Are model companies ripping you off? Revell 1/32nd kit comparison
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- In this video, I'll be taking a look at a couple of 1/32nd scale Revell kits - the 1970 Corsair F4U-1A and the 2014 Supermarine Spitfire Mk IXc - to demonstrate the shady practice of model companies in reboxing old toolings as new releases, and why we as modellers should oppose that.
Visit my Amazon Store for links to the products used in the videos: www.amazon.co.uk/shop/mannsmo...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @mannsmodelmoments
or support the channel on Patreon - / mannsmodels
Listen to me and Mos tak about various model-related topics on Beyond the Box, our new modelling Podcast available on all podcast platforms
Don't like CZcams? You can also watch my content on Odysee: odysee.com/$/invite/@Mann'sMo...
or Rumble: rumble.com/c/c-2451734
Subscribe - czcams.com/users/MannsModelM...
Follow on Instagram - @MannsModelMoment
Follow on Twitter - @MannsModels
Facebook Page - / mannsmodelmoments
Video Chapters
0:00 Introduction
2:53 Spitfire Mk IXc unboxing
9:20 Side-by-side comparison
13:53 Conclusions
16:24 Next video & win stuff!
17:40 Like, Subscribe & Share
PIXABAY LICENSE CERTIFICATE
==============================================
This document confirms the download of an audio file pursuant to the Content License as defined in the Pixabay Terms of Service available at pixabay.com/service/terms/
Licensor's Username:
pixabay.com/users/penguinmusi...
Licensee:
u_ex8sb99phs
Audio File Title:
Sexy Urban Beat
Audio File URL:
pixabay.com/music/future-bass...
Audio File ID:
120564
Date of download:
2023-04-05 17:48:11 UTC
Pixabay GmbH c/o Lacore Rechtsanwälte LLP
Berliner Freiheit 2, 10785 Berlin, Germany
Pixabay is a user-contributed stock content website. The above-named Licensor is responsible for this audio file. Pixabay monitors uploaded audio files only to a reasonable extent. Pixabay cannot be held responsible for the acts or omissions of its users and does not represent or warrant that any required third-party consents or licenses have been obtained.
For any queries related to this document please contact Pixabay via info@pixabay.com.
2023 model kits,2023 model kit releases,new plastic model kit releases 2023,1/32 scale models,plastic model kit,revell model kits,revell,revell 2023 releases,revell 2023 range,revell news 2023,revell model kits 2023,revell airplane,revell aircraft,revell 1/32 corsair,revell 1/32 corsair review,revell 1/32 corsair unboxing,vought f4u corsair,corsair f4u-1,corsair f4u-1d,corsair f4u-1a,corsair f4u-1c,tamiya 1/48 corsair,trumpeter 1/32 corsair,F4u-1,1/32 scale models,plastic model kit,revell model kits,revell,revell 2023 releases,revell airplane,revell aircraft,revell 1/32 corsair,revell 1/32 corsair review,revell 1/32 corsair unboxing,vought f4u corsair,corsair f4u-1,corsair f4u-1d,corsair f4u-1a,corsair f4u-1c,tamiya 1/48 corsair,trumpeter 1/32 corsair,F4u-1,revell 1/32 spitfire,revell 1/32 spitfire mk ixc,revell spitfire 1/32,revell spitfire,1/32 spitfire mk ixc,supermarine spitfire mk ixc - Jak na to + styl
Let me know your thoughts in the comments everyone
I’ve just got back in to building kits (aircraft etc) as I’m putting my model railway on hold until we move house. My wife has seen me pottering away and wanted to try so we purchased some Airfix starter kits for her. I think Hornby/Airfix have the right strategy and price point with their starter sets and their classic range. Maybe Revell should put the likes of the Corsair in a budget/ beginner range?
I WOULD like to show that Scalemates lists that Revell Vought F4U-1A Corsair 10 times since 1970
I don't agree with the "Old tooling, presented as new" business model as it's a bit like putting new body work on a 70s car and hoping no one realises. But i will play Devils Advocate as it can be fun :)
You asked, How can they produce the New kit for it's cheap price, but sell the Old kit for a similar price (or words to that effect).
Maybe that situation is possible because the Old kits inflated price subsidises the New kit low price. If the older kits price is lowered then the modern kits price would have to rise to compensate for the loss of subsidy
@@Tommy-he7dx also when you buy F16 ,F18 and American type aircrafts model kits , you pay royality fees (part of the model kit inflated price) which goes back to the actual Aircraft companies like Boeing ,Lockheed Martin etc.. including toy planes for kids tp play.
@@Tommy-he7dx That's where Mann has it all twisted up in his head. Re-pops are NOT presented as "New Tools" but as "New Releases' usually with new decals, new box art, and sometimes even new parts. Revell is not hiding anything when they do this, in fact EVERY maker does re-releases from old tools. The difference in prices today would be due to inflation AND the fact that if you only ever had the one release in 1970, and IF that kit was available sealed and undamaged from a collector or anywhere, the collector could name his price to the tune of hundreds of dollars. Re-releases actually keep prices down, which BTW, collectors do not like.
I built a bunch of models as a kid, back in the old days, and my family was not well off, so if they had cost the equivalent of $35 back then I would not have gotten them. I'm shocked at what a model kit costs now, and it's clearly price gouging. I mean it's literally $3 worth of materials (if that).
You took the words outta my mouth, Kilroy. Same here, but in England. I don't do aircraft anymore, but did as a kid in the 70's with Airfix and Frog kits, as you do. Our prices are stupid, whichever transport group you choose. I'm looking for a 1:72 Cloud Cuckooland kit 🤣👍 🌬☁️
...Plus hundreds of thousands for the research, mastering, mould making, decal design, storage. And a few beers' worth for the admittedly unlovely box design. I take the original point that the pinnacles of plastic design from 1965 are now placed next to today's aftermarket-friendly triumphs, worlds apart, fair comment. The State of the Art is marvellous (although the user numbers are, reportedly and ironically, shrinking.) However the likes of the Scalemates database and some of the excellent online forums mean you shouldn't ever need to be horrendously disappointed. If someone normal buys you an ancient release that never was right, consider thanking them for their kindness, building it, detailing it as much as you can and enjoy the learning experience fror the fun it is. Spencer Pollard made a very good point in one of his books where he (hiss!) put a German seatbelt into a 32nd P-47: how many IPMS judges will check the dihedral on your first model on your shelf? And if it preys on you, do a better one...
@@patricknevin9280 I understand your point about the overhead costs - there's also the rent, the cleaning staff, the ice queen in the HR department and her minions, etc., then you have to add all the same costs for the retail store where it's sold (which is where the bulk of the price gouging is probably done), but I can't believe that hundreds of thousands are spent on one particular model. I'd be more willing to accept the low tens of thousands. I mean seriously, how many man-days are spent researching a model, and how long does it really take for a skilled artist to reproduce the decal design? I'd think (maybe wrongly) that designing and making the molds would be the most expensive part.
Wow! Me too
@@kilroy2517 The cost of an injection mould tooling for a complex multi cavity mould like used on model kits can reach 100k
It's the price point that's the real problem. Those older kits should be under £20 in my opinion. Ideally around the £15-18 mark and aimed at the younger and novice modellers, being very basic and with a lower parts count . There is a place for these kits, but they should not be placed in the same realm as the latest releases, and they should be priced accordingly.
Yes, absolutely!
I get what you are saying, but many of these early kits, didn't fit well and were often a pain to assemble, with an ordinary result in the end. Why do beginners in the hobby have to put up with substandard decades old aircraft kits? They can build a Bandai Star Wars kit or some Gundam, that is also aimed at entry level modelers but is light years ahead in build quality and results in an excellent model. Why shouldn't aircraft modelers expect the same? I'd say its time to bin these tooling's completely, unless they are released specifically for the retro market like Airfix have done. New modelers to aircraft kits should be getting new generation tooling with the same care to assembly and quality that you get from a Bandai kit, with simplified assembly and a manageable parts count for a beginner to aircraft kits and Revell should be branding these new generation kits accordingly. These old tooling's like the Corsair paid for themselves decades ago, their commercial life should be seen as having come to an end. I've got older kits in my stash I am fond of and have good memories of building years ago, but I wouldn't wish them on a new modeler. They aren't what we should be expecting in the market now, given the improvements in technology over the decades.
@@DansModelBench i have done the Bandai Starwars Darth Vader ""advanced Tie X-1 fighter" and its an amazing kit....no paint or glue required and i have about 140 Gundam kits done.
