If I implied that a mega kit is bad I apologize. What I am saying is are we reaching a point of diminishing return with the newer kits? The level of molding today is excellent. One way to improve some detail is to make separate parts instead of molding them on the larger pieces. They use slide molds today in some areas but it is expensive.I don’t realistically think there are many more levels of molding detail to be achieved. I think additional parts will be the trend to increase detail. For me I am reaching my its good enough level. I do not want to build a track with 8 parts per link. I like single link track or maybe a link with a couple end connectors. I lack the patience of the wooden ship modelers having to add one plank at a time. I would like to be done with about 40 hours or less in a kit. But that is me
Again I want to insist that evolution does not mean more parts.
Minor has workable, ready to use tracks 3D printed in one run:
That can be an example of how modelling can improve without adding complication, the opposite in fact.
i like the variety and choices available for more detail. As someone said, All models are wrong, but some are useful. If I learn something new from building a kit, then it is useful. I have boxes of kits in my stash that are opened just to make me dig deeper into a subject and then may get put back into the stash. Please don’t tell the wife!
I’ve considered this question quite a while now and I don’t beleive there’s a difinative answer to “that’s enough”. I think it’s a matter of personal preference and commitment to complete a particular model. We’re all trying to build or create something we can admire and, perhaps vainly, show off our talent. As you’ll notice in the dialog here it seems we universally agree it’s a question of the manufacturers intent when producing a high part count kit. As stated so eloquently a lot of parts doesn’t equate more detail necessarily, it’s just more parts. I’m glad they’re trying though, we have choices now that we used to dream about. A fully detailed interior? Man that’s cool if you could see it, an M42 Duster in my mind would be the perfect subject for a detailed interior given it’s garage door sized access hatch and open gun tub, an M48 with it’s swing away louvered doors and removeable engine deck lend itself well to an engine and engine bay detail, both are covered and executed well by AM companies and model makers. They’re trying but they’re missing the mark though and that’s what is so disappointingly frustrating. I think any one of us appreciates a good accurate base kit we can take to the next level if we choose but give us a sensible starting point. Tracks that weigh hundreds of pounds need to sag, road wheels need to articulate unevenly over obstacles and for Pete’s sake steering wheels should be able to point left or right especially if it is a multiwheel steer vehicle, a tank’s turret turns and rightly so otherwise what’s the point? Tamiya took forty some odd years to make an accurate M551 Sheridan, and then offered the grille screens and gun tube separately. That in itself is demonstrative of manufacturers intent. Mega-part kits? Heck yeah! If it’s the right parts.
FWIW, I think the trend in increased fidelity of detail is reaching a point where current CAD and CAM have essentially give us all that’s possible with the technology of two-part injection molding. Designers are working around the limitation of the two-part mold to create complex 3D shapes in single parts by breaking those shapes up into more and more individual parts to be assembled by the modeler. The combination of the individual parts into the final assembly by the modeler creates something that the two-part mold simply cannot.
However, there is a natural, consumer-acceptable limit to this trend, and we see that limit being discussed here: How many parts are too many parts?
Future advances really need to come from manufacturers who will improve on the actual design and engineering side of the process. Better design to take advantage of the capability of the technology to achieve a level of detail rather than simply making more parts to achieve that same level. Tamiya is an example of how kit design and engineering can be combined to improve detail while keeping assembly as simple as possible. Tamiya also demonstrates that IF greater fidelity of detail is demanded, there is a price in complexity that must be paid. Armor modelers may not see this in Tamiya’s armor kits, but many, many other Tamiya kits are, compared to their armor kits, very complex (and expensive). Clearly, there’s also a limit to what improved design and engineering can do.
The same design and engineering use of CAD and CAM also allows the kit makers to add even more details, such as interiors, faster and easier than the older technology of hand-mastering and manual mold cutting. I’d submit the approach to the consumer-acceptable limit may be possible through improvements in the way kits are marketed and sold. As an example, I’d submit MiniArt’s approach where kits of the same subjects are sold with and without interiors.
