage of the deck pieces. Revell had to mold the decks in three parts, because anything bigger would have shrunk and warped - and the examples one finds nowadays frequently have warping problems anyway.

It's worth remembering that, unless my recollection of the dates is mixed up (as is quite possible), the first of the Imai kits appeared at about the same time as the last of the Revell ones - that is, in the late seventies. (As a matter of fact, the planking detail of that Revell Viking ship looks remarkably like that of an Imai kit. I wonder....) Imai gave us a tiny hint of what the plastic kit industry was capable of doing with sailing ships at that time. What a first-rate company could do with a sailing ship subject in 2005...well, I guess we'll just have to leave that one to our imaginations.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Saturday, May 14, 2005 8:53 PM
Jtilley a great run down of Revell ships.I have a couple others that weren't on your list.the Elizabethan Man O' War which was just a re box of the Golden Hind.Also They did a Pinta and Nina to go along with there Santa Maria.From Revell Germany they have the British Sovereign Of The Sea.which I think is a the old Lindberg kit.Then in my stash I have a kit called The Flying Dutchman.Its suppose to be a 1600's Dutch war ship.I got it at a model show a few years back.Its the only one I've ever seen.
Rod
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Saturday, May 14, 2005 10:54 PM
Rod - Thanks. I should have included the "Elizabethan Man-O-War"; I'll go back and edit the list. (That's one of the many great things about this forum: it's possible to cheat. The Drydock Models forum won't let you edit your posts after somebody else has replied to them.) It think, though, that it's a reissue of the small Mayflower rather than the Golden Hind. (Here, as usual, I'm going by Mr. Graham's book.)

I think the Nina and Pinta are reboxes of Heller kits. Heller did all three of Columbus's ships in the late sixties; the Nina and Pinta shared the same hull, but there were enough other differences between them to keep that from being obvious. There was some sort of corporate relationship between Heller and Revell during the eighties, I think. I recall fairly distinctly seeing, among other shared kits, a Revell Flying Cloud in a Heller box.

I think you're right about the Lindberg origins of the Sovereign of the Seas. (Lindberg may have gotten the mold from Pyro; I'm not sure. There was also - briefly - an Aurora one.) I have a very vague recollection of that "Flying Dutchman" kit. It surely was a reissue of something else - but I can't remember what. Anybody else remember it?

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: Greenville,Michigan
Posted by millard on Sunday, May 15, 2005 1:12 PM
Jtilley you are correct The Revell Elizabethan is a redo of the Mayflower.They re-did the stern removed the flower decoration and added open gunports.Also Theres a large E R
decal for the mainsail and hull decoration decals.
Rod
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
Posted by MBT70 on Sunday, May 15, 2005 4:00 PM
I've always been partial to Tamiya's 1:350 Missouri because of the historic ship, the impressive scale and the wealth of aftermarket details available. I like their entire series in that scale, in fact, but I'll still put the ICM Konig and Grosser Kurfurst in second place because they are so well cast and fit. But if I ran the zoo, I'd have someone put out a 1:200 scale of either SMS Seydlitz or SMS Von der Tann. I do have VDT in that scale as a card model, but I'd rather have it in plastic with a full hull to boot.
Life is tough. Then you die.
  • Member since
    November 2005
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, June 6, 2005 8:40 AM
Jtilley,

Thanks for all the info on the Revell models. I've been away from the forum due to work (don't you hate when that gets in the way of hobbies?) but do have a few questions for you/other readers:

Has anyone built the Revell AG Batavia? Is that a decent kit? She's waiting on my shelf for time.... By the way, the book "Batavia's Graveyard" is a great historical read on the wreck of this ship.

Ditto the Revell AG Nao model, can't remember the name, think it is called the San Marcos? Recent issue.

I've been curious about the Revell Nina and Pinta origins: I thought that those were listed as 1/90 scale on the box, which is substantially smaller than Heller's 1/75th scale? I've built the Heller kits, and they are a fairly decent representation of 15th century caravels in various rigs. The longboat leaves a lot to be desired though!

Thanks for the clarification on the Revell Golden Hind and Mayflower kits. Yes, the Golden Hind is definitly a great kit. I'll have to get Mr. Graham's book, as the information you provided from it was fascinating. I was aware of the Mayflower II origins of the kits, and have the Bicentennial edition of the larger 24" Mayflower waiting to be built. On a side note on that one, it is amazing what a little common sense can do for historical accuracy. As you probably recall, when the Mayflower II was launched, she had a pretty elaborate paint scheme with multi-colored triangles, etc. I always wondered why a merchant captain would spend that kind of money on a fairly old ship when the main object was to make money, and paintwork costs. If you've seen recent pictures of Mayflower II, she has a much more (IMHO) realistic paint scheme, much simpler to apply.

You are correct on the reissue of the Lindberg "Flying Dutchman". I actually saw some open box pictures on eBay about a year or more ago, and recognized the contents. Of course, my advanced stages of CRS don't allow me to recall now what it was I recognized.... :-(

ERic
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
Posted by MBT70 on Monday, June 6, 2005 10:03 AM
If you look at the question with an eye on popularity of kits as well as quality or historic significance, over the years and recently, I think it might stack up like this;

1. Tamiya 1/350 Missouri
2. Revell Cutty Sark
3. Tamiya 1/350 Yamato
4. ICM 1/350 Konig
5. Lindberg Blue Devil Destroyer
Life is tough. Then you die.
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: Greenville, NC
Posted by jtilley on Tuesday, June 7, 2005 12:30 AM
Micronaut - I haven't built either of those Revell Germany kits - or, for that matter, seen them first-hand. I've drifted away from plastic sailing vessels during the past few years - not out of any disrespect for them, but simply because I've gotten involved in other stuff. I think the Revell Germany Nina and Pinta are indeed reissues of the Heller kits, but I'm not sure. My recollection of those kits (which I bought many years ago, when Heller kits were sold in the U.S. under the Minicraft label) is that they were generic enough to pass as either 1/75 or 1/90. The two shared the same basic hull halves, if I remember right. Not bad little kits by any means, but the structure of such vessels was so simple, and we know so little about the prototypes' dimensions, that there's not a whole lot to determine the scale.

