On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:13:29 -0800, Erik B. wrote:
Unless you're going for the collector's value, you really don't want it.
It's grossly inaccurate. Try this one instead:
It's a limited edition resin/vac kit, very expen$ive but worth every penny.
Go here http://www.welshmodels.co.uk/ then look under "Listings" then
There are other nice kits on the site as well.
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:13:29 -0800, Erik B. wrote:
Unless you're a collector, the Aurora kit is not worth wasting your time
on. There are serious shape issues everywhere. Try
http://www.welshmodels.co.uk/ instead. Go to
http://www.welshmodels.co.uk/Classicairliners.html to find an accurate
737. Warning: this kit is not cheap, but it's very good.
You'll find many other good kits there as well.
Yes, well it looks more like a 737 than a Mustang. Get over yourself. Not
everyone wants to spend vast sums of money for a vac kit, nor do they want
to build a vac kit. Some people built the old Aurora kits many years ago and
would simply like to replay the experience with thier many years on improved
Not everyone is anal retentive. Not everyone can devote large sums of money
and time to a hobby. Some people have families which demeand thier attention
and command thier paychecks. These people sometimes just need a hobby that
is not to stressful to RELAX!!!!
Get over yourself. I deal with enough blowhards in my professional life, I
prefer to avoid them in my hobby. My local club for the most part is sans
snobs. This makes it a pleasure to attend. I have now won two firsts with
kits that were 40+ years old. Maybe not $40+, 500 piece magnificinces but I
had FUN building them, and scratchbuilt most of the improvements. My God I
can't be hip, not a touch of PE or resin anywhere!. Just good technique,
imagination, manual skills and paint.
Yeah I gues the $30 DML T-34 with it's link to link tracks and exquisite
detail requiring many hours to build is a much nicer kit, but the $10 Revell
1/40 T-34 is actually pretty accurate in outline and easy to build and
paint. Brass tubing exhausts, bent wire handholds, scratched end pieces and
straps for the fuel tanks, chop off the awful muzzle brake and drill out the
barrel, yeah OK I ain't the coolest geek in the club. But apparently I do
have some skill.
And I got it done in the short periods of time the rest of my life permits
me to have for my hobby.
Yeah, the Aurora 737 isn't right the engines being wrong. But if you checked
the dimensions of a 737 and measured the kit you might find that it appears
to be a 737-200 in 1/78 scale. (measure it and compare to specs on
Airliners.Net, I did). My decals were trash and 2 big shot decal makers have
turned me down on resizing existing 737 decals, I guess if it isn't cookie
cutter they can't handle it. So I'll make my own by resizing 1/144 decals.
And then I'll do a fine job on it, take it to a show and you can tell me how
inaccurate it is. And then you can show me the one you built.
Erik, go to eBay. The Aurora and the Monogram repop are there all the time.
The Monogram is probably a better deal as a builder, Monogram cleaned and
somewhat improved the molds, the decals will be newer and probably better
and the Mongrams command less money since they aren't collectors.
Get one and have a good time with it, not to many parts, put your effort
into the paint job and tell every one of the know-it-alls to blow it out
their thrust reverser. AND HAVE A FUN TIME!!!
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 14:05:28 -0600, Gray Ghost wrote:
I think you need to take your own advice. The OP wanted a 737 model, so I
pointed out the best one I know about. You assume I'm anal retentive and
you call me a blowhard in a post at least 8 times longer than mine was.
You insult me, you insult our hobby and you insult Erik. By doing so, you
have managed to also insult yourself worse. Go step away from the glue
fumes now, okay?
As I think I mentioned some time back here. The old Aurora 737 was done
before the real one was done. They came to Seattle and the only thing we
had to show them was the mock up. Also of course the various sales
literature and stuff like that.
By the time we rolled out the first 737-100, there had been some significant
changes made. These are some of the most noticeable changes from the Aurora
It was supposed to be a 737-100 as that was the only one we were working on
at that time. I don't think there are many -100 series birds flying
anymore. For that matter, I am not sure there are many -200s either. The
fact they got the length wrong is a pretty good indication of the rest of
the kit as well.
