AMK will release a MiG-31!

[mingwin]

i also concur that the single part missiles (of the GWH MiG-29) are pure gems. and beyond the wow factor (because they look way better than any other styrene missiles i've seen so far) ...there is the promise that every fins will be perfectly lined-up... less assle, less assembly required... more time on other aspects of the build...

and i would certainly welcome more slide molding technology in the plastic aircraft model industry... some seamless intakes could be done that way... nozzles could also benefits from that technology...

[Laurent]

Also, this is how development occurs. Now, all other manufacturers will respond in time and soon enough this will be an industry standard.

... or it will be its death: tooling costs rises, company increases the kit price, less kits are sold, budget too low to develop new kits, company dies.

[shion]

AMK is a very small company, and they are trying (successfully, I think) to make a name for themselves. It would be far cheaper and easier for Tamiya to make the cowling panels on their 1/32 kits snap-in rather than held in place with magnets, but that's not the way they chose to do it. They chose to do it the way they did to make themselves stand out from the crowd. Not every decision is made solely on the basis of money. Quality and the perception of quality is something you can't really put a price on.

I applaud AMK and GWH for their approach.

In the end, only one thing matters: sales.

Companies don't give a .... about your personnal support or your applause.

Quality has a price, and every design decision has a price.

I'm agree with Stephane, one-piece missiles are a nice feature, but did they really worth the amount ot money?

No.

Dragon, perhaps the leader on the market about use of slide-mold technology, had wise and unwise choices of it.

I don't think a "new" company, will make wiser choices.

[Berkut]

The "wiseness" of the tooling choices made doesn't depend on whether a company is new or old. There are plenty of old companies that do some really horrible engineering decisions all the time (looking at you, Boeing).

Just depends how good the engineers doing the tooling and design are. And i have every reason to believe AMK and Sio know exactly what they are doing. But i am biased i guess.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Berkut

[erik_g]

I think they ARE worth the cost. They are as fine as any after market resin missile, but comes included with the kit. The GWH kits aren´t aimed at the beginner that is looking for a cheap kit to put together, but to the crowd that otherwise will feel compelled to buy aftermarket items from Eduard and Aires.

The GWH Eagle is about $60 to the Hasegawa and Revellogram $30, but then you add Eduard Brassin Sparrows and Winders and maybe resin bang seats ($10 per set) and you arrive at $60 for the kit. If the kit is good enough that I don´t feel that I have to spend money on after market stuff (which I more or less expect a $60+ kit to be) it is worth the money.

A kit that is accurate, detailed and easy to build is clearly worth more than one that is not.

When all is said and done, if GWH and AMK earns enough money to stay afloat and make their owners happy, they obviously have the correct business model for them. You might look at the business in several different ways, just as we all look at the hobby in different ways. You either want to produce kits that are "good enough" but are cheap, generating a lot of profit that can be used to quickly expand or just to make the owners rich, or you can look to the connaiseurs, charge more, but sell lower quantities and maybe not generating as much profit.

In the car maker world Trumpeter would be the Kias and Hyundais while GWH and AMK might be the BMWs and Audis..(although no one believes that BMW or Audi doesn´t make a profit, right?) I have owned both a Kia and an Audi. Both cars did what they were supposed to, but I did really prefer the Audi.. :-)

[Jennings]

In the end, only one thing matters: sales.

Companies don't give a .... about your personnal support or your applause.

Sorry, but you are factually wrong there. I've been directly involved with the business and the players in the business for a lot of years now, and your statement is wrong.

[shion]

The "wiseness" of the tooling choices made doesn't depend on whether a company is new or old. There are plenty of old companies that do some really horrible engineering decisions all the time (looking at you, Boeing).

Just depends how good the engineers doing the tooling and design are. And i have every reason to believe AMK and Sio know exactly what they are doing. But i am biased i guess. :rolleyes:/>

Wiseness of tooling choices doesn't depend on the tooling or the design, it depends on the use of the right tool for the right result.

