[JustPlaneNuttz]

Originally Posted by hworth18

. . . What I have learned over the years is that these are not museum quality replicas, but mass produced toys marketed to adults and should be viewed as such.. We should expect a certain level of quality and accuracy, but anything past that is asking too much for the price we pay..

While I would agree with you that these models are certainly not museum quality replicas, I do find the term 'toys' a touch trivial overall. To me, a 'toy' is designed with 'play' in mind. Even the 'simplest' model in my collection wouldn't stand up to too much play. I only have to look at my collection of vintage Dinky and Corgi Toys from the 50s to mid-60s to see the differences. Mind you, those spindly props on the civil airliners were often the first to go. And to add chaos-to-confusion, diecast collectable models do often get lumped in (erroneously IMPO) under the category of 'toys' at trade events or swap meets, so I guess it is easy to see why people may use the term.

You are right in our expectation of quality and accuracy as it pertains to price, but I think if some firms are going to banner their wares under terms like 'Aviation Archive' I would expect they pay a bit more attention to the 'accuracy' of those limited details they are adding. I suspect that is the area that irritates collectors the most.

Just my 2¢ worth.

JPN

[Gort]

Louie made a profound comment on another thread yesterday that bares repeating. Remarking that certain “rivet counters” essentially killed his enthusiasm for Witty F-14s, Hobby Master P-39s, Corgi P-51Ds and several other models, he proudly shared his new motto: “IGNORANCE IS BLISS!!!!!”

For him, buying models is visceral; if a model appeals to his senses, he buys it. Consequently, when others verbally murder it, his joy of ownership suffers.

And I agree completely; I’ve been there. So in keeping with Louie’s “ignorance” philosophy, allow me to suggest the following ...

When you trip over a post that’s out to slaughter your enthusiasm, give it the boot. Ignore it. Don’t give it a second thought. That way the offending member can keep swinging his hatchet, and you continue to delight in the knowledge that your model is absolutely fantastic.

It works. Try it!

[Captain Eddie]

Sounds good, Gort. Actually, I CAN read about the flaws of a model, and STILL enjoy it, such as my 1:72 Corgi P-51's!

[JustPlaneNuttz]

Originally Posted by Gort

Louie made a profound comment on another thread yesterday that bares repeating. Remarking that certain “rivet counters” essentially killed his enthusiasm for Witty F-14s, Hobby Master P-39s, Corgi P-51Ds and several other models, he proudly shared his new motto: “IGNORANCE IS BLISS!!!!!”

For him, buying models is visceral; if a model appeals to his senses, he buys it. Consequently, when others verbally murder it, his joy of ownership suffers.

And I agree completely; I’ve been there. So in keeping with Louie’s “ignorance” philosophy, allow me to suggest the following ...

When you trip over a post that’s out to slaughter your enthusiasm, give it the boot. Ignore it. Don’t give it a second thought. That way the offending member can keep swinging his hatchet, and you continue to delight in the knowledge that your model is absolutely fantastic.

It works. Try it!

It does work -- very well too. My blood pressure is in a much better state because of it!

JPN

[Epapazian]

Originally Posted by 91ken

Do you mean just their aircraft line or the company as a whole?

I was referring to Corgi's aircraft line which appears to be getting cranked up again. Other information I can't discuss in any detail, also tells me that they aren't giving up just yet. I sure hope that they find a reliable production partner or, better yet, set up their own factory.

[timbo]

What should we do - I think it varies depending on the model.

For new molds - Standards are getting raised all the time, so if someone comes out with a real dog, who's shape is so obviously wrong when compared to the competition who released the same earlier, then IMHO it should be "Off with their heads" There really is no excuse for one dog in particular that was released last year.

Small detail inaccuracies that seem to be picked up a lot - I think this falls into constructive criticism mode. I think it does not do anyone any good blowing up because a specific radar Ariel is missing, etc.

When it comes to the older molds no they should not be given a completely clean bill of health, but I do think they get roasted a little too much when compared to the newer ones - standards have moved on and I think it's like comparing apples to oranges to a certain extent. It's a little unreasonable to expect every die-cast company to completely re-tool their models every 3-4 years to keep up with the latest standards, esp when we are also demanding so much new stuff as well.

[SneakyPete]

Originally Posted by timbo

Small detail inaccuracies that seem to be picked up a lot - I think this falls into constructive criticism mode. I think it does not do anyone any good blowing up because a specific radar Ariel is missing, etc.

I prefer my models to come without Ariel, but that's just me.

[Black 6]

One thing that really gets me ticked-off in regard to the "criticisms" made against models is that, in many cases, the criticisms levied against the model tend to bleed onto the person who bought it. Pappy brought it up to some extent in an earlier post (this thread) with "constructive criticism is always better than just slamming a model and calling everyone who likes it dolts..." I am not talking about a thread that someone begins asking for your take on a particular model (give it what you will). I'm talking about threads by members posting about a new plane in their collection, a great buy, or something they like - only to have it shot-down by a group of people who cannot let the criticism of the model stand by itself, but instead find the need to make additional comments along the lines of only idiots would buy it or that piece of crap will never find its way into MY collection. I think, under those circumstances, a little tact is called for in making your views known. How about just good manners? Nothing is accomplished by doing that except ruining that person's day or alienating them altogether from the Forum or the hobby.

While I'm at it, when making critiques how about giving some reasons why YOU think the model is bad. What is so wrong with this particular model that it has your contempt? And for Pete's sake be reasonable when making your gripes known and about what they are being made.

OK, you can get back to the original thread - now in progress...

[Captain Eddie]

Originally Posted by SneakyPete

I prefer my models to come without Ariel, but that's just me.

SneakyPete, that is GREAT! Ya had me rolling in the aisles! (or is that isles, hehehe).

Now, back to our subject at hand (wouldn't want to be accused of hijacking this thread. Black 6, hear, hear! Very well put. Folks here can voice their opinions without being, shall we say, "over the top" about it.

[Epapazian]

Several comments in this discussion ring a bell with me. I note that some of us want product critiques only from owners of said models. It seems to me that this is a bit over the top. Often, there are ample amounts of pictorial evidence to support criticisms by a non-owner, coupled by the observations of those who actually bought the models in question. Of course, such "documentation" should be cited when possible.

I do feel that critiques should be reasonably specific, as opposed to "what a load of crap" type comments and it is certainly true that those who bash a model just after someone has praised it should recognize that this can be hurtful. I have probably done this myself, albeit unwittingly, though I try to point out particular issues with each model I happen to be down on. Also, it's only proper to credit the positives as well as complaining about the negatives in any balanced review.

Which leads me to a question. Should a set of reasonable rules be set up for product reviews-----not overly restrictive, but fair ones-----that we can all live with and the moderators feel can be enforced?