Let's talk about...REVELL (RANT!) Part 1😡

[@johnorlitta]

Any kit that says "trim flash here" multiple times on the first page of the instruction sheet should come with a free x-acto knife, a note of apology from the mothers of the kit designers, and a 50% off coupon (non-expiring) towards the purchase of your next kit.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Lol! 😂 I agree! 😜

[@timf3099]

100% off coupon would be more suitable. What an appalling company. Not that Hasegawa is much better in the area of reboxing, ad infinitum.

[@700sizehelisaretoosmall]

Honestly a LITTLE…. Flash on the seams area can be „free putty“ but I talk some minor flash that gets by the way sanded down Let’s talk about warped ship hulls aka Colombo express

[@EricIrl]

The ironic thing is that. at one point, Revell did indeed label some of their old kits as "Classics". Unfortunately, they didn't keep up that practice. And even then, their "Classic" kits were often kits that they had acquired from Matchbox. The Matchbox Twin Otter and Handley Page Heyford appeared in "Revell Classic" boxes. I have nothing against old kits. I'm more than happy to grab a geriatric Airfix, Matchbox, Revell (other brands, both current and extinct, are available) and give it a go. But it's not right that potential customers are not alerted to the fact that the kit residing in a nice shiny new box might have first seen the light of day when Marc Bolan and T-Rex were still calling themselves Tyrannosaurus Rex.

[@ninebolts]

Pull up a chair and a bottle. Join in the Peter Oxley drinking game. Every time he mentions Matchbox take a sip.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

😆😂🤣

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

...You should also include the word 'Garbage' in the game too...😉

[@BigAndTall666]

Matchbox made fine and entertaining kits, never liked revell nor airfix...

[@BigAndTall666]

Revell germany is "hansa" they will sell any kind of crap to earn a fart(h)ing! 😂👎

[@BigAndTall666]

Ps: English Naval Rum ftw! 😂🍻✌️😁

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Somebody said to me today: "I prefered the drunken, Shakespearean Peter, to this really angry, sober version!" 🫣 (Lol...🤣 Fear not, normal service returns soon!) 😜

[@jaws666]

Thankfully other companies and not just Airfix, DO let you know their old kits are old...for example Heller call theirs the "mueseam collection" so you know its an old tool before you buy

[@BigAndTall666]

Always check with Scalemates before purchace of any revell kit! 🍻✌️😁

[@Hacienda_27]

That was an absolute revolution

[@antithesisjones765]

Great commentary with many excellent points. I’m a former aircraft modeler who returned to the hobby last year after more than 3 decades away. Back then I wouldn’t touch a Revell model with the exception of the 1/32 F15 kits which were not to bad for $30ish. Coming back in I was shocked to see Revell 1/48 aircraft north of $50 and the better companies comparable kits between $75-$100. Now I’m only building cars and the couple Revell kits I’ve done were of pretty decent quality and were below $25 so no complaints. I just picked up one of their newly tooled kits and am anxious to see the quality. Given the buzz about the kit I have high expectations. I really feel for you aircraft guys though. It’s true that modeling has come a long way with aftermarket stuff available but by the time you get done correcting a kit’s shortcomings you’ve spent a small fortune.

[@nakuru1956]

I purchased many years ago a P51 model kit. It was made in clear plastic with different coloured plastic internal aspects. You could follow the fuel system, cooling system, ammunition system. The flaps would deploy, wheels retract and propeller rotate. The copit detail was excellent as was the radio detail behind the copit. I wish it would be resold again

[@MartinSparks-ef9gr]

That would be the revell, monogram ghost mustang . I think it was 1/32 . You can probably find it online . M

[@cecilboatwright3555]

I'm 62 years old, and the old Revell 1/32 kits were TO DIE FOR back in the 1970s!! I remember them being on the hobby shop shelves for UNDER $5 APIECE back in the day!! Their 1/32 P-47s, F4Us, Spits, Hurrybacks, Beaufighters, Stukas, F4Fs, P-40Es, and Harriers were AWESOME back in the day (their P-51s ALWAYS sucked!!). And the original 1/32 Mossie Mk IV and F-4J were just AWESOME!! But, by today's standards, they are just rather sad....okay, maybe "quaint"? And the old Monogram 1/48 airplanes were STANDARDS. But they ALL pale in comparison to the Tamiya, Hasegawa, HobbyBoss, HK, and modern Airfix offerings. Scale modeling has come such a long way since the 1970s!! The old Revell/Monogram "legacy" kits are still fun to revisit though! I love your videos Peter!!

[@mattmatt350]

I bought my first model kit in over 20 years, a revell f14 1/48. I thought I was just out of practice but after a while I started thinking there’s no way the fit is supposed to be so poor. I didn’t even finish it when I bought a Tamiya kit after reading reviews and doing research. You definitely get what you pay for. I wish I had watched your video sooner. Thank You

[@pja-ok4714]

I hear you, I buy LOTS of great kits and I have been bitten by this practice myself several times. It is deliberately deceptive...I am much more cautious now and if I have any doubts at all I will stand there in the store and do an internet search.