@@DansModelBench a very good point.
@Dan's Model Bench Very well put!
Revell should do what Airfix does and that is to clearly label the old toolings. Tamiya should do this too. So many of their older 1/350 ships and 1/35 tanks are actually ancient toolings.
I agree - though in fairness to Tamiya's older 1/35th tanks, they have both kept the tooling's in impeccable condition and they tend to be priced lower than their modern ones - you can pick up the Panther Ausf A and Pzkpfw II for under £15 - cheaper than many 1/72nd scale equivalents!
@@MannsModelMoments And this is why people don't really mention Tamiya when it comes to this practice. Their toolings started off as excellent and they realised that there is still good life in them, but priced them accordingly compared to their newer releases (that admittedly are very, very good and still priced fairly).
@@MannsModelMoments I'm glad you mentioned this, I've also noticed the huge price difference in Tamiya's 1/35 Panther range due to age.
Tamiya’s pricing approach is a lot fairer though. Take their tanks, yes there are very old models, often with the evidence that they were originally sold as motorised models. The moulds have withstood the test of time fairly well and the kits still go together pretty well. They make up into pretty good models though the detail can be a little simple compared with modern equivalents. But the big difference is in price, Tamiya’s older kits have a substantially lower RRP then their newer kits.
The issue here, is that Revell are selling the Corsair and Spitfire at the same RRP. Had you bought the Spitfire first, and then the Corsair, it would be reasonable to accept that you were going to get a kit of similar quality - and my be quite shocked at what you actually get.
I’ve no problem with the Corsair still being sold, but if the Spitfire is £35 then the Corsair should be no more than £25.
@@MannsModelMoments Yep, I'm an aircraft modeller in Australia. Their 1/48 F15 eagle is an old tool and while that wasn't clear to me when I bought it, it was like 55 AUD. Compare that with their 1/48 f14 which is a similar size and costs around 120 aud usually, there really is a difference. Even their modern 1/48 f16 which is small for a modern fighter is like 80-90 AUD.
I’m okay with old kits because they can make you improve your modeling skills but they should be priced much cheaper than newer tooling.
revell made my life hell as a new model maker. With the huge range of models they make it made me think these guys were the one to go to and for awhile I just got on with the major problems the kits had thinking it was part of model making but after a few kits it become clear when i read the tooling date for a kit i was building was released before my nearly 60yr old parents weren't alive to see the release of. I see myself as a keen modeler now sticking to the newer tooled kits just to avoid un needed problems you see with nearly all revell kits. I remember after spending quite alot of money on airbrush supplies and massive amounts of expensive paints tools etc I questioned why I've done it as I wasn't enjoying it nor was I happy with the outcome of the models. I stuck with it building other brand kits and found without all the issues I was able to invest my time into learning better techniques for painting details etc instead of how to get around the endless issues revell kits were giving me in the first few months.
This is exactly the point - your hobby time (and money) are precious, and you should be able to have clarity on what you're spending them on without being a subject matter expert or having to check a site that you're probably unaware of as a new modeller, or just an interested party (relative buying a present, for example)
Same. I‘d never thought the difference to lesser known yet higher quality (czech and japanese in my experience) brands is so big. It‘s a huge leap actually. They still have their flaws and quirks too, but sooo much more enjoyable.
The problem with Revell is that it is hit and miss. For example: Mavericks F18 was terrible, but I enjoyed the Foxbat kit
A well reasoned analysis. I built the Revell 1/32 Zero and Bf-109 G6 when they were new and I was around 12 years old. At the rime they were great kits for a novice and turned out reasonably well. Today they should be sold as beginner kits at a greatly reduced price. Recently I bought a new Revell kit but only after doing my homework on Scalemates and build-up reviews on a couple of respected modelling websites.
Exactly
I have been building models for over 50 years, and have found that Revell is not the only ones to regurgitate the kits, and not revise the old molds. The Spitfire kit is a new mold with recess panel lines, and the old (i have built the Corsair,way back when it came out) Corsair is raised panel lines. The instructions were basically relaid out, and reprinted copying the original, similar to the old Airfix instructions.😊I just bought the "new" release of the AMT 1969 Plymouth Barracuda. It is the same old mold from 1967, modified back in '69, to the '69 specs. The floor still has the date molded into it from it's 2005 release.
For all the flaws Revell has, I still have a soft spot for them, because they got me into the hobby. In Germany Revell sponsored a lot of Hobby club's youth programs, which means we had tools and paints ready to use for free, and there always was a big box of easier kits to pick from, either for free or dirt cheap, I don't remember the details anymore. For many years the only kits I've ever build were Revell. We didn't have a dedicated Scale Model shop either, and Revell was the only brand the local toy store carried. Still, the first time I build a Tamiya kit was eye opening, turns out removing tons of flash wasn't normal...
This is why I never buy a kit without checking scalemates first, after getting "burned" on a Revell 1/32 Phantom which was also the last Revell kit I ever bought. That's how ripped off I felt. Also note that on scalemates the "new parts" often means only a few new bombs/missiles or a different nose cone is included, the main moulds can still be 30+ years old. And yes, other brands do this too (looking at you, Tamiya 1/35 armour kits...) , that doesn't make it better. My problem though isn't that they still sell them, my problem is that they try to pass them off as new kits for inflated prices.
Exactly: checking Scalemates first. It's the internet days,folks: with minor effort one can find any information on any kit. In the case of older kits, there are online reviews available.
Mainly a problem for people new to modelling. Most people know what’s in the box because modellers spend most of their time looking in boxes (from their huge stockpile of unbuilt kits).
Very true!!
😂😂😂
Even the "inferior" Corsair instructions are quite a bit more advanced than what we had available in the 1970s.
Edit: As long as they don't replace the wet and slide decals with those shiny peel off stickers, the Spitfire style kits are a definite improvement though.
Due to financial problems, Revell had to join a financial group. This deprives them of many decisions. If the investment company is of the opinion that we can still make quick money with the old and not so nice models, they will still put them on the market. I am very sure that Revell themselves are not always happy with the decisions. But they also bring good kits, affordable, back onto the market through the reboxes. So the Horten from Dragon in 1/48. You have to find out from Revell models beforehand what you might want to buy.
Dapol, who still produce and market the old Kitmaster and Airfix model railway kits, write on their packaging that the product is of a historic nature and should therefore be treated as such. Despite this the kits still hold up pretty well and I've enjoyed building and modifying many of them. Also, Dapol don't charge a lot for these models either, and I think they're reasonably priced. :)
I just checked out their site and I suspect some of those were some of the first things I made as a kid in the 60's.
I've built both kits in the last year and can confirm this analysis. The difference between the spitfire and the corsair is like night and day.
In addition to the points raised, the corsair has a particularly bad weak point which is where the folding wings join.
Well painted, and from a distance, the corsair can look 'ok', but it's not a kit I can recommend to anyone.
I agree soooo much. I have a Spitfire, Hurricane and Typhoon in 32nd scale. Got them at a garage sale. I KNEW they were old at the start, and they LOOK old as well. It's not that they can't be made into nice kits, but, you better bring your A game to the table. They are so not a reflection of modern tech in making molds. They are not the equal of current kits and don't deserve equal pricing of current kits. I enjoy making old kits for nostalgia, and they should be glad I will pay for them at all. Selling a kit from my youth for 2024 prices is pure greed and deceit. Some old kits are occasionally very good kits. The Tamiya 35th scale Panzer II is the perfect beginner model. But only if you get the original boxing. They have re released a lot of their old kits with maybe some old figures. But that doesn't make it worth 2024 prices. A re release 10 dollar model is not worth 50 bucks because you put some old figures in the box.
I personally don´t mind. I love building and collecting ancient kits (especially Matchbox and Monogram) and I´m happy I can still get them this way with excellent, high quality decals. Also all of them are still perfectly buildable so it would be hard to accuse Revell of "false advertisement". But of course it is quite unfair of Revell to not mark them as "classic" on the box, like Airfix does.
This video highlights why I always suggest to people newer to the hobby to research the kit before pulling the trigger, dates matter! Also I must add the quality of the Spitfire kit genuinely surprised me, I have ignored Revell as a brand for many years.
they need to know what to research : "No experience ?No change of direction"
Take away points here are 1. Never buy on impulse, 2. Always do your research before deciding to part with your money, and 3. Scalemates should be the default loading page on your phone’s web browser. 😊
Never were so valid a set of points likely to be ignored by so many members of a single community! 😂
@@MannsModelMoments 🤣
This applies to other companies as well. AMT is guilty of issuing simple curbside kits that are ancient but command the same price as a modern Moebius kit with a ton of great fitting parts.
