GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post away...

stubeck
Constructors Champion
Constructors Champion
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 11:36 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Stewart Grand Prix
Location: Charlotte, NC
Status: Offline
United States of America

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by stubeck »

capri-schorsch wrote: Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:30 am I think a perfect kit did not exist.
Don't matters how expensive it is there are always parts or shape that are not right. Sometimes it has something to do with the molding making or sometimes with the cost of the kit at the end.
Thanks to the company who is willing to release a new kit in 1/12 instead of searching for all the mistakes. Not every modeler is a rivet counter like we sometimes do.
In 99,9% of all builds the mistakes can't be seen by a normal non modelling person. Why do we always critics a new kit?
I think its normal to criticize, but agree that we tend to get in a circle about it which gets more negative than it should. There is never going to be a perfect kit of older cars as each car was so different from each other with repairs and other changes which means that even if somehow the kit is 100% accurate to a car they were able to look at today, its easy to miss something which wasn't right in the 60s.

It is a bit funny too, so much of what we like to do is those small modifications to make it more accurate, but then we cry foul if its not done correctly to begin with.
User avatar

Grypham
F2 Champion
F2 Champion
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:06 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Williams
Location: B.C., Canada
Status: Offline
Canada

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by Grypham »

Thanks Michael for your "review". I agree with the above comments, and I'm not a rivet counter either. We wouldn't have aftermarket accessories if the kits were all perfect. :lol:

Nice to hear from someone with the kit in hand before opening the wallet and releasing the moths. The only Meng kit I have is their Sopwith Triplane, which showed very nice tooling that they apparently did for Wingnut Wings.
User avatar

sky1911
Major Constructor
Major Constructor
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:28 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Jim Clark, Lotus
Status: Offline
Germany

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by sky1911 »

Grypham wrote: Wed Feb 10, 2021 11:37 am Thanks Michael for your "review". I agree with the above comments, and I'm not a rivet counter either. We wouldn't have aftermarket accessories if the kits were all perfect. :lol:

Nice to hear from someone with the kit in hand before opening the wallet and releasing the moths. The only Meng kit I have is their Sopwith Triplane, which showed very nice tooling that they apparently did for Wingnut Wings.
Easy there tiger, that was the Fokker DR.I - wrong side of the channel ;).
That kit also had some issues mostly due to the casting but was otherwise perfect (warped wings - I have two and both have the issue that might have been evaded with different packaging or longer cure times) but I still maintain it is an awesome kit with no "glaring" inaccuracies. On the GT40 - I'm not complaining. I have the "unbuildable" Trumpeter offering and I've been contemplating getting this one (Meng) as well. In a perfect world, you could kitbash them together, but I just don't have the time for that right now. So in my view the perfect option would be a kit that can be built beautifully oob without the need to fix things because it is done right the first time.
But I will agree that the snap fit of the Meng is great and I really like that over the issues most have with their Trumpy, i.e. parts not fitting, etc. (remember the after market which also had parts that were plain wrong, crap or didn't fit by a country mile - looking your way KA models - axles, exhausts, cough cough). I find that annoying for a product that I pay a not insignificant amount of money for only to find it's ill-fitting. Something that should have been taken care off during QA. I wouldn't buy a car where the doors won't fit or have significantly different gaps between the two sides - hand built cars with hand-laid panels are a different thing - I'm talking machine assembled cars.

It's just my opinion. I'd like to have things fitting as well and being designed as accurated as possible. I'm willing to pay for that. But here I don't really see why this is more than twice what the Trumpy costs, hence my comments, especially on the head lights which are really obvious, nose shape and doors is negligible really.
Cheers,
Roman
User avatar

Grypham
F2 Champion
F2 Champion
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 11:06 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Williams
Location: B.C., Canada
Status: Offline
Canada

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by Grypham »

Easy there tiger, that was the Fokker DR.I - wrong side of the channel ;).
Whoops! LOL. Brain fart .... I had just picked up a Sopwith as well. I was lucky in that my DR.1 didn't have wing warp or broken parts like a lot of them seem to.