[@JohnSmith-ve8mj]

A prime example of ancient kit is revell 1/72 focke wulf Ta 152 which is a old frog mould which is really old so I agree Peter no mention of the age!!

[@megandarling2215]

I bought a kit from Revell and open it. It was a 135th King Tiger the box was too small for the spruces that when I was ready to pack up of the spruces couldn’t fit in it that I had to cut some spruces I also found pieces broken when I opened it….

[@murder.simulator]

I got my first experience working with rubber O rings and metal latches for moving parts from Revell kits back in the 80s. Specifically the Robotech line of kits. Some where challenging because they were meant to transform from jets to robots. Some plastic parts were meant to slide and move in between two other plastic parts that were glued together and some glued plastic parts with holes held metal parts that moved. Had to be sparing with the glue so you didn't glue parts together that were supposed to move

[@arrrgee]

I think we've all been caught out before by Revell boxing old kits in new boxes, at least I certainly have. It would be nice if they followed Airfix's example of doing a "Classic" range.

[@bazp489]

I have exactly the same issue with Revell - no distinct ranges that indicate what's in the box. Sure we can look things up, but we shouldn't have to. There's no indication as to whether we're getting a Frog rebox or a brand new tooling.

[@imperialinquisition6006]

I built Revell’s 1/72 Tornado GR1, pretty difficult build, issues with flash and etc… But I was pretty happy with the results and it was cheap and came with paint, so can’t really complain. I have an old 90s Airfix kit of the Tornado got off eBay, so I’ll se how that compares. Hopefully Airfix releases some newly rolled Tornados though.

[@alanmorris8783]

I had a Classics 1/32 Spitfire a few years ago. It was almost like a vacform kit as you literally had to cut the parts out of thick flash! Do they still have their terrible paint call-outs where you have to mix multiple colours in bizarre ratios?

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Yes. 🫣

[@jeroenkoster1366]

Don't like the reboxing of ancient kits either, but at least Revell produced a pretty good Ju-88, He-219 and He-111 in 32 scale for very little money, that's worth something.

[@johnjones-fj7qw]

Good points, well made. I exercise care when buying Revell kits too. The recommendation to look at 'Scalemates' or similar is a good one also. The distinction made between the price of a kit and the cost of the model once additional extras are bought is a good one and I must say that it's more likely to be the 'better' modeller who excuses the kit producer for supplying a kit which needs 'extras' to produce a 'finished' model. Mind you, it's not only Revell in this regard. I remember buying the re-tooled Airfix 1/72 B-17 and finding that whilst a detailed bomb bay was provided, the bombs weren't. When I aired this and my disappointment on a well known site the site 'owner' pointed out that bombs were included in the USAAF Aircraft Servicing kit. Yes - for an extra £20! OK you get vehicles, but you may not want them! I am of the view that the provenance of a kit should be made on the packaging in a clear and obvious manner. Not doing so will result in fewer sales of that brand and/or fewer builders which ultimately affects the brand through reduced sales etc.

[@davidmccann9811]

I love Revell kits and as a kid in the 70s/80s I loved Matchbox, so I still occasionally buy one for nostalgia. However, I agree that kits should be clearly marked if they are decades old kits in a new box. Airfix do this now, but they didn't for a long time. On the other hand, I have no problem with Revell if (as in that diorama kit you showed) it shows a photo of the finished model on the box, as any buyer can see what they get.

[@BigAndTall666]

When Tamiya rebox Italeri kits they are ment for the Japanese market and not for you as an European to buy at a higher cost, one must think of that! 😮🤔🙂

[@mikelewis6233]

Absolutely bang on criticism about Revell. A friend gave me a Revell model because he could not figure it out. I have virtually every tool and have the experience but even I found it awkward because nothing fitted as it should and the instructions/parts numbering made no sense. Some of the stuff I've come across with their kits is beyond belief, e.g. wrong instructions, unusable parts, bad parts numbering, and parts "FIT"- is a joke. I'm a long experienced modeller "60+ years". Your comments are true and to the point, so don't apologise for telling the truth. As for your point about value and product quality. The true definition of Quality is, "What you expect", at the "Price you Expect", and "When you expect it". This is the Tamiya ethos, and not some arbitrary theory from simple minded financiers, e.g. "P=O/I", i.e. Productivity = Output divided by Input. It is this simple equation that has brought our industries to their knees. Time for a new theory....

[@juanizcue5574]

VC funds, or Vulture Capital funds, are not interested in quality, ethics or the customer. They are waiting for an unsuspecting buyer and selling the company for a good profit.

[@austinreed7343]

They don’t even care about “THE MESSAGE”… yet.

[@paulkilich4727]

I filled and sanded the gap on the box straight away.

[@ronmarlett1704]

I enjoy watching your channel. You pronounce Revell the same way I do. I was born in Oregon in 1951 and moved to California when I was 7 years old. I didn't know it at the time, but Revell was manufacturing their model kits near where I lived in Los Angeles. I think it was Venice. I got into building sailing ships and 65 years later, I like to collect Revell, Airfix, Lindberg, and Heller sailing ships. At the moment I'm building the Airfix 1/72 Golden Hinde. I was Airfix would do a new sailing ship kit. I think a Royal Navy 18th century bomb or rocket vessel in 1/72 scale would be very nice.

