Revell's Carbuncle Corsair - is age an excuse for a bad kit?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июл 2024
- In this video, we'll be taking a look at the venerable 1/32nd scale Revell Corsair, and I'll raise the same questions about it that I did about some of their other older tooling releases in my 2023 Revell release video (available here if you've not seen it )
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
Support the channel on Patreon - / mannsmodels
Beyond the Box Podcast: www.buzzsprout.com/49144/1256...
You can also watch my content on Odysee: odysee.com/$/invite/@Mann'sMo...
or Rumble: rumble.com/c/c-2451734
Subscribe - ruclips.net/user/MannsModelM...
Follow on Instagram - @MannsModelMoment
Follow on Twitter - @MannsModels
Facebook Page - / mannsmodelmoments
Video Chapters
0:00 Introduction
0:13 Beyond the Box
0:49 Unboxing
5:23 Conclusions
8:32 Like, Subscribe & Share
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 
Хобби
Is it acceptable for a large company to sell 50+ year old toolings without explicitly saying so? I take a look at the ancient F4U-1A Corsair from Revell, and give my view on this practice - what do you think? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments below!
No its not acceptable..i have no issue with vintage kits but put the age of the tooling on the box
@@jaws666 I agree - it would solve these problems...but I think Revell feel it would harm sales...when in fact I believe if done intelligently it could actually boost profits for them as a company
Revell will sell anything, they are "hansa", even airfix is better! 🤔
@@MannsModelMoments I'm not sure how it could boost their profits, might be a good subject for video/podcast on its own. Will give Airfix credit for putting the date on the box, however. Airfix better off a subject for another day, with credit to their current management making improvements.
The Revell matter at hand, specifically NOT Revell Germany (or is it GmbH?), Is the same tired old molds that your video shows so much flash on, etc. Seems like they are trying to keep at the approximate prices of competition's 32nd and 48th scale average kits. That doesn't mean the kits are competitive, just the retail price. There's always new outliers, meaning the average shelf filler and been on the market for years with new boxes or decals occasionally. Those are the ones that turned me off Revell as a flat hard no, similar to your mentioned experience. Blind siding customers without the knowledge provided by places like Scalemates and others to check how old and outdated it may be, seems to be a byproduct of the number of times the company has been sold to venture capitalists or others attempting to rescue the brand. Another group trying to squeeze out pennies from the old dies.
Not sure when or what the contractuals are, suddenly appears the German,/GmbH version with actual cleaned up molds, real new tooling, and by gosh, some nice new kits. Seems to be a company I'd be willing to spend money on kits from, despite the first part of the name, Revell. Couldn't be more night and day to me here in the States. How much could this be also affecting the unsuspecting customers? I do look at them as separate entities and treat them as such. Interesting questions and hope we all can get better information about which company has which rights/molds etc.
Looking forward to catching the new podcast over the next day or so. Cheers ☕🥂 to many more.
@@crazylocha2515 Having been a commercial manager for a looong time, profitability is a simple outcome of managing the equation of cost of sales vs volume and price of the same. There are, of course, many things that go into those pieces, but volume is very much influenced by reputation - something Revell erode with releases like this. Airfix have been steadily rebuilding their reputation with excellent new tools, the Vintage Classics range clarity and good social media presence. If Revell dropped the price on these old toolings by 50% and were clear on their age and origin, I'm sure many would jump at the chance for a range of cheap kits for many purposes, and praise Revell for it. Would cost them little but pride, and have a positive influence on their brand name.
In defense of this kit, I built this when Baa Baa Blacksheep was first run on TV and it was affordable and approachable for a 10 yo kid. I enjoyed building it, painting it, and chasing the A6M5 from the same period all around the house! “ Take that Meatball!“ rat a tat a tat
I definitely grew up enjoying that show, unfortunately for me it was a mustang as first kit, and I wasn't very skilled at building it all of 9 years old 😜. Still flew it around pretending it was part of the black Silver sheep.
I'm unfamiliar with the show (I'm guessing it was a US one?), and I agree that a 10 year old won't care - but what 10 year old (or their parent) would spend £32.50 on this for that? If it were £15 or even £20 as a starter set, i think it could be ideal for younger modellers (though I'll hold that in reserve until I've built it!)
@@MannsModelMoments This show was popular around the world but never shown in the UK or Ireland (I lived in both).
Papa Boyington was the Squadron C.O.
How do I know this?
I emigrated to France 8 years ago and when I display my models at model shows everyone refers to my Corsair as Papa Boyington’s one despite the French Fleet Air Arm in the Algerian War markings!
The show, Baa Baa Black Sheep , is regularly re shown here and it’s quite enjoyable, I must say!
Early 1970’s vintage.
Worth a watch if you can find it online.
All the best for the Podcast, just subbed.
Ian
Thanks - I took a look on Wiki after the third mention of it (for some reason I thought of it as a kids show when I heard the name!) - seems interesting and he seems quite a character!
@@MannsModelMoments No problem 👍🏼
Spot on. Revell has a long history of this sort of thing. I've learned that a look at Scalemates is essential before considering buying any Revell kit. They show little respect for modelers and I generally avoid the brand.
Scalemates has saved me many a buck. Highly recommend it as your go to reference.
Scalemates is fantastic, and free - I'd advise every modeller to join up!
Same here. I'd rather pay a little extra for better kit.
Revell kits in America are affordable but not detail desirable, turning their kits into a completed model is always an extra challenge due to issues with the old molds including flash, less detail, and imprecise fitting parts. See also Putty, Sanding, Creativity, and Patience....a great introduction for young modelers but not a great choice for historical accuracy etc.
Good point John. I wouldn't spend more than 15 pounds to buy this kit.
Totally agree. No problem with classic kits still being around but the way in which they are marketed needs to change. Airfix use the ‘Classic’ labelling which is a start but still doesn’t go far enough. The issue for me is the dishonesty, it feels like the manufacturers are trying to dupe customers. They puts these decades-old kits in new packaging to make them look like they are something new. They also charge a high price which again gives the impression that you are buying something comparable with the new kits - there is no need for the price to be high. The majority of the cost of the model is in the design and the tooling, but with old kits like this, those costs have been sunk and were recouped decades ago. The cost of these kits these days is just the plastic and the production run, they really should be able to sell kits like this for £10-£15. Now if they warned customers that these were old kits not up to modern standards but priced them at £15 then these kits would be worthy of a place on the shelves. But the way they are marketed at the moment just feels like profiteering.
Agreed!
I bought this kit a while back (back when Southampton still had a model shop so make that `a long while back`) because at £7.50 (sale price) it was crazy cheap for the size of the box, but one look at the parts told me I'd bought a lemon. A modelling mate had joined me for the unboxing and after I said how disappointed I was he offered to buy it for the same price... but I gave it to him for free. He thought I'd done him a favour, but I hadn't!! He's a very skilled modeller but that kit tested his patience to the limit... he said it was about the worst kit he'd ever made and he didn't enjoy any part of the build.
@@doczoff5655 I was born and brought up in Southampton, I remember when it had FOUR model shops - the big one was Beatties (later became Modelsone) on East Street, there was a smaller one round the corner on Queensway, there was a model train shop near the Civic Centre and a RC model shop on Bernard Street. And don’t forget that practically every place that sold toys (toy shops, department stores, newsagents) carried models to varying degrees. Don’t think there is anything now unless you count Warhammer.
Even in the small sleepy village that I grew up in there was a bicycle/hardware/toy shop that had decent Airfix stock, a toy shop that carried Airfix and Hasegawa and a newsagent which specialised in Matchbox. Had to go into town if I wanted Revell/Monogram (horrible stuff at that time) or Tamiya (stuff of dreams but beyond my pocket).
I built one in 1975.
It was cool!
Dad flew them in Korea.
He was a good Marine and turned me on to modeling. Great Dad!
