I’ve been thinking about a question while building models: fundamentally, what are the differences between plastic and metal models? Which material is more popular, and why?
From my experience so far: Plastic models are easier to assemble, offer rich detail, and are lightweight—great for complex shapes. They’re also easier to paint, sometimes producing unexpectedly good results. Metal models feel more solid and have a better tactile quality. Their parts are often more precise compared to plastic models. Many metal models also feature complex moving parts, and some can even actually operate, which gives a great sense of accomplishment.
For me, I personally prefer metal models , since I’m not very good at painting and would rather have a complete piece right after assembly. I’ve built T700 and DM135 in metal, and WS-15 in plastic. In my opinion, metal models are generally much more detailed and meet my standards for collection better.
(Disclaimer: That’s just my humble opinion. Slightly smiling face If you have different thoughts or experiences, I’d love to hear them — do you lean more toward metal or plastic kits, and why?)
What about you? What factors do you usually consider when choosing model materials? Which do you think is better for beginners or for collectors?
I don’t think there is a single answer, not even for an individual person.
There are more plastic than metal kits for most subjects.
For some subjects a metal kit is the only option, for many subjects a
plastic kit is the only option, some subjects even have multiple plastic kits.
If I wanted to build a Swedish Strv 74 I would have to scratch build based
on drawings and measuring & photographing one in a museum.
In the end it comes down to interest and personal opinion.
Some will scratch build in metal even if there is a plastic kit simply because
they want to work with metal (I am deply impressed by their skills even if
I would not attempt it myself). Some make wooden ship models from drawings
and absolutely refuse to use plastic, I would rather use plastic since it doesn’t
soak up water.
I think you’re absolutely right—different communities do have different preferences.
In my modeling circle, since we’re all aircraft engine enthusiasts, this topic often sparks debate. Some people say metal is better because it’s more detailed and has a premium feel, while plastic’s only real advantage is that it looks nice. Others argue plastic is better because it’s easier to paint in your favorite colors, and most importantly, it’s a bit cheaper than metal.
My friends actually got into a bit of an argument over this. Honestly, I think it got a little too heated for what’s supposed to be a fun hobby. At the end of the day, both materials have their strengths, and it really just comes down to personal taste.
If I would ever think about building stand-alone models of jet turbines think I would actually prefer metal.
Those turbine blades are too thin to be realistic in plastic, even in larger scales (my opinion or gut feeling, I may be wrong)
I would rather struggle with getting the correct colour than being irritated
at thick and clunky turbine blades.
Arguing over hobby preferences, especially heated arguments, is a pointless
waste of time and energy.
Edit: About the question in the topic title:
It is the individual builder/collector who needs to decide which subjects are worth
spending time and cash on. Thi applies to the choice of building materials.
There are also “multimedia” kits (plastic, metal rods, wires and chains, photo-etched metal, pieces cast in metal or resin, maybe even wood and textile) …
If by “worth” you are talking about lasting monetary value, it’s got to be metal all the way. Even your best assembled plastic kit to a professional standard once completed is almost certainly worth less than you paid for it, especially if you factor in the value of your time, paint, glue, after-market parts etc. whereas some metal kits, e.g. Pocher may well increase in value in time. If by “worth” you refer to the enjoyment you get out of making the kit, that may be something completely different and only you can decide which is appropriate for you. Or if you are referring to how challenging the kit is, that is equally applicable to both types. I did a Gecko kit recently and decided I would not do any more of their kits because the smallness of some of the parts and IMHO excessive use of PE parts (individual chain links for a tiny piece of chain that retains a towing hitch in 1/35th anyone?), which pushed the construction beyond enjoyment for me.
I totally agree with you on turbine blades — plastic often looks too chunky, especially for something as thin and sharp as fan blades. Metal really does a better job of capturing that realistic feel. And you’re right, at the end of the day it’s all about what each builder values most, whether it’s material, subject, or the challenge itself. Multimedia kits are fascinating too, though sometimes a bit intimidating with so many different materials to handle.
That’s a really good point about monetary value — plastic rarely holds up in terms of resale, whereas high-end metal kits like Pocher can even appreciate over time. I also like how you framed “worth” in terms of enjoyment and challenge, since those are just as important. Funny you mention Gecko — I’ve had similar experiences where the PE parts felt like more frustration than fun.
If you have different thoughts or experiences, I’d love to hear them — do you lean more toward metal or plastic kits, and why?)