Were they always this bad in the 60s? Review of Airfix USA Kit of the HMS Hood it's just not British

[@tomsenior7405]

"Constant Scale" was the main feature of Airfix. This legend was boldly displayed across the top of their early catalogues.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Ahhh my Bad… just never seen that on an Airfix kit box before

[@jaws848]

Yes they WERE that bad......have you seen the newley reissued "Bristol Belvedre" helicppter from the vintage classic line......straight up reissue with all the faults and fit issues it originaly had and from all the reviews i have watched about it it is total garbage.....yes i realise its decades old now and not up to todays standard but even for a "vintage classic" its AWFUL......as much as i love old kits from the 50s/60s /70s that is 1 kit i will NOT be buying.....infact i will be avoiding it like the plague.

[@stigkerstin]

Bought the "Shell Welder" from a site here in Sweden. Reduced price because of some missing parts. Original box from - 64. I built it when I was a kid,but didn't have the patience to do it right. But now at the age of 75 I had more patience and knowledge so I think the result turned out better now.I notice a lot of flash and I had to fix the bad fit on some details and make a propeller that was missing. But it sure was a great joy to see this kit again at the age of 75.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes the nostalgia usually out weights the kits miss givings

[@bob_._.]

We didn't worry about the gaps back in the day because we had this glue, Testor's Model Cement... thick liquid, almost a gel, came in a lead foil tube, so aggressive the plastic would soften enough to warp into position while the actual seams would melt into oozy blobs and the fumes let you see colors that are not found in nature. '60s model kits were lots of flash, lots of bad sink holes and ejection pin marks. Plus it's not unusual for large pieces to take on some warpage over time if they're just sitting open in the box (it's probably the deck pieces); you could try softening them in a hot water bath and set them on a flat surface to cool.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

You know I have been building model kits for 60 years matey?

[@corvanha1]

I built Airfix kits since 1958, so am familiar with the shortcomings, but never was a problem. In my youth they all looked perfect. Recently rebuilding some "vintage classics" well that's a blow to my memories, had better nog begun with it again. But good enough for exercises in fitting, repairing and painting, yes, SINKHOLES. Airfix takes it a bit lightly in those re releases.

[@MarkD-g4s]

I built this Airfix (British version) kit in the last 60's and it had the sink holes just like your kit. But I still enjoyed putting it together at the time

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Did you have numbers on the parts and sprues though Mark?

[@MarkD-g4s]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Hi Harry, the lifeboats and secondary gun turrets had the sink holes just like your kit. When I saw your video, I instantly remembered them on my kit all those years ago. Mark

[@musoseven8218]

I remember some Airfix kits from the 1960s and 1970s being just like that (Ive Monogram kits much better). Sink and gas holes, misformed parts, flash etc, on Aitfix kits of that era (some of it could be due to, too fast a removal from the tooling, before cooling). I was born and bred in blighty btw, still here too. My impression of Airfix kits from that era? 50% were deeply flawed. We welcomed the likes of Tamiya with open arms for that very reason, making build time much more pleasurable, pleasant. I know my comments are contrary to yours, but I well remember my dream kit, the, circa 1971, 1/72 Hercules kit. A joint birthday and EXmas present. It was a complete dog of a kit - even the fuselage was badly twisted. Ive probably still got it in the loft🤔 It broke my heart as a kid, even with replacement parts, it was a dud. Having said all of that? The ships, figures, horses, small aircraft ranged from very good, to okay. The other 50% was dire though!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Seems we all had different experiences in different parts of the world.

[@babylonsburning1]

Hi Harry. I remember Airfix ships with lots of sink holes. Only I didn't realise at the time that is what they were. Watching this vid brought it all back and you explaining what those marks were reminded me. I had always thought that they were intentional.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Ha ha yes we did not know any better back then… but this kit is really bad. See my pinned post at the top.