To be fair, I'd rather have a vintage kit of the 'General Lee' than any car kit Moebius has put out over the last 20 years. True, I'd hate to have to pay the same amount, but it just isn't a perfect world we're living in, is it?
@@Etherdave minus the decals, the MPC Country Charger is the same kit.
@@TI4438Minus the decals. Apparently the Dixie War Flag isn't so popular anymore, nor references to some old treasonous Westpoint grad. How times have changed.
I gave up on Revell about 40 years ago, for several reasons, including some kits in shiny new boxes with new art, but made with worn out ancient moulds having very little detail. I don't buy many commercial kits, but when I do I buy Tamiya, and have not ever been disappointed. Cheers!
I never really gave up on Revell, and 40 years later I'm glad I didn't. I really enjoy building the older, vintage kits, of which I have created a sizeable collection over the years: Sir Francis Drake's Golden Hind (which is actually a Heller kit reboxed by Revell), the Bell X-5, Swindler II Drag Racer, Ed Roth's Outlaw, and much more. I find these kits have what it takes to create superior display pieces, ones anyone can build and be proud of, regardless of age, experience, or ability. Cheers!
I had a few good Revell kits that I have built on my channel like 1/48 PV-1 Ventura, Ju-52 or F-15E. The 1/32 spitfire mk.II was also a nice build but it has many accurancy issues that I did not knew about back then.
Despite the fact that they have some good kits I don't think that Revell is relevant and if you asked me few years ago I would say that Airfix, Revell and Italeri will be still on the market in next few years only on nostalgia life support but, Italeri started to step up to the game a little with 1/32 F-104 starfighter and Airfix became from mediocre to petty good in what they are doing in recent years. still very far from tamiya (just look at tamiya's F-14, F-4B and new F-35!)
Revell however is far back.
They still do the shitty boxes most of the time where is super easy to lose bits. In some cases the parts are so squized in I could not but them all back in the box. The "NEW" label on old kits is just straight out predatory. Look what airfix did labeling old shit with "vintage classic", at least you know what you are dealing with.
The finish build pictures are not doing any favors for Revell in my opinion, I think they should hire someone who has more skills as very often they are a subject of jokes and laughter bewteen modellers.
Their electric kits are laughable too, few cheap wires, motor and few led's (that is a few quid) and they ask like £100 more for a kit..
Lastly I would like to take on people who hates on tamiya because they are too expensive or even funnier, they are easy kits for "assembles" not modellers... especially i heard that here in UK..
If you can't afford a tamiya kit living and working in UK, I really don't know what you are spending your money on. The minimum wage in UK is now what? a £1400 a month? tamiya tomcat is like £75 sometimes cheaper. Some of these guys are buying multiple cheaper kits a month and hoarding them, never build them some guys are building a kit for 3-5 months. You can't affor a good kit once in few months really? I had 80 kits in my stash few years ago, I sold almost all of them to afford quality kits that i know I will build and invested in aftermarket parts too. You call me "assembler"? sure I am proud one! because im not throwing money away to the companies that are too lazy to release something decent, I prefer to pay more and have quality stuff that I will enjoy too work with instead of pulling my hairs out and feeding the lazy ones with my money just because its cheaper.
The time these people spend filling and sanding, I prefer to use to add some extra details, do some wiring on the model, prepare aftermarket stuff or just spend more time enhancing my painting and weathering skills instead of wasting my life with "basic modelling skills" that will keep you being mediocre at best.
Well I guess I got carried away.
Take care!
@Scale Hangar 182 I think everything you say is absolutely true - other model companies are starting to "smell the coffee" and wake up to what the modern market demands, and people (especially the hard-core "greybeard") massively undervalue their (and others) time - a commodity vastly more important and valuable than money.
Thanks for stopping by, and love the channel, btw
@@MannsModelMoments Keep up the good work mate!
The issue is with point of sale retail. If Hobbycraft had two same scale models for sale, similar size models, similar part count but one was twice as much as the other it would be difficult to sell the new tool to the casual shopper. I did see a Vintage Classic Airfix in The Works bookshop a few weeks ago but my guess is the casual buyer would assume that was 'vintage' because it was a WW2 tank though experienced modellers know 'vintage' means old tooling. Prehaps a fair option would be to brand new tools as high detail, old tools as basic detail to differentiate the quality like supermarkets do with 'finest' and 'basic' ranges .
The Revell "Blue Stripe" range? 😂
Ok. That's interesting and a bit cheeky to be honest. I am a returning modeller so my only reference to large scale Revell kits are from the 70s and back then....not tamiya but ok. Now.....unless there was nothing else, forget it. A recent comment was that some manufacturers appear on your side and the kit inspires you. The corsair could be a paint mule if you engraved it, the Spitfire actually looks like something that would build into a nice replica. The question is why the price and why side by side on the shelf? I guess the reduced development costs aid better newer kits, but it's a good way to put modellers off. At least Airfix declare classics and you take your chances. I own but 3 Revell kits. One fairly modern one that looks as good as its contemporaries and one a re boxed ICM kit which they simply changed the scheme for but didn't realise that in that specific role, there were some huge changes...they missed and finally a Lanc Special. The latter was virtually free and after extensive surgery to re build the bomb bay (wrong and didn't fit) dihedral, rads etc it actually built into a fairly decent model....for a returnee. It's a shame and a poor strategy imho
When I was young back in the 1970s, everybody was building Airfix kits that seemed to be a standard quality, then there was Gap-box (Matchbox) and Revell that was considered back then as another sub-standard plastic kit manufacturer. I then became aware of Tamiya that took modelling to a whole new level in quality plus you could motorise your tanks. There has to be a debate by the marketplace of what we are willing to pay for a model, with Hornby now owning Airfix; this debate is not just limited to the model kit world but the model railway world too. Thanks to 3D printing we, the consumer now know how much 1kilo+ of ABS filament wire costs at a commercial rate. We can calculate by how much a model weighs, of how much it should really cost including labour, profit, mould and pattern depreciation unit cost, mould release spray, packaging etc! For example a 1:72 tank it should be £7.50 for a 1:32 tank it should be £12.50 to £15:00.
I don't whether it is the same in the model kit world, as in the model railway world where they have almost a captive market. Pre-orders are essential to secure your desired the model! Sadly one cannot guarantee the quality or performance of the item, which really should be a given and the manufacturer should look after their market! It is time for the tail to stop wagging the dog and for the role to be reversed!
Fully agree with your point of view. I started building models in the 70s and the corsair is clearly old school and there for should be much cheaper and labeled correctly. I will go even further on this. Back in thr day we had to up grade mode.s using are own skills. I learned fast how to scratch make parts and add details, to the point where I was not even using parts for a kit anymore in favor of one from scratch. This was the fun in building for me. Now today people want these kits that are very detailed with tons of parts. That in itself is fine but thatt means the prices have gone thru the roof. I feel alot of the kits made now a days are way to expensive. On the extreme side I would refer to the border models lancaster. Im sorry I dont care what they went thru to get the molds and produce it for the price they want I would expect it came with lights sound and and a box of photo etch. And still I wouldn't pay that price. How about the kinetics 1/24 p47 wanting well over 120 US. I feel the hobby has gone the wrong way. The kit should be basic accurate as possible but basic. And if you want all the details, buy after market etch or resin OR make your own parts and super detail it. Even themost detailed ,its I still find theres lots to add. Today I mostly scratch build and use 3d printing alot. I haven't bought a kit in a long time.
I also do wooden ships and they to are way over priced. itse asier to get the plans and build from scratch.
I’ve been defending Revell’s new-tooling kits for the last 25 years. Top notch details and quality. The sad part is that most of their reputation is based on the old rehash kits you can buy at Michael’s and Hobby Lobby and other big box stores here in the states.
@@davidmcinerney5937 all revell 48th kits? Lol. Have you built every single one? Because they're molds from Tamiya, italeri, ICM and others that revell uses.
One thing we didn't have access to in the 80s-90s compared with now is numerous websites that can tell you both the vintage and the quality of the majority of reboxed kits on the market. Of course that requires the prospective buyers to be willing to do some research, a modeller returning to the hobby might well do some to catch up on development, but a newbie just trying it out could get badly burned and go to another modelling hobby instead, such as warhammer (expensive, but very good quality models for the most part), railways (more expensive than either, but has things like sound which could entice, plus numerous kits available in a wide variety of vintages and media).