Love that - I think it's how many of us started in modelling
When I was a kid back in the late '80 and early '90s, I remember Revell having a lack of detail, raised moldings, and extreme amounts of flash. I would rather do Testors kits. I got back into modeling about 4 years ago and it seems like revel kits have not changed. Honestly, I wouldn't pick a revel kit unless it was free or one of you RUclipsrs recommend it. (I say one of you RUclipsrs because I watch a lot of different RUclipsrs such as you, Mos, Gary, SpruesNBrews, etc., so I apologize for the generality).
Thank you for being honest and reviewing kits like this one.
No offence taken! Thankfully RUclips is an open platform (at least, at the moment!), so you can gather a broad spectrum of opinion to make choices - I think that's the important thing, that people can make informed choices based on information, not just glossy marketing.
I think Revell do themselves a great disservice with offerings such as this, because some of their kits are great, as I said in my review of their 2023 release video.
There never has been nor ever will be "recessed" mold lines on an aircraft. Brought to scale those Tamiya kits would fall to pieces with gaps that large and would never fly even if they found long enough bolts to keep it all together. Monogram and Revell are closer to real than any of the "Hype" crap out there. However their cockpits leave a lot to be desired but these are Models not Replicas and the 2 terms are very very different.
@@animalyze7120 Well, I completely disagree with you, but you're entitled to your opinion.
The one high point of the Revell line is their habit of reissuing Monogram's old 1970s kits, many of which still hold up well.
@@animalyze7120 very true. The good thing about recessed lines is that they 'usually' don't sand away very easily where the raised lines did. There are significantly more raised panel lines on aircraft than most people would expect. I work on F-15s and panels often have a raised sealant line where skin panels meet. It's not very high but its still there even though it's a supersonic fighter. In scale you still wouldn't usually see the raised sealant lines though. I like the recessed lines until people do extreme highlighting and darkening of panels and the panel lines.
I have been building old Revell 1/32 kits from the 1970's. So far it's the Corsair, ME262, Hurricane, Harrier, ME110, Beaufighter, Typhoon, P47 and FW190D! I bought them for less than £25 each - but you have to approach them with care. Lots of scratch building cockpits putty-filler and a few resin add-ons (mostly exhausts) It's been fun and in the end I got the kits looking good! However I researched the kits and I knew what I was letting myself in for!
Exactly - I'm not trying to educate experienced modellers buying this kit knowing what it is ad what they're getting into, I'm drawing attention to the way this is marketed primarily to the unaware, which I think is poor practice.
Your point is completely valid. It’s for people who aren’t aware how much variation there can be inside a model box, particularly those who want to make an accurate scale model but haven’t built up super slick skills. A tidy modern kit can help get all the way there, when another kit can make this goal unachievable to exactly the same person.
Even if with the advantage of knowing about quality variation, without confirmation on the box or internet access there is only the option to open the box in the shop. They don’t like that.
Admittedly, this is an absolutely ancient kit, one of Revell's 1/32nd scale "bigger is better" series. Many of these were true "dogs" with shape and scale problems and ALL were severely lacking in detail or accuracy of that detail considering their size (back then you were supposed to slap that baby together... how many of us kids had Dremels, Badgers, Paasches, compressors etc. lurking in our bedrooms...). The Corsair was one of (if not the best) the better of those kits. Its size and lack of detailing made it a great candidate for correcting and scratch-building (as its dimensions were actually quite good)...if you had the means, resource materials, and stubborn persistence to do so. I saw what the great Shep Paine did with this kit. A masterpiece. He modified everything but the box-art on the original release. I built the kit eons ago and in this day of amazingly detailed kits, there is no excuse for trotting out these fossils without an attempt to update and correct them. Price would be of relatively little concern as the market is no longer teens and pre-teens but old fools like me...with disposable incomes...and a hobby room(!) replete with aforementioned Dremel tools, Badger and Paasche airbrushe, compressors scanners...even 3D printers!...
This is exactly how I'm tackling the kjit at the moment - not wanting to spend much on this, I've 3D printed an R-2800 double wasp and cockpit, and will sand, rescribe and rivet the airframe and see how she looks...
It's essentially the original molding from 1969 (horrendous wing hinges included) but it CAN be built into a decent representation for a reasonably skilled builder.
It CAN, but you can also buy a better base kit for less (Tamiya 1/48th is just one example) and do the same...
I built the Spitfire and Hurricane in this 1/32 range - fifty years ago, and then they seemed good models. Unfortunately times have moved on, and things now are more sophisticated. I used to play a marvellous game of 'spot the most travelled tools' with the old Aurora and Merit 1/48th aircraft as they went on their travels around Europe! I don't buy plastic kits any more - they seem very expensive, particularly when I remember the original prices!
I think all manufacturers should feel obligated to state the age of the mold on the box or put the old sets, just like Airfix, in a separate range. But I have to thank Revell though, without their BoB Gift Set from 2010 I probably would never have come across Scalemates. I was so appalled by its contents that I thought the seller swapped the kits and ripped me off, but no, it was Revell who ripped me off.
Again, Scalemates should be every modellers first bookmark on their browser - invaluable!
I have the fondest memories of this kit as a teenager, then again in the 90's. It did the trick for me & it was fun.
I think that's the main reason to buy the kit, which I don't object to - what I do object to is them selling it at a high price and pretending it's new to the detriment of the unwary
I made this kit a few years ago, and had no idea just how bad it is, boy was I in for a shock!!!
Yeah, that's the issue for me - if you'd know it was as it is, would you still have bought it for the price you paid? Personally, if I'd have paid more than £30 for this, I'd have seriously considered taking it back to the store.
No,I definitely wouldn’t have bought it.
I can make a cheap kit look pretty much as good on the shelf as a nice one. It just takes almost twice as long, several mods from scratch and a few extra bucks for better decals. I always do three (3) mods; Home made Seatbelts, Ignition Cables & basic Hoses, and Brake Lines/Hoses on the landing gear.
I don't disagree, though with this kit I would say at LEAST three times as long and much more extensive mods - the very visible engine needs essentially replacing, the cockpit will need a lot of work on this kit (pretty much also needs replacing). The wings need work whether you display them deployed or folded. and things like the wing intakes, engine exhausts and surface detail also need redoing in order to bring this up to the same level as a "nice" kit. Unless you have a particular love of this particular kit, I think that's probably more than it's worth.
@@MannsModelMoments Oh yea, I agree too 100%. For 3 times the work, tripple the money in resin & Photo Etched upgrades, and $100 in tools for rivet wheels, scriber, drills, etc…. One could have a model almost as good as a Tamia or Kōtare! 😹
I built this and the Thunderbolt way back in late 70's when I was 11-12. They both got repaints, the Thunderbolt emerging as Tarheel Hal after seeing a side profile in an aviation magazine, the Corsair emerging as an R.N.Z.A.F. example after seeing a few photo's in a book and learning that my A.T.C. squadron commander flew them in the islands during the war. It complemented my 1/32 Matchbox Dauntless of 25 Sqn.
Dear Mr Mann,
Thank you for your well thought through comments.
Regards,
Z
So nice of you - but you can call me Alex, no need to be so formal 😀 (It's Dr Mann if you do want to though! 😂)
Yep, they should behave themselves and state on the box when kits are first tooled and released. I actually bought this kit from Hobbycraft too, but I was perfectly aware of what I was buying and at 16 quid, well it's probably worth that, just! I'm about to start Airfix's HMS Victory from the vintage classics line. At least they put the date of tooling on the box, 1965! In a funny way I don't mind flash, I have classic FM or radio 3 on in the background and scrape and whittle away. I find it therapeutic somehow, or am I just weird!
Not at all - I also find cutting sprues up therapeutic! At the end of the day - as I said on the video - it's about informed choice, which this practice obfuscates
Modern builders should know that a large portion of the Revell portfolio of kits are re-pops in new boxes. Buyer beware when it comes to Revell.
