although i have encountered a few models that aren't good like the old italari mi-24 hind and the mh-47 chinook, which i've scrapped.
my least favorite model was the zvezda mi-8mt Hip. i think it's the worst kit i ever bought. when compared to the hobbyboss mi-8mt Hip, you can see how badly zvezda's kit actually looks. the quality of the plastic was terrible as well as some of the detail. i ended up scraping that kit as well.
Armor/AFV
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
For discussions on tanks, artillery, jeeps, etc.
Hosted by Darren Baker, Mario Matijasic
Absolute worst model kit you encountered?
SpaceXhydro
Joined: March 13, 2015
KitMaker: 418 posts
Armorama: 235 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 06:06 PM UTC
Kevlar06
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 11:32 PM UTC
I agree with Top Smith and Alex who allude to the perspective of the modeler-- I think it depends on what you're used to seeing in your experience. In the late 50s and early 60s there wasn't much out there-- therefore when Renwal produced something it was the "Dragon" of its day, now more modern modelers would look at those kits as "crap". I for one bought Aurora kits as much for the box art and color of the plastic, but at .29 cents a kit, they were just as much fun to blow up with a firecracker. As my modeling taste became more sophisticated, I progressed to the newer and "more accurate" (and more expensive) Tamiya armor kits, but they had rubber-band tracks too, whereas the old Aurora tank kits had vinyl cast tracks. In my earlier post, I mentioned two kits I'd attempted to build and couldn't finish-- a Life-Like and a Lindberg kit form the 60s, but there were other kits by those manufactures that were quite nice for the time (and a few still are, since they are the only game in town). I applaud companies like Glencoe who took some of these kits and re-marketed them since that's all that may be out there. My concern today is the number of new kits being sold at really high prices, but with issues and problems which put them back into the "dog" category. This seems to me to be a bit of a letdown for the consumer. At least when I was a kid, .29 cents didn't break the bank, but an $80 dog today is no fun, regardless of the "build-ability". I'm beginning to look at new kits with a slightly "jaded eye" and usually wait for a review, before deciding to buy, but agreeing with Alex, sometimes the fun is in the challenge. By the way-- can anyone remember the Israeli "Starfix" line of kits? not only were they sometimes old 1950s Aurora knock offs, they were extremely bad molds-- have to be the worst manufactured ever. VR, Russ
disorderly
Joined: June 07, 2014
KitMaker: 125 posts
Armorama: 114 posts
Posted: Sunday, March 27, 2016 - 11:45 PM UTC
Without doubt, my worst kit was the Mach 2 1/72 Piasecki H-25 helicopter.A complete pig of a kit.
Garrand
Joined: October 27, 2009
KitMaker: 195 posts
Armorama: 194 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 12:39 AM UTC
Quoted Text
By the way-- can anyone remember the Israeli "Starfix" line of kits? not only were they sometimes old 1950s Aurora knock offs, they were extremely bad molds-- have to be the worst manufactured ever. VR, Russ
Yes, I have an A-4 from them still, with vague dreams of fixing it up using old skool techniques. I also have a few PM kits in my stash, nearly as bad (but some interesting subjects...Yak-17 FREX?)
Damon.
Namnut
Joined: February 22, 2005
KitMaker: 41 posts
Armorama: 31 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 12:56 AM UTC
I don't build much in the way armor.. but the wirts airplane kit EVER was the Mach 2 C-123 Invader...
SO much so that it felw into a wall, leaving a smaal scrathc on said wall... and NO plane....
Harald
SO much so that it felw into a wall, leaving a smaal scrathc on said wall... and NO plane....
Harald
spartan01
Joined: December 25, 2011
KitMaker: 314 posts
Armorama: 244 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 02:52 AM UTC
working on the Tamiya t-62 and the fit is atrocious I don't think I have ever had to use so much putty on a kit before 
ivanhoe6
Joined: April 05, 2007
KitMaker: 2,023 posts
Armorama: 1,234 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 03:12 AM UTC
My kit was Renwall's Ontos. Probably was a bit too advanced at the time for me. The recoilless rifles kept drooping every which way is the thing I remember most. I fought it with more tube glue added to solve the problem. Big gluey fingerprints everywhere, I almost cried.