The best way to get companies to be clear about the vintage of their kits is probably social media, plaster it over Facebook, twitter and CZcams etc and if they see a model maybe they will spot some of those posts when searching for more information or whether the price is good.
However, with these kits at the price you got them for i think they are decent enough, the corsair definitely not being worth more.
I couldn't agree more - and part of why I made the video...the more awareness there is the less companies will make from the practice, hopefully making it disappear
I might also add, that when we were buying kits back in the '60's, and '70's, the companies like Boeing, or GM, Chrysler weren't adding their (if they were it was a small amount) outrageous royalty fees to each kit. That seems to be the bulk of the kit price. We have been trying to recruit the younger generation of model builders into our model club, but they would rather be playing with their cell phones, than acquiring the skills to assemble something with their own hands. The price of the kits now a days are turning them off. I myself haven't built a kit since December. Every time go into the hobby shop, the price seems to keep jumping by $10.00 - $20.00. (for the same kit) Even the price of an Airfix kit over here now is getting crazy. I love the newly tooled Airfix kits, but I'm not going spend $60.00 for a 1/48 Hurricane, or $135.00 for the Sea King Helicopter.
I am in the modelling hobby since I was eight, and that was in the early seventies of the last century. I started with Revell and Heller and made my way over with Monogram and Tamiya. Todays modellers should feel blessed with the level that companies like Trumpeter, Bandai and Takom for example are offering us. Nowadays Revell is quite capable of releasing kits with a contemporary engineering level, but they will not re-engineer their old molds, because they're too expensive and nearly impossible to rework. They would have to make completely new tools to reach a modern level. At some points Revell seems to care for the need of modelers with their new kits of airplanes, tanks and ships. But if you`re a sci-fi-modeler it is all PITA. If Revell does not rebox kits from Moebius (OK, that was the SSN585 Kit), Fine Molds, Bandai or Zvezda, the scales of their own Star Wars kits are only painful and low on detail. If you look for a model of a kit where Revell has old tools only, you should better look if this model is also released by a different company and buy it there. I would also recommend looking models up at scalemates. They mostly have timelines of model kits and you may decide if it is worth getting a model kit over 30 or 40 years old if it's not for sentimentality reason. I personally bought some old kits (Revell 1/24 Gemini Capsule for example) because I built it decades ago and lost it during several relocations.
It does require investment. but Airfix have done this, so why not Revell? Airfix had all of these issues in the past, but they've turned the business around in the last decade with a different approach, quite the opposite to what Revell are doing
@@MannsModelMoments Yes, it's a pity. Maybe some companies are growing too big or loose the connection with the modeler. I remember a lot of great model kits from Airfix, when I was young. From todays perspective they may be not that perfect but Airfix has done some "homework" an is now releasing great kits even for todays standards. But did they retool their old kits? What about the 1/12 Bentley Blower? I am not so deep in Airfix todays products, since I moved more over to the Sci-Fi & real space topic and that has been abandoned by Arifix seemingly and unfortunately. I still have an old Space 1999 Eagle Transporter today, which I like very much, even if it can't compete with todays releases by Round2 and seems to be completely out of scale.
Not sure who you're referring to but please keep it respectful or your comments will be removed
Do you know what mate…….you are absolutely bang on the money with this video. What you said at the end about decisions being made by executives who have no interest in the hobby is right and yes it’s a shame that Revell can’t see this. I like that you recognise the progress airfix have made. Let’s hope Revell can realise airfix journey and take heed? Good luck with your channel! :-)
I hope so too, and thanks!
Nice comparison video. Thank you. I feel the street prices you paid were very low. Personally, I think you paid about right for the Corsair and got a cracking deal on the Spit. The 1/32 Spitfire market is getting really crowded lately. Frankly, I never buy a model before seeing the sprues up close. When I was a kid manufacturers would put 100 piece kits in a box the size of a dining room table because consumers couldn't warn one another in the '70s. I had to mow a lot of yards to get ripped off by a big empty box. Looking at you Lindberg "Diamond Duster"!🤨
I was 10 years old when I bought the 1/32 scale Corsair;
the model sold for $2.50,
state of the art back then.
I agree. Fobbing off old kits as new releases without clarification is deceptive.
I had thought some cases might have a sentimental value, harkening back to one's childhood. I since had found some of Revell's kits from the 1960s and earlier of Second World War U.S. Navy warships; an Iowa-class battleship, a Baltimore-class heavy cruiser, the USS Enterprise CV-6 Yorktown-class Aircraft Carrier, the Currituck-class Seaplane Tender, a fleet oiler, etc. First, they share no scale in common, which defies all sense. More problematic, however, is that they have proven so crude in features and detail that assembling them to a reasonably worthy replica of the original I found to be an especially exasperating exercise in futility. One might as well scratch build the thing from the outset.
1:700th-scale is just too small for me. The resultant models just do not have what I seek. Ironically, the few I had built had better detailing and far superior overall crispness than that of these older kits.
1:350 scale obviously is much better. However, they are expensive, and they occupy a far greater footprint. I tried one: Tamiya's Fletcher-class destroyer; the exacting fit made it a dream to build. It veritably cried out for detailing. However, I wanted a model build, not a project rivalling the actual shipyard operation! A suitable compromise would be 1:500th scale--which is close to these old Revell "Steel Navy" models. If only!
Now we have a number of salivatingly enticing kits in 1:200th scale. Cost, especially with all the aftermarket detailing, make these absurdly prohibitive for me. And they would be a year-long project, which I likely would eschew. Ironically, my severe myopia readily would lend itself to such super-detailing these models. Conceivably, to build such combat ship kits with simulated battle damage would add to a display extraordinary dynamicism!
Also, with all ship kit models, the photo-etched railing simply looks too flat; the two elements of the actual railing are CIRCULAR in cross-section. PE's chief shortcoming is that it suffers from what I call "false two-dimensionality". Such remediation would require a master modeller to supplant all such railing with fine wire, and small posts. Such meticulous fineness in artisanship would be beyond measure!
Revell do seem to suffer from what I'd call a "lack of clear focus" in their projects. Honestly I'd like them to get a grip because capitalism isn't kind and there are plenty of rising kit manufacturers to replace them...
Wow, I would have atleast thought they would have tried to hide it by calling it the nostalgia line or something. It's identical to what I used to build nearly 2 decades ago 😬
40+ years ago I used to buy 1:72 scale kits from a local hobby shop with my pocket money.
I couldn't imagine a youngster being able to do that now.
Yep! - It all comes down to pricing and marketing - Market them as 'Vintage' like Airfix now do, and also reduce the price-point appropriately then it would be fine IMHO - Make it plain to beginners that it's an older, and basic, kit - As you say, it's boardroom greed causing this.
I do have a few of these older Revell 1/32s (Including the Corsair) stashed for future builds, but that's because I sometimes enjoy detailing out an old basic kit - and I've never paid more than £15 for any of them.
My (1960s) Martlett came out really nice after a rescribe and a LOT of extra detail work, sanding, drilling, opened cooling flaps, scratch-made exhausts etc.etc... - Even motorised the prop and put contacts on the canopy so that sliding it shut completes the circuit and starts the motor - I know it's inaccurate, and I even had to sand the mould date off the outside of the fuselage, but it does look nice on the shelf now - There's an awful lot of ME went into the finished model.
Same kind of work went into their re-pop of the old Matchbox mould Mk.22 Spitfire.
I'm one of those few weirdos who find re-scribing and opening up access panels theraputic - LOL
Whatever floats your boat! haha - would you like to sand and rescribe mine for me??
Yeah interesting comparison indeed. Good case for the older kit being sold at a lower price - but then, is it really any cheaper to make, box, ship and stock on the shelf ? Buyer beware.
I still paint a lot of small miniatures for wargaming (15mm scale in metal), where the prices, age and quality of the castings is all over the place from one manufacturer to the next, and even old vs new moulds from the same manufacturer can vary greatly in quality.
Little secret though that many painters don't mention - it's all in the finishing of the figure, and especially the basing ! Yep, you can spend over $100 more on a unit by using the very best brand of figures, but the total "wow factor" of the unit on the table really comes down to how realistic that $2 worth of basing material gets done.