But not all "modern builders" are experience ones, so they still provide a trap for those just coming to our hobby
There are a lot of us older builders who cannot see, handle, a kit with 200 pieces, and 50 of those in the cockpit, never to be seen. So a kit with 100 pieces, little detail, except for what we include, is acceptable. But for newer builders, looking for more parts, details, it's buyer beware. It should say it's older tooling, new box, and the price should be less, at least it be nice.
@@charlesnavarra8574 Agreed - and if you choose to buy the kit it should be priced reasonably,
If Revell discontinued their bad kits, the whole hobby would benefit from it. Mothers would more likely let their sons and husbands to buy kits-instead of complaining about a stash of unbuilt kits.
At least Bandai doesn’t bother repackaging their Gunpla and keeps the correct copyright date for the kit on the box.
Well, as I have said before they really ought to market these ONLY under some kind of 'vintage' label, but I am still glad they reissue old kits periodically, and there is an obvious reason you can buy this for less than a quarter of the price of the 1/32 Tamiya kit. Or at the £16 you paid, close to an eighth of the Tamiya price. Incidentally the Revell kit for sure has a terrible cockpit but at leas it is externally correctly Corsair-shaped, unlike the Trumpeter kit which resembles nothing ever produced by Vought. Would I advise a newbie to buy this kit? obviously not, and mainly for reasons of the complexity of the wing assembly, which is not suitable for a beginner. I would always send them in the direction of one of the simpler 1/48 Tamiya kits and their small Corsair is a perfect beginner kit, one of the easiest things ever, and is hard to screw up. But I would steer newbies away from the Trumpeter kit too.
I agree the Tamiya kit is better for a newcomer, but the Trumpeter kit offers more for an experienced modeller to "have a go at" for little more than the Revell kit - I've seen some beautiful examples of both builds.
I'm a fairly experienced modeler who built this kit last year. I took my time to make sure everything fit properly before gluing it all together. No aftermarket was used. I even made sure the fiddly folding wing option worked as advertised. After a painstaking two months I had a pretty decent model of the F4U-1D and one I was happy to include in my "classic" 1/32 scale aircraft collection (that happens to be my thing right now). I paid around $22 US for it new. Many people have had positive comments to say about it but it's definitely no Tamiya and that's ok by me. General shape is acceptable and it definitely looks like a Corsair in outline and scale. But yes I agree the price needs to reflect the basic nature of kit and not at the inflated prices we are seeing these days for the older tool kits like this one.
Purely nostalgia. The original boxing was the first kit my father ever built with me as a boy.
Nostalgia is a great reason to build a kit, but you need to know what your're getting if you're unaware it's that old!
@@MannsModelMoments you are correct, sir. Fortunately,.I realize it's age and can formulate a plan for it. Don't get me wrong, I so would take a Tamiya 1/48 F4U-1, but this just kind of fell into my lap, and for nostalgia sake, I couldn't pass it up
All your points are well taken. For the modeler who just wants something that looks like a Corsair and is a reasonably straightforward build, this is probably adequate. That was me back in the 1970's, and I had this kit.
I would say yes, or at least an explanation. Technology was more limited when a lot of older-tooling kits were originally made, so molded detail was harder to do finely (especially while keeping them budget-friendly).
And if it's a _new_ release of an old kit, there's the chance of mold wear making it actually be *worse* than one from when the kit was new: details that were crisp back in the day becoming soft or even vanishing outright, excess flash because the molds don't fit together as perfectly as they once did...
Which explains the state of the model, but not the decision to not be honest about the age of the tooling, or charge so much for it....
its 50 years old. I was 10 when it came out. When I was old enough to build, it was my first large scale model. It is a basic kit for a beginning builder. Nothing wrong with the kit in that context.
And how many 10 year old beginners are going to spend £32.50 on something they just started doing?
I built this kit when I was 9, and it was a pain back then. I got back into building about 4 years ago, starting with the 1/48 Tamiya kit, which was hundreds of times better in every way.
Thanks for the feedback - I have the Tamiya 1/48th kit too and am looking forwards to building it
It's always going to be a personal judgement call. And you do have valid points. Continue to be yourself and that ultimately is the best approach to take. If you don't like what you see, feel free to express your opinion on these matters.
As for the question of new boxings of old kits, that is always going to be a personal judgement call. Modelling is something we can share with others, but ultimately it is a hobby with very few exceptions that we do solo. On the workbench it is just us and the kit. I've done the high end new tool subjects and the old stuff and received enjoyment from both. I've achieved high level of success at contests and built other stuff just for personal satisfaction. At my age I have "been there, done that" and yet I still continue this hobby I started at age 6 about 45 years ago.
My answer regarding new kits versus old is to a modeler is it will always be a personal judgement call. Not every project is necessarily going to require the latest and greatest kit. Sometimes I admit to being fearful of building a newer kit as the higher price spent subconsciously can mean a higher chance for money wasted if I mess something up. So sometimes I feel more comfortable beating an old kit into submission and scratchbuilding details on it to make people go "You built THIS from THAT kit?" I know, that can seem counter productive because newer kits from Tamiya indeed fit together so beautifully. It's my personal thing though so I don't necessarily expect others to understand.
Now concerning the question of whether or not Revell should make it easier to identify on their kit boxes how old a kit is, yes I do believe they would benefit from that. But, apparently these certain older subjects have enough demand to keep getting reissued. There are very few years that they haven't been produced. That's not unique to Revell though as Tamiya (1/48 FRS-1 Harrier), AMT (1969 "Country Charger" aka "General Lee"), and Airfix (1/144 Space Shuttle and Vostok rocket) have their share of old kits not necessarily marked as vintage that stay in their production queues year in and year out. If they weren't selling, it begs the question why do companies keep offering them?
In any event, good presentation.
I think it's a matter of people not returning what they bought - once you've bought a kit, most people will think it's too late - especially with the increase of on-line sales which can make returns difficult or costly if you have to pay postage. I don't think there's any excuse for the deception - intentional or not. You are also right about it being a widespread practice, but again, that doesn't make it right - although I have to say that Airfix Di not currently market old kits without the Vintage Classics label, they've only been doing this for 4-5 years so there are still old kits in newer boxes in retail circulation outside of the Airfix direct channel
I remember building this kit back in 1970-71 timeframe when I was a teenager. It looked great hanging from the ceiling in my bedroom and was a fun easy project for a weekend build.
And if it were priced for teenagers to do that I'd be very supportive of the strategy...unfortunately it's not
@@MannsModelMoments If I remember correctly, I paid $8.00 for most of the 1/32 scale Revell kits, P51B, BF109, Stuka etc.
@@MannsModelMoments the price is 100% the problem I think. that trash isn't worth $30 or pounds or anything. It should cost $15 max and be on sale for 10 most of the time.
And yet many people here defending it....but then you know what they say about a fool and his money....!
I built that kit back around ‘77! I was so young then. I thought it was great back then, and so big!
Revell even reissued tank kits and there were/are clearly old matchbox molds. As i was born in Germany, I mainly got stuck with matchbox or revell. Airfix was not so available, but I liked them most…45 years ago…😜 Matchbox were the best back then (for me as a kid) as the planes came in two colored molds and there was no urge to paint them. And you could buy them with your pocket money…good vid and thanks for the advice! 💯👍
I loved the old Matchbox multi-coloured kits with the clear windows in the box so you could see the sprues! Reissuing them now I'm shocked to see the prices Revell retail them at, as Matchbox were a very affordable brad, and when they're asking for them now is way of inflationary growth.