In the future, it could be possible to streamline the customer sales side. Customers (i.e. us, the model builders) might have the option to individually order kits with just the features we want directly from the manufacturer. So, for example, you’d go onto MiniArt’s website and “build” the kit you want from a list of options, and MiniArt then boxes up only those parts you need and want before shipping the kit to you.
Unfortunately, there are cost and price penalties that would have to be paid to this approach, but the kit consumer would get just what he or she wants.
In the end, though, I think consumers will continue to drive the train, so to speak. Kit makers will continue to make and offer kits that continue to sell. Buying the kits you like and avoiding those you don’t is really the only message that matters to the kit makers.
How many parts are too many parts? Anytime you buy a kit, you tell the manufacture your answer.
I don’t know if Miniarts approach will be the norm. The reason I say this is the costs to make the interior are the same as making the exterior. If only a few want the interior it means the production costs have to be distributed across both internal and exterior only variants… Auto manufacturers resolved this issue by making more extras standard. You really only have a few options compared to the early 70’s. However every buyer pays for the extras they may not have wanted.
The current molding processes can make a lot of sprues quickly and that is the basis of relatively cheap kit costs. I see 3D printing as a way of making complex parts for our kits. However the rate of production is to low compared to injection molding. Making it play the part of specalized parts like slide moldings currently do. 3D is improving its quality and I see it playing a larger role in the future but at a cost.
I do think future premium kits will definitely be multimedia kits but they will be for a premium price. Dragon had several kits that were released with multi media parts but when they ran out those parts they went back to plastic. Continued miltimedia kit production requires reconstructing those parts as those kits are re-released. Otherwise it is an initial release only like Dragon has done.
MiniArt’s not the only one of the “major” kit manufacturer’s to offer both interior and exterior-only versions of the same basic kit / subject. They were just the first that comes to mind. However, you are no doubt correct about the way design and production costs for the entirety of the product line are passed on to the consumer.
MiniArt’s design and engineering approach, however, also supports the way that they mix and match components that are common to more than one version of a subject or that can be sold separately as stand-alone kits. They get a lot of additional sales opportunities from their modular kit designs and that modular approach also makes it very easy for them to reduce overall kit complexity (based on parts count) by simply leaving out entire subassemblies to create versions of kits of the exact same subject which have different and limited options and features (such as full, partial, or no interiors).
I’m not sure if I actually expect any kit maker (at least none of the “majors”) to offer direct consumer selected options any time soon, but with the internet, CAD/CAM, and some version of MiniArt’s modular design approach, it is a technical possibility. The real obstacle is probably that the size of the overall market for scale models is too small to support what might be fairly small profit margins with such an approach. Labor coast would have to be streamlined in a tightly controlled “lean” flow and individual shipping costs would have to be managed. In the end, this sort of sales would probably mean increasing the costs to a level that would likely be unacceptable to the potential consumer. Still, customizable direct sales are technically possible for an efficient, lean company that can figure out a cost savings shipping method.
In regard to 3D printing, there are a number of issues that I think will inhibit its incorporation into mass production by the major kit makers.
As you note, low production rate is one of these and is probably the most important right now when it comes to including 3D printed parts in kits. I’m sure it’s been done by some kit maker, but like the occasional “limited edition” injection molded kits that contain resin parts, it can only be taken so far (more as a marking gimmick than a sustainable manufacturing / production method).
I know a lot of modelers believe that the day is right around the corner when they will be able to simply download 3D printable files and shift the actual manufacture of kits into their own workshops. However, my personal experience with 3D design and desktop printing suggests otherwise to me. For the future, 3D printing will be relegated to the mostly AM and low-volume kit makers (the “garage kit” industry).