I've got a CD-ROM set of the National Geographic, which covered the transatlantic voyage of the Mayflower II extensively. I'll get it out and take a look at the pictures. I don't recall that she ever had the triangular color scheme - but I could well be mistaken. My recollection is that the three "Jamestown ships" built in the fifties were painted that way. I believe the basis for the scheme is the Matthew Baker Manuscript, at Cambridge. There are so few contemporary renditions of ships from that period that every one becomes important, and gets used over and over.

MBT 70 - We'd better be careful about evaluating ship model kits on the basis of popularity. You're probably right about the Lindberg "Blue Devil," which, I imagine, has been sold in the tens of thousands - despite the fact that it's ludicrously inaccurate. I suspect the best-selling ship kit of all time is the Revell 1/535 Iowa-class battleship, which originally appeared in 1954 and, incredibly, is still in the Revell-Monogram catalog. (At last count that catalog contained seven ship kits. Count 'em - seven.) In terms of accuracy, fit, and practically every other criterion it's one of the worst plastic kits ever made, but I imagine it's sold in the millions.

Youth, talent, hard work, and enthusiasm are no match for old age and treachery.

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
Posted by MBT70 on Tuesday, June 7, 2005 4:00 PM
jtilley,

Sad, but true on all counts. The Blue Devil is impressive by size alone and really lacks detail and accurate scale. The 1/535 Missouri barely rates as a toy, much less a scale model. And Tamiya's 1/350 battleshjips are popular and fairly well cast, but it took GMM and a few other aftermarket kits to make them what they should be in the first place. Perhaps that's why multi-media kits are coming into vogue so fast and strong ... more details in the box already.

Good points and well taken
Life is tough. Then you die.
MJH
  • Member since
    April 2005
  • From: Melbourne, Australia
Posted by MJH on Sunday, November 20, 2005 8:05 PM
 jtilley wrote:
One thing Imai seemed to have going for it: an ability to mold thick pieces. My recollection (which may be defective; it's been a long time since I've seen any of these kits) is that the hull and deck castings of the big Imai kits were remarkably heavy and sturdy - which was one reason why they fit so well. In fact I seem to recall that they were molded in an unusual plastic with a slighly metallic cast to it. I wonder if this type of plastic resisted the shrinkage that normally stops manufacturers from making parts that are more than about 1/16" thick. One of the problems with the big Revell kits was warpage of the deck pieces. Revell had to mold the decks in three parts, because anything bigger would have shrunk and warped - and the examples one finds nowadays frequently have warping problems anyway.


As you say, the hull and deck mouldings of the Imai kits were indeed remarkably thick and sturdy, the plastic was usually in a ‘wood’ colour and even had a sort of grain effect.  It did appear to have a metallic content so perhaps this was some kind of additive to help solve the shrinkage problems.  I assembled the hull and decks of the Imai Santa Maria recently and the finished hull is probably the strongest (and heaviest for size) of any model I’ve ever built (other than perhaps Imai’s own HMS Victory with the die-cast metal hull!).  Carefully treated and stained it would be almost impossible to tell from wood.  Warpage of parts is a problem I've often found in Heller kits particularly - I once built the Viking ship and I'd swear the only thing the two hull halves had in common was their colour!

Another feature which I appreciate on Imai's kits is that the planking on the hull is varied from port to starboard, rather than one being a mirror image of the other.  Being moulded in various colours is a nice touch too.  While no modeller worth his salt would leave it unpainted, an attractive model could still be produced that way.

I’ve just acquired the Imai 1:120 Cutty Sark and the kit is everything you have said.  I was lucky to get it at a reasonable cost but on examination I’m now reluctant to build it as it’s practically mint-&-boxed perfect.  I suppose I’ll have to look for an Aoshima version so I can actually build one.  I only wish the Imai came with sails - and I don’t mean the dreaded vac-forms - something to replicate the furled sails on the yards would have been nice though.  Any suggestions?

Michael

!

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • From: Connecticut
Posted by DBFSS385 on Monday, November 21, 2005 8:47 AM

I thought the Tamiya 1/350 scale Fletcher Class DD was an excellent kit.

I also like the Revell S-100 in 1/72 scale and the Tamaiya MTB in 1/72nd scale was awsome.

Be Well/DBF Walt
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Pacific Northwest
Posted by MBT70 on Monday, November 21, 2005 9:46 AM

I've built a lot of ships in time, but there's just something special about the ICM Konig kit that really pleases me.  It's a good-looking ship for a subject, just for starters ... nice and gnarly but with a statuesque dignity befitting it's time and it was hi-tech in its day.  The kit captures that very well, but also has a very good fit and the parts are cast very well with lots of detail.  The plastic seems somehow unique, sort of like fine ivory and everything goes together so well.

Mine is about half done and it's in the configuration and colors for the sad trip to internment and scuttling at Scapa Flow.  I'm also going to rust and weather it extensivley, since the High Seas Fleet was laid up nearly inactive at Kiel for the years after Jutland.  A sorrowful end for a majestic ship.

But strangely compelling ....

Life is tough. Then you die.
JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.