At the end of the day, I don't want to complain about anybody bringing out new 1/12th car kits! Even the Revell F2002 was warmly received by myself.
I have the Trumpeter Ford as well, so it will be interesting to see them built, side-by-side.
User avatar

indycals
FOTA Chairman
FOTA Chairman
Posts: 2927
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:27 pm
Your Name: Indycals
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Lotus
Location: 6450'/1955m Colorado USA
Contact:
Status: Offline
United States of America

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by indycals »

sky1911 wrote: Wed Feb 10, 2021 12:02 pmBut here I don't really see why this is more than twice what the Trumpy costs
A few reasons - The Trumpeter is old tooling, it's costs have been amortized. From the comments it's also not as well engineered to begin with. It's also not licensed. Between the new engineering and tooling for the Meng, and the licensing, it's not surprising.
User avatar

indycals
FOTA Chairman
FOTA Chairman
Posts: 2927
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:27 pm
Your Name: Indycals
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Lotus
Location: 6450'/1955m Colorado USA
Contact:
Status: Offline
United States of America

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by indycals »

capri-schorsch wrote: Wed Feb 10, 2021 7:30 am I think a perfect kit did not exist.
Don't matters how expensive it is there are always parts or shape that are not right. Sometimes it has something to do with the molding making or sometimes with the cost of the kit at the end.
Thanks to the company who is willing to release a new kit in 1/12 instead of searching for all the mistakes. Not every modeler is a rivet counter like we sometimes do.
In 99,9% of all builds the mistakes can't be seen by a normal non modelling person. Why do we always critics a new kit?
I've developed I think five of my own model kits now, and I also work with Replicarz on their line of 1/18 Indy cars and I even physically designed their 1985 Indy 500 winner, so I can say that there are ALWAYS compromises made: How thin can the parts be cast? A great example of this is how thick the body work is - you simply cannot scale down the sheet metal bodywork thickness to even 1/12 scale - your model will not be structurally sound, if it could even be cast that thin to begin with - so right of the batt the model is inaccurate in that regard - the inaccuracies compound from there. When designing 3d parts I have to consider the tolerances of the 3d printer and sometimes fine detail will have to be made bigger than it really should be. Then you have to consider how well will a cast part hold hold their shape? (more important for larger parts). How much does doing it this way cost? Are we getting to a point of diminishing returns (ie, is the extra time/expense in making it that much more accurate/detailed justified in the end?) Perfect example - some of my kits have full engine detail - mostly because the engine was exposed. Others such as the 1985 Indy winner with fully enclosed body work would have been so complex to design, and produce that the compromise was to do it curbside. Bottom line - it is impossible to design a perfect scale replica - it's like an exponential mathematical curve that will approach the line, but never reach it. The closer you come to that line, the greater the costs is - exponentially. So the model producers have to find the balance between accuracy and practicality.
User avatar

scaleautofactory
Midfield
Midfield
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 4:25 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: LH44
Location: Gera (Germany)
Contact:
Status: Offline
Germany

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by scaleautofactory »

Some comparsion shots from my both gt40 kits.
Overall comparsion Trumpeter (bottom) vs. Meng (top)
Image
Mengs is a bit shorter as the trumpter.

Front area comparsion Trumpeter (left) vs. Meng (right)
Image
Trumpeter looks a bit better in details.

Rear cowl comparsion Trumpter (left) vs. Meng (right)
Image
Wheel area has the same size on both kits, Mengs cowl is shorter and the rear window is to square.
On mengs cowl all air intakes are open.