[@cyberleaderandy1]

I object to any kit that decides you aren't allowed to make a 100% accurate model from the box because pc reasons forbid it, especially if the kit was 100% complete 50 years ago 😢

[@jdcookiemonster]

i`m juts finishing up Revell's 1/48 Tornado Gr.4 with a Gr.1 conversion. the construction absolutley aged me. so much work making it all fit together properly. the most filling, sanding & scribing i've ever done. Revell make nice decals, i think going forward i will only purchase their re-boxes ... if absolutely no other option.

[@williamkoppos7039]

Just built The Hurricane 1/32 Mk IIb. No etch, no masks, semi soft detail, few rivet representations, not even a seat harness. But the shapes were right, it looks pretty good, plenty of room for those that want to "develop" it.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

To be fair, that is one of their better recent products.

[@MACEWINDULastJedi]

I think the INVINCIBLE kit should come with a couple sheets of 80 grit sandpaper!

[@obi-ron]

I still have bits of a Revell HMS Invincible because they come in handy for kitbashing, but not as an actual kit because it took me hours of hot water treatments and shaving just to get parts to fit together and the sea harriers looked as though they had already seen combat when I opened the box and took them from the plastic wrapping.

[@michaelbaker2552]

I was born in 1952 (when Elizabeth became queen, actually). My first models were Revell. I built many of them to start, starting when I was ten. Then I found Monogram which far outpaced Revell in nearly every detail. I switched from 1/72 to 1/48 and built many Monograms. I would anxiously await the release of each Monogram kit. Monogram released excellent kits, many of which are still usable today such as the old B-29 and the B-17G (the latter was so good that it was pirated by Revell and released with some modifications as a B-17F). I would never think of getting a Revell kit today unless it was a rebranded Monogram. The worst thing that ever happened to Monogram was getting bought by Revell.

[@Ste-_.]

I attempted the f18e & f18f 1/32, got about 3/4 way through and they both ended up in more pieces than they were originally 😡… That said, the 1/48 blackbird new version was a very nice model.

[@AndrewComerford-l1z]

When I built their Ju 88C in 1:48, (ex Dragon) the nose guns were included(not just the barrels), but if you fitted them, the nose-cone wouldn't fit. My thoughts on Dragon are unprintable.

[@1965GJS13]

I have a sort of internal priority list of model manufacturers. If I want a model of a specific subject, then I work down that internal list of manufacturers; yes Tamiya is pretty much at the top (the acme is Bandai), then Tamiya, and we work down through several others to Airfix, and then down much further to Revell who, along with Kitty Hawk, are at the very bottom. I've only ever bought Revell when there was pretty much no other choice for that specific subject.

[@davidhinkson8856]

Revell is also a significant part of my history in this hobby, as my first ever kit outside of an Airfix model was a Revell Germany Laker Airways DC-10 airliner. Over the years I have mostly dealt with their cars, both the German and American models, and I would say they have served me well; the only one I had a few issues with in terms of the level of detail was a Ford Escort Mark 2 rally car which was an old Esci kit that Italeri has also reissued more than once. As I think you have said previously, like Airfix with the Vintage Classics series they should let the buyer know whether the kit is all new or if it is one of the old Esci or Matchbox models, and price them accordingly based on what would likely be a lower level of detail or parts count etc.

[@fifteenbyfive]

As a Yankee kid I remember a Revell F-18 mold had a bad nose-up weight problem on its landing gear and I used a few ball bearings to weigh the nose down but I used epoxy glue that reacted with and melted the plastic. So I gave up the build and threw that one out. Like I did the Testor's 1:48 F-4G which was a cockpit fitment nightmare when trying to mate the fuselage together. I defy you to build that kit, sir Oxley. Felt awful throwing that one out. A penance of Test Fitting I didn't or wouldn't pay as a child. These days I've heard a lot of good things about the 1:48 Revell F-15E. I've only built Tamiya since getting back into the hobby other than that Testors #572 I challenged myself to attempt again. Revell was about all I had as a kid. Other than a lesser supply of Monogram or Testors and nothing whatsoever from the UK or Japan.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Yes I built the F-15E from Revell (see my video back catalogue) which just ok and not as good as people say....quite a lot of fit issues...the Great Wall Hobby one is much better. And yes, there are some evil kits simply beyond my powers and patience.😖

[@judebrad]

I never finished the Lancaster I bought from them. I learned later that the dihedral is incorrect which put me off.

[@barrygibbons2803]

Hey Peter, Thanks for all you do for the modelling community. Your videos are informative and entertaining and very helpful for all levels of modellers. Cheers me ol mucka.

[@garfieldsmith332]

I have built a few Revell kits in the past few years. Also have some in my stash. Revel has been buying molds, re-boxing kits, and farming out molding. I have Revel kits from the last few years molded in countries Poland / Germany / S. Korea / Czech Republic / Ukraine / Italy / China / Japan. Fit and finish varies. The ones I built had fit issues. They also mold the same kit in two places and box it according to the intended market. I checked out a car kit molded in China in a white box (USA market). and the same kit molded in Poland in the black box (Europe and Canada). Saw both at my hobby shop and the black box kit was $15 more. The prices of Revell have risen quite a bit here in Canada.