Same thing probably applies to the Spitty vs Corsair comparison. One is definitely better, but there are probably more than a few finished Revell Corsairs that look a tonne better than finished Revell Spitfires. It's all in the finishing I guess. Some of my favourite builds are indeed really horrid old Monogram kits, or hideous vac formed rarities where everything turned out better than it should. More luck than skill in my case, but just knowing that I have some gems in the display cabinet that came out of cheap rubbish 2nd hand boxes, keeps the interest up in the old Corsair kit.
Same thing is happening in the model railway world. I purchased a model 5 to 6 years ago for £87, bachmann are to release the same model for £250+. Old tooling they’ve already got their money back but still gouging Joe Public because prices gone up.
That's a bit more than an inflationary price!!
I noticed recently that if I am in a hobby shop and considering Revell kit I pull out the phone, check the sprue shots on MegaHobby, pull out the kit on Scalemate, read a review, watch youtue review, try to find build review of the kit and only then I might buy it. There only other manucfacturer that I would check like that is Trumpeter/HobbyBoss b/c sometimes their models are way off from the real thing (like infamous 1/48 F-14 where you need to fill almost half of the panel lines and rivets since the real thing does not have those)
Yes, Revell might do a great kit (1/48 SR-71A, 1/144 An-225) but they might package a kit from 70th (like the Corsair), they could repackage somebody else's kit (ICM MiG-25 in a Revell box was a great surprise while Academy's OV-10 was not) or they could tool a great subject but you have to treat it as a vacuform kit b/c the amount of flash is insane (Embraer 190)
I'm 62 and remember building that kit at 14. Strongly considering getting back into the hobby. So many great resources now. Thanks for the video.
I have not built a model air plane in over 40 years. This brought back memories of sitting for hours building and the fun I had.
I know how you feel. As a lad, as long as I kept up my grades and my room and got to school on time, I had no bedtime. My fondest memories are of sitting at my desk late at night in the glow of a lamp and working on a model. I didn't complain about the kits because the real fun was detailing them ... ballpoint pen ink barrels for gun barrels, etc. Neither my kids nor my grandkids have any interest in the hobby. They'd rather stare at their phones.
@@StringerCourier
Some times I think part of it was the volatility of the model glue and airplane dope fumes that we were aware of, ie good ventilation.
My pop wasn’t into models being built at all, so I learned a lot from my grandfather who was building model ships (the kind you have to really wood work). He showed me how to detail, paint and also make it look weathered. Good times!
My veiw is i like the older kits but agree they should be cheaper than the newer kits. I've been building since the 60's and some of the older stuff holds fond memories. If iwant a good kit i buy a good kit I'll buy a good kit but if it's nostalgia i want I'll buy the old stuff knowing it will be flawed.
Well for starters, I've built both of those kits, my spitfire STILL came with a couple of deformities that I had to address (relatively minor). I would not consider most Revell kits as first class. Sometimes, they are the only option for a particular subject but, when you compare the 1/32 Tamiya Spit vs the Revell, you see why the Tamiya kit is truly "first class". I'm not one to just automatically put down a specific kit maker, as each one can offer something unique over the other. Having worked in a hobby shop in my younger days, I was taught to experience different model kits and pass on any info to a potential customer interested in a particular subject and, not be afraid to offer the honest truth to the kit in question. Plus, some of these older kits are valuable learning tools for younger modelers to cut their teeth on. Price point can very easily come down to the retailer, as opposed to the manufacturer.
I've been a model builder for maybe 25 years now. Probably longer. I agree with your criticism for many reasons.
I am disappointed by the model companies who release old molds as new kits, only to surprise us when we open the box.
I am disappointed to see kits that somehow omit important parts! For example, I have built aircraft kits that expected me to buy a separate kit in order to add missiles, bombs, pods, etc, and I have built some 1/72 armor kits that couldnt be bothered to include Schurzen skirts for tanks that had them.
Finally, I resent the practice of removing unused parts from the kits that could otherwise have been added to my spares box. How much did they save really?
I don't have a problem with old kits being up for sale. Sometimes they are a joy to build. I'm not always in the mood for fiddly photo etch and separate molded details, and admit to occasionally building a 1/72 ESCI/ERRL/Italeri kit just to relive my early days of building simpler kits and to enjoy the experience, but I know what it is that I am building!
Excellent video. Agree with all you say about Revell. Some good models (RAF Tornado 1/72 for example) but aIso very poor, very old kits that should carry a health warning. I bought a1/72 ME110 and felt conned, I felt I had been ripped off. As a consequence I don't look to buy Revell now as I expect value for money as well as accurate models.
The old simple kits are good for beginners provided the tooling is not so worn that there are fit problems.
I built several of the Airfix Wellington’s from 1959. Old pressings fit very well while the last ones produced had horrible fit.
I think the 150 part kits are a bit much for new modellers, but the companies should be honest and maybe note the year of the tooling on the box.
I do rely on scale mates charts and internet reviews to help me make my mind up on a kit.
The old Corsair is a nice enough kit provided that you know it is from the 60’s and the price should be way less than half the price of the new Spitfire.
I like that ancient series that Revell put out, but they should be nowhere near the price of a modern kit.
Love this review and I can remember way back in the late 60's, early 70's when I could find a decent Revell 1/32 model on sale for around $3.50 on sale sometimes. That's when a kid could afford to do modeling. I'm old. Those were the days!
I have to agree with all your points, I understand the difference between an "old tooled Kit" and the new offerings, I don't mind spending a few extra hours filling and sanding a kit that cost me £20 but do not expect that at £35+. You can buy an old Tamiya kit but it will be priced accordingly (mind you its only the level of detail in these that is lower than a new kit). To sum up my view I would just like clarity of what I'm buying without resorting to trolling through scalemates or reviews.Sadly as a result I'm sure I'm missing out on some great Revell kits because I just can't be asked to research them. Many thanks for an interesting video.
Yep, my thoughts exactly. Also we're both aware of the practice, but many new modellers are not, and this practice hardly encourages them to stick with the hobby
I've only bought 2 Revell kits.
First was a Pz IV; the gun barrel and armor skirting was warped beyond repair, and the top and bottom parts of the hull did not properly seat together. Rendered that one for spare parts.
For the second, I have the P-61 Black widow still in it's box and plastic shrink wrap. The only reason I bought it was because it was on sale for $6 US. We'll see if it is as jacked up after opening.
Great video I think true modellers know of old tooling re boxing but new modellers starting in the hobby can feel a bit ripped off when they purchase old vintage kits thinking they are new tool kits. In the end it hurts the hobby cheers ✌
I agree - I feel like Revell are doing themselves no favours
To put this into perspective, I built the Corsair kit in 1983 and the instructions are identical. The kit itself was a 1970's issue. It's annoying when you get all these reissues masquerading as "new" items. Tamiya, to their credit, at least clearly place the origin of some of their reissue models on the front of the box, eg. Italeri or ICM. However, even then, they may include some new parts, but often parts of the kit that are in desperate need of a much better level of detail are left untouched. The obvious one that springs to mind is their reissue of Italeri's M48 Patton.
You know, I have zero issue with companies releasing each other's models, or companies releasing older tools - just be open about it. How many people would be happy to buy a Rolex that was actually a Citizen inside for the same price as a current Rolex?
Clarity and cost are the two pieces here - with clarity and an appropriate cost, everything is permissable.
@@MannsModelMoments I agree, it's the appropriate cost that is the issue. Charging 2023 prices for kits that were tooled in the 1960's-1970's is where most people are put off. Thank god for Scalemates.
The last revell kit i picked up was a 1/48 Corsair. It's detail was so absurdly poor that I had to give it away. It's now passed through five people who won't even consider building it and it's become somewhat of a meme. My intention was to have it sunk in the bottom of a resin ocean, and it still wasn't good enough. I won't touch revell again after that. (It wasn't my first revell kit, but it is my last )
There are some really good revell kits that are worth checking out, the issue is there insistence on churning out these really old ones, just to make money cheaply, not good 😢
@Richard Brace yeah, i think I've built one, which was good, but i couldn't even tell you what it was anymore. The majority have been mediocre and not enjoyable builds, and the one i mentioned before was such a dumpster fire that i can't justify risking the money anymore. Until they start getting rave reviews, ill stick with Takom, Thunder, and other brands, which you know the detail and fit you can expect before you open the box.
I don't think much of their (though mainly seem to be Revell of Germany) 1/35th armour/land models either. I bought a handful in the past as no-one else makes them, but I'll not buy any others unless there's a DRASTIC change in the level and subtlety of detail.
Dragging out old worn out molds is not new, but for what they are asking for sub par kits with high price tags and new box art is simply uncalled for. They should just let the molds rust away in storage where they belong.