Did consider another try when the kit was re-released but never pulled the trigger. The kit later became one with a firecracker
Did consider another try when the kit was re-released but never pulled the trigger. The kit later became one with a firecracker
PRH001
Joined: June 16, 2014
KitMaker: 681 posts
Armorama: 603 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 06:13 AM UTC
I have a friend who gave me my start in armor modeling and pushed me away from most of the dogs out there.
If winged things can be discussed on this thread, that same friend bet me that I couldn't build the Glenco Albatros D.III in 1/48 scale. Two different asymmetrical profiles for the fuselage halves, an engine that looked like a bug that had been stepped on and landing gear that looked like it might have been in a crash.
I got it done, but that was 3 1/2 months of torture and wishing I'd kept my mouth shut.
PH
If winged things can be discussed on this thread, that same friend bet me that I couldn't build the Glenco Albatros D.III in 1/48 scale. Two different asymmetrical profiles for the fuselage halves, an engine that looked like a bug that had been stepped on and landing gear that looked like it might have been in a crash.
I got it done, but that was 3 1/2 months of torture and wishing I'd kept my mouth shut.
PH
samkidd
Joined: January 06, 2006
KitMaker: 530 posts
Armorama: 450 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 06:41 AM UTC
For me it had to be the 1/35 M29C Weasel from a company called Bluetank. It actually was closer to 1/twentysomething in scale and had horribly toylike cast in details. The stern was wrong and it had tracks that didn't even resemble correctly patterned ones.
All that was bad enough, but it also came terribly warped and accompanied by a set of awful figures that were actually 1/48 scale. Basically, I remember it being something of a perfect storm of "who cares" and "it's close enough".
Jim
LSA
All that was bad enough, but it also came terribly warped and accompanied by a set of awful figures that were actually 1/48 scale. Basically, I remember it being something of a perfect storm of "who cares" and "it's close enough".
Jim
LSA
saurkrautwerfer
Joined: March 28, 2016
KitMaker: 44 posts
Armorama: 44 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 07:43 AM UTC
While not likely as bad as anything you all have been through, my Italeri M4A3 76W was a pretty rough build. The plastic seemed like all it took was a funny look and it'd snap. A lot of the suspension isn't mounted on the provided pegs simply because they snapped off. The fit between upper and lower hull was painful too.
Then to top it all off the Olive Drab spray I was using despite being from the same brand and nominally the same color....wasn't at all the same once I started with a new can. This handily lined up with the changeover from hull to turret (as I foolishly started weathering and detail painting the lower hull while I built the turret), so I had to repaint the whole thing.
Also the tracks are terrible, they're just the right balance of too long and too rigid post painting to get them to actually rest on the return rollers.
Then to top it all off the Olive Drab spray I was using despite being from the same brand and nominally the same color....wasn't at all the same once I started with a new can. This handily lined up with the changeover from hull to turret (as I foolishly started weathering and detail painting the lower hull while I built the turret), so I had to repaint the whole thing.
Also the tracks are terrible, they're just the right balance of too long and too rigid post painting to get them to actually rest on the return rollers.
Kuno-Von-Dodenburg
Joined: February 20, 2007
KitMaker: 1,453 posts
Armorama: 1,319 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 03:17 PM UTC
There are plenty of turkeys to choose from, but after careful consideration my nomination must go to the RPM 1/35 Minenräumer. What a pile of crap that is. I gave up about 1/3 of the way through and binned the thing.
The worst one I've built and actually completed was the Emhar 1/35 Mark IV "Male".
- Steve
The worst one I've built and actually completed was the Emhar 1/35 Mark IV "Male".
- Steve
spongya
Associate Editor
Joined: February 01, 2005
KitMaker: 2,365 posts
Armorama: 1,709 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 04:14 PM UTC
Does resin count? Sovereign's Sd.kfz7 halftrack was horrible. I did not finish it.
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.
vikingtanker
Joined: August 23, 2002
KitMaker: 43 posts
Armorama: 43 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 06:05 PM UTC
ANYTHING from SKIF, which I'm pretty sure is Russian for SucKer Its F'ed up.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 06:12 PM UTC
Quoted Text
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.
When did someone nominate the Miniart Bulldozer here?