[@J.A.Hansen]

Thats true 👍

[@Emdee5632]

The first time I discovered I had bought a reboxed Revell kit was when I opened their T-34 in 1/72 scale. It was the former Matchbox PK-82. I immediately recognized its stand with the broken wooden wall and its soldier armed with a smg. I did built it and it looked better than my first attempt all those decades ago with the original kit but if I had known about it in advance... I later discovered Scalemates and found out I had several other reboxed kits, not many, but I hadn't built the original ones before. They were fine kits as far as I remember them.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Those ARE the one to get, but be careful to be sure you don't pay the RRP

[@BigAndTall666]

Matchbox made those cute child friendly dioramas, still soul gold! ❤🍻✌️

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

@@BigAndTall666 I have reviewed most of them & have mint original examples, - please check back on my video history and you will find many to enjoy! 😄👍🏻

[@flitsertheo]

The 1/76 scale is a giveaway. Almost exclusively used by British manufacturers.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

@@flitsertheo Yes and Revell burned out the 'Made in England' logo on the Matchbox sprues...😢

[@mikerodent3164]

Ah, subcultures. I knew this was going to be worth watching in its entirety when you mentioned the wine you were drinking: Kylie Minogue Rosé. The name alone made me laugh. I checked at Tescos: 3.5 stars. "Absolutely awful, tastes and smells awful"; "Thin and tasteless."; "very sour and went straight down the sink.". But that makes me want to try it 😃.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

We really enjoyed it, but ours was £15

[@timf3099]

Somehow, wine seems to taste better as the price increases ;-) @@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab

[@MACEWINDULastJedi]

You know I am enjoying Revells 1/32 Miskito. its not bad for the price.The real plane was made of plywood,so very few panel lines and this helps with sanding the body,and coming out with a nice result.

[@flitsertheo]

First issued in 1971.

[@pgtips9511]

I’ve not see your Airfix critique, so will go and find it. What strikes me about the comments you raise about dishonesty from manufacturers is essentially marketing. I spent 40 years as a graphic designer, creating packaging and sales materials and I’m afraid to say that everyone is at it. Supermarkets sell own brand products under imaginary, misleading and dishonest names, pubs advertise ‘home cooked’ food which is obviously misleading, vehicle manufacturers lie about their mpg figures, clothing manufacturers lie about who makes their lines and where it comes from, and on it goes. Ethics in marketing has been a bug bear of mine for years. It doesn’t look like there will be much improvement any time soon…

[@cameronfarrell9076]

I used to build revell kits when i was a kid and didnt know better. The kit that burned me out of the hobby was a 1/48 f-18e, not a great kit, especially considering the new competition over the last few years. Now i only have a single revell kit in my stash and that's the 1/48 rafale, since in this scale revell is the only game in town. I'd love a tornado and a typhoon too but the revell kits on those subjects are just sub par, so keen for some new tools from other companies because i just wont buy revell.

[@kl0wnkiller912]

The trick of reboxing has been done by many manufacturers. It is not necessarily a 'bad' thing IF it is a good quality kit and the pricing is consistent with the age and quality. There are some rebox kits that are desirable because they are the only molds that make that kit, the only game in town. It is far cheaper for a company to rebox and use old, paid off molds and many use that profit as a buffer for other losses... 'money in the bank' so to speak. I don't agree with it but I do understand it. I have fallen for the old rebox trick but after building models for over 20 years now I am getting pretty good at spotting a rebox. If the prices match the kit I don't see a problem with doing it.

[@jaggeh3340]

this explains a lot, i remember struggling with Revell as a kid. been debating doing a model again but no clue which company to trust

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Trust the latest Airfix releases or any Tamiya (Except the Seat Harrier).

[@realitycheck908]

Recently I build the revell leopard 2a6 , very good detail for the 1:72 scale but the plastic is very hard

[@harrymedina7470]

Love the Old Revell Kits Not these New Reissued or Package for some reason Thanks for the info Peter,

[@fredbasic1918]

Max's Models did a whole series of vids on model company histories, Revell being one. While I wouldn't say they're "authoritative", I do think they're enlightening. You should check them out as they're quite informative.

[@ivaniii9707]

Age of a kit is not always a negative, but sometimes it really is a good indicator of a bad kit. I bought recently a Zvezda MiG-23MF which I think is from 1992 and it has raised panel lines and the fit isn't great, an immense amount of moulding errors and flash. I also have bought a Tamiya A6M5 from 1982 which looks great. It was pretty cheap at 15 euros and it includes a pilot and a few ground crew the parts gave very little moulding errors and flash. This point doesn't really go anywhere, but I will post it anyway

[@markhill4526]

I have 4 of the tornado gr4, which i'm going to model as gulf war gr1's. Bought the eduard weapon set so i could model pretty much of the weapon load outs. So the cost of the extra's was divided by 4. No itention of buying any more detailing sets other than gulf war decals. The kit decals will get recycled for my what if projects etc

[@tomlavelle8340]

I’m afraid that my beloved Airfix is guilty of this, too. I love their new tool 1/72 aircraft. But they sneaked in an old B26 Marauder in 1/72 and put it in a new computer generated artwork box. The decals are new, but the molds are old and I thought it was a new tool. Yes, Scalemates is your friend!