@@MannsModelMoments Agree! When i was a kid a kit was around 4,- Deutsche Mark which would be (just conversion, no inflation included!) 2,- € nowadays. Actual prices for a 1/72 plane is around 7,- €. This would be 14,- Deutsche Mark. 350% increase for the same stuff sold ages ago…😳🤷🏻♂️
I was ten years old when this kit first came out, and at the time it was considered a highly detailed kit that was a fun (if a bit challenging) model to build - but nothing that a Fifth Grader circa. 1970 couldn't handle. About five years later when I joined IPMS, I even saw a few examples built with added scratch built details that looked pretty good. That said, it's nowhere near a state-of-the-art kit of today, and only has nostalgia appeal for those of us, "of a certain age." But Revell should state that it is a classic kit made with vintage tooling.
Would I build one again? Maybe . . . if I could find one at a garage sale or eBay originally made in 1970 - 1975 when the tooling was relatively new, and the parts fit would be optimal. But if I wanted an accurate model of the F4U in 1/32nd scale, probably not . . . .
I agree - it's fine to sell this kit today at a suitable price with clear indications of its age - I'm sure many older modellers would buy one or more if it was more economically viable to do so
@@MannsModelMoments I think that classic model kits from the 1950's - 1970's STILL have a place on the hobby shop shelves; both for us "old timers" who want a bit of nostalgia, and newer, younger modelers to the hobby who could build them to gain practical experience before going onto the current, highly detailed (and more expensive) model kits offered today. But to do this, they need to be offered at a VERY reasonable price - especially considering that the old tooling is "bought and paid for." (If nothing else, neither the very old or the very young have that much 'disposable income' to throw around.)
On the practical side, the modeling industry should consider making their older, less state-of-the-art models available at an affordable price as an "investment." If a Pensioner can't afford the latest kit, or a Grade Schooler gets a model they want as a birthday present, and realize they CAN'T build it because it's over their skill level, (and subsequently gives up on modeling as a hobby,) then the modeling industry is sealing its own fate.
Absolutely! If this kit was retailed at £15, I'm sure many would pick it up. Price it at £20 with paints, brush and glue and you have a starter set for a child that a grandparent could buy for them and their parent or grandparent could help them with - everyone wins.
Revell and Monogram were for a long time known at least to me as a poor person's kit. They were top of the line back in the day. But Revellogram for years needed to go and retool kits they have long been in possession of.
However that never occurred and while there were some new kits they were far and few mostly using or reboxing kits from other companies.
To me Revellograms downfall in America was the inability to bring a lot of kits up to other companies standards and the modeling community wanting better quality kits and not get into pricing consumers out of the market.
Plus things change because it's hard to compete with the digital games and other things like it that replaced building a model with paint and glue.
But let's face it when the Tamiya 1/32 scale Corsair came out it blew all the other same size Corsair kits out of the air. It's more expensive and has more parts but in the end it's a better quality kit.
You can dress up the old Revell Corsair in 1/32 scale but it won't come close to Tamiya.
Yeah, it's going to be a challenge rather than a "pleasure" build, this one!
@@MannsModelMoments Been there done that with that particular kit myself.🤣
Interestingly enough the exact scenario you described (out of the hobby for a decade or two and pick up this kit to get back in) happened to me. I bought this kit not realizing it’s age. As soon as I unboxed it it became immediately evident. In all fairness the employee at the store did recommend another Corsair but I assumed they were trying to upsell me. I’m going to build this one and treat it as a lesson learned. I’ll do my homework going forward.
I built revells 60s Era P40E kit, added resin wheelwells, and resin cockpit, with aftermarket decals. I took a silver medal behind a Hasegawa kit. I'm happy with the results. Some tlc, and real modeling and the older kits turn out great. Don't knock the manufacturers, we are lucky to still be getting kits to build.
Whilst I'm glad for you, that's not the point here and I absolutely will hold manufacturers to task on dishonest business practices
You make very valid points re the marketing of an ancient kit. I bought the Corsair back in about 1980 or so, and later ordered the Lone Star resin set. Here it is, 40 years later, I'm finally getting round to building it. The basic shape is reasonable, (the engine blows chunks) and the cockpit was the first to hit the bin. The Lone Star resin is fair, needs a lot of clean up, but so far, fits OK. The inserts for the wheel wells require a great deal of sanding in order to get the wing together but adds quite a bit. I'm about half way done, adding detail to the tail wheel well. I have taken the kit engine apart and will attempt to make it look better but the molding on the cylindar banks is rough, and in order to get the fuel pipes to each, you really have to file them down to the point they look even worse. (I said attempt. If it fails or drives me nuts I have a Quick Boost resin P&W 2800, which looks a hell of a lot better). I was debating rescribing everything but replacing the rivets? Not a chance, So I'll leave the detail as is and try not to mess it up too much. Pretty annoying that we are paying a good chunk of money for a kit that has long since paid off the costs of the molds , cranked out a few thousand kits and starting to show the wear. It'll make a good 3 foot model. (viewed from 3 feet +, it should look ok) Note: Revell Germany puts out excellent recently produced kits, and I have yet to get a bad one.
Would love to see your build once you're done.
@@MannsModelMoments I'll see what I can do. Gonna be a while yet, working a dozen off the shelf of doom ATM, trying to clear the backlog. Hour here, hour there. Move on.
No hurry!😀
Hi, I enjoyed this video, you told the truth regards it and I totally agree. I purchased this kit quite a while ago and after looking at the plastic I put it on the back burner, but now I think like you, I'm going to build it. Thanks for the Video. PS I dont usually comment on vids as I watch them on TV, just thought id mention this :)
Thanks for taking the time to comment, it's appreciated :-D Show us your build when you're done!
I first got into model kits a few years ago with 0 prior experience. Bought a Revell 1/72 Spitfire, BF-109 and this 1/32 Corsair kit. For a newbie, the 1/72s were not a particularly fun build experience and I left this sitting in my closet until recently. Since then, I've returned to the hobby mostly via Bandai's Gunpla kits, and opening this thing up again a few weeks ago to compare what I was getting for my money was rather depressing.
A handful of non-colormolded rough plastic with questionable detail cost me around 30 euros when I bought it a few years ago. Bandai's HG Gunpla kits are roughly half that price (Not accounting for shipping and customs which do admittedly bring them on par), and are above and beyond more newbie friendly as a vessel for getting people like me into model kit building. I actually thought this Corsair was a far newer kit that it lead on thanks to the markings on the water decal sheet. Sheesh
Thanks for the comment - it's very insightful to get a new(ish) modeller's actual experience - confirming some of my suspicions (sadly). I'm glad you're still with us though and it didn't put you off completely!
I tried to build this kit pre-covid. Oh sweet jesus what a mistake it was. for a 1/32 scale kit there were no locating pins/ tabs, and no internal strengethening spars for the fusilage or wings. The memory i had for this was using lots of Tamiya extra thin ro join the fusilage and wings together. They attached, I left it overnight for the glue to go off, next day I picked up the model, and the two sections came apart due to no locating tabs/ pins. The same issue with trying to attach the engine/ engine cowling the kit just has no spare surfacing to make contact to give a solid join. I soon threw the kit into the bin.
Oooh that's not good...I'm terrible at hording even my failures, however, even if they're just going to be used as test-beds!
Good review! I would have said the same thing and expected the same from ANY magazine kit review as well. Part of the problem is such an old kit being dusted off and reissued without any refreshing of the molds (not new box art and decals) and sold at quality kit prices is a reason why American manufacturers especially are generally thought of as the worse or most basic kits (even those sold at premium prices). YES! A quality builder can invest $100+ in fleshing out a good result with photo etching and aftermarket parts- but that’s what a quality modeler WILL do with any high quality kit too. This IS supposed to draw young and old alike into the hobby- not sicken them as to being bitter about it. I like seeing Round Too and similar makes taking these subjects and TRULY updating them and making them worth those prices or slightly higher versions. Thanx.
