Gentlemen what is you experience in a judging/contest environment regarding a model containing an above average level of detail? If the contestant chooses to go all out by detailing the underside and sitting the model on a mirror, providing photos, reference material, etc.? What is the judge's response/attitude towards this?

I realize at the outset doing this has both risks and rewards. It draws more attention and perhaps more interest. Maybe it impresses more but the construction and execution still have to be be done to the same level of quality and perfection as the rest of the model. Also this extra detailing must meet the required contest level of construction.

In doing all this one just as easily might run a higher risk of disqualifying themselves over some construction flaw or detailing mistake.

I want the detail and not have the kit manufacturer make decisions for me. It's one reason I buy very few Tamiya kits.

Quoted Text

---

I want the detail and not have the kit manufacturer make decisions for me. It's one reason I buy very few Tamiya kits.

---

I would say the kit manufacturers make decisions for themselves; that is, about what they can afford to make and what they think they can sell. The only things holding them back from creating fully detailed kits inside and out are a) Information and b) Money.

It's always about the money.

KL

The only things holding them back from creating fully detailed kits inside and out are a) Information and b) Money.

It's always about the money.

Quoted Text

---

The only things holding them back from creating fully detailed kits inside and out are a) Information and b) Money.

It's always about the money.

---

Yes, and no.

Tamiya makes kits that are very buildable. In order to do that, they simplify certain aspects and details. It's clearly NOT about the money with them (they send research teams all over the world to measure surviving examples of planes).

Hello, Everyone!

Kurt has brought up the TAMIYA M3. By "M3" I am going to assume that he means the latest TAMIYA 35360 "M3" kit, and not the old TAMIYA 35042(?) "M3A1" kit.

While I cannot speak for the big corporations, I can absolutely say that being a manufacturer is NOT ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. I know that for myself and at least one other aftermarket manufacturer that I am friends with that the love of models and the tremendous desire to create and share them are the motivating factors behind our efforts. The amount of sacrifice I've put into LSA could fill a whole thread here.

The whole point of this thread . . . was to gauge how to best use my limited resources. Why waste time and money on complex, delicate or high casting failure parts if nobody cared about them? That precious time could be absolutely be put to better use elsewhere if no one cared.

Kurt, we will have to agree to disagree.

I have had some fairly detailed conversations with one of the Asian kit manufacturers about the business, and it's not as cut & dried as you say. Tamiya has a business model about what kinds of kits they want to sell, one that has been successful for decades.

That having been said, when Zoukei-Mura introduced their hyper-detailed aircraft models with very complete interiors (often in places invisible except to the model builder), Tamiya felt the marketplace pressure and began including such "hidden" details in their more-recent kits. They didn't have to (their Corsair kits, for example, are gems without the interior detailing, including support spars), but they reacted to the Zoukei-Mura moves because they felt they had to, even if it increased costs.

Bill & Kurt:
It IS indeed about the money, even if it is not only and exclusively.
I consider the money when I go shopping, groceries or kits or whatever.
Those who do not think about and take money into consideration
usually end up paying too much or even go broke.

Some politicians try to pretend that money is not an issue but after a while even they end up looking for a new job.

/ Robin

Quoted Text

---

Hello, Everyone!

Kurt has brought up the TAMIYA M3. By "M3" I am going to assume that he means the latest TAMIYA 35360 "M3" kit, and not the old TAMIYA 35042(?) "M3A1" kit.

---

That is an incorrect assumption.

I was telling my tale in the context of the recent arrival of the "High Tech" kits, which was in the late 80s according to Scalemates.

KL

Quoted Text

---

Quoted Text

---

Hello, Everyone!

Kurt has brought up the TAMIYA M3. By "M3" I am going to assume that he means the latest TAMIYA 35360 "M3" kit, and not the old TAMIYA 35042(?) "M3A1" kit.

---

That is an incorrect assumption.

I was telling my tale in the context of the recent arrival of the "High Tech" kits, which was in the late 80s according to Scalemates.

KL

---

What have "High Tech" kits of the 1980s and "Scalemates" have to do with my "assumption"..? You are the one who brought up the TAMIYA "M3" in the first place. My "assumption" was merely that. An assumption. That doesn't mean that it was to be taken as a cold, hard, fact. It was your ambiguity in referring to the TAMIYA "M3" which led to guesswork on my part. If you didn't write in riddles, people would be able to divine your meaning a little bit better...

VR, Dennis

...I'd actually put an address label on the bottom so if lost, someone would know where to send it. ...

Quoted Text

---

...I'd actually put an address label on the bottom so if lost, someone would know where to send it. ...

---

Mom used to do that with her dishes at PTA Bake Sales

Quoted Text

---

Quoted Text

---

Quoted Text

---

Hello, Everyone!

Kurt has brought up the TAMIYA M3. By "M3" I am going to assume that he means the latest TAMIYA 35360 "M3" kit, and not the old TAMIYA 35042(?) "M3A1" kit.

---

That is an incorrect assumption.

I was telling my tale in the context of the recent arrival of the "High Tech" kits, which was in the late 80s according to Scalemates.

KL

---

What have "High Tech" kits of the 1980s and "Scalemates" have to do with my "assumption"..? You are the one who brought up the TAMIYA "M3" in the first place. My "assumption" was merely that. An assumption. That doesn't mean that it was to be taken as a cold, hard, fact. It was your ambiguity in referring to the TAMIYA "M3" which led to guesswork on my part. If you didn't write in riddles, people would be able to divine your meaning a little bit better...

VR, Dennis

---

Good [auto-censored]ing Lord, I cannot fathom how your mind works.

There is no riddle here:
There was a debate in the clubs for a few years when the "super kits" from Gunze Sangyo and others came out with PE, white metal, and other non-plastic parts. Some thought this would upset the order of things because now somebody could "just" buy an expensive kit and end up with a Best of Show winner using what came in the box. The other argument, and the one that quickly proved to be uniformly and immutably correct, was that all those extra parts and materials were just more [auto-censored] to [auto-censored] up. If you couldn't build a Tamiya M3 without problems you weren't going to automatically become George Lee or Shep Paine by buying a 500 part Panther.

For some reason you thought the object, the key element, of my story was that M3. I don't know how, I don't know why. You then went into a five-paragraph monologue about what you would do if you were building the new Tamiya M3 light kit and what kits you built 20 years ago, and what you like and don't like. Again, I don't know how you got there.

Does it [auto-censored]ing matter if I was talking about the 1974 M3 light, the 2018 M3 light, or the 1974 M3 medium?!? The point was, people who couldn't built a simple kit right weren't going to be get better by working on a kit that was far more complex. There's nothing confusing about that. There are no puzzles or riddles in there.

KL