[@paulnutter1713]

I recently built my first ever 1/32 kit, a revell f4 corsair. I thought for £20 it was brilliant value, went together essy enough, painted up with car rattle cans( I'm a good Yorkshireman)looks great only to read the reviews and find out its a terrible kit that doesn't fit and is all wrong. What do you expect for the money????

[@darrenwhiteside1619]

I too had a great experience recently building the classic Revell 1/32 F4U OOB... folding wings and all. It's no Tamiya, but IMHO it is more accurate in some respects than the much newer Trumpeter offering. Looks very much like a Corsair to me and it gets a lot of positive feedback from those who have seen it. Cost me $25US which is a fraction of what similar kits go for. I too painted it with rattle cans but I chose dark blue paint because I wanted an early model F4U-1D. But if you want a museum quality model than you should definitely look elsewhere. I however chose to build 1/32 classic airplane kits at the moment so I knew what I was getting myself into from the very beginning.

[@martijn9568]

Yeah I'm building that one too. Those folding wings are a nice gimick. The rest of the kit has a lower detail than the modern 1/72 scale F4U Corsairs, but for the price of Revell's 1/32 Corsair it is worth it. Tamiya's 1/72 F4U Corsair costs around €25,-😅

[@paulnutter1713]

@@darrenwhiteside1619 mines dark blue too and with just plain stars, I build to suit myself not accuracy. They all look the same once I take my glasses off anyway

[@Flingwing24]

Hmm. Recently built their (ICM....it was on the spruces) O2 Skymaster. For some reason, possibly too quick removal or lower pressure, the areas at the top and bottom of the fuselage moulds were rough and the fine panel lines....well it was a sand and re scribe job. Then to add value they added another upper wing and fuselage side to create a civil version....but with only 2 versions available the military one (because they had just added decals and no research) was armed in a way it just wouldn't be.....along with a host of other mods needed including production of my own armaments (simple or I would have left it). It turned out a little beauty but only after adding brass undercarriage (the plastic legs would never support the weight) and a yahu control panel (not necessary but nice). I am not a master modeller but I want to be. Sure modelling has layers, but a nice fit and accuracy should be a minima. As regards Tamiya, some of their old kits are better than a lot of new ones by other manufacturers. The old Skyraider is a beaut. Airfix classics? Only because they have some subjects nobody else will touch and I am a modeller, otherwise why pay £15 for a 1:72 Beaver that needs totally rubbing down and re scribing when I can have a jewel like IBG PZL11 for less...? As regards aftermarket....yea, pick any kit Peter, and triple the cost....and even then does the aftermarket part go together well? I have the odd Revell kit but they have "made in Poland" written on the boxes and were "pre owned".... Companies that re box should be forced to declare this and the original date of manufacture

[@mikehanson7328]

Peter, are the mutton chops in homage to the good olde days of Matchbox?

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Yes Mike! Time for some good old fashioned victorian values!

[@mikehanson7328]

@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab indeed Peter, possibly for some good old victorian craftsmanship and pride in one's labour and product (ref: anyone except Revell, Novo, Eastern Express, Masterkit, etc)

[@SimbianMinistry]

39:40 - Yes Revell did do that in the 2000s/10s.... I built Bob Stanford-Tuck's Hurricane in 1/32nd, from a Revell kit labelled 'Vintage' - Came out OK after a lot of work - BUT... I certainly wouldn't recommend it to a beginner. Also have a 1/32nd 109F in the stash, in that 'Vintage' boxing. On the flip side... I have the infamous 1/32nd Corsair stashed away somewhere, which may well be no more than cupboard-stuffing and never get built... though I did build up the 1/32nd Martlett which is equally as bad as the Corsair... included date stamps on the OUTSIDE of the fuselage....!!!!! But if you want something worse - Try a 'Smer' or 'ZTS Plastyk'

[@alantoon5708]

I bought one of those Harrier kits, in a Revell (GB) box around 1982. The original release date was 1970 or so. A good kit for 1970...

[@flitsertheo]

The older the issue, the "fresher" the moulds are. Without flash or warping.

[@BigAndTall666]

Cheers for Kylie, still a cute little "scale" object! 😊❤

[@paulclow3398]

Gotta say i love building the revell/matchbox kits, but i agree that the prices of the first diorama kits are way ott, saying that revell plz rerelease the panzer 3 and German half track

[@MACEWINDULastJedi]

REVELL's Slogan should be! It looks good on the shelf! If you keep it in the box!

