True, there just needs to be a system that categorizes them instead of let the buyer beware.
I have not found a discernible problem or difference with purchased vs. gratis kit write-ups. That is an easy scarecrow to bayonet when the real problem is that the vast majority of modelers buy kits to build or to have something new to paint. The write-ups reflect that. The authors arenāt shilling for their benefactors, they simply donāt know or donāt care. The things that the OP is seeking just arenāt out there.
I will say that the preponderance of āwhatās in the boxā articles seem to be by website contributors trying to pay off a freebie . It doesnāt affect the objectivity or value of those write-ups, in my mind, simply because those articles are fundamentally worthless in first place. The people who should be complaining about them are the model companies, but I guess they consider it cheap advertising.
KL
2 Likes
I have read this a couple of times and canāt escape the conclusion that you believe that this is a practical idea.
KL
1 Like
My system would be more reliable reviews.
There is more than one critical flaw in my āplanā 
Itās so full of holes it could be used as engine grille mesh ā¦
1 Like
That is the hobby. Confusing reviews, flash, sinkmarks and bad fit. Nothing has really changed since I built my first model in 1963 except $$$. Ok now we have after market stuff and a ba-zillion more parts.
Cheers
3 Likes
The problem with subjectivity is ā¦ well, itās subjective.
4 Likes
I have done several reviews of models and books here on Armorama, so I can talk about my own experience.
First of all, making a review takes more work than it may seem, including taking photos of an acceptable level, write a coherent text, correct it, check spelling, etc. And for this reason it is not easy to find reviewers, not everyone is willing to spend all that time.
And of those who write reviews, we can not be experts on all fields. I have some (limited) knowledge on a few subjects but far from being an expert so I know I will not be able to point out all mistakes on any book or model.
Thus, despite I can mention any inaccuracy I may detect, I see my task as reporting quality or fit issues, and explain the best I can what will you get if you buy that kit or book. And taking enough photos to see any details you may need.
I am always open to improve my work, and appreciate feedback from more knowledgeable readers -thatās the advantage of reviews linked to forum topics.
it would be great to have detailed reviews from someone with a deep knowledge, who is also a modeller (a kit can have all the details but if the fit is poor or is full of flash, what is it worth?), but good luck finding that reviewer for every kit out thereā¦
5 Likes
Hey mate, I just look at reviews for the basic build. there are two things I look at . The Proās Then the cons. Depending on the manufacturing and cost I make my decisions. For instance you mentioned three of the top in of the line manufacturers in armor . One you didnāt was Italerie. the price is good the quality is good. No interior,but you cand always find that . good hunting and always keep Modelling. MERRY CHRISTMAS!
Ultimately . Every kit has flaws , it is up to the builder to decide what to correct.
In most cases of a poor review ( barring bad engineering) it is either the reviewer feeling the need to serve the model community by pointing out every flaw. Some cases a bad review is simply due to the builders skill set not being up to the task at hand.
If we want better reviews then we should supply them , with the good , bad abd how to do it all
2 Likes
Excellent thread, with great comments.
Perth Military Modeling was always the best go to site for worth while objective reviews in my experience. Sadly Terry hasnāt updated it in two years.
As for big name reviewers, most are OK, a few are fantastic but some are just as on the take with free goodies as anyone else that over values a good relationship with a certain manufacturer. Not calling names and giving examples but I definitely could.
As for picking the best new kit, I tend to look for build reviews that can show why one kit is a joy to build. Iām always looking for the good build experience and can fix details if thatās an annoyance. Major dimension errors are a turn off.
3 Likes
I question the assertion that anyone doing build reviews is āon the takeā. I make this qualification to distinguish build reviews from the open box write-ups which, because they provide such little information and value, cannot be taken seriously or viewed as anything more than advertising.
The problem with build reviews and build logs is that the authors often donāt know or care about the details of the subjects or arenāt good modelers. When I see an armor model with a half a tube of putty on it, I really question any claims about the kit being poorly engineered.
KL
2 Likes
@KurtLaughlin Kurt,
Iāll clarify as my intended commentary may not be clear. If the reviewer didnāt pay for the kit and has an open history of receiving lots and lots of kits from a specific manufacturer - be careful taking whatās said at face value.
3 Likes
PMMS was the go to for everyone. Honest, factual, etc. And Terry Ashley was not afraid to update a review if he was wrong about something AND leave the original in place with a correction below it - how honest is that! The problem with Terry and PMMS was that he came under a lot of Flak for being honest - especially from Dragon. Yeah people purported to be independent, but 90% of modellers saw through that and knew it was the manufacturers stooges. But like anything, you can only take so much, and his health issues only added to it all.
Terry has a facebook presence of sorts, but it is not PMMS re-incarnated. if you want to see what he is up to search him out āTerry Ashley - PMMSā
4 Likes
@petbat Peter,
Terry was indeed the voice of Truth in a wilderness infected by Dragon stooge reviews.
Thank you for the update info on Terry, that may motivate me to log into Facebook for the first time in four years.
2 Likes
what bother me about review is when they blow a small problem out of proportion like the takom jagdtiger rear when the rest of the kit is good (note: I might be biased on adjustement after building a unicraft kit)
Great commentary, 18Bravo. Can you tell me what kit was this worst kit of the century? Got me really curious.
AER ASU-57 (and all of itās offsprings).
Donāt walk. Run!!! 
Regards
- dutik
Got two of those. Bought one, forgot I had it already and bought another.
āRunā would be a most useful advice but I am determined to build it and win the battle against that abomination 
Lol I think I have 4 of those ASU-57s from various manufacturers. The Hobby Boss kit is by far the bestā¦. I think. AER, Maquette, TOGO and Hobby Boss. Theyāre buried in my stash and I havenāt seen them in a long time so Iām not 100% sure of the Maquette kit.