The Worst Kit

[StephenLawson]

Thats got my vote for worst pun 'EVER' on the drome...

[StephenLawson]

And just think...it didn't even happen anywhere near off topik

[Michael]

The early Airfix models were pretty crude as far as interior details go - no seat (let alone floorboards and controls). That certainly was a problem given the rather crude pilot figures in those days. Frog never got over that problem, but Airfix figures got much better, at least for WWII planes.

[topgun56]

I built all of the first Airfix kits......They all had seats. This was in 50-60's .

I wanted Frog kits so sent the company an "Air Mail Letter " and by return mail received a letter from them. They info'd me the address of the nearest dealer.......I bribed my Father and on the return trip from Grandma's we stopped at the shop. All Frog kits were 70% off.....That cost me 3 months allowance in advance. And filled the trunk. They were great kits.

The worst kit Battle Axe ......Anything by B/A

But then there was that Russian bomber kit !!!!!! By a Russian company.

[Michael]

Originally posted by topgun56@Jul 26 2004, 05:11 AM
[b] But then there was that Russian bomber kit !!!!!! By a Russian company.

How about all those fantastic Russian bombers and fighters Aurora and Revell kitted from blurry Soviet airshow/May Day parade photos?

[StephenLawson]

No question about it here no perfeckt kits...

[Romani]

Originally Posted by Volker_Nemsch

The two worst kits I´ve seen were made by ACADEMY: the Sopwith Camel and the Spad XIII. They are lousy!
Volker Nemsch

Well, I got both of them (1/72, I suppose you mean them) with a Toko Pfalz DXII on an eBay auction, and I honestly cannot say I was ripped off.

The pieces are neatly moulded without flash, the detail is crisp. Assembly is easy, things fit together at the right angles without lots of filling, sanding and filing, and it doesn't use "individual struts with one-hole locators" True, the wing struts are thick, but I think that's intentional to make the kit hold together.

The only complaint are the machineguns, and that the SPAD propeller needs some putty.

Overall, I think they are good kits if you are more concerned with having an example of that particular aircraft and you are more concerned with the paintjob than the detail, wich is the point of 1/72nd scales.

In comparison with other commonly available kits they certainly are better than the Revell Fokker DrI and the Airfix Albatros DV "Special Edition" kits. The first one is atrocious and the worst kit I've ever built, to the point I regret having wasted so much time on it. The Albatros has a nice fuselage but you cannot build it unless you also have a Roden kit with spare parts to complete it, and nothing cannot be done about the 2 piece stabilizer.

[topgun56]

Michael,

Did you build Revell's Russian "atomic powered" bomber ? I did...then I sat the wing too close to a hot lamp. Actually, they were pretty close.

Then there was the cut-a-way of the US nuc Sub. The US Govt was a little upset about the "perfection" of this kit.

[StephenLawson]

Originally Posted by topgun56

Michael,... Then there was the cut-a-way of the US nuc Sub. The US Govt was a little upset about the "perfection" of this kit.

Poppycock!!!!

[cobra427]

You know, I just built the 1/32nd Sop Camel, and (even with my fairly low experience in WW1 kits) I found it generally quite easy going, all the bits fit well, not really much to complane bout, cept mabye that the bottom wing dihedral is a tad too low so you need to put the model upside down and put a paint jar at either end of the lower wing till the glue sets, and of course those shiny decals which just won't conform to the ridges on the wing (sorted with appropriate amounts of MicroSol). But all in all, i'd say this is a great kit. I was really impressed with the cowl, cause I built the 1/48 revell one (naff) and the cowl seemed a bit too flat at the front, but the academy cowl stops in mid curve. The rigging was real easy too.