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

...but not for long as the box sags and warps...😖

[@alexeveryman5080]

​@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab:)

[@alexeveryman5080]

:)

[@RichardsModellingAdventures]

I just don't buy them unless they are the ICM re-box ( 1/32 Tiger moth was great) . Exception is the 1/32 P51 mustang that's going together OK and It was cheap and used it as a test bed for foil covering. I don't build fast. I will go for Tamiya most of the time. I go for larger projects that take time to complete. I simply don't have the room for loads of complete models. Ive been modelling for near on 40 years on and off. Revell was always the bargain bin of kits.

[@zeroalpha7755]

I never did like Revell and this might sound petty but I don't like the side opening boxes. Everything about Revell just spells out "cheap garbage". Just my opinion.

[@carlosballesteros4670]

I was really happy to have in mu hands a "builders choice" model of a PA 28 piper super cub, sold under the name "sports plane" . I must say that I never finished the model airplane....... went to trash can after some steps carefully taken as per the directions booklet. I've never seen such a piece of junk along with another revell model of a MBB 117 helicopter with so many gaps to fill with molten plastic and putty and meat and clay 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 that one also ended up in the garbage container. Revell germany deserves what is going to happen with them in a very short time; bankruptcy. Incredible how other companies like Italeri and most recently Airfix are improving their game. Bye bye revell, and sorry for those glorious years when they manufactured beautiful and crisp models.

[@davidkennedy7743]

Hi Peter another classic your suggestion change the box may I suggest Revell change what is inside the box

[@peregrintokes2919]

I tried a couple of revell kits when i returned to modelling...plenty of flash and bad fitting parts put me off them for life lol no problems with the few airfix models i have done , but for me hobbyboss are my favourite especially in terms of value ....i love their 1/48 scale range - for £15 you can get a brand new ME-262 that has over 200 parts and even photo etching and had no trouble with parts fitting in any of their 3 models i have built so far , all went together very nicely tbh , and im on a tight budget , so i look for value and for me hobbyboss are by far the best value for money ....

[@darrenwhiteside1619]

I've found if you're buulding Revell kits manufactured in the late 60s/early 70s there is far less flash and details are a bit more crisp than with the reboxings. Fit seems a bit better as well. Of course the ancient decals will most often disintegrate in water so you'll need to buy them aftermarket in order to complete the kit.

[@kahumike]

I distrust anything i see in a Revell box now. Its contents could be from anyone - Matchbox, Italeri, Frog, Academy, Hasegawa or wherever. Some of those moulds aren't too bad for their time, but it's the way Revell charge way over the odds for something they never did the tooling for in the first place. As an example, the ex AccMin SBD Dauntless is available from Academy at $55 NZD, the Revell boxing of the same kit literally costs double that. Revell have done some stunning kits some years ago (1:48 Rafale, there was a very nice 1:72 TF-104 etc) but at the same time they also pump out some stake old turds. The lack of disclosure on the age and/or origins of the tooling really does make "Caveat Emptor" the best advice when considering anything by Revell nowadays.

[@billestew7535]

Old Charlie Fox's ears look like he's been in a few scraps

[@westockfarmsltd6339]

When I was a teenager I used to love building revel or monogram. The tomcat, hornet, A-10 warthog, stealth bomber, mosquito, spitfire. But now. Most kits are junk and almost unbuildable. My last three revell kits only 1 was a good build. The 1/32 mustang. The second a 69 Camero. Bought it for my daughter. She couldn’t get past the engine without loosing interest because where to fit was a mess. I finished it. Fit was a disaster and detail was laughable. Decals where really good tho. The last revell kit was the F-117 stealth bomber. An old school kit. Re build a kit I really enjoyed in my teenager yrs. Well. I got the fuselage together. Got mad at it and used the kit to site in my 7mm reg mag…. Really enjoyed that. But really a shame what has happened with revel. Used to love making those kits. But now you have to do your research or you will get burnt

[@stevesmodelbuilds5473]

In fairness, the 'new' Airfix under Hornby is much-improved. As far as value goes, as a fairly experienced modeler I ask myself how many hours of enjoyment -- not frustration -- will I get out of this? I watched one video where a very good modeler was trying to build a Revell 1/700 destroyer, and got so frustrated with the bad fit he stabbed it with his knife amidships, impaling it on the mat. Even when I was a kid 50 years ago, Revell was right down there with bad 'snap-together' kits. There might be a few good ones, but I've never seen one, and would avoid them like the plague.

[@marcblank3036]

Scalemates is the reference before buying anything from Revell or even Airfix. Revell has plenty of beauties. Some originate from brands like Zvesda, Matchbox etc and come at a better price.

[@Sniper_Cat_71]

I'd rather pay more for a quality Tamiya kit than for Revell's stuff which is usually simplified, geared towards children, sometimes old, etc...

[@robertfarrar6212]

Peter, great stuff! I have several '60s era 1/72nd Revell WW II fighters to build into a nostalgic collection. However, being 63 years old, I knew what I was getting when I purchased them over the last few years. Love your avatar!

[@modelrestorations]

I primarily build car models. When it comes to Revell they are typically somewhat better than AMT, MPC etc. Although they definitely have there dud kits. My biggest complaint with Revell is most kits only include what is on the front of the box. As opposed to say AMT which usually gives 3 different ways to build the same model. Great review.