Desktop 3D printing definitely has a place in the modeler’s shop, but for now that place is mostly for the creation of parts and accessories needed by that modeler for his or her own projects. 3D print file sharing among scale modelers is growing, but as more and more folks gain experience with the entire process, from idea to physical model in hand, they are also learning that it is in the design creation function where the majority of the value is added. Sharing, giving away, or even selling the 3D designs and print files almost totally eliminates any potential for profit. The reason being is that once a file has been shared the creator no longer has any control over the number of additional shares that can be made. Each additional share totally eliminates a potential sale.
No business could stay in business if it spends its money on creating a product which it can only profit from selling once.
(It is worth noting that the tabletop gaming and super hero figure collecting communities are leveraging the patron system to keep up the supply of relatively low cost 3D .stl figure files which are purchased, downloaded and desktop printed. FWIW, though, I believe the somewhat unique nature of the gaming and sci-fi fan communities enable this. There are simply a lot of folks out there creating a lot of 3D figure model designs. Their overhead is essentially non-existent, most doing the work for fun rather than real livelihood sustaining profit from their homes part-time. In other words, this is not really a sustainable business model but rather an example of a defined community social experience.)
However, I am aware of several “garage kit” manufacturers (with apologies for the term) that lean heavily on 3D design and printing for both mastering parts to be produced using RTV and resin casting and for direct inclusion of the parts in their kits. Some are even using CAD and 3D renders to produce very polished looking assembly instructions, too. Of course, AM product makers are also using direct 3D printed part sales, but their production and sales rates are relatively low.
I know of at least one low volume kit maker (better term than “garage kit” maker?) who is considering selling some of his kits with parts he manufactures combined with 3D print files to be printed by the modeler in his or her own shop. Purchasers will have the option to pay less for the kit if they’re willing and able to print SOME of the parts on their own desktop 3D printer. He anticipates that he can still retain overall control of his designs by only releasing some of the 3D part print files which must then be combined with the parts he will actually produce and ship to the purchaser. The purchaser will not be able to make a whole model from the 3D print files, so he or she must purchase the entire package. Sharing those files with someone else would probably not cut into profits for future kit sales.
I think this is a pretty good example of the forward thinking of the possible merging of technology and marketing to combine to offer a more individual, customizable scale model product. However, to paraphrase Churchill, this is not the real beginning, but perhaps we’re seeing the ideas of the beginning when it comes to the future of mode kit design, engineering and marketing.
Interesting topic. I may have hit my “good enough” point with kits a few years back. Thought it’s probably also related to having a wife, kids and a house. I can certainly afford more now than I could when I was riding my bike to the local hobby shop but I just don’t have the same time to spend on the hobby.
The Miniart kits are a great example. I love their accessory sets but I’ve yet to complete one of their kits. Even some of their “smaller” truck kits, I’ve ended up trading them off before getting started. Knowing that most of my work never makes it to the paint stage, it’s to the point where a 2,000+ piece kit just isn’t worth the investment in time. While I’d love to build of other their T-55 variants with an interior, deep down I just know that I’ll never finish it and I’ll only be frustrated by the high parts count.
There was a time when almost every kit I bought “required” every piece of aftermarket I could get my hands on. These days I’m cutting out the Photo-etch or at least getting the smaller PE sets that are focused specifically on engine screens. I really don’t need to replicate every M113 tie down with a piece of PE. Those individual link sets where there are 6 separate pieces to each link? They’re out too.
With all that said, I do appreciate that there is some variety in the market. Being a huge fan of the M113, I’ve got stacks of them in the stash. AFV Club, Academy and Tamiya. These days, the Tamiya kit is my favorite. If I’m dedicated, I can knock them out in a weekend without even looking at the instructions. I’m willing to sacrifice the accuracy for the sake of a quick and relaxing build. Do I really need the high end, multipart AFV Club wheels when I’m only going to foul them up with a thick coat of paint because I was rushing to finish up before dinner?
I’m doing a little early holiday shopping for myself and picked up both the Meng M1A1 AIM and Tamiya M1A2 OIF kits. Meng is the only manufacturer who puts out an Abrams that I haven’t built yet so I was a little curious having enjoyed their Bradley. The Tamiya kit is something to do for fun.