Front cowl comparsion Trumpter (left) vs. Meng (right)
Image
Wheel area has the same size on both kits.
Meng cowl is a bit longer and more rounder on the front edge.
User avatar

CK
Constructors Champion
Constructors Champion
Posts: 1305
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:38 am
Your Name: C K
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Mercedes, McLaren, Williams
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Canada

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by CK »

According to most sites, the dimensions of 1966 GT40 Mk II are:
Length - 163.0 in.
Width - 70.0 in.
Height - 40.5 in
Wheelbase: 95 in

This means in 1/12th scale, the dimensions of the model are:
Length - 13.583 in (345.02 mm)
Width - 5.833 in (148.17 mm)
Height - 3.375 in (85.73 mm)
Wheelbase - 7.917 in (201.08 mm)

I wonder whether Trumpeter's kit or Meng's kit is more accurate
C K
Canada

kentak
Spectator
Spectator
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:29 pm
Your Name: Ken
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Mario Andretti
Location: Golden, CO USA
Status: Offline
United States of America

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by kentak »

I've built the Trumpeter kit with the KA upgrades and I got the Magnifier/Trumpeter for a do-over. I also got the Meng kit in January '21. I think I like the Trumpeter body better than Meng's. The shape of the headlight openings and front hood/trunk opening seems more accurate on the Trumpeter/Magnifier body as well as the shape of the rear curving under to the rear wheels. The Meng engine is way better than the T/M engine; Meng chassis components, rear axles (u-joints), and tires are better too. The Meng interior is better, especially the seats and dash board.

I've looked at photos in "The Ford That Beat Ferrari" by John Allen and Gordon Jones and also "Ford GT40 MkII" by Mark Cole and there are some good shots for comparing the bodies. The color shots in the Allen/Jones book sure makes it look like blue wins the black vs blue color controversy.

Unfortunately given the cost of the Meng kit it's especially sad that they didn't get the body right as it's the most prominent part of the kit.I may do the Meng all opened up to show off it's good points and obscure the low points. Don't get me wrong I am really happy to have these kits and I'll enjoy building them; I just wish Meng would've sweated the body shapes a bit more.

Ken
User avatar

sky1911
Major Constructor
Major Constructor
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 7:28 am
Favorite F1 Team or Driver: Jim Clark, Lotus
Status: Offline
Germany

Re: GT40 lovers, start your drooling

Post by sky1911 »

scaleautofactory wrote: Wed Feb 10, 2021 1:42 pm Some comparsion shots from my both gt40 kits.
Overall comparsion Trumpeter (bottom) vs. Meng (top)
Image
Mengs is a bit shorter as the trumpter.
I don't usually quote images, so only one. I see all the points indycals makes about designing a kit - I get all that. We have a similar approach in doing our mods for GPL. We can try for 100% accuracy, but to get that would take an unreasonable amount of time - "diminishing returns" - with every extra minute or hour spend to get a fraction of a percent closer to 100% accurate. Our decision was to release a 95% accurate mod (by our reckoning anyway) because the remaining 5% would easily take half of the time (and we're talking man-years here) of the already done 95%. So I get that, I honestly do.

BUT! (new line on purpose) what I do not get is the rather big differences between the two cars in just this one picture. If you are designing a product and checking it with your references, some things should be obvious. This is true for either of the two companies. The differences I have found, in just that one photo, starting from the front backwards:
- shape of nose (negligible as I said before)
- shape of the headlights
- shape of the door opening
- shape / size / position of the side intakes aft of the doors (could be due to the angle of the photo)
- shape of the rear window - rectangular 4-sided (M) vs. rectangular "fivesided" with a point at the bottom edge (T)
- shape of the rear wheel arches, wider (MK1 style-ish) (M) and less pronounced with a rather straight side (T)
- shape of the tail end

and probably also the shape and size of the opening for the metal inset with the vents just behind the windscreen and between the scoops.

What I don't understand with that is how that happens. I know some game companies have modeled their racing car models of diecast models. So if those aren't accurate, using them as a basis will likely yield not an ideal result. That would comparable to modelling a Lotus 49 based on the motorized Tamiya kit with the off-sized engine and all.

Now don't get me wrong - either kit would probably be fine if it was the only version. But whenever you have two options, you should be free to compare between the two and discuss the differences / issues. I might even end up buying both (well the Meng, as I already have the Trumpeter) and may even end up building the new one as it has fewer fitment issue oob.
Cheers,
Roman
Post Reply