[@lxtechmangood9503]

I think the only revell i would consider buying would be the matchbox kits only! The only thing revell seems to get right ( other than the matchbox kits) is the contactor glue!! As their paints i have had over the years were not great!

[@markgordon2260]

Great commentary. I recall the 1/32 Revell kits from the late 1960s/early 1970s when they were the ducks %^^$s. They were the only 1/32 scale kits with any sort of detail at the time. What a sad and sorry story now.

[@kenhanson1819]

Revell is really hit or miss these days. You are correct for calling them out for releasing ancient kits without having a warning label or some kind of "Vintage" label on it. People should badger them at trade shows with the nonsense they've been up to the past decade. The one time I bought a Revell kit without checking Scalemates first I got burned. I picked up the 1/72 Focke-Wulf Ta152. I though it was a new tool, but discovered upon opening the box it was the ancient Frog kit. Never again I say!

[@randyherbrechtsmeier4796]

My complaint is they dont sell all their kits internationally. They wont even ship them from their Deutschland Store. Some releases I want I have to buy them on Ebay. I wrote them an Email said it was linsencing issue. I think its Crap. All we get old Monogram Kits from the 60s in Fancy Revell Package!!!

[@NazidKimmie]

Good arguments, whole heartedly agree - modelers should demand value for money - Tamiya is premium but you get premium quality. Not ALL Revell or Airfix are bad - they have systemic issues and quality issues... but reissuing really old, bad molds is criminal...Oh those terrible box designs! Their old F-15E 1/48 is a rare gem that's actually quite decent - but that stupid box, I tapped it up and cut the top to make it top opening!

[@michaelgrey7854]

If you want a revell kit that will really test you try the 1/72 C-54. I almost threw mine in the bin.

[@colindelamare1413]

I Started making Airfix kits in 1962. I am by no means an expert modeler even after all this time. I now have thousands of kits that I collected over the years to make in my retirement. Life has not allowed that to happen yet, but I live in hope. I have always regarded Airfix kits as a challenge. I know that most of them lack detail and have their faults, but they were always like that. The challenge is to make them look as they should, and that can take a lot of hard work. Thats what I like. I am not a fan of kits that are so well engineered that they just go together perfectly.

[@danestewart2539]

FIRST AND FOREMOST… I AGREE WITH YOU! However… 1. If you were able to question Revell in a court of customers and ask why they can morally offer what they do offer, they will simply say, if you don’t like it, don’t buy it. 2. Why don’t you list your terrible/old kits as “classic” etc, they would likely say.. why should we? Who will buy it if we acknowledge that it’s A. Very old and B. Poor, plus there is no law stating we must. 3. Venture capitalists companies are there to generate margin, purely margin therefore (even though I agree with you) they simply won’t care what you have to say. 4. They have never told anyone that they are a prime time manufacturer… they are just Revell. At the end of the day people, if you see a Revell kit you are interested in, check it on scalemates and look at reviews. Happy modelling!

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

There's no arguing with any of that! 😜👍🏻

[@danielwcheng6381]

Great Revelle comments, But Tamiya is also guilty of selling old kits, but least they don't pawn them off as new kits. I've found that a really cheap Tamiya kit is an old one and know what to expect. Ultimately I would like to see more truth in advertising or even Scalesmates state that a kit is a rebranding of a old kit.

[@Ronno4691]

I got sold a Tamiya 1/48 Harrier kit that cost £12.50 and it's got a great mixture of detail and looks and ease of build then I see reviews and builds of it online saying it's crap, a re-issue, a pile of sh*the that could be better and so forth....Well, I built it and LIKED it a lot so there!

[@danielwcheng6381]

Yup I have that kit yup it's very cheap and definitely not the best, but then again it's a 70s kit. And once painted it's not too bad and a decent beginner's kit or for use as a paint mule.

[@Blowinshiddup]

I have that Harrier kit (the old one). Should finish it if I ever get brave enough. That is a glancing blow to the scrotum just re-boxing, though. My worst Revell kit ever was the 1/32 Apache. Not a single piece that wasn't misshapen.

[@larrym572]

the harrier kit you show on the computer screen is th USA box art not the Geman boxing

[@vaughanlockett658]

Whiskey in hand love the Channel, and i will come to the defence of Revell . There's one kit that has all you desire, turned brass barrels two massive sheets of PE , turned brass mast's and the kit goes together a treat and the amount of spruce's all for under 100 pound. The Fletcher class destroyer in 1/144 massive kit . Proper value for money. I am editing the comment to say i biild aircraft for a living and specialist in airframe structure. I had the joy and opportunity to work on the Remowa Junkers W13 out in the black forest Germany a few years later i was looking for a kit of this aircraft and the only one i could find was the Revell 1/72 . Revell to the rescue.

[@anthonycurtis7990]

Glad to hear that it wasn't just me who almost fell for the Harrier. I almost bought one, however the relatively low parts count and Revell's reputation made me pause and decide against it. Regarding the video subject,I find Revell very average at best. Completely agree with you about getting what you pay for. I'm a decent to average modeller at best, I'd rather spend the extra money on a kit I know will go together well than waste a lesser amount on a Kit that will just annoy me and sit on the shelf of doom for eternity. The hobby is supposed to be relaxing and not a task to fix a substandard product.. now I'm starting to rant 😉

[@thomasbell6655]

Brilliant information, saved me a lot of grief, especially the Hornet...nearly got caught on that one.