Rforand
Joined: July 14, 2013
KitMaker: 108 posts
Armorama: 89 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 06:45 PM UTC
Been modelling for almost 40 yrs and I believe there is only 1 kit I never finished that would be the MPC Israeli Sherman. It was quite a dog and ended up bouncing off the wall
PRH001
Joined: June 16, 2014
KitMaker: 681 posts
Armorama: 603 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 07:21 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.
When did someone nominate the Miniart Bulldozer here?
Yep. It was mentioned by someone back on page 2 along with the Tauro A7V...
MikeyBugs95
Joined: May 27, 2013
KitMaker: 2,210 posts
Armorama: 1,712 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 07:59 PM UTC
Quoted Text
By the way-- can anyone remember the Israeli "Starfix" line of kits? not only were they sometimes old 1950s Aurora knock offs, they were extremely bad molds-- have to be the worst manufactured ever. VR, Russ
I remember those... Not that I was around when they were put out, but because I made the mistake of actually buying a Starfix Me-109. Scrapped it shortly after assembling it. Definitely one of the worst kits I've seen.
Kevlar06
Joined: March 15, 2009
KitMaker: 3,670 posts
Armorama: 2,052 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 08:19 PM UTC
Yep, Starfix I think has to be the worst manufacturer out there I've ever seen-- we wouldn't even carry the kits in the Hobby shop I worked at because we felt they would discourage model building in general. You used to be able to find them in the "dollar stores" occasionally, but even spending a buck on one was .99 cents to much! It's strange that manufactures like Mach-2, Battle Axe, RPM, SMER and others managed to make it, but I guess it's the subject matter-- if you're the only manufacturer who makes a product, "people will come". Sounds like "Field of Dreams" doesn't it? I've heard some of these companies moonlight for other manufacturers too-- I think (could be wrong) that SMER makes the plastic for Pacific Coast Model Kits, which aren't too bad. VR, Russ
Biggles2
Joined: January 01, 2004
KitMaker: 7,600 posts
Armorama: 6,110 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 08:33 PM UTC
Any Heller 1/400 ship kits. Total lack of detail, release pin marks on every possible surface, massive putty work required for poor fit (and the pin marks), and out-of-scale armaments. Their sailing ship models, on the other hand, are quite nice! 
IPLawyer
Joined: March 18, 2015
KitMaker: 71 posts
Armorama: 63 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 08:54 PM UTC
Quoted Text
My kit was Renwall's Ontos. Probably was a bit too advanced at the time for me. The recoilless rifles kept drooping every which way is the thing I remember most. I fought it with more tube glue added to solve the problem. Big gluey fingerprints everywhere, I almost cried.
Did consider another try when the kit was re-released but never pulled the trigger. The kit later became one with a firecracker
I've been in the middle of building the Revell reissue of the Ontos for over a yenow. From reviews I've seen of the Academy Ontos and my experience with the Revell reissue, unless it's a nostalgia thing for you (which I understand . . . I have a Spider-man model and an Incredible Hulk model that I am working on that have serious fit issues, just like the smaller Aurora originals), I would go with the Academy Ontos.
I actually figured out how much to get the guns more or less aligned: I tried dry fitting the gun pieces together in various combinations until I had 6 guns that were close to the same length, then glued together each assembly of 3 guns and stood each assembly vertically on the ends of the guns to ensure they were the same length, I then used Vallejo paint bottles to support the guns in place and ensure they were parallel.
The problems I encountered related such things as having a tab for one of the gun pieces snap during assembly which led to me drilling a hole in the piece and inserting part of a paper clip to strengthen the join, having the hinge on one of the breech doors snap, the fact that not every breech door can be use on each gun, the fact that one of the breach doors fits none of the guns, the sink holes in the sides of several of the gun pieces, the general misalignment of the gun pieces, general lack of uniformity of parts or portions of parts that should be identical,the huge sink holes in the figures, etc.
I've spent 10x as much time correcting things than actually putting together parts.
Cantstopbuyingkits
Joined: January 28, 2015
KitMaker: 2,099 posts
Armorama: 1,920 posts
Posted: Monday, March 28, 2016 - 11:41 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextQuoted Text
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.
When did someone nominate the Miniart Bulldozer here?
Yep. It was mentioned by someone back on page 2 along with the Tauro A7V...