The kit does not have a wing body fairing. This is a noticeable omission as
it is quite noticeable. I think this might be the biggest problem with the
The thrust reverser actuator fairings on the sides of the engines are
horizontal. We found during flight test that they blew a large bubble of
air under the A/C and reduced braking efficiency. The simple fix of
rotating the reversers about 45 degrees fixed the problem. So the actuators
are only accurate for a couple of the flight test birds for a short time.
If Erik's intent is to model anything he sees at the local airport, then the
suggestion to look at the Welsh kit is a good one, or perhaps to consider
changing to 144th scale. there are an excellent selection of 737s in that
Of course there are a lot of fiddly little stuff to be added but I'll pass
While I think I agree with the basic premise you had in your post, I sure
didn't care for the harsh manner.
Perhaps a bit to harsh. It just grinds me to hear people griping all the
time about a hobby. I deal in precision calculations every day. My hobby is
to relax. I agree many kits aren't accurate but if you have someone fairly
new lookinmg for something to have a go don't discourage them. I do think
people get turned away by the carping sometimes.
I know the 737 ain't right. But it does scale as a -200 in 1/78, can't help
that it just does. Ask Ron Smith about ship models and how inaccurate modern
molds cut this year are. Yet somehow they sell them. I just know I'm not
making 100% accurate copies of the prototype. Maybe on some things I'll try
harder, but jeez everyone take a break.
Didn't mean to come across so harsh. Everybody off the internet and go build
a model rather than kibbitz about it.
Now were on the same page.
There are some rather disturbing trends happening in this modeling hobby.
At least the way I see it.
Your absolutely right about the constant barrage of bad vibes and bitching
about every little thing. But the depth of interest is so varied that I
think the bad needs to be pointed out in constructive ways so that those out
there who want to go the extra mile at least have some idea what they are
To me the key here is "constructive ways" I think the ideal is to try to
point out what is not accurate (within reason), provide some documentation
of how you came to that conclusion, and maybe even try to suggest some ways
to correct that. To just ignore these things and assume everyone is a
casual builder and doesn't care would be a disservice to those who do.
But again, the key for me is credibility and politeness.
Yes, I do visit the ship forums. I have seen Ron's tirades about the
efforts by Trumpeter. I am pretty new to the ship world so don't have a lot
of depth there. I am pretty sure when I get down into the nuts and bolts of
Ron's post that he is 100% right, but the intensity he displays bothers me.
Not much different than trying to avoid someone that is clearly angry and
out of control in the real world.
Like you, this is a hobby. That implies enjoyment, and I do enjoy it. But
too often the heat prevents me from enjoying the warmth.
Norm, I'm just sick and tired of people claiming Trumpeter should be
thanked for producing shoddy kits. It gripes me even more when they had
the proper research available and blew it off. The poor engineering of
some of them is inexcusable as well. Every 1/350 kit since the Franklin
has been a step or three backwards in quality and accuracy...it's like
they almost hit the mark and now that they have market recognition they
don't care anymore. If they want to charge Tamiya prices, they better
keep the quality up or they'll get hammered.
I can't disagree with any of that.
I have some personal reservations about sending my money there and
encouraging them, but they are for sure into this market big time. The
reality is that a lot of our modeling associates apparently have been
working with them for some time trying to help them do good stuff. As you
say, some of it is being ignored.
But the Tamiya and Revell and other companies are not free of errors either.
But one thing is very clear. Trumpeter is paying attention to the modeling
desires and trying to fill most of them in a couple of years apparently.
Nobody else in the world is doing the volume of new stuff in popular scales
like they are. Anybody else done a 1/350th carrier lately? I did not buy
the Tico. and South Carolina kit for several reasons, but Tracy White's
comments regarding the Tico. and yours on the S.C. did play a part. But I
do have four of their carriers sitting around here and I suspect that is a
lifetime of ships for me.
I find it interesting that Trumpeter figured out the pricing thing very
quickly. Their first few kits were very competitively priced to say the
least. That changed in about three or four months. Now they seem to have
figured out that they can sell their stuff at premium prices. And it is not
the US importer getting rich either. If you look at the on-line hobby
retailers in Hong Kong, or Japan the prices, while somewhat lower, are not
going to save you much money by the time you pay the freight.
Ron, I think we are pretty much on the same page here, where I take
exception is the heat in the messages. I doubt if either of us will have
much impact on the Trumpeter market share, so perhaps the better way is to
try to encourage those who have bought the models to do a bit of research
and provide constructive advice on what they can do to improve both the
model and their modeling skills.
