Re: Question: New Kit Parts Problems

> I am curious about the experience of others when they open a new kit > and inspected the parts. I have been at this hobby on and off for 50 > years now and its rare (none comes to mind) to have any problems with > the plastic injection parts. I build them right out of the box. Its > only within the last 20 years or so that I started making > modifications and additions (of extras). > > My curiosity is with the kit reviews published. The reviewers seem to > suffer an unusually high incidence of kits with poorly molded parts, > flash, that needs cleaning up, missing parts, warped parts, ill > fitting parts, injection pins, injection pin holes that need to be > filled, etc. In otherwords the QC inspector was asleep at the bench, > the kit distributor loves to tease reviewers or the reviewers need to > invent a problem to have something to write about. > > What is your experience?

I think I've had maybe three kits in the past 50 years with short-shot parts. The one that caused the biggest problem was the Monogram F-15A. The incomplete part was the upper fuselage/flying surfaces. That stalled me for awhile until the new part came in. To my surprise it was of the production wing shape where my kit had been the prototype wing shape. When it comes to ill-fitting parts, I haven't had too much trouble outside of TKM cars or Merlin kits. The review that causes me to snicker everytime I read it is the one for the '75 Dodge Dart that RC/Ertl managed to title as a Duster. It seemed that no one at Kalmbach alerted the reviewer to that fact. He spent so much of the review complaining about the parts making a Dodge when they were 'supposed' to be of the Duster that he came off as clueless. Either Kalmbach wanted to impress RC/Ertl with their goof or their editor let one of his writers make a fool of himself.

Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.

Reply to
Mad-Modeller
Loading thread data ...

Only a couple come to mind, both Frogs. The Fairey Firefly and the Hotspur glider both had short shots to the fuselage that I had to repair myself. Fortunately, in each case, the hole was small, maybe

1/2" across. In fact, I was thinking of using the Hotspur in a vignette, showing a hard landing (the hole was in the nose portion of the fuselage).
Reply to
The Old Man

The only kit I've had with short shots is the 1/48 Smer MiG 17. (I know you are shocked to hear that a Smer kit could have such problems!) I'm assuming they were short shots. However, it could have been a flaw in the mold itself as I had two others of the same kit and the same parts were incompletly formed in those as well.

One thing to keep in mind about the reviews one reads: There is no objective standard by which one rates the flaws. "A lot of flash", "many sink marks", "nasty ejection pin marks" are all subjective descriptions. I'm currently working on a 1/32 Trumpeter MiG 21 F-13. It has a "good bit of flash" and "numerous, deep ejection pin marks" in "really noticeable and difficult places". Flash to me is a non-issue as I expect it and can deal with it quickly and easily. But I hate pin marks! Some other model builders may be the opposite - pin marks don't bother them but flash is hair-pulling nightmare.

Art

Reply to
Art Murray

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.