[@Mike-mm4mx]

I have built a few Revell kits and like others have said they are a bit hit and miss. I really enjoyed building their 1/32 Arado and have another different version in my stash. I was, however, taken in once when I got carried away and bought their 1/72 USN Phantom thinking it was a new release only to discover it was the ancient Monogram kit with raised panel lines. I agree that those flimsy side opening boxes are absolutely awful and really should be replaced!!

[@Steelbackuk]

Feel better now for that rant. Bit then again its not a rant but its the truth. Some of the kits are pretty crap. My biggest gripe is on the boxes. They are always far to big for the kit they contain. Have the who transporter in the stash , you can get 2 of the kits in that box.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Very true , Dan! 👍🏻

[@neilwilkinson2700]

Absolutely brilliant video, i couldn't agree more,a model kit thats half a century old, really all model companies should display the original date it was released, as not everyone goes on stalemates, some kits are brought on inpulse by the glamorous artwork. 😊

[@ellbowski]

Made the Razor Quest by Revell recently- the only kit I would say was good- keep buying them because the range is big and often inexpensive on ebay- usually very poor but I'm a sucker for a bargain, then I spend a lot of time sanding, filling injector marks and swearing, next to old Airfix they are in the bottom of my choices.

[@juliettwhiskey2662]

May I remind of the completely cheeky and ridicolous high prices for their former "Technik Models" Ju 88 and Spitfire 1:32? Not to mention the price for the current "Mandalorin Razor Crest Platinum"

[@jamesvozar1]

I certainly do have mixed feelings about Revell, i`m building a sprint car (the one with the big wing on top) at the moment by them, and half the kit is new parts and the other half is utterly terrible old molds from the 80`s, so half have crisp detail and the other half is soft molded flashy stuff with more ejector pins than you could imagine.

[@robertfarrar6212]

I remember those. Back in the '80s they were Monogram kits; you had to strip the chrome from the wing parts and re-finish after filling the ejector marks...

[@TheSargeNZ]

Speaking of "Value For Money" and Phantoms. In about 1998, I picked up a Hasegawa 1/48 F-4G Wild Weasel on sale for NZ$99.00.The originally price was NZ$200.00. This a kit that is based on moldings from 1982! (And still looks pretty good). You can now pick up a Meng Wild Weasel kit for around NZ$110.00 from overseas! The original price of NZ$200.00 works out to around NZ$365.00 in today's money.

[@BigAndTall666]

Have a tripple tot: "Matchbox Matchbox Matchbox!". 😂🍻✌️😁

[@BigAndTall666]

My last revell kit was a 1:48th scale Starfighter, presented as "new" but the molds are from 1972, that will be my last revell kit literally! !!😂👎

[@martinjrgensen8234]

I built the Razorcrest this year. And oh boy. The drop in quality from Bandai Star Wars was shocking.

[@gregchijoff9959]

I love the rubber gloves. This could make a good introduction for a Benny Hill clip! 😂

[@johnmaddox7432]

Trumpeter and Eduard have put out some real stinkers as well. 1/32 Mig3, P38 and several others from Trumpeter. The 1/48 series of I16s from Eduard my fingers are still smarting from trying to warp the wings back into shape at the roots.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Oh yes indeed.

[@kittyhawk9707]

I built their Hunter and i found it great .. builds into a rather nice looking model

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

1/32?

[@kittyhawk9707]

@@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab No Peter, 1/72 scale

[@Ducknuck84]

Back when the US side of revell went bust I had hopes that a lot of the pushing of the old kits state side would end but alas it was not to be. What really sucks is that with the sparsity of hobby shops state side, craft stores are really the only exposure most people have with scale modeling unless they go online or hunt down those specialty shops and all those craft stores carry if you want any military scale kits are these worn out revell kits. with a smattering of ancient round 2 reboxs of Linberg kits

[@emmabird9745]

Hi, I am very much a returner. In the 60s I used to reguard Revell very highly. I always did 1/72 (in aircraft) and I thought their range well thought out and they made kits which others did not such as the SE5, Fokker DVII, SPAD and DH2. They were excelent and went together well with no filler and so on. Those I wouldn't mind building again. The one I was disappointed with was the Memphis Belle which by 1965 standard was primitive, eg the turrets were a tranparentcy with a pin, no body to it at all. I realise that modern kits have so much more, more detail. more parts so obviously recent toolings should be good. I totally agree that old tooled kits should be clearly labeled as such and nothing, not even oldies should go on sale that does not build satisfactorily straight out of the box. So where did Revell lose the plot so badly? On the subject of display stands, every kit Revell, Airfix, Frog had one but we never used them (except as a source of plastic for convertions or scratch build) they were simply not much good.

[@Peter-Oxley-Modelling-Lab]

Yeah the Matchbox stands were the best...😉