What are the 10 worst Sci-Fi , Space , or Monster Kits

With me that ''StarWars'' tank comes to mnd as Pretty High UP on my List. That thing is just Totallly a Piece of Crap
In all fairness the ''Cut-away Enterprise'' is no Great Masterpiece Either
I just love the Old Monster Kits from the Movies. The ''Creature from the Black Lagoon'' is a Favorite Movie Monsters of mine. But the Only 'GooD' thing for that Kit is the 'Lizzard' that sits on the Rock actually goes together well. Nothing else there in the Kit seems to fit right at all. :(
Who else has Kits like these they Love But would like a lot better if they were a little bit eaiser to Build..........
... cyberborg ..........
,,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sep 12, 11:34 pm, snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net (cyberborg 4000) wrote:

the star wars tank, you mean the thing with one big tread thru it? I built it a few days ago. Have no idea what color its supposed to be.
the big brown star wars tank thing is a good kit and looks good on display.
you are right about the creature. the head and gill section had lots of gaps. My vote has to go to the early Star Trek kits where it was impossible to get the nacelles glued at the correct angle. If I remember correctly there was no interior bracing or anything but a hole in the engineering section for the vertical nacelle support to go in.
Craig
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:

The movie version had real problems with the structure between the nacelles and engineering hull also, due to the weight of the nacelles. and the pretty skinny attachment pylons. Trying to attach the front bridge/neck section of the TV version Klingon Battlecruiser so it wasn't sticking down at a angle in comparison to the back hull was also difficult. Remember the awful "Spock And The Two-Headed Space Snake" model? How about the wonderful detail on the insides of the "Galileo 7 Shuttlecraft"? The lack of cockpit and transparent canopy on the Battlestar Galactica Colonial Viper kit was sucky also; you could get away with that on the Cylon ship due to the canopy design, but not the Viper.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@daktel.com (PatFlannery) wrote: snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote: My vote has to go to the early Star Trek kits where it was impossible to get the nacelles glued at the correct angle. If I remember correctly there was no interior bracing or anything but a hole in the engineering section for the vertical nacelle support to go in. The movie version had real problems with the structure between the nacelles and engineering hull also, due to the weight of the nacelles. and the pretty skinny attachment pylons. Trying to attach the front bridge/neck section of the TV version Klingon Battlecruiser so it wasn't sticking down at a angle in comparison to the back hull was also difficult. Remember the awful "Spock And The Two-Headed Space Snake" model? How about the wonderful detail on the insides of the "Galileo 7 Shuttlecraft"? The lack of cockpit and transparent canopy on the Battlestar Galactica Colonial Viper kit was sucky also; you could get away with that on the Cylon ship due to the canopy design, but not the Viper.
I do have to agree with everyone about how ''Bad'' the Nacelles fixed themselves to the Enterprise Engineering Section it was just messed up. And i'm One of the Biggest Star Trek Fan EVER. But they have to take the Hit for things like that wit their Models. Altho I have to say that the Design for the ENTERPRISE 1701 stands out as One of the Best Sci-Fi Ships EVER Elegant-n-Practical a truly Awesome Ship
And yes the Galileo Shuttle could have had just a bit mor Detail with it .... LOL It Could have had the Option for Open Doors and a Lot more Detail inside like Phasers , a Phaser Rifle , Tri-Corders along with other Crew items and Packs Could have even thrown in a few Crew. But - Nooo , they couldn't Do That - LOL
OHH - I had the same problem with my Klingon Battle Cruiser. It wants to Tip downward just a little. But that is Just One Scary Looking Ship. That Ship just Sreams ''The Beating will Now Begin''
.. cyberborg ..........
,,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
cyberborg 4000 wrote:

Right up till you blow the whole command section off the front with one good phaser or photon torpedo hit to its skinny attachment pylon.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's why I mounted a cockpit interior from an W-Wing that I threw against a wall in frustration (those seams just wouldn't line up!). I cut the canopy open and mounted flat glazing from a Pinter toner cartridge pack, cut to fit. I know the two models are supposed to be different scales, but supposedly they ~were~ designed by the same guy and they are pretty much of a drop for fit, so what the hell, why not?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Old Man wrote:

"W-Wing"? Did I miss that one? I was supposed to get a free Colonial Viper cockpit interior for getting second place with my Dune Thopter on the Starship Modeler contest: http://www.starshipmodeler.net/contest4/v_s06.htm But the company never sent it to me.

