The why of modeling hidden features

[49thStateRT]

I know it is kit specific, and the larger the scale the more likely there will be options for leaving more things open or in multiple positions, but I do question why some expensive 1/32nd scale kits have you model (and paint) things that are cool and all, but then are literally 100% hidden except maybe if you bend down and use a magnifying glass and light to look up an intake or exhaust.

Engines and radars are my big pet peeves, because they are often cool to model, but then why hide them. In the F-86D Sabre Dog I am working on there are no easy ways to show off the engine details or even to leave the radome open, unless you rig something up..

I know, I can just skip them, or maybe cut fake viewing "hatches" out of the body, but why do they even bother including them. It just raises the cost.

The other end of the extreme is an awesome kit like the 1/32 F-16 C/J by Tamiya that has many options, including a cart for the engine to be on display as if it were removed for maintenance. Or Meng AH-64 Longbow 1/35 scale is another good one.

 

[BarleyBop]

why do they even bother

For me it comes down to 'why do I model in the first place'... like so many closet guitarists who play without an audience, I enjoy the building part more than the showing part, and would continue to build if I never posted another pic, or invited another soul to my bench.
That's not to say that a forum like this isn't lots of fun, and a great source of inspiration and learning.

 

[Jakko]

If there's a way to show them without having to cut up the model, such as by building hatches or nose cones or something in opened positions, then there's a point: some modellers will build the model with those open. However, IMHO the kit should be designed in such a way that you can also build it "closed" — in which case you just put the bits that would be out of sight, in your spares box.

What I consider pointless is things like Zoukei-Mura's engine cylinders: even if you want to, you can't display those on the finished model.

I'm a firm believer in only building what (you think) will actually be visible. Everything else is wasted effort, if you ask me. It's usually better to err on the side of caution, though, and build slightly more than you think will be visible, but I certainly wouldn't include something like an aircraft's radar dish if I was to glue the nose cone shut.

 

[Pantherman]

I know it is kit specific, and the larger the scale the more likely there will be options for leaving more things open or in multiple positions, but I do question why some expensive 1/32nd scale kits have you model (and paint) things that are cool and all, but then are literally 100% hidden except maybe if you bend down and use a magnifying glass and light to look up an intake or exhaust.

Engines and radars are my big pet peeves, because they are often cool to model, but then why hide them. In the F-86D Sabre Dog I am working on there are no easy ways to show off the engine details or even to leave the radome open, unless you rig something up..

I know, I can just skip them, or maybe cut fake viewing "hatches" out of the body, but why do they even bother including them. It just raises the cost.

The other end of the extreme is an awesome kit like the 1/32 F-16 C/J by Tamiya that has many options, including a cart for the engine to be on display as if it were removed for maintenance. Or Meng AH-64 Longbow 1/35 scale is another good one.

I always take loads of photos of my builds so I can look back and remember what is hidden. Pantherman

 

[the Baron]

This is an old debate: why finish interior detail if it can't be seen. I'm in the "Because I know it's there" camp. I was a kid then teenager in the 70s and built Monogram airplanes, and Revell ships and airplanes. Between the engineering and the instructions, I learned a lot about those subjects from building them.

Today, I do moderate this somewhat, by taking into account the time it will take to detail an interior. But I still prefer to finish a kit's interior details, if I can.

Best regards,
Brad

 

[chip]

Seems like they could lower the price of kits if they got rid of the unseen parts. I guess it's a way to sell more kits.

 

[KINGSLUG]

I just spent several days building the frame and suspension on a bugatti in 1/12 that won't be seen..but i know its there and researching how it really looks and works allowed me to modify it a bit.
It gets you closer to something you cant buy...5 million bucks now..but I sure know more about this car than I ever did.

 

[Jakko]

Seems like they could lower the price of kits if they got rid of the unseen parts.

Perhaps, but I suspect it wouldn't be by as much as you might think. The real cost of a model kit is in the moulds: those are very expensive to make, but once you have them, the plastic costs next to nothing. Out of the physical parts you get when you buy a kit, probably the most expensive to actually make is the box it comes in.

Fewer parts makes kits cheaper in as far as the mould size can probably be reduced, which means it will cost less to design and make. But if there's space on the mould, they might as well include more parts, I would think.

Here's a calculator for typical mould costs. If I try a mould for 300 mm × 200 mm × 15 mm, which seems reasonable for a single kit sprue, it says US$5170 for a "complex" and US$6070 for a "very complex" mould. Reducing the size to 250 mm × 200 mm × 15 mm (so 50 mm shorter) lowers that to US$4320 and US$5075, respectively.

But say you have a kit that needs one of these "complex" moulds, and you make ten thousand kits with it. That means the 300 × 200 mould costs 51.7 cents per kit while the 250 × 200 mould costs 43.2 cents per kit — an 8.5-cent reduction in the manufacturing cost of the kit (plus at most a few cents saved on plastic for the parts that are now not present) for omitting a bunch of parts. (Labour costs would be the same, and I'm assuming the two would come in identically sized boxes, one having a bit more room to spare inside.) Would that have much impact on the price of the kit in the shop? I kind of doubt it, actually.

I guess it's a way to sell more kits.

That's another interesting discussion: Do manufacturers sell more if they make kits with a bunch of options to make different variants all from a single kit, or if they release separate kits that all build only one variant each? The former is more or less the Dragon approach, while the latter is exemplified by Hasegawa. Both of those seem to be doing well enough, so it's hard to say, IMHO.

 

[KINGSLUG]

And then there's MFH and Pocher..which are a whole universe away...