I think modelmakers should disclose on the packaging if the kit is a re-release or new tool, something similar to what Airfix now does.
My last Revell Kit was the USS Voyager (Scale 1:670) number 04801, in 1996. Not a great fit compared to the AMT/Ertl line of Star Trek ships.
Produced until 2018, I think. You can still buy a Voyager from Revell today in the same scale , number 04992.
At first glance, its the same model. But no: All the hull details had been redone (rounded windows, higher detail impulse drive). So Revell can do it, if they want to.
While the Spit instructions are indeed a great improvement, it’s a bit sad that when the Corsair first came out people were perfectly capable of building it from those instructions supplied. As a kid I don’t think I was ever stumped when building any kit and there was the bare minimum to work with.
I'm sure people today are perfectly capable of building from the original instructions, but that's not the point - things move on, and they have. If I bought this from a second-han store or a flea market, the instructioins would be an interesting insight into the past - but photocopying those same instructions doesn't carry the same pathos, nor does the original manufacturer just printing the same old booklet when it could (and does) do better. What it says to me is "we're not going to put any effort into this"
I have to admit that I only use Revell models as test pieces for technique practice as they are generally cheap enough and it saves me from expensive mistakes on the more expensive models. The exception is if Revell has a specific model that isn’t available from another manufacturer and I really want that model (rare these days, but some sci-fi subjects come to mind). Once I’ve completed the technique practice mule, it generally looks good enough and I give it away to someone.
I think they should be clearer on the box around the year of the tooling, but they are a cheap way for someone to get a larger plane kit. It’s just a shame that building the Corsair would likely put a lot of people off the hobby as it really is a terrible kit if you’re less experienced and don’t yet have skills to resolve the issues it brings. Raised panel lines still amaze me..
Just out of interest I looked in Hobbycraft yesterday to see what they had. The Revell US Harbour tugboat is still going strong, and that kit must now be some 65 years old! It was new when I was a small kid. Dapol are still issuing the Airfix model railway buildings, some rather heavily retooled to cope with their much softer plastics, and they date from around 1958 as well.
Give those old models credit, they sparked many a life long hobby, and, in my case, led to building my own from scratch.
They did, but I'm not sure they have the same pull in the 21st century when our leisure time and money has SO many quality options
@@MannsModelMoments Spot on. Especially when trying to get younger people interested.
The ships are worth a go, I’ve recently built the Bounty and found it perfectly ok if you’re willing to do a bit of scratch building and research 👍🏻
Well done. I always hesitate before buying a Revell kit (which is seldom). I have made some of their ships, and their 1/32 Spitfire - but ... nothing else.
The more people know about it, the less likely they will be to buy them, and hopefully the higher powers will reflect that in what they choose to push internally
Im just so grateful i could build
I agree, prices could be better especially with older molds
The older ones has already paid for themselves and should sell for a lower price
But here in my location in canada, its more difficult to get kits and must buy online
Im just happy i could get a kit, old or new
I bought a matchbox set in the late 1990s. Its tooling was made in 1976. The set provided the expected quality, the problem was only due to the fact that I was still a beginner. Revell recently re-released the kit, so I thought I'd buy it and build a nicer one than before. Its price has increased fivefold (in 20 years), but its quality has remained the same. In fact, even the iron teeth of time can be seen on it in the form of rust spots. It's a pity that they don't even bother to fix the smallest mistakes...
You have research the kit as well as the the subject of the kit. There's nothing wrong with old toppings as long as you know what your getting and the are priced accordingly. Think of all the fun you can have sending off and receiving the panel lines and rivet. (Honestly some do actually enjoy that sort of thing. Can we say SMER?) I think it be fun to build an old Revell large scale kit OOB along side a modern production of the same same subject. Go to town on the paint and finish of both and -then- see how they compare from 3 feet away. The result would be interesting.
I had some 1/48 SMERs once. I had to downsize.
They were fine for what I wanted, which was wrecks, post-apocalyptic conversions, and props for pulp adventure gaming. They were, however, less than 15AUD each...
Just about to start building the revell spitfire kit, and was pleased to see the quality. Totally agree that buying revell kits can be hit and miss regarding quality, and should be priced accordingly! Thanks for this interesting video👍👏
Enjoy building it! Are you going to remove the wing blisters or just ignore them?
@@MannsModelMoments if they can be removed, I will, as long as the wing strength is not compromised
Good luck! :et me know how it goes - it may be a while before I get to mine after the 1/24th Airfix Spitfire project saturated my Spitfire requirements for the time being!
I have been in the Retail hobby business for 37 years, and I have sold dozens of the Revell Corsair, mostly to people that want a Corsair but don't want to pay the price of the Tamiya kit. It is not just Revell that reissue old models and it is up to us to warn customers about their purchase. I still want them to release the older kits to give the builder some variety. One of my best sellers is the Revell 1/32 Mosquito that sells for $80 dollars here in Canada compared to $360 for the Tamiya kit.😎
Fantastic video mate. I've not made a a scale model in over 30 years, preferring to scratch that itch by creating my own art sculptures made from recycled plastics. But this was presented in such an immersive and hugely entertaining way, I felt like I was deeply into the hobby once again for the entire runtime!
Great vid, most of my 32nd scale kits are revell and they are amazing value, I grab them as soon as they come out as they go up in price rapidly which is a shame, I paid the equivalent of £30 pound for the me262 when it came out, and now it's hard to find under £50
The 1/32 ME262 1-seater was first released in 1971, the 2-seater in 1974.
I'm talking about the new tools from 2016
When I got into Bandai gunpla I was floored by the level of quality when I'd only ever built a Revell kit in the past. It's not even close, it's like comparing an Austin Metro to a Rolls Royce.
GREAT video bro. Listen, as a guy just like you, I was born in '75 and ive been building since I can remember. I hope Revell, and you read this and agree on my proposition, which Ive been saying for YEARS, is this: Revell should continue developing new and exciting model kits, while taking a new product line called "classics" or whatever. These classics should be discounted kits, Not like the center diplays you see at Walmart, with $30 car models, but make that Corsair in a Budget box, and sell them at a STR8 BUDGET Price, even bundle multiple kits together, In the "Classic Line". I am STILL Revell's customer, Ive been building Revell for ever, but they really need to realize the legacy money everyone has paid on some of these copies where tooling was completed 50 years ago, Should be used to get more people into modeling and practically give them away..Design a new Cheap package..whatever..Legacy molds should NOT be full price when I seen that same damn kit, and built it in '82 BITCH!! Great vid..You are correct...Revell, make a BUDGET "CLassics" line.
The haters are going to be out in force... I also purchased a 1/48 scale Horten Go229 Revell kit, turns out it's just a rebox of a Dragon kit, no mention of it in the instructions, no new parts.
It's always hard to have a balanced and reasoned discussion on the internet, especially when it comes to these subjects.
I never understand why manufacturers try to pass off others toolings as their own - just own it - we can find out the information anyway, so they're only fooling the unwary. In many cases it would actually help sell the kits - I'd buy an ex-Dragon Horten from Revell with no issue!
@@MannsModelMoments The kit actually goes together reasonable well, and the dragon head on the sprues is a dead give away.😁
With all the new brands of paints paints available, a nice brand comparison for an accurate build very nice. Its still is tough to pay so much for kits in today's world. The prices you had in beginning are reasonable. It would be interesting to know how you found them almost half price.
He apparently got them at HobbyCraft? I got a cheap Mosquito there a while ago. It’s one of those places that it’s worth popping into if you happen to be nearby in the hope of catching the rare opportunity of a discount.
Yes, it was Hobbycraft - they usually have seasonal sales - I got these in their Christmas sale, as well as some Tamiya kits
@@eddiebruv Eddie thanks for reference , I'll definitely check them out. Plus the Mosquito is one of my favorite aircraft, I wouldn't mind getting an updated kit on one. I think my fascination with them came from seeing the movie 633 Squadron.