Heller do similar, but have been at least reconditioning the tools and labelling kits with their age. I don't think that's quite as transparent as Airfix with their "Classics" range, but it's better than revell's current practice
Totally agree with your conclusions here. Old kits don't get compared to other old kits unless it's obvious they're old toolings that are sold as such. If it's marketed the way that Airfix Vintage Classics kits are and packaged accordingly I'll judge it as an old kit. If it's boxed like this Revell offering that makes no effort to give anyone notice that it's older than most modelers? It gets judged up against any other modern kit it's competing in the marketplace with.
Airfix have been known to do the same thing aswell from time to time....i know of 2 old airfix kits off the top of my head that are available in the current style "red box" leading some to think they are recent or new toolings despite they are not.
@@jaws666 Yeah, the Sea Hawk model is an offender. I do believe most of those old kits in the new red boxes are mostly, but maybe not all, out of the production range these days. The 2020 release of the 1:24 109E made it into a Vintage Classics boxing as an example.
@@flycasualmodeler sorry,i meant the Sea Hawk,not Scimitar
As I mentioned to Arthur above, even comparing period kits to the Corsair doesn't really help when looking at things like older Tamiya armour like the Stug IV I got for half the price of the sale Corsair....it loses based on detail, casting and plastic quality as well as cost....
@@flycasualmodeler @jaws To be fair to Airfix, the Seahawk starter set was released 13 years ago, it's not currently marketed by Airfix (though there may be some kits still lying around). Airfix only started their "Vintage Classics" series 4 or 5 years ago (in their 75th anniversary year) - until then they were also guilty of this. I think it was a smart move and one that should be adopted by other older manufacturers like Revell
My brother bought the Revell F-111 kit when it was released and I remember the complexity of the retracting main undercarriage, a marvellous piece of model engineering in plastic. His first "air spray gun" was a modeller's miniature version of the fly spray hand pump that gave very good results considering (it did splatter) and he loath the use of a paint brush to cover large surfaces. He began his journey with Airfix 1/72 kits and progressively worked up to 1/48 and my favourite Monogram kits.
I take it you mean the 1/48th F-111, and not their 1/72nd F-111 Raven, which is...not great...
@@MannsModelMoments Correct as it was my brother's preferred scale and it came in both US airforce and navy versions and his interest was drawn to the elegant navy nose.
I can't speak about the quality of the kit overall but remember the wings did swing and the whole of the rear elevators pivoted. That was over 50 years ago I dare say.
I agree on all your points and to be honest I hadn't thought of it like that about 'Hobbycraft' and selling this kit to beginner modelers or youngsters...I do have this kit but I did my homework on it first so I knew what I was getting into...Also got it very cheap...I do enjoy trying to cut a diamond from a lump of coal (check my Revell 1/32 Beau vid) but I have to say I do disperse building these kits with my 'new mold' kits cos it can be a heartbreaking and labour of love so I give myself a break by building a new mold with a lot less work to do after every one...Happy Modelling!
Agreed!
I absolutely concur with your video.
I got back into the hobby about 10 years ago as a 45 year old man and looking to buy my first kits I was looking to keep costs low. I started with a couple of 1:72 kits as those are what I remember building with my dad. They were cheap and brought back memories - but I realised I needed bigger due to eyesight.
I was amazed to find that a 1/32 Me-109 from Revell was something like £25. I simply didn't realise that it meant I was going to get a kit that was totally unsuitable for my skills at present.
I think they need to be honest and tell people the year the model was last moulded. Generally speaking, the older it is, the worse it is. Even Tamiya who's older kits seldom have flash often have fitting issues or are fiddly.
Like you - it's not about "not being a proper modeller"...it's about honesty in what you're being sold.
I can pick up an old Revell kit nowadays and work away at it to my leisure knowing what I'm in for...but back then, I needed easy, good fit, no hassle models to get back into the hobby. It took me over a year to build that Revell 109 because I didn't want to scrap it but I didn't want to build it either...I found it draining...so I didn't build another model for a year. I got it finished mind.
They need to be honest about what they're selling...making it cheap doesn't cover it. Tell me - plainly on the box - what year it was last moulded. That at least covers the older mouldings being foisted on new modellers.
I'm currently building an Me-110 from Revell and it's a dog. I actually bought it about 8 years ago. But I know what I'm doing now.
EVERY modeller should know about the Scalemates website...I use this all the time now to see when a kit was last moulded.
Scalemates is a godsend...and it's free! I'd absolutely recommend every modeller joining up
I think you mean what year it was FIRST moulded, surely that is the relevant date
@@harryspeakup8452 I'm referring to the date the tool was created, yes
@@harryspeakup8452 i was thinking "last moulded" took care of a kit that was a new mould.
Some kits are moulded in the 70s and show on Scalemates as New Mould. I thought "new mould" meant using a more modern process...not remoulding the original mould.
Does "new mould" on Scalemates mean it's the old mould but recently made? Or does it mean it's a recent mould using a brand new mould and techniques?
Generally scalemates refers to "New Tools" - as in a new stainless steel tooling has been created. They also use "New Parts" and then various types of reboxing, sometimes across manufacturers. Deciphering the information on some old kits can be confusing, but then the journey of the tool and impressions from it can too - Some Airfix Tools have been across the world and back, sometimes losing pieces on the way, sometimes being permanently modified...it's a minefield!
As someone fairly familiar with Revell kits I can only agree with you. Since returning to the hobby about five years ago I have built (or nearly completed) three kits- 1/32 Westland Lynx, 1/72 Catalina and 1/32 F-14 Tomcat. The Lynx and Catalina, being more modern kits from this century are pretty good, particularly the Catalina, tho both suffer from what I call Revellisms, those little annoying things that Revell seem to do so well. The F-14 is from 1981 and it shows. It's pretty bad...
But, these kits were cheap, way cheaper than any of the other big names in plastic kits in my experience. And yes, Revell should tell the buyer that this and similar kits are old molds. Airfix do it and it hasn't harmed them at all much, has it?
If I see one cheap (or cheaper) I may buy this Corsair for my on-going Rebel Squadron project.
I think that is not to be underestimated - if you bought this for £10 you would expect what you got,, and couldn't really complain....but it's not!
I purchased this model second hand but the 70s version. For a 70s kit its ok, but i didn’t realise that thy were still selling the original mouldings in a modern box. For this day and age its frankly shocking quality.
An all too common practice, unfortunately. Heller are also very guilty of this - thankfully Airfix have changed their ways about 5 years ago - we just need these other companies to follow suit!
Bro did my boy skipper like that 😭
Could not agree more! Companies like Revell, Italeri, and even Hasegawa have made their recent monies selling kits that are repops of 10-30 year old molds. Italeri seems to thrive on repops of old Esci kits as a matter of fact. And as you mentioned - I'm buying a kit with 2023 money, not 1970 money. I honestly don't care about using my "modeling skill" to improve an old kit - how about using that 2023 money to buy a better kit?
Couldn't have said it better!
The old ESCI 1/72 kits are pretty good but the 1/48s are a mixed bag
I think Revell, especially Revell of Germany, puts a higher skill level on the box, hoping to appeal to more advanced modelers. I've purchased a couple of the car kits that are a skill 4or5, when they would be very suitable for novice builders.
The "skill level" is another interesting discussion point...I'll add it to the list for the podcast!
@@MannsModelMoments
Gunpla works differently; scale, then difficulty. It roughly goes:
Entry
Revell Germany's Skill Level rating is based almost solely on the number of pieces a kit has. Which is why you get cars with "higher" skill ratings.
@@Fitch93 thanks, I always wondered what it was all about.
@@Fitch93 you beat me to it, that would make every miniart kit a level 53.....🤣🤣
I bought this kit about a year ago for a bargain price. It's exactly what you say it is - basic in the extreme. Painted and weathered - it doesn't look too bad from a distance. The real weak point is where the folding wings join - this is incredibly fragile and I ended up having to superglue the wing ends on.