I know quite a bit more about that than I'm willing to state in public.
No real argument that Tamiya and Revell also have quality issues but
they're consistent and haven't let it lapse not that Trumpeter is
producing a lot but then so does my cat. The backslide in quality does
concern me, if they produce a plastic kit and it's crap nobody else will
want to risk the capital and we're stuck with crap or nothing.
Most of that is directed at the idiots who insist on using secondary or
tertiary sources to argue against primary sources. The same idiots will
also insist "put up or shut up" yet they aren't willing to pay for the
privilege....guess what? I don't work for free and I sure as hell will
not just give away information that has cost me serious time and/or
money to acquire. It the same basic group of idiots in both cases. What
really sets me off is constant claims "X has never been found" yet
copies of X sit right in this very room....of course they aren't willing
to pay for copies of X, they want it free.
In some cases that involves spending as much or more on aftermarket
replacement parts than the kit cost or spending so many hours of labor
fixing the kit's errors (mostly stupid engineering)that the average
modeller ends up sticking it back in the box and on the shelf (a few
will finish it and refer to it as the kit from hell....this has been
applied by various modellers to Hornet, Lexington, the original Essex
release and North Carolina; multiple times each). The Liberty is just
about the only kit that doesn't need much in the way of accuracy
correction and major amounts of working around stupid engineering. Not
one of the kits has a lower hull that fits the upper hull without
fiddling, about half actually need surgery to get that fit close.
Later tonight after I finish putting all the extra computer bits away
I'll post a list of the various stupidities for the North Carolina, with
part numbers if applicable. All the carriers are currently in storage or
were built long enough ago I can't clearly remember all the errors. And
yes, I've built 2 Horents and 2 Essex class on commission and swore a
bluestreak through most of each build.
I recently began buying 1/32 or so wooden display models on eBay.
There's one outfit advertising an "F4U-5N", when it's actually a -1. It
has no radar pod or 4 blade prop, so it's not even a straight -5. I
can't tell from the pic if it has the correct cowl shape, but I doubt
it. It is in -5N markings, IIRC. I wrote them & asked if I were to buy
it, would it be a proper -5N, with correct cowl & prop & radar pod &
surely this was just a representative pic. I was told that it would be
identical to the pic. I wrote them again & explained the diffs in a -5N
& what appeared was a -1 in -5N markings. They responded that if I
provided them drawings & pics, they would model any a/c. I told them
there was plenty of available documentation on -5Ns & if they were
going to sell a Corsair as a -5N, it should certainly look like one,
especially the most obvious details. I bought a -7 in French markings
from the same seller earlier & upon its arrival, where I could see it
better, it didn't have the hump behind the canopy & had basically a -1
cowl with a chin scoop added, not nearly deep enough. I told them had
it not been for the excellent finish & French markings, as well as my
low buying price, I would have returned it as being misrepresented.
Despite Ron's, err, curmudgeonly ways he really is a good guy and a fount of
knowledge. I watched a demo he did once and was quite inspired. He also does
a lot of research on commision for resin modelmakers. I think his point is
quite simply that the material is there and there is no excuse for gross
accuracy issues nor boneheaded engineering given todays technology. And I
agree with him.
I choose to build plastic while he prefers resin. He makes a good case that
you can spend as much on aftermarket to bring a plastic kit up to resin kit
standards and still not have as good a kit as the resin one. Of course it
depends on how much time and money we choose to spend and the level of
"accuracy" we can accept. Frankly I am blown away by many of the really nice
jobs done by the experten, but I haven't the time or money to emulate them.
I'd rather do what I can and achieve a reasonable copy of the original.
Others crave the nuts and bolts accuracy and work to achieve it. I think the
problem tends to be that guys like me look at the experten for advice and
inspiration, but I get the impression that (some of) the experten tend to
look down on those more tolerant.
I can live with a 30 to 40 year old kit because I can accept the limitations
of the time without obsessing over the errors. And given the errors pointed
out by Ron, and other modern problems (check out the DML Pz IV E, there is
some kind of serious fit problem with some major components which in my mind
combined with the many, many, many parts says to me this kit will take
forever to build) does tend to put one off considering the prices.
It's called perspective. Everything is a give and take. Let's just have fun.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.