Speaking of Meng, they are quickly becoming one of my go to companies. I haven’t built that many of their kits (none of their WWII kits) but of the ones I have built, I’d rank them as “Tamiya+.” A shake and bake kit but you have to leave it in the oven twice as long. I’ve found them to be a nice mix of detail while not being overly engineered.
Bottom, line for me…
Maybe it’s nostalgia but these days I seem to get more enjoyment out of old school modeling–adding my own nonslip texture and styrene details. Those older and/or simpler kits usually also means less time on the floor with a flashlight looking for some little plastic dot.
Greg,
I have to say - and here I’m sure I’m not helping the general philosophical content so far - but to put it simply (and I’m more or less incapable of much else) I really don’t think that as modellers we’ve ever, ever had it so good. Not just in the sheer scope of kits now available (and there are dreams made true out there at the moment), but in the quality too.
However, the latter attribute may have gotten slightly out of hand. For example, I have a Bronco GAZ 69, desperately needed for one of my more obscure projects, yet the parts count is mad, and the build overwhelming. I have no confidence that anything at all will fit when it comes to the final sequence - I simply do not need to build the model like the real thing. I do not require a fully detailed engine, yet have struggled on just in case there was a vital fit that otherwise would have compromised the build. Ditto the Roden M37 truck; the only game in town, yet again, I’m building the damn thing like I was on an actual assembly line. I DON’T NEED AN ENGINE! Dear God, how many times does one see a model displayed with the bonnet (hood) up? Not many. Let me build the damn thing and get as realistic a model as possible - as possible; please, for the love of God, don’t suck the fun out of the hobby. Sadly, Trumpeter are beginning to follow this mad trend, seemingly set by Bronco, then others.
Conversely, or perversely, I’m currently working on an ancient Tamiya Sturmpanzer IV (watch this space folks); now, this is a kit that dates from 1977 (I think), and needs more than a bit of tender loving care, but Oh! What a joy in actually constructing something that fits and doesn’t have a zillion parts! Bliss. I am sure this reflects badly on me.
Now, you can use that as a rod to beat me with, but please, if we are to continue at all, let’s have some sort of model option whereby one can opt for the “Full Interior” with something that says “Partial interior including breech block and radios/driver’s compartment”.
I appreciate that as I fully acknowledge, we are where we are, but just because something can be done, doesn’t (necessarily) mean it has to be done. Plastic models for Dummies - that’ll be me!
I’m sure I’m not adding much to the argument, but as George C. Scott says in his portrayal of Patton “Now you know how I feel” - sorry if I’ve parodied this inaccurately - and I’m certainly not equating my comments as worthy as those of the great General(!)
Brian
A bit off-topic ramble here as to the future of this hobby…
Truth is, this hobby is driven by those in Europe, Asian Rim, Russia, and former Eastern Pact nations; it is not driven by the USA and Canada. North America may be the consumers, but the culture of the Asians with their Cosplays, Airsofts, trinkets, souvenirs, toys, art and design, and love for the cute and adorable is what drives the modeling market, meaning that this hobby won’t DIE. Modeling will surely live on overseas as the local hobby shop, bookstore, video store, and other mom and pop stores phase out in North America.
That said, modeling in North America has taken a turn for 3D printing and design. Instead of kits, hobbyists are painting 3D printed statues with little to no gluing or assembly…these folks don’t need to read directions or use tools to sand or file or snip or glue. They just go right into painting. Some 3D printed statues even come sold as primed! Therefore, we modelers on this Forum are the “Old School” bunch who start with bare disassembled parts like LEGOs. North America is rising in 3D, whereas overseas still retains the “build, glue, prime, and paint” hobby.
In the future, we need to discern who is a modeler and who is a painter (of preassembled kits, statues, figures, and 3D prints). Not many will start with sprues and snippers in the way the future is turning out to be as painting of objects is getting easier with 3D printing and no sprues.