If you can pick it up cheap it's worth it even if only as a testbed for finish application and weathering etc...but that's the point, it's not marketed in any way as different to anything else in their range
Ibought this model , tried to build it , binned it , have the trumpy kit in the stash ..cheers for sharing:)
Share pictures of the build when it's done!
The funny thing about the Revell Fokker Triplane from 1956 is that they rereleased it in 2017 as a "LIMITED EDITION"? What's limited about the oldest model still on sale today???
Limited value??
I remember this kit. I got it at a Kmart in 1991 or 92. I remember it being a dated kit then with the same issues in this video. I also recall that this kit was a pain to fit together. Surprised they still make it in 2023.
People keep getting duped into buying it...so yeah, they keep pumping it out...
I think there should at least be somewhere on the box that shows the original first year of release, and this goes for ALL kits. It's not a coincidence that they don't show that year though. It's absolutely a deliberate marketing tactic to fool the unsuspecting with some attractive box art. They put some up-to-date art work on the box, perhaps a different box completely, some different decals, and voila! The actual kit itself could be a 50+ year old relic that is more painful to build than having wisdom teeth pulled. The 1/48 Revell P-40 immediately comes to mind. I built that kit about 10 years ago and my time on it was 90% filling/sanding and 10% everything else. There's a reason why you typically only see that kit on the shelf at Wal-Mart or on Amazon - targeting the unsuspecting. I don't blame it on the store that is selling the kits though. I blame it on the manufacturers that are boxing these kits up and sending them to the stores to be sold.
Yes, agreed!
I also bought this kit when it was on sale from Hobbycraft and is next on my todo list, but I might wait until you have built yours now!
I bought several kits in the sale, including the Tamiya Stug IV (a 1976 tooling) and their Yamaha Virago XV1000 (from 1986). The two Tamiya kits cost the same as the Revell Corsair, and there is no comparison in terms of quality. Despite the Tamiya Stug being only 6 years younger, and having a very 1970s provision for an electric motor, it is crisp, has zero flash and is a very pleasing build to a pretty great looking model (video on that coming up soon). The Virago looks like something created yesterday, and the value I'll get from the £8.50 I spent on it blows any defensive arguments for Revell's policy out of the water.
As for the Corsair, I hope you share your model with the channel when you've finished!
Glad I saw this first. Very helpful. Re-entering model 30-odd years after last doing it, I always had a lingering doubt about Revell but wasn’t sure why. Mostly Tamiya 1/35 as a kid. Can you recommend a good larger scale Corsair kit? Want to build my Dad’s USN planes: Stearman, Harvard and Corsair.
If you're looking at 1/48th, the Tamiya kit is a steal. For 1/32nd you can either get the Trumpeter (which opinions vary about) or the Tamiya (which is hella expensive)
@@MannsModelMoments Thank you. I was looking for something larger (along the lines of the 1/24th Airfix kits) as my sight's now what it was..... ;))
I agree with you. I tried to build this Corsair in 1970. It was a disappointment then. I threw it in the trash.
I'm glad it didn't deter you from the hobby though!
I built this kit back in the 70's. I remember how the landing gear kept collapsing when installed with tube glue.. It was also released as Pappy Boyingtons plane from the Baa Baa black Sheep tv show.
Also built it in the early 70s. It was about $3.99 at the Post Exchange back then, and a fair price. At the reissue price of around $10 in the mid-80s, not so much.
Yeah, if this kit was $3.99 in 1970 it should cost $30 today, not the $40-$50 it's being retailed at - they're actually charging a relatively higher price for it now than it was when the toolings were brand new and competitive!
Good honest review of a kit that should be marketed with a little more honesty by Revell. I have a couple of Revell kits in my stash but in no hurry to complete them. Even the black and white colour call outs are frustrating, so I tend to print out a separate colour cross referenced sheet. I would definitely go for the Tamiya or Trumpeter kits if I wanted to build this. I personally think your video is of very high quality and love the pictorial metaphors👍👍
Thank you very much!
Your right in the review, 50 years ago this was the cats meow. I blame this on Revell in NOT retooling their old products. As one person stated buyer beware! The price is cheaper than other 1/32 Corsair kits, then you get what you pay for in this matter. Think of it as a 1970’s car, you will get to your destination okay, but it might be rough. The same is true with this Corsair, you will eventually have a Corsair built but at what cost? Frustration and hardship, it is best to pay the big bucks and get a kit you can enjoy. 😊
You certainly "Pays yer money and takes yer choice" that's for sure! Having said that, you can pay less for a slightly smaller but much better model...so, yeah...
I’ve bought a couple of the Revell larger scale kits and I passed on this one as well, to bring it up to standard would take a lot of after market parts.
Even with after-market, you'd still need a lot of work on the basic fuselage to bring it up to spec
@@MannsModelMoments absolutely correct, it’s an older mold where specs were not accurate. I suppose it’s great for a kid on a first model but that’s it.
When you realize that the tooling for this kit was paid off a long time ago, there is no reason, other than perhaps corporate greed, to charge such a high price for it. I built this kit back in the 60's, and it wasn't cheap back then either, but it was all we had in 1/32 scale. It's not even collectable in the new box. I would definitely rather build the Tamiya or Trumpeter kits and pass this one up.
Agreed
At least airfix mark the older kits as "classics" and i fully agree some kits are so poor by todays standards that they could put a person off modelling. Here in texas (Dallas) we have hobby town USA; they stock scale kits, but the staff are practically all "buggy boys", Walmart has kits occasionally ( the staff think they are lego kits), hobby lobby (staff don't have a clue as they sell to a mainly female craft clientele ) and a couple of independent buggy shops. anyone trying to get into the hobby has no support from the retailers.
Here in the UK we have European stores Lidl and ALDI, which used to be thought of as "budget" supermarkets, but have changed that conception a lot since they arrived. For the last couple of Christmas' they have sold new tooling Airfix Starter Sets for £7 (less than $10), which is fantastic - and a store that sells groceries (as well as other things in their "weird" isle!) is an ideal platform to expose kids coming into modelling age, who are out with their parents shopping, to modelling...so it can be done!
If you want another bad 1:32 Revell kit, try the Me-262 Kanonenvogel.
I had it when i was around 11 years old in 1999, so excited to have a 1:32 Me-262…needless to say I never finished it.
I found the unfinished kit more or less complete a few years ago and tried to rebuild it and improve it, but I quickly realized not only the green plastic is very brittle, the detail is non existent, but even the dimensions and shape are wrong…basically need to be completely reworked unless you’re ok with a very crude level of details.
I am a beginner modeler and really enjoying the hobby with being said I think your video is a good idea for people like my self looking for model down the road thanks
Thank you!
Ach, you're right. Revell have got a cheek asking modern money for a 50 year old kit. They should update the tooling, it's an iconic thing, the Corsair and Revell should do it justice. They've had their moneys worth out of this old moulding.
Yeah - I'd love to see them redo these subject like Airfix are doing in 1/24th with their Spitfire and in 1/72nd with the Vulcan etc.
I got a Revell Mosquito kit and I suspect it is of similar vintage. Was not a ton of money though but thanks for the heads up on this stuff.
I built so many as a kid. It's just it's age. Remember its was the only 32 scale available for ages. Before Tamiya did it. So only build it for nostalgia.
I get that, and that's fine - my issue with Revell is that they put a nice new shiny box around a 50+ year old kit and sell it alongside new kits for similar prices - nothing to tell you its and old kit....unless you're savvy enough to use Scalemates, and if you are, you already don't trust Revell.