Money isn't infinite, for both producer and consumer.

I don't think all slide-mold choices by Dragon were wise, either by AMK.

[shion]

Sorry, but you are factually wrong there. I've been directly involved with the business and the players in the business for a lot of years now, and your statement is wrong.

which statement?

That the only thing that matters is sales, in a company point of view?

[Laurent]

The "wiseness" of the tooling choices made doesn't depend on whether a company is new or old.

To some extent it does. Higher quality tooling is more expensive so the company has to be able to finance the tooling.

Just depends how good the engineers doing the tooling and design are. And i have every reason to believe AMK and Sio know exactly what they are doing.

No (money and/or other opportunities) and yes (he graduated 14 years ago).

[Jennings]

which statement?

That the only thing that matters is sales, in a company point of view?

Both. You clearly know nothing about the industry if that's what you think.

[Laurent]

Both. You clearly know nothing about the industry if that's what you think.

Healthy company = incomes - expenses >> 0 ?

[Jennings]

That's not what he's saying, and that's silly. It's not an either-or situation.

[shion]

Both. You clearly know nothing about the industry if that's what you think.

Oh please, not the autorithy argument.

That's not what he's saying, and that's silly. It's not an either-or situation.

It is exactly what I say.

AMK, or every model kit manufacturer aren't no-lucrative associations, they're commercial groups.

Like I said earlier, they don't give a .... about your applause, they need consumers.

Edited August 14, 2015 by shion

[foxmulder_ms]

@Shion, do you ever spent money on after market stuff? If so you are contradicting yourself. If not, I can understand you wanting cheap stuff but otherwise I don't get you. Everybody knows quality costs more. Not that complicated really. I, for one, always prefer a Mercedes rather than a Kia. My modelling life has been buying Kias and pimping them up to Mercedes levels by aftermarket so overall cost does decrease for me.

Example:

Su-27 from academy: I buy nose cone, pitot tube, exhausts, cockpit, missiles..

Mig-29 from Great Wall Hobby: I just buy the kit.

Total cost: Mig-29 from Great Wall Hobby < Su-27 from Academy.

Edited August 14, 2015 by foxmulder_ms

[shion]

@Shion, do you ever spent money on after market stuff? If so you are contradicting yourself. If not, I can understand you wanting cheap stuff but otherwise I don't get you. Everybody knows quality costs more. Not that complicated really. I, for one, always prefer a Mercedes rather than a Kia. My modelling life has been buying Kias and pimping them up to Mercedes levels by aftermarket so overall cost does decrease for me.

Example:

Su-27 from academy: I buy nose cone, pitot tube, exhausts, cockpit, missiles..

Mig-29 from Great Wall Hobby: I just buy the kit.

Total cost: Mig-29 from Great Wall Hobby < Su-27 from Academy.

Sorry, but what's the point of your comment?

[Berkut]

Point being that;

A - Getting a badly detailed kit and bringing it up to a well detailed kit will cost atleast as much and often more.(Ala Acad MiG-29 and GWH MiG-29)

B - Having a "full package" kit where everything is included, being accurate, detailed and good decals is nice. Spares headache of ordering loads of stuff separate.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Berkut

[shion]

I do not see points here, I see fallacies.

Fisrt fallacy: People must buy aftermarket goods because this or these kit is badly detailled.

No, I buy aftermarket if and only if I want to, the fact that a kit is good or badly detailled, isn't the main reason of my choice.

Second fallacy, the biggest: to believe every modeller thinks the same, chooses the same, builds the same.

[jinmmydel]

I do not see points here, I see fallacies.

Fisrt fallacy: People must buy aftermarket goods because this or these kit is badly detailled.

No, I buy aftermarket if and only if I want to, the fact that a kit is good or badly detailled, isn't the main reason of my choice.

Second fallacy, the biggest: to believe every modeller thinks the same, chooses the same, builds the same.

