Jump to content

Inaccurate Kit GB


Recommended Posts

Has there ever been one? There sure are enough kits according to most forums

I belong to. Maybe have kits built OOB with no aftermarket to fix the "glaring"

mistakes? I have always wanted to try a Starfix kit!---John

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a hoot!

I'm expecting the flaws should be visible and obvious to an informed observer?

Hm, perhaps the Lindberg 1/48 F11F-1, which is really the prototype, an F9F-9?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think EVERY kit made to this date is inaccurate in some shape or

form, with the exception of maybe the new Tamiya F-14A and the

Fisher 1/32 resin kits. There could be more.They don't have to be

glaring issues, maybe have the kit have a certain amount, say a

minimum of 4 or more documented issues, such as wrong shaped canopies,

gear legs too long or short, dihedral actually an anhedral, mishappened

weapons, kits where flaps only go down but slats and flaps should all

go down. Lots of issues to consider, just read some of the reviews!---John

Edited by john53
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think EVERY kit made to this date is inaccurate in some shape or

form, with the exception of maybe the new Tamiya F-14A and the

Fisher 1/32 resin kits. There could be more.They don't have to be

glaring issues, maybe have the kit have a certain amount, say a

minimum of 4 or more documented issues, such as wrong shaped canopies,

gear legs too long or short, dihedral actually an anhedral, mishappened

weapons, kits where flaps only go down but slats and flaps should all

go down. Lots of issues to consider, just read some of the reviews!---John

Was thinking the same thing...I mean, c'mon folks, these manufacturers actually use PLASTIC to replicate ALUMINUM airfames...totally inaccurate!!! <_<

Seriously, though, I still remember fondly in the Detail & Scale of the F4U Corsair, the review of the Testors F4U-1. It said, boldly in print, that the only part of the entire kit remotely worth using on any model kit was the centerline drop tank! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could really work well. As long as you let the "inaccurate" determination come from any source at all. Make it not matter if it comes from advice in a book, magazine, online website,,,,,,or a person's own measurements.

I saw Starfix mentioned,,,,,,but, remember a Starfix F-5B/T-38A is just as accurate as the Hasegawa/Frog kit. (same mold)

Also, let a person do anything they want as to finish, etc. That way, a guy could turn something into a Whiffer, to make use of a kit that he wouldn't build if it were for aftermarket decals. Or a person could bring it up to accurate with resin and work, and use those aftermarket decals on it.

If it is left nice and open, we could wind up learning how to fix a bunch of kits that we all have sitting around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you describing a "Modeling Required" GB? If so, short-run and really old kits would be easy choices. I suppose you could have a build-it-as-it-lays as well as build-it-as-it-should-be entries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

You can call it the rivet counter's inaccurate kit group build...............every single damn kit ever made would be eligible for the build.......

Edited by Johnopfor
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Johnopfor said:

You can call it the rivet counter's inaccurate kit group build...............every single damn kit ever made would be eligible for the build.......

Maybe "Rivet Counter's Nightmare"? How's that for a title?

Link to post
Share on other sites

How about the controversial kit GB, Accuracy and crappyness are very much in the eye of the beholder. What about kits where there has been lots of arguing over the years? This would allow many of Trumpeters early 1/32 kits, like the A-10 ,and  the F-105, as well as some of the monogram classics like the 1/48th F-105 where  some people feel the nose is too pointy, or the F-84F which many argue the fuselage is incorrect, or the newer Revell 1/32 Phantoms where many argue the canopy shape is wrong. There are many such examples

 

This way we can build otherwise good and  fairly modern kits, and go about it in a light hearted way. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kurt H. said:

How about the controversial kit GB, Accuracy and crappyness are very much in the eye of the beholder. What about kits where there has been lots of arguing over the years? This would allow many of Trumpeters early 1/32 kits, like the A-10 ,and  the F-105, as well as some of the monogram classics like the 1/48th F-105 where  some people feel the nose is too pointy, or the F-84F which many argue the fuselage is incorrect, or the newer Revell 1/32 Phantoms where many argue the canopy shape is wrong. There are many such examples

 

This way we can build otherwise good and  fairly modern kits, and go about it in a light hearted way. 

 

Okay...how about "Rivet Counter's Revenge" GB? :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

well, if it is going to be named as an insult to a large group of modelers,,,,,,,,,,I will just keep "building offline"

 

I think dem ebil rivet counters should just stop answering questions. And making masters, and sending stuff to other modelers, etc, etc

 

 

Edited by Rex
Link to post
Share on other sites

For this to work, I think the kits meet the requirement of having an obvious shape issue. For example, I cant obviously see the flaws in any of the mentioned F-105 kits, but an Academy 1/48 F-14 is clearly misshapen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rex said:

well, if it is going to be named as an insult to a large group of modelers,,,,,,,,,,I will just keep "building offline"

 

I think dem ebil rivet counters should just stop answering questions. And making masters, and sending stuff to other modelers, etc, etc

 

 

Didn't mean it as an insult at all, sincerest apologies that it was taken that way. If any insult was intended, it was surely directed at the kit, and not the builder. I withdraw my previous suggestions. :cheers:

Edited by Andrew D. the Jolly Rogers guy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...