New 1/48 B-17

[11bee]

21 hours ago, echolmberg said:

 

 Considering I can pick up a perfectly perfect Revell/Monogram one at Hobby Lobby for $26 after coupon, it seems obscenely, well, obscene.

Monogram paid off the cost of the engineering and tooling decades ago.   It costs a fortune to design and tool a model these days, especially a large, complex one like the B-17.  Are you suggesting that HK should just be selling theirs for the cost of the raw plastic? 

 

I'm also pretty sure that once this kit is out for a bit, you will be able to find it for less than the MSRP. 

 

   

[Joe Hegedus]

10 hours ago, nspreitler said:

 

And you will still be able to do that, but now there is a kit that isn't 45 years old.   The old Monogram kit has paid for itself many times over, and what it costs isn't relevant for HK.   $118 is a great price for a new tool 1/48 four engine bomber, but you certainly don't have to buy one if you are content with the ancient Monogram.  

 

But what it costs is very relevant to many modelers. Dimishing disposable income is not uncommon today - cost of living goes up but wages don't necessarily keep pace, so $40 for a Monogram kit is a lot easier for many to swing than a c-note plus.  And it's not too hard to find Monogram B-17s at a show for quite a bit less.

[nspreitler]

16 hours ago, Joe Hegedus said:

But what it costs is very relevant to many modelers. Dimishing disposable income is not uncommon today - cost of living goes up but wages don't necessarily keep pace, so $40 for a Monogram kit is a lot easier for many to swing than a c-note plus.  And it's not too hard to find Monogram B-17s at a show for quite a bit less.

 

The $40 kit will still be there, but now there is an option for a new and hopefully better one.   For some the cost will matter, for many it won't.  I figured out quite awhile ago I would rather spend my money on fewer good kits than on a lot of older cheap kits.    For many a used Ford Focus is a lot easier to swing than a new Corvette C8, but that doesn't mean Chevy shouldn't make a new Vette.  

 

Edited September 29, 2019 by nspreitler

[jabow]

I'm gonna have to buy at least one to satisfy my curiosity.  If it's good, may buy another.  

Also, hopefully encourage HK to make more 48th scale subjects!!  For sure will if the next is a F Model B-17.

Bo

[echolmberg]

On 9/28/2019 at 10:20 AM, 11bee said:

Monogram paid off the cost of the engineering and tooling decades ago.   It costs a fortune to design and tool a model these days, especially a large, complex one like the B-17.  Are you suggesting that HK should just be selling theirs for the cost of the raw plastic? 

 

I'm also pretty sure that once this kit is out for a bit, you will be able to find it for less than the MSRP. 

 

   

 

I remember getting the Monogram B-17 kit as a kid back in 1979.  I'm pretty sure that, when my dad got it for me, he didn't pay the 1979 equivalent of $100+.

[niart17]

3 hours ago, echolmberg said:

 

I remember getting the Monogram B-17 kit as a kid back in 1979.  I'm pretty sure that, when my dad got it for me, he didn't pay the 1979 equivalent of $100+.

That's possibly true, but there are other things to consider as well. Back then modeling was MUCH more popular and there were a lot more model making companies here in the U.S.. That means it wasn't as a specialized industry as much as it is now. Now days models aren't at your every five and dime corner drug store like they used to be. Marketing, manufacturing and selling model kits I'm sure is much more difficult than it use to be. Not only that, it at least APPEARS that there will be much more features on this kit than were included on the Monogram kit. That's not knocking the Monogram kit, it's still possibly one of the best and maybe most successful models they ever produced. But it was from a totally different era of model kits. Just my 2 cents

[11bee]

3 hours ago, echolmberg said:

 

I remember getting the Monogram B-17 kit as a kid back in 1979.  I'm pretty sure that, when my dad got it for me, he didn't pay the 1979 equivalent of $100+.

 

I honestly don't know what it cost in 79, I built my first one in the early 80's.  But for S&G's if we assume that kit cost $30 back then, if you account for inflation, today that kit would run you $106 today.    If you opt to spend a bit more $, you are getting a new-tool kit that (in theory) should far exceed the very nice Monogram product.   

 

Seems like a good value to me but to each their own.....

[Joe Hegedus]

1 hour ago, 11bee said:

 

I honestly don't know what it cost in 79, I built my first one in the early 80's.  But for S&G's if we assume that kit cost $30 back then, if you account for inflation, today that kit would run you $106 today.    If you opt to spend a bit more $, you are getting a new-tool kit that (in theory) should far exceed the very nice Monogram product.   

 

Seems like a good value to me but to each their own.....

In 1988, Discount Hobbies (the mail order place that was in Utica, NY) was advertising the 1/48 Monogram B-17G and B-24D for $10.87 each, and the 1/48 B-29 for $12.50.  Given that they were also asking $5.29 for the Monogram Tomcat, and Squadron was offering the same Tomcat for $8.50 in the same magazine, and applying the same percentage difference in price, the retail for the B-17 and B-24 at that time works out to about $16, and about $18.50 for the B-29.  This assumes that the Squadron prices listed were full retail, as was their normal pricing strategy.  Source was the Feb 1988 issue of FSM.  

[nspreitler]

5 hours ago, echolmberg said:

 

I remember getting the Monogram B-17 kit as a kid back in 1979.  I'm pretty sure that, when my dad got it for me, he didn't pay the 1979 equivalent of $100+.

 

I am sure it didn't and if you want a new kit with the level of detail and fit as the 1970s Monogram kit it would probably cost the equivalent of the Monogram kit.   That kit has right around 100 parts, if a company today released a new B-17 with the same level of detail nobody would want it.   It's an apple and oranges comparison.    