@@c123bthunderpig When I was still at school, I had the opportunity to see up close and actually sit in the cockpit of two of the Mosquitos from the film, one still fitted with the wooden prop guns! They were just out on the airfield, unattended - can you imagine that ever happening today? 😂😂
@@gordysevenzero3244 OMG, that was more than a dream like experience it was a miracle being in the right place at the right time. Unattended too. Thanks for sharing it's like knowing somebody famous. I even have the theme music as s ring tone :-) The special effects took a little imagination but the practice runs banking right though The practice canyon in Scotland were awesome. Only thing I never got from the movie even the book was did Cliff Robertson live, both kind of left it to your imagine I think he made it. :-) Something about Mosquito movies in that time frame. Remember David McCallum, Ducky from NCIS, he made another move called " Mosquito Squadron". circa 1969, , virtually the same movie as 633, and used same scenes. Ducky was a bit younger. I think he and George Charkiris from 633 are the only ones still with us. You weren't by chance a " Military Brat" attending DOD School? Thanks once again for sharing that with a fellow Mosquito aficionado ". VESUVIUS
50 years ago that would've been the thing to beat .
But now with cardboard , tape , putty , paint , you can and bits of plastic and rubber and metal in any scale for a nickle .
Watched your video closely as i have just received the spitfire as a gift and i am currently researching any previous reviews of this kit, however while looking up the history of the original spitfire this was based on i have concluded that the wheel bulge was not a mistake but actual research by revell as this particular mk9 was converted from a mk5c which would also account for other details in the planes body size and tail section bieng closer to a mk5 than the later specificaly built mk9s.
I would agree with you on all other counts, they should at least state how old the kits are.
It's a nice idea that Revell have done their homework, but unfortunately they depict a teardrop-shaped bulge which was a post-war modification created to prevent tyre scrub when using paved runways, and also when the original tyres were discontinued these were necessary because of the increased width of the alternatives. Whilst this is correct for MJ250 in it's restored state, it's unfortunately not for wartime aircraft. Early wing bulges for Spitfires were more subtle and a "D" shape. It's not just a Revell problem, lots of manufacturers got it wrong in the past, though the lovely 1/24th rendition from Airfix does not - one of the reasons I spotted it immediately was I'd just finished that kit!
The model building hobby is in a huge decline. So few people actually build models anymore, instead opting for instant gratification. Scores of modelling companies have dissappeared as there is no way that they produce enough revenue and profit to provide jobs that could actually feed a family. Consider the R/C model airplane business is almost completely gone. The looks I get from people who look at the work I do to build a model are no longer looks of respect, but looks of contempt for a nut-job who plays with toys.
and thats due to the low retail part time hours and lack of Budget of workers these days . When I was younger we had more discretionary income which spread through building the marketing world. The retail marketing expanded . Now they screwed that down so much most Western democracies are struggling and closing down "generally" ( except for those on 100,000 incomes)
Yes, I watched that episode,
And I commented about your
Thoughts…
You are RIGHT about the advertisement…
It should say on the box,
CLASSIC KIT…
ALSO, should use the old
BOX ART…
ATLANTIS MODELS from the USA… are REPOPING old
MONOGRAM, REVELL, AURORA, RENWALL kits
Most of US OLDER MODELERS recognize and know the OLDER KITS…
I personally like the older
MONOGRAM, REVELL kits
still have quite a few in my STASH…
YES , better advertising on the BOX should done
like CLASSIC KIT…
enough said!!!!!!!
GOOD VIDEO and REVIEW
CHRIS from OHIO 🇺🇸
Thanks!
As I work in injection molding: molds for things like that are much, much more expensive than you'd imagine, to the tune of several hundred thousand. They're very highly detailed compared to most injection molded parts and I assume they'd also be difficult to produce consistently even if polystyrene is quite forgiving. Comparatively low production series of a few hundred thousand kits would never make the money back, so they will be in production for long. 40 years might be pushing it to the extremes though. Some of the molds I work with have made multiple millions of parts.
That was exactly my understanding of the costs involved.
agree - all about tooling age - the Spitfire (the mk2) I build was nice (same tooling at mk9) - built up well, and with the Quanto studio and it was close to the Tamiya Spitfire I was building in parallel - but clearly not there, but mutch better value when comparing - I've build the Bv-222, Halifax, both tooled in the last 20 years and with that in mind, both were EXCELLENT and worth every cent, build the SR71 48 front last year - a miss - expensive, late of detail and poor fit let it down... not up to the cheaper Spitfire!! - I've build the 1/32 P51 and Fw190 and both were excellent.... SO... ,outside the SR71 (exception?), every kit tooled in the last 20 years was excellent for me... Will be getting the 1/32 Hurricane...
share with us your findings when you do!
As a kid (in the 70s), myself and everyone I knew my age who built models avoided revell kits like the plague, they were considered model kits for the poor, jokingly considered made in Taiwan, with the worst quality and they NEVER went together as they should. Airfix were ok and had the most choice, but Tamiya kits really were superb quality and a joy to build. The prices reflected their polar differences, but price was never an issue for us as model kits were a Christmas and birthday treat. Now as an adult I buy Tamiya every time.
This tracks closely with my experience as a youth(1980s): Revell at the bottom, Monogram a step above, with Tamiya and Hasegawa being the unaffordable dream model kits.
I remember, as a 12 year old, buying a kit of a P38 Lightning. I opened the box and took all the parts out of the plastic bag and to my horror found that one of the tail assemblies was badly warped. I took it back to the shop and the owner said " You took it out of the plastic bag so no refund ". I'm 65 years old and still angry. I built the model anyway and kept it as a reminder to never trust adults. Ever. It's good advice, folks.
Let it go!
I like the 1/32 scale, but I confess that there are kits that look more like Revell toys. I have these two kits, my corsair is from the old mold (molded in dark blue plastic, that brittle) and had a lot of work to make the wing mechanism work without breaking before. At the time, for me, they were like the real. With the internet, I found that what they did was more to resolve the toy and not seem the real one.
As for Spitfire ... wow ... How much difference! I wanted to have the kit for months, bought and didn't regret it. I found it super detailed and to my surprise ... no photoetch! Which for me was good, because I'm not very used to them.
But returning to the subject in question, since they are kits sold as if they were new, why don't they do how Airfix does? Putting something like "vintage" in the box? So people would really know what they would be buying. And they would know that the kit in question is based on old molds.
Big hugs and cheers.
I have thought of this too. I imagine all modelers have too. Funny.. but your point is exactly why I have never bought an Airfix kit in many many years. You have just made me realize.. maybe I should try them out... I'm still wavering..
If you haven't tried an Airfix kit from the last ten years, you absolutely should - they're nothing like the Airfix you remember from 30 years ago!
Fun fact. That box art is only slight tweak on the 1970's art work that had the Jolly Rogers's on it. I longingly looked at until I finally bought one in 1982. I wonder if that canopy cracked in half as easily as mine did?
Yeah the Box Art really hasn't changed, it's just been "revamped"
Revell seem deliberately duplicitous. They are the kings of selling old tat kits and reboxing like the nasty old Harrier Gr.1 (1/32) or even the old Matchbox AFV kits which they cheekily rebranded as 'First Diorama' last year and doubled the price to around £20, a total disgrace. This company is less than honest with it's customers and thereore doesn't really deserve to survive: At least airfix clearly brand their old tool kits as 'Classics' so you know what you are getting, although even they dropped the ball offering their 1/24 Harrier @ £95...but at least we know to avoid that one. Revell are nothing more than con-men.
Spot on mate. Off topic: I really enjoy your content.
@@basmoleman1488 Thanks Bas! ☺️
@Peter Oxley The Matchbox kits really annoy me, because they formed a part of my childhood and I'd love to revisit many of them I didn't get the chance to build back then, but I'm, not prepared to spend what Revell are asking to support this sort of business model. The Krupp Protze kfz.69 was announced this year as a new release - with what they're asking for it you can almost buy a 1/35th Tamiya one...just ridiculous.
Also I've just seen your channel, will check it out :-)
@@MannsModelMoments Thanks Buddy! And yes, I totally agree, I am feeling we almost need to boycott Revell until they stop this! Please check out all the matchbox AFV kit reviews I did...it sounds like you will enjoy those a lot! 👍🏻☺️
Airfix and Matchbox were exactly the same; I was only buying either of them to get some cheaper vehicles and guns for WW2 gaming. Now Airfix Vintage Classics are almost 20AUD - and Revell's ex-Matchbox kits, packaged with the cheapest-but-still-commercial finishing products they could find, are almost 40AUD.
Which still wouldn't be so bad if they hadn't made it more expensive to get an armoured car platoon than if you'd gone to Plastic Soldier Company. Somebody please tell Revell the reason we were buying those old Airfixes...
It seems there’s a lot of conning going on. Older kits repackaged sold as new, old kits from other companies, reskinned old kits with the only new bit being the decals…
At least the whole thing is very intransparent and/or a lottery.