The fundamental problem with these kits is that they were designed in a bygone era, where (perhaps) the sources from which to draw photos and details were very rare (the internet era was still a microscopic sperm 😂😂😂). What leaves us perplexed is the fact that, nowadays, some manufacturers of the same kits don't make much effort to make a complete "restyling" of what they then propose to two/three times what they are really worth, then forcing whoever they want engage in detail (even minimal) in the purchase of aftermarket with additional costs. I understand that the molds cost a lot, but I also believe that certain producers (with "very broad shoulders") would not suffer so much.

I'm not sure access to information was as much of a problem as some of the technology and methods employed - after all there were more physical Corsairs around in 1970 than there are now! I thin one of the fundamental errors in the case of old toolings is the assumption of the companies that tricking people is the only way to get people to buy them - perhaps Airfix's Vintage Classics line will start to show others that is not the case, and there is a market for them without expensive tooling updates, but just using some different marketing and selling strategies.
@@MannsModelMoments I don't think they started out trying to dupe customers. the technology to make great tooling was very limited and probably more expensive to produce back then than it is now. They are definitely duping customers now though.
Remember in the late sixties and early seventies I was young and didn't have the money for really expensive models. So I ended up with Revell 1/32. P-51 (Shangri La) P-47,P-38, Hawker Typhoon and Hurricane, Corsair, Kawinishi Hien, Mitsubishi Raiden and Zero, Sptifire and Mosquito. Also models from ESCI. Fun and not comparable what is on the market today. So are lease of one of those old molds I would not buy unless they are priced the same as then.
Even back in the 70's I viewed Revell kits as "dime store" brand. Cheap, easy to build for a kid, and got the job done, but not a "serious" model. I like building them now if I can find one at a jumble sale and then I use it for practicing new techniques and detailing.
In defense of Revell, for all their faults, they are still 1000x better than a Lindberg kit.
Revell have built their brand image by their actions, which is sad - they do have the capability for making excellent kits, which makes this shameless profiteering with old crap kits even more frustrating!
Lindberg are the boxed equivalent of scratch building in many cases!
I see you posted a picture of my LHS .. Northern Model Centre . Still looks quite the same but expanded now to downstairs and a very good selection/prices.
Yes I visited there when I was staying with my uncle in County Durham - it's a great place!
@@MannsModelMoments Yes he's really turned it into a "one stop shop". I live in Co.Durham near Bishop Auckland and when the wife gets dropped off in Durham to see her friends I always swing round to see what I might need (models/paints etc.) then sneak any purchases back into the house before I pick her up 🤣.
@@axesspeaklouderthanwords8077 Nice! My Aunt and Uncle live in Crook....it's a lovely part of the world up there...but a bit cold! I studied in Sunderland and Newcastle during my student years, and it was like going back a season!
@@MannsModelMoments My wife is from Crook and we now live up the road at Willington ..small world !! Your right about weather as it always seems so windy here and course cold. I used to live in Kuwait and Vancouver so The Northeast took a bit getting used too but alas here for the long haul...for now 😂
Great review. I had this kit in original boxing in my stash for many years. Based on my fond memories of building 1/32 Revell kits in my youth, I’d pull it out to work on it every few years, only to rediscover what a terrible kit this one is and put it away. During the lockdown I decided to finish it no matter what. Spent too many hours and putty to finish it just to make it look OK. People should beware. I’m sure those craft stores, like Hooby Lobby here in the US sell these kits to new modelers or non modelers buying gifts for others. Sad to think this is how a new modeler would be introduced to the hobby. While I appreciate the effort and skill required to turn something like this into a gem, I think life is too short to spend time bringing a poor quality kit up to snuff.
Yeah, I wonder how much repeat business they get? Would be interesting to know (though I doubt it make any stats as it's bound to be a minor part of their revenue stream). I think manufacturers often give these sorts of companies kits that haven't sold well commercially elsewhere as a way of "offloading" them to a new (and unsuspecting) audience. If they were to capture new hobbyists they'd be completely different kits.
@@MannsModelMoments considering how much the model kit aisles have shrunk in every mainstream store, if they even have any, I'd say they don't get many repeat customers at all. Unfortunately the managers of those stores probably can't even order different kits because the corporation dictates what they sell.
I expect that's exactly the case
You will need another video where you try to assemble the model. Just try to fit the pieces together. JUST TRY, MUH- HAHA! The two main fuselage pieces were warped badly back when the mold was new. Revell's Corsair was uniquely bad even back then. I build the kit back in the late 70's and had to try and physically wrestle the left and right pieces of the fuselage. I strapped it now, taped it, put books on it to hold it down while the glue dried.
As an adult I found a second hand copy of the kit. It had the same issues. The kit put me off Revell for a long time.
I am going to "take one for the team" and do exactly that....pray for me..!!!
I gre up on an airbase in Germany in the early70's.We could go to the PX and pick up pretty much ANY model for less than $1 US.Sadly,this warps my view of the plastic models available today-there's NO WAY I'm spending that much!!I guess I'm just and old fart now...
The cost of this model has increased above inflation in the 50+ years of its life, whilst the tools gradually wear and mouldings become worse, and other models technology evolves - but apparently there is a masochistic section of modellers who don't mind party with good money for bad kits, so I suppose I can hardly blame Revell for parting them from their cash!
Yes the vintage label used by Airfix is very helpful and evren attracts customer like me, so a similar label and a "Matchbox" label would be a good marketing.
100%!!
I started modelling at Christmas, and bought this in the new year for £16 at Hobbycraft. Haven't built it yet, but good to be aware of the issues beforehand. I also bought the Mayflower from Lidl for £16. The amount of flash is unbelievable, and the instructions are really poor.
I hope you're not put off by the experience - there are so many good kits out there!
Thank you for the advice. Just the lack of detail for that scales isn’t right for the modeller. I’ve bought some old kits and enjoyed them but I’ve also bought some that a just stash fillers.
I look at them and say one day, honestly knowing if my wife ever found out she’d hang me by my short and curly.
Stay safe!!!
Spot on!
I've been saying the same thing. There is no excuse for this shady reboxing tactic from Revell. And I also roll my eyes when people defend these old kits as a trial by fire thing, because its their nostalgia. I grew up on these and I don't want to go back unless I make a conscious decision, or a given vehicle is only available as a vintage kit.
For crying out loud! The instruction is just 15 steps long. Show me a new kit in 1/32 scale that is just 15 steps.
Yes, I don't understand people's vitriolic defence of scurrilous business practices and reacting like I'm attacking their childhoods...but you can't please everyone...
I built this kit in the mid seventies. Can't imagine it could sand up to today's kits.
No, it doesn't - but then if Revell were honest and sold it cheaper, it wouldn't have to - plenty of people would buy it knowingly for a fair price point.
I bought this kit for a wreck diorama.. so after I’d cut the fuselage in half, bent all the propellor blades, broken off the port wing at the hinge, and weathered the thing to within an inch of its life.. a bit of flash and some back-in-day inaccuracies didn’t seem to matter.. 😅 horses for courses people
I got this kit for $30 Australian second hand.
About 23 pounds I think it is.
Yes I did a lot of scratch building and had fun and I now have a great looking model.
But if I’d had paid $70 dollars abouts in our convict money I would have been very very disappointed with my purchase 🙄
"convict money" made me laugh! Thanks for checking in! 🤣
Someone told me once, that; Revell/Germany does not manufacture kits. They simply rebadge kits that other companies have "thrown in the towel" on. That's where the low quality comes in. I'd assume that the reason the mold was being sold in the first place is that it is worn out. I have a Revell JU-87 Stuka that has been in the stash 10+ years that is actually a Hasegawa mold. I've looked at it and it is topnotch. I did their German "S" boat years ago and it was a travesty. Flash, ejector pin marks, and a couple of sink marks over 1/4 inch. The whole 9 yards of a bad model. Even in their heyday back in the 60's, they weren't all that great. Apparently, little has changed.