Wargaming is taking off with Kickstarter with many fundraisers achieving 200-400% OVER asking goal. If the Wargame Kickstarter wants $4,000 USD, chances are the end of the campaign gets $150,000 USD! There are a LOT of lurkers, painters, artists, Studio Scale Modelers, prop collectors, and hidden modelers out there that don’t post anything, ever—and they never will. The culture of modeling is such that even as Railroad modelers, this hobby is viewed as childish because models are so expensive and fragile, not to mention the Time Sinks involved in making them. Honestly, the money spent on kits can be spent elsewhere until people see the finished product and then wonder how you ever built and painted it (and they want it). Outsiders don’t really want unbuilt kits (unless to sell for profit); they want finished one because they lack the skills and the patience to build and paint them.
We modelers who yearn for custom art and something we made by ourselves didn’t abandon the hobby. I recall a longtime modeler tell me a few times that “He likes things.” Hence, he keeps on modeling because kits are just some of the things that he likes.
As long as Asia keeps loving their “cute” culture, Anime, and toys, and as long as Europe and Russia keep producing realistic figures, this hobby won’t die, even if all North American modelers do is spend money for overseas hobby imports.
@Trisaw You make it sound as if the fast food culture is eating its way into the modelling hobby.
Whipped cream? Whip out the can and spray it on!
Filters and washes? Get the pre-mixed cans and jars
Want a model? Buy an assembled and painted one, can be delivered with a brass plaque with your name on it.
Want a drink? Buy a ready mixed one, just pull of the lid and enjoy
I build (OK, when I actually manage to get some time for it) models because I like building and to some extent painting.
If I didn’t I would settle for nice 3D-renders that can be twisted and turned on the screen. No more dusting of crowded display cabinets. A stash of 10,000 models takes up a couple of USB-sticks or less.
Not all new models either want to be the best, most detailed model ever and for both very detailed and less sophisticated models, sometimes they still miss the mark in terms of accuracy or fit. There are still bad models out there for both a lot and a little money.
The real determinator will be the market, of course. If models are too expensive, people won’t buy them in sufficient numbers to make a profit. If they aren’t good engough, even if cheap, they still won’t buy them.As with anything bsaed on personal tastes, there is a huge spectrum of whys and hows and whens for modellers buying models. If a model company gets the answer wrong too many times, they don’t last. Like any hobby endevour, it’s pretty purely a market driven thing.
A thing to think on as well, of course, is that as far as hobbies go, it’s still a pretty cheap one. People pay a lot more if their hobby is piloting aircraft, skiing, scuba diving, etc. Activities like that can cost hundreds of dollars a day. We get days of enjoyment out of a singe $40-150 kit. Still pretty cheap, all things considered.
+1 for working on decent 70’s to 90’s vintage kits and doing some additional detailing in general than working with newer complex super mega kits.
In the hot rod hobby with some of the tuning software one has to buy credits in order to use the product. When additional changes are required more credits have to be purchased. The products are either encrypted or use dongles to restrict unauthorized use. It’s proved very lucrative to those in the business.
Maybe the 3D world of model printing for the home work station could do something similar - x number of credits allows x number of parts to be printed.
@Uncle-Heavy well said!
Wink - America McDonald’s fast food modeling mindsets! Order up via next day shipping - large bottle McMig dark wash, a medium bottle McMig filter and a whopper jar of AK rain streaks plus a finger licking side of Wilder pigments. $35 please!
And to think in the old days we had to mix own washes and grind up our own pastel chalk…lol
Another truth of modeling is that these forums encompass just a partial view of the hobby of modeling. Not included are the Studio Scale Models, usually Sci-Fi, and huge…about five feet long for a spaceship and costing $5,000 to $12,000 USD! Yes, Dot-Commers and rich Millennials can afford them, and from what someone told me, they’re often already built and painted on commission and hush-hush so that the young wife of girlfriend wouldn’t know how much money was spent on this model kit by the single Bachelor.