Looking up revell kits on scalemates is almost a must as there you can clearly see the origin of the mould. The new boxes make it easier to identify newer kits but they have also rebagged quite old matchbox kits into the new boxes and those can be easily identified by them being 1:76 and not 1:72 as their usual offerings and they also have an included scenic base to put the model on.
Revell was one of the better companies about producing decent quality stuff for reasonable prices until whoever has them this week got hold of them... their latest new-mold 32nd scale fighter planes are not perfect, but very nice for the prices they WERE charging (28-35 dollars), now they're 50 or more...no.... I'll keep the ones I bought years back in the stash first... the problem is, their 1970s - 80s molds are being peddled for what their new tool ones are ... that is a FLAMING RIPOFF
I wish they'd just choose a path and stick to it - Airfix have decided to be very clear about their old toolings, Heller continue to sell old tooled kits but have at least gone back and refreshed the toolings but Revell just seem to be all over the place.
The "vociferious Revell supporters" you mention are the reason the company continues to sell these 1/32 clunkers from the 1960s at 21st century pricing ... and they weren't very nice kits even then ... as the great American showman P.T. Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute."
"a foole and his money is soone parted"
Dr John Bridges, 1587
Your observations between the two aircraft kits are spot on. It is possible that what you are rightfully pointing out is some of the outfall of Revell of Germany taking the brand when Hobbico USA allowed the Revell USA brand to go bankrupt which was bad enough that we could have lost the brand entirely. I am primarily an automotive modeler, who takes a side jaunt once and a while into aircraft. I'm also in the Engineering field, so I observed the new style sprue systems which are allowing the heated pressurized styrene to fully fill the mold simultaneously so that the natural sink marks are less likely to occur. Ejector release pins are a different story altogether. I have observed some of your same observations in the cars that Revell has released or rereleased along with the Monogram brand which has equally as old of subjects both Cars and Aircraft. The Asian kits have certainly raised the benchmark for
all kit manufactures to either step up their game or be left behind, the manufacturers certainly seem to be embracing the younger modeler with the newer style instruction sheets versus the Blueprint style sheets of the past. Thes newer style sheets assist the serious modeler as well, taking some of the study and research out of the build. Taking some of what exactly did it look like out of the factor. The kit manufacturer must have hundreds of hours of research as well as measuring up the full-sized prototype. So, they should be passing this information along to the builder of the kit, as it gives us more time to build, paint, modify and detail to our hearts content. At present time, the kit manufacturers are listening to their customers, they should be too. They are now competing with high quality resin cast, aftermarket parts kits, quality photo-etch, 3D Printing and more. We have found in the automotive realm of modeling that when we ask for more that we are now getting more from the kit manufacturers. Whether that be Revell of Germany (Atlantis) or AMT (Round 2) who have listened to their buyers and are now cleaning up molds, reverse engineering entire kits and putting out quality models. You skimmed by the real reason that the manufacturers of model kits have to clean up their act and produce high quality kits; the next generation. If they do not, there will be no one to sell their kits to, they'll end up as an albatross in some secondhand shop gathering dust! Cheers
Very well presented and fair comments. I do like Revell because of the choice of kits in 1/32 and the very reasonable prices. But as you say, these can be very hit and miss for value if you don't know what's in the box. I recently bought a Tamiya Spitfire IXc and the difference between the Revell is exactly what I expected given the price difference, but once built up the Revell looks perfectly good as a model, which is kind of the point.
I do wonder if Revell's overcharging for the 50 year old Corsair is what allows them to produce the high quality Spitfire at a lower price than other firms that have more uniformly high standards.
With a Revell kit you have to tinker to get it right, with for example a Tamiya kit you're just assembling.
Revell kits have more variety in quality, the 1:24 Volkswagen T1 was a joy to build, the 1:12 Mercedes 300SL (1983 kit) needed a lot of rework.
Japanese kits always go together nicely. AMT is also nice to build.
COVID Lock down started me model building along with thousands of others no doubt. . A great pastime that an old mate of mine also took up to pass the time. The arrival of COVID handed the model makers a license to squeeze the new, uneducated, newcomers who started modelling with no real idea about cost, value and quality of he models that arrived through the post. All the points you show in your video are more than RELEVANT they are true, and the truth will always be important to know. Thanks
The answer to your question of the price of the Corsairr is profit. The cost of producing the kit has long been amortized. So, the cost of marketing the kit now is the plastic, printed items, and a box to hold it sll.
Is it a rip-off? Yes.
But there's a bigger picture. The profit Revell makes on this model goes back into producing new models, like the Spitfittre. That's how the industry progresses.
The Corsair was a first-class model when it was released but that was over 30 years ago.
The real issue is the marketing. Put a note on the box that says "Classic Kit" and price it according to demand -- it's only fair, Revell.
Revell is one of those companies that I'll generally avoid unless I've spent a ton of time researching the kits I'm even remotely interested in, because of just how badly I've felt burnt by their kits. When I was a kid, it was perfectly fine to have kits made in the 1980's, or even early 1990's, because it WAS the early 1990's. Things have changed dramatically over the past thirty years, and it's rather saddening to see a company who's kits I looked forward to seeing now be ones I won't even look at if there are known companies producing known good products. I don't care that Meng, Trumpeter, Tamiya, or others are upwards of three times the cost, I care that I'll actually enjoy the kit. My Revell A-10 Thunderbolt II sits on my shelf as a reminder as to WHY I refuse to buy their products - I literally can't bring myself to painting it, because it was that much of a pain to actually get assembled (I shouldn't wind up putting it back in the box six times just during assembly).
Ton of promise, a lot of reach, and a name that even non-modellers seem to recognize as having been around for a long while, but the incredible variance between their kits and just how often it's a repackaged old model with either a new waterslide decal sheet or just new box art... It's sad to see. They could be so much more.
The Corsair was first released in 1970, the Spitfire was released in 2014. Differences in molding are expected. As for the instructions, the same applies. The Corsairs instructions are a revised version of the original. There were no color instructions in the 70s. But I agree the "corporate" types ruin the hobby.
You say differences are expected, but we're paying the same for both....that's like buying a used 1970s car and brand new car from the same manufacturer for £35k.....
My plan was to spend my retirement building all the kits I didn't get to as a teenager. But have been priced out of the market.
Over 50 yrs ago, my Brother would spend hours building Airfix kits and had many models of planes, tanks and ships. He took great pride in painting them and applying the transfers. I, on the other hand had no patience for the fiddly wee parts. I`ve no idea what they cost back then as he saved his pocket money to get 1 kit a month.
Sadly I have gotten in the habit of buying two boxes of whatever subjects from Revell that I am building. Parts are always wonky, sometime the fuselage halves don’t even line up, weak landing gears that can’t hold the weight of the model such as the F-4G. All that said, they’re still fun to build
Revell definitely has their place in the market, being accessible and beginner friendly is their niche but at the same time their pricing needs to reflect that. The way they put kits out with updated box art only to be molded from the same ancient tooling is pretty deceptive marketing so its good to hear people calling them out on that aspect.
Glad someone is raising these issues. New design and tooling is not cheap, although new technology has kept costs down, simply not right to sell old stuff for a high price, just cynical, especially as modern kits are superior in detail and fit. Got to say Revell are very low on my list when choosing a kit. To be fair have had issues with Airfix too with the same practice. Have been very pleased with new kits but am wary of buying from both without doing my homework 1st. All manufacturers keep selling older designs but 14 quid for a Tamiya 1/35 Panzer, (20+ years old design) is a best seller at my local model shop and quite rightly- not super accurate but a great pocket money kit...
On the issue of tooling, age is an issue from a storage perspective, but also from a use position. If it was stored well, it should be fine. If it got rained on, the parts might not release. But the real factor is how many times it was used. Some of the tool is taken away with each injection. As the tool is used, sharp features will become rounded and the tool drafting will widen and give the part the appearance of having far too many paint coats. To refurb a 50-year old injection tool would take serious skills that jewelers and neurosurgeons rely on. However, a real investment would have the tool being dialed into a CNC system and read to make a new tool.
As for modeling, I had a colleague who made models for a living. This included theme parks, casinos, parking structures and at least 1 hospital. He used balsa, foam, fiberglass, chop sticks, spray paint nozzles, all kinds of stuff. He had a 7' long model of the Mir hanging over his pool table to remind him to get the check up front after getting ripped off by a firm in Orlando.
People have made models since before we could write. It's an amazing craft that really connects us to reality and potential.