The problem for me with Revell is transparency. They have made some excellent kits, but they have also made some steamers, and reboxed many, many manufacturers kits good and bad since forever. Yet going by the box alone, unless you happen to be an expert, you're none the wiser, and prices don't give anythign away either. There are many kits I bought from Revell (before Scalemates existed) that I expected a new kit, only to find it was a rebox of an old kit from another manufacturer I already had. Then I just stopped buying Revell. It wasn't until a kit was praised in the published media or later reviewed on the 'net that I would consider a purchase of a Revell kit, so they hurt themselves with this poor practice
Thanks for sharing 👍
Thanks for watching!
I agree with you 100%, Revell need to pull their socks up and get with the times, I don't think I've ever had a good Revell kit in the 50 odd yrs I've been modelling, and as for the comment about doing something with and older kit, why should you have to spend money to fix an old casting, I'd rather just stay away from them.
True
I do believe Revell have improved their offerings with their new tool kits. I returned to modelling after a couple of decades with their Mk 9 Spitfire and was reasonably pleased with it, thinking it pretty good value for the price. At the time I couldn't bring myself to spend the price on the Tamiya offering. Since then I've added the Tamiya Corsair, Mustang, Mk 9, and Mosquito to my stash and look forward to tackling them. I'll have to admit though, that Mossie does intimidate me a little. ;^)
J'ai acheté récemment une très vieille boite vintage Revell, le Stuka au 1/32. J'avais déjà monté ce kit dans les années 70 et je me suis bien amusé. C'est lorsque je me suis rendu compte que le Stuka 1/32 de Revell actuel était encore exactement le même, que je suis arrivé aux mêmes conclusions que vous. C'est une forme d'arnaque. Rentabiliser les moules c'est bien, mais combien de temps ? :o)
Je suis d'accord avec cela - c'est un état d'esprit commercial à très court terme, qui est mauvais pour les modélisateurs et mauvais pour l'entreprise
I bought several of the 1/48 Monogram/Revell WWII bombers from a chain craft store within the last 4 years, knowing they were the old tools. when I opened them they were just so bad. I got them on deep discount but they still weren't worth it to me. I started to just build them without paint and most of the parts didn't fit at all and it was awful. I threw them in the trash.
Yes, age does not improve a tooling!
It is okay to release such old tooled kits today, provided the tooling is good enough so a model can still be built out of it without the need to replicate or kitbash half of its elements. Thing is, the price should be adjusted accordingly or at the very least, the box should clearly state the tooling year. Preferably both.
Few years ago I built Hasegawa's first generation F-14 Tomcat in 1:72. Despite the age, the model went together beautifully without the need to use filler alltogether. Of course it had (accurate) raised panel lines, which I highlighted by dragging a hard pencil over them, rather than using a wash and the extensive decal sheet completed the look nicely. I was however aware I'm getting an older kit (the online store I regularly buy from generally has photos every offered kit contents, so you know what you are getting) and it was significantly less expensive than a more contemporary 1:72 Tomcat by Hasegawa.
The 1970 box art version is what I recall having. Then I had the Baa Baa Black Sheep version in the early 80's. Yep, same model from the same molds. And about the same amount of flash, maybe a bit more, but the plastic was dark blue. I'm shocked that the molds have held up as well as they have.
Agree totally. My first ever kit in the mid 90s was a 1/72 Revell Spitfire mk2, and I remember how badly it fitted, how wrong the wing thickness was, how the canopy didn’t fit properly. It was quite disheartening. My second kit was the Airfix Blenheim and that seemed so much better, and as a result I stayed away from Revell. I’ve recently returned to modelling after a 15 year absence, and again I’ve avoided going for their offerings based on that experience nearly thirty years ago.
Did you mean the moern tooled 1/48th Airfix Blenheim? If not, you should try it - it's a LOVELY kit
@@MannsModelMoments This would of been 1994 ish. It was the then current 1/72 Blenheim. Knowing what I now know it was probably a really old kit by then, but the whole experience of putting it together was so much more pleasant that the Revell Spitfire, and it looked way better at the end (even with my limited beginners modelling skills)
For a 1:32 scale model, it has the detail I would expect from a 1:72 scale. The whole idea of buying a 1:32 model is to be able to show off greater detail.
Exactly, though I would say it doesn't even meet 1/72nd standards for most kits
Built the Corsair about 50yr ago along with several other of their 1/32 aircraft. They were all rather basic even by the standards then. I seem to remember the one piece cowling was too tight
Yeah, maybe I SHOULD do a review of several kits from different manufacturers from 1970 toolings and see how well they stack up against each other....
I ve the problem with my twin otter and my Bf109. One was a matchbox rebranded the other a svezda with bad plastic and fitting
I built this kit around 1975 (when I was about 9 years old). Due to my age and inexperience, I had fun, but didn't do a great job! But I do remember that there was nowhere near that much flash. I agree that continuing production of this exact same kit (except for the box design and art) seems lazy.
Agreed - they could at least revisit the tool and recondition it like Heller have been doing with their old kits.
I remember in the 1970s building some Frog, Airfix kits with the pilots head molded in to the fuselage halves and feeling pretty cheated at the lack of detail. I did build the Revell Corsair in the late 1970s and thought it was a good kit at the time.
I remember those too....awful, even as a young child!
Great review, Alex. So, they've pulled the same trick they did for the Spit V in 72nd years ago. We've already talked about it, iirc. It's just a money grab by Revell. Their part of the deal is over once the retailer buys from them. Hands clean, money pocketed. And people have short memory about brands as well, no matter what they say.
For the all-terrain purists out there. It's 2023. Not every model kit has to have blood, sweat and tears poured into it to make it look good. If I'd want to go for an assembly nightmare I'd volunteer at the Tank Museum for maintaining Tiger 131's running gear. Again. It's 2023. Time to cut some slack on people's abilities and their right to call bull when they see it.
"Don't call yourself a modeler if you can't turn this maguffin into a shenanigan."
Christ Almighty on the Cross... I don't want to. I don't need to. Life is short and Tamiya rules supreme.
Edit: Sorry for the vitriol. Insomnia does impair kindness.
I think it's just being honest. It's like Jeff Goldblum's line in Jurassic Park (paraphrasing here)
"Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD".
Greybeards will be greybeards no matter how much common sense is put in front of them...I'm not producing content for them anyway, so I thank you for your comment, honesty and subscription, and I'll see you on the next!
The only Revell models I have completed are their 1/48 F15E and the 1/32 P51D which build into nice models . I attempted the 1/48 Eurofighter Typhoon not long after returning to the hobby and quickly abandoned it . Even though that was a few years back and I have acquired more experience I still wouldn’t touch another of their Tiffies😅
Sadly their good models are saddled with the bad name revell have developed because of their aged old tools concealed in new boxes. I'll be the first to applaud new tools that build well and are well priced
@@MannsModelMoments Agreed. I can’t ever see a time when I’ll be buying another Revell kit as they stand. I only built the aforementioned kits because they had mostly positive reviews .
@@Mors_Inimicis Yes - Scalemates and early reviews always guide my non-"bargain basement" buys - even then, it there's internet access, I'll still check out Scalemates before even a purchase from a charity/thrift store!
I have a copy ofFine Scale Modeller , detailing scale model aircraft , where this corsair had added to the cockpit alone over 100+ pieces ? Time , skill and a touch of insanity just proves most things can be done ???
They can be...but you shouldn't HAVE to unless you choose to!
Revell is the industry king of reboxed models.
Yes they are
Well said.
Thanks!
I think you are right. Haven't built a model like this for over 25 years (yep hiatus) Once bought a Revell 1:32 F-14 in (I want to say 1993) and it was the same story. REALLY basic detail and an even more basic decal sheet. There's only so much I could do with it without throwing too much money and time at it. As in your video; trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Yet if the price had been lower and the tooling date made very clear, at least you could have made an informed choice, rather than being blindsided