Stratchbuilding sci-fi cockpits is fun, although you have to be sure everything fits when the canopy goes on. You can't see it in this photo:
http://www.starshipmodeler.net/contest4/contest_images/v_s06_throneroom.JPG
But Baron Harkonnen's throne is at the top, and when you are talking to him, you are standing on top of a hatch that he can open to drop you right out of the bottom of the thopter.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sorry Pat, my bad (shouldn't type before morning coffee), the should have read "X-Wing". I was refering to the 1:48 MPC kit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
" snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net" wrote:

I'll vote for that one too. I must have seen 3-4 variations as they tried to fix that problem. The last variation with the deep wells was probably the only one that had a chance.
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote: On Sep 12, 11:34 pm, snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net (cyberborg 4000) wrote: With me that ''StarWars'' tank comes to mnd as Pretty High UP on my List. That thing is just Totallly a Piece of Crap In all fairness the ''Cut-away Enterprise'' is no Great Masterpiece Either I just love the Old Monster Kits from the Movies. The ''Creature from the Black Lagoon'' is a Favorite Movie Monsters of mine. But the Only 'GooD' thing for that Kit is the 'Lizzard' that sits on the Rock actually goes together well. Nothing else there in the Kit seems to fit right at all. :( Who else has Kits like these they Love But would like a lot better if they were a little bit eaiser to Build.......... ... cyberborg .......... ,, the star wars tank, you mean the thing with one big tread thru it? I built it a few days ago. Have no idea what color its supposed to be. the big brown star wars tank thing is a good kit and looks good on display. you are right about the creature. the head and gill section had lots of gaps. My vote has to go to the early Star Trek kits where it was impossible to get the nacelles glued at the correct angle. If I remember correctly there was no interior bracing or anything but a hole in the engineering section for the vertical nacelle support to go in. Craig
The Tank that you're talking about with the Center Track is more of a Weapons Carrier-n-Transport and is a much better Model overall than the Tank i'm thinking of. I meant the ''Hover Tank'' from the same Movie. It looks pretty good when you see it in the Movie. But I think they could have done a lot better when they made the Molds. This is just me but I would have liked it alot more if they had put the seams were where all the parts actually went together.
AND don't anybody Get Me Started on that Great Big Door Stop they call the ''Star Destroyer'' I should build one just to Keep my Front Door pushed Open in the middle of the Summer ...... LOL
... cyberborg ..........
,,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
cyberborg 4000 wrote:

The original MPC X-wing fit together well, but the Darth Vader TIE Fighter wasn't well detailed and had poor fit. The detail and fit on the MPC Death Star was nothing to get excited about either.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
cyberborg 4000 wrote:

Definitely "Why THAT?" Although you knew you could pick up sets for kitbashing on $3 clearance sale soon.
When Revell with the Star Trek: Voyager license (and only Voyager) brought out the "Kazon Torpedo" another waste of setting up an injection mold. (Did they drop the license before they could have done the USS Dauntless, Equinox. Prometheus, the Ares Mars probe, Friendship probe, or USS Wells timeship?)
The Babylon 5 model was my first exposure to the concept of full-model decals... daunting prospect.
--
-Jack


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jack Bohn wrote:

Those were great decals! The one for the pilot's helmet in the Starfury didn't suck either.
Pat
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

my kit went together just fine. what is wrong with it that puts it on this list?
Craig
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

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.