I re-read page 2 and didn't see any mention of that kit
PRH001
Joined: June 16, 2014
KitMaker: 681 posts
Armorama: 603 posts
Posted: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 - 12:39 AM UTC
I was surprised to read about the Miniart D7 dozer here; I found it an amazing (but challenging) build.[/quote]
When did someone nominate the Miniart Bulldozer here?[/quote]
Yep. It was mentioned by someone back on page 2 along with the Tauro A7V...[/quote]
I re-read page 2 and didn't see any mention of that kit [/quote]
My bad, it was on page 1 about the 9th or 10th post.
When did someone nominate the Miniart Bulldozer here?[/quote]
Yep. It was mentioned by someone back on page 2 along with the Tauro A7V...[/quote]
I re-read page 2 and didn't see any mention of that kit
[/quote]My bad, it was on page 1 about the 9th or 10th post.
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 - 12:42 PM UTC
Quoted Text
You guys realize that there is a "Build a Dog" campaign fixin to kick off on April 1?
April 1- Is there some hidden meaning here?
M4A1Sherman
Joined: May 02, 2013
KitMaker: 4,403 posts
Armorama: 4,078 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 - 12:50 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextMy kit was Renwall's Ontos. Probably was a bit too advanced at the time for me. The recoilless rifles kept drooping every which way is the thing I remember most. I fought it with more tube glue added to solve the problem. Big gluey fingerprints everywhere, I almost cried.
Did consider another try when the kit was re-released but never pulled the trigger. The kit later became one with a firecracker
I've been in the middle of building the Revell reissue of the Ontos for over a yenow. From reviews I've seen of the Academy Ontos and my experience with the Revell reissue, unless it's a nostalgia thing for you (which I understand . . . I have a Spider-man model and an Incredible Hulk model that I am working on that have serious fit issues, just like the smaller Aurora originals), I would go with the Academy Ontos.
I actually figured out how much to get the guns more or less aligned: I tried dry fitting the gun pieces together in various combinations until I had 6 guns that were close to the same length, then glued together each assembly of 3 guns and stood each assembly vertically on the ends of the guns to ensure they were the same length, I then used Vallejo paint bottles to support the guns in place and ensure they were parallel.
The problems I encountered related such things as having a tab for one of the gun pieces snap during assembly which led to me drilling a hole in the piece and inserting part of a paper clip to strengthen the join, having the hinge on one of the breech doors snap, the fact that not every breech door can be use on each gun, the fact that one of the breach doors fits none of the guns, the sink holes in the sides of several of the gun pieces, the general misalignment of the gun pieces, general lack of uniformity of parts or portions of parts that should be identical,the huge sink holes in the figures, etc.
I've spent 10x as much time correcting things than actually putting together parts.
Ah, RENWALL- Forgot to mention their "Skysweeper" Automatic 76mm(?) Anti-aircraft gun; ditto the "nothing fit", "sink-holes", "general misalignment", etc, etc. Also, an "extra added attraction": Styrene Cement would NOT work with the plastic used in that kit, and I tried virtually all of the cements that were available at the time, i.e, TESTORS, MONOGRAM, REVELL, and AMBROID... No go...
pod3105
Joined: August 08, 2010
KitMaker: 466 posts
Armorama: 444 posts
Posted: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 - 01:52 PM UTC
Mine was the delightful Glencoe models 1/32 BTR-50.
A combinations of soft, missing and totally eroneous detail throughout, hollow backed road wheels, poor fit of parts, a "spring" in the plastic that meant getting pieces to stay together was "challanging" to say the least, something that was meant to represent the Dushka-but looked more at home on some sci-fi build tbh....single piece figures with massive sink holesthat made them look like eviscerated gnomes and all of this represented ( sans figures) in wait for it..... THIS IS NOT A TYPO - 42 pieces!
I still bet the thing into submission though and I'm quite pleased with the end-result.
A combinations of soft, missing and totally eroneous detail throughout, hollow backed road wheels, poor fit of parts, a "spring" in the plastic that meant getting pieces to stay together was "challanging" to say the least, something that was meant to represent the Dushka-but looked more at home on some sci-fi build tbh....single piece figures with massive sink holesthat made them look like eviscerated gnomes and all of this represented ( sans figures) in wait for it..... THIS IS NOT A TYPO - 42 pieces!
I still bet the thing into submission though and I'm quite pleased with the end-result.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.