So, no, there won’t be a limit as to the complexity of kits because kits encompass more than what is seen on Armorama. No offense, but the kits people build here aren’t the most expensive available on the market, usually under $100 USD. And with 3D-Printing, the quality and cost of kits can become astronomical. A lot of modeling has gone unseen in the public’s eye.
If one goes into a comicbook store, one can see the wide range of prepaints, statues, dolls, and other offerings that make the hobby of kits and parts kind of old-fashioned. Many hobbyists just want to paint or collect and buy statues. Others want to weather and buy prepaints.
Model kits are similar to LEGOs. Years to decades ago, LEGO designs were quite primitive and boxy. Now, LEGOs are very realistic, with some kits very complex with curves and smooth surfaces and having numerous parts, not to mention expensive. One can collect LEGOs and sell them for profit if unopened and unbuilt…they’re that precious to some hobbyists. The LEGO Star Destroyer has 4,784 pieces and retails for $700 USD.
@trisaw Don’t get me started on LEGOs! That’s my other big passion and fortunately one that my kids also enjoy. You’re absolutely correct with everything you mentioned.
In some of the LEGO groups that I follow, people will post pictures of their most recent hauls, sometimes totaling close to 2 grand…and it’s only a couple sets. They have similar discussions to this one too, $700 Star Destroyers, $800 Millennium Falcons, a couple different $400 Harry Potter sets…where will it end?
Even opened and built, you can get a pretty good return on LEGO sets once they are discontinued.
Similar to this hobby, you start out with the more basic kits and work your way up…and then before you know it, your spouse says no more LEGO and silently wonders, “Did he and the kids just expand the LEGO train layout and city in the basement?”
I just find that picture very funny.
I can hear it at the estate sale auction the battle between collectors, “LET GO MY LEGO!!!”
Interesting subject.
Im from a younger generation, 20 odd years old. From my perspective, if manufacturers don’t make something new, such as interior or some odd designs, then it is not really attractive. Most people of my era get into figurines collection (no assembly), Gundam alike (which I find pretty expensive for their simplicity) orDnD/ Warhammer alike stuff (which are sometime insanely expensive because of the artificial rarity for their tabletop game), and these things are not really helping the military miniatures
The “good enough” point, imo, was achieved in the 2000s. Dragon was then leader of the military modelling, their kits are among the top in term of design and ease of assembly. They are still one of the most reputed brand on the market and their kits are generally “couldn’t go wrong” stuff. Nevertheless as you see in the recent years, Dragon can’t re-release kits forever, they couldn’t offer anything really new, then price increase for a rebox turn people off, continuing to produce old stuff does indeed make them more expensive over time.
The modular design is not something new, it was done even by Dragon in the past to miss match spues, it is more efficient this way. AFV Club T-34 /w interior have parts to actually build the other models of the series, though it is limited by some main parts. Takom, RFM, Miniart and now Border are getting very aggressive in this direction - kind of a shame that they all release similar vehicles even though they are not carbon copy of each other.
Companies find their way to open a larger market instead of relying on the same demographic. In a time when you have digital models and videogames with stunning details and customizable, traditional miniature is not viable, useless it has cult following like Warhammer stuff. The interior option are their solution. Many people in the past asked for it, many new people want more than just the empty shell, and so the interior option got the steam. And by designing the whole vehicle with interior, makers also have to design the exterior, therefore they can double release for different preference.
Companies like Tamiya still continue the old route, but nonetheless with changes and upgrades, from “good for its time, still acceptable” and “good price therefore good kit” to “accurate and detailed” and “good kit therefore good price” while keeping the ease of assembly. Look at current the military modeling release: PE parts are now norm in new kits, optional parts are generally expected. If one can’t do things right, there are a dozen other, so better do things correctly.
@Dinocamo, interesting point. My grandkids could careless about modelof any sort but a “Rocket Raccoon or Groot” figure is a whole different story.