[ChesshireCat]

I got a better look at the kit on Facebook awhile ago. I'm not really an expert or even a B17 guru, but to my eyes it looks like a very late F model instead of a G! Am I wrong? The very late F is often mistaken for a B17g

Gary

[echolmberg]

3 hours ago, 11bee said:

But for S&G's...

 

Here I was trying my hardest to think back to my college accounting days to figure out what "S&G"s was thinking it must have been some financial/accounting term.  LOL!  

 

I'm going to hope and pray that Hobby Lobby will carry it and I can use a 40% off coupon on it!  

 

Eric

[bashace]

4 minutes ago, echolmberg said:

 

Here I was trying my hardest to think back to my college accounting days to figure out what "S&G"s was thinking it must have been some financial/accounting term.  LOL!  

 

I'm going to hope and pray that Hobby Lobby will carry it and I can use a 40% off coupon on it!  

 

Eric

Schillings and Guilders😉

 

[jester292]

On 10/1/2019 at 3:04 PM, ChesshireCat said:

I got a better look at the kit on Facebook awhile ago. I'm not really an expert or even a B17 guru, but to my eyes it looks like a very late F model instead of a G! Am I wrong? The very late F is often mistaken for a B17g

Gary

 

Allow me to show my ignorance. What’s the difference between a late F and an early G?

[afspret]

5 hours ago, jester292 said:

 

Allow me to show my ignorance. What’s the difference between a late F and an early G?

I believe the only real way to tell the difference between the two was the serial number, as externally they looked pretty much the same.  

[ChesshireCat]

6 hours ago, jester292 said:

 

Allow me to show my ignorance. What’s the difference between a late F and an early G?

Start out with the chin turret. Both have them. The F has the same waist gun setup as well. But I think the F retained the early tail gun. There is a slight difference in the glass as well. The tail gun is hard for me to identify.

Gary

[WymanV]

The early G did not have the nose cheek guns. They were deleted because it was believed the chin turret would be sufficient. It didn't take long for them to come back.

[mawz]

4 hours ago, ChesshireCat said:

Start out with the chin turret. Both have them. The F has the same waist gun setup as well. But I think the F retained the early tail gun. There is a slight difference in the glass as well. The tail gun is hard for me to identify.

Gary

Was there a tail gun change before the Cheyenne Tail? Because that's a late G feature, early G's didn't have them.

[11bee]

1 hour ago, mawz said:

Was there a tail gun change before the Cheyenne Tail? Because that's a late G feature, early G's didn't have them.

I don’t think so. The tail position was standard on F’s and G’s, until the later introduction of the Cheyenne turret.  

Edited October 4, 2019 by 11bee

[ChesshireCat]

On 10/3/2019 at 8:21 PM, mawz said:

Was there a tail gun change before the Cheyenne Tail? Because that's a late G feature, early G's didn't have them.

That's why I said I wasn't sure about the tail end. I do think the was a difference in the surround fairing, as I remember seeing an early and late comparison photographs. 

Gary

[Scooby]

On 10/1/2019 at 5:33 AM, echolmberg said:

 

I remember getting the Monogram B-17 kit as a kid back in 1979.  I'm pretty sure that, when my dad got it for me, he didn't pay the 1979 equivalent of $100+.

 

 

I bet he did.

 

In 1979 : An AMC Pacer cost $3,100 in California, while a Chevy Impala cost $5,471 in New York. An Oldsmobile Tornado cost $10,041 in the US, and a Toyota Carola was $3,698 in New York. Prices for most cars ranged from 4,000 to $6,000 in 1979.

 

2020 MSRP: Corolla $19,500, Chevy Impala $28,895 (almost identical increases 529% and 527%). The other cars don’t exist anymore.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Charlie D.]

 

 

 

I bet he did.

 

In 1979 : An AMC Pacer cost $3,100 in California, while a Chevy Impala cost $5,471 in New York. An Oldsmobile Tornado cost $10,041 in the US, and a Toyota Carola was $3,698 in New York. Prices for most cars ranged from 4,000 to $6,000 in 1979.

 

2020 MSRP: Corolla $19,500, Chevy Impala $28,895 (almost identical increases 529% and 527%). The other cars don’t exist anymore.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe the price point in 1975, the year it was released was $8-$9. Let's just call it $9. According to the latest inflation calculators, that's about $43 in 2019 dollars, so well under $100. Current online price not including shipping is around $35, so it's even cheaper now when taking inflation into account!

Edited October 7, 2019 by Charlie D.

[Scooby]

Not if you are buying a Monogram B-17. They can be found for $40 USD.

 

The HK B-17 is comparable to switching from a Corolla to a Cadillac.

[Charlie D.]

$37 shipped on Amazon, and $34 shipped on eBay. Let me know if you need links.... For the Monogram 1/48 B-17G that is....when adjusted for inflation, that's cheaper than when they were issued in 1975.

Edited October 7, 2019 by Charlie D.

[Don]

For anyone looking for a Monogram/Revell B-17G and you're in the U.S and have a Hobby Lobby close by you can walk out the door with a Monogram/Revell B-17G for under $24 with the 40% off coupon. Just throwing that out for those interested.

 

Happy modeling all!

[VMA131Marine]

 

Looks like the MSRP is going to be $118, which in my opinion is very good.   That's less than what the Tamiya Lancaster costs.  

 

The Tamiya Lancaster goes for under $60 in Japan. Even adding shipping, the final cost will be less than $100 to most places. That won’t stop me from getting the HK 1/48 Lanc when it’s released.