You're missing the underlying theme here which is that "bad" kits like the Academy Mig-29 are unbuildable without all the aftermarket corrections. People with this mindset can't fathom that someone would build the Academy kit without buying all that stuff, and if you do you're an idiot. Clearly the only option is to buy the Academy kit and a load of AM, or buy the GW kit. :unsure:

That being said, I would much rather have the GW level kit with the better OOB detail cost and all. And even then I would add AM if I could. I like high detail fidelity. Cost really isn't a concern for me. There isn't a plastic injection model kit yet that had extended beyond a price I'm willing to pay if I want to build it. You get what you pay for with expensive kits. I'm happy to pay (a minimal) upcharge for single piece weapons. They look just as good as many resin options. It's a no brainer for me.

[mingwin]

i think that GWH and AMK might have chosen a niche market...in a niche market... maybe it's risky business... but sometime, to win, you have to take a certain amount of risk...

both are rather new players in the business and might think that this niche is a good one... at least to make their names.

but with the hundreds of Aftermarket companies, with a couple of them being rather big players (in the market) ...there should be people that likes to buy aftermarket stuff...

i, for myself, spend more money, overall, on aftermarket items, than on kits. (not that much more... still, slightly more...i own 7 GWH mig-29's, and haven't feel the need yet to buy any AM item for them (decals excepted))

Edited August 14, 2015 by mingwin

[foxmulder_ms]

... to believe every modeller thinks the same, chooses the same, builds the same.

Look at the mirror and repeat this. I want Mercedes, period. If you want Kia buy one but don't tell Mercedes stop producing high quality cars.

[foxmulder_ms]

You're missing the underlying theme here which is that "bad" kits like the Academy Mig-29 are unbuildable without all the aftermarket corrections. People with this mindset can't fathom that someone would build the Academy kit without buying all that stuff, and if you do you're an idiot. Clearly the only option is to buy the Academy kit and a load of AM, or buy the GW kit. :unsure:/>/>

If this is directed to me, it is BS.

After market is a must for me, not for everyone and that is what I said. Therefore, I want AMK and GWH products. What I don't want people to come and ask these companies to lower the quality.

Edited August 14, 2015 by foxmulder_ms

[shion]

You're missing the underlying theme here which is that "bad" kits like the Academy Mig-29 are unbuildable without all the aftermarket corrections. People with this mindset can't fathom that someone would build the Academy kit without buying all that stuff, and if you do you're an idiot. Clearly the only option is to buy the Academy kit and a load of AM, or buy the GW kit. :unsure:/>

That being said, I would much rather have the GW level kit with the better OOB detail cost and all. And even then I would add AM if I could. I like high detail fidelity. Cost really isn't a concern for me. There isn't a plastic injection model kit yet that had extended beyond a price I'm willing to pay if I want to build it. You get what you pay for with expensive kits. I'm happy to pay (a minimal) upcharge for single piece weapons. They look just as good as many resin options. It's a no brainer for me.

Sorry but these lines are so...typical.

First: No, Academy mig-29 aren't unbuildable.

They're buildable and more important, cheap. They aren't a good representation of the plane but you can build them.

Second: Academy mig-29 are buidable and can be corrected with some scrachtbuilding, if you want to.

It was the norm before the GWH kit's release.

[mingwin]

i have 7 Academy MiG-29 kits (both types) i'd gladly sell for 15 USD +SH each ...or trade the 7(+ even1 more academy kit, bagged) for 1 GWH 1/48 MiG-29SMT...

this whole thing have convinced me... i should do a Buy and Sell thread for my Academy Mig-29 kits and goodies this week end... to free some money for more GWH/AMK style kits...

Now selling all my Academy 1/48 MiG-29 and aftermarket! see the buy and sell forum or click this link!

Edited August 16, 2015 by mingwin

[jinmmydel]

If this is directed to me, it is BS.

After market is a must for me, not for everyone and that is what I said. Therefore, I want AMK and GWH products. What I don't want people to come and ask these companies to lower the quality.

It wasn't directed at anyone.

[Berkut]

This is getting tedious.