[@richardhumm1422]

Airfix didn't start adding part numbers to the sprues until the mid-1960s - I've got original mouldings in early boxes that show this. Airfix kits for the American market were moulded by MPC in Michigan, and they also made some changes to the tooling, mostly surface detail on the earlier kits.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

You are correct and my research since making this video confirms it. I built the later kit with numbering and better plastic from the UK. See my pinned post at the top.

[@ericbeaton7211]

Hi, Harry, like you I remember building most of these Airfix WW11 ship kits back in the sixties and seventies. Maybe it is selective memory, but I don’t ever remember having a problem with them. Or maybe back then we didn’t know enough about what we were building to expect better than we got at the time.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

They were not as bad if you got the later UK version. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@nicholasmoore2590]

From the UK. I built this kit in the early 70s and it was fine. No sink holes, a tiny bit of flash, it had part numbers, no problems at all!.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Same with my build in 1967

[@barrygibbons2803]

Harry Ive got the 1/72 B17. 1963 Airfix of America , 1964 British Airfix boxing and 1975 British Airfix boxing. Both 1960s versions have no numbers on sprue or on the inside of larger parts. the instructions number the parts though. I suppose you just compare the part to the illustration in the instructions. Any way this was a trip down nostalgia lane. I started the hobby in the 1970's and it is only recently that I have had any 1960's kits thanks to ebay sellers. Love your channel Harry, you bloody legend...

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Thanks Barry… seems Airfix only started numbering the parts in 1965. My build back in 1967 did have part numbers, as did all my Airfix kits. This is the first pre ‘65 kit and one of the few USA releases I have seen. I know what to avoid in future.

[@I_Don_t_want_a_handle]

I used to make these kits as a kid and I don't remember them as being bad. The hulls were often warped and the desks didn't always fit. Injector marks were standard, sink holes popped up now and again ( if that is possible ) and pegs often had to be filed to fit into holes ... or the holes were too big. I loved them.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

They were not that bad for me either, and I found out why this kit is so poor. Read my pinned post at the top.

[@tomsenior7405]

Great tutorials, Cheers mate. I built Hood when I was very young in the early 1970s. The kit was a bugger to build. It was the first time I resorted to using Sellotape (Durex for you Antipodeans) to keep the parts in place while the glue went off. I was a very novice modeller, but with the aid of multiple Modellers' Magazines and the Airfix Magazine, I learned a lot very quickly. So yes, many of the old Airfix kits required a lot of sanding and filling. (I made filler by saturating chopped up sprues in Polystyrene Cement). Nowadays there are so many tools and products on the market to make the job a little easier. Also, modern kits are CAD processed with Laser scans, for accuracy. The old design process involved hand drawn blueprints by Draughtsmen and then carving by Artisans. This was the method 70 years ago. New Production methods have vastly reduced the guesswork associated with the design process. You know all this stuff. You are an expert. I hope this helps you with the Algorithm. Keep up your great work. Best Wishes from England.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Thanks Tom… I did some more research and added a pinned comment to the top

[@tomsenior7405]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Excellent. I was aware that Airfix tried to break into the lucrative North American market and that kits were packaged in the USA under licence. (I have a few First Issue HO/OO Boxes with 50c emblazoned on the box, along with "Made in the USA" in the fine print. It makes sense to me that kits manufactured in this way could be of a lesser quality. Airfix have made use of France and India over the years, in order to reduce production costs. I thoroughly enjoyed this change of tack. Thank you for your hard work. Best Wishes.

[@michaelpeters1644]

As I remember, and I go back to making Airfix kits as a kid in the early sixties, there were no parts numbers alongside the parts on the sprues, I think they were a later development. You were supposed to look on the instruction sheet, and it would say something like, 'locate and cement part 47' or whatever alongside a drawing of the relevant part. That was fine if building a 1/72 Hurricane with about fifteen parts or more, building a ship like The Hood in 1/600 made it a bit more difficult.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

So it seems and I finally found out why my memory of this kit is so much better than this USA release. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@philsmodelmaking2260]

hello harry! I've been building the Hood kit on and off for a while now, mine is a new vintage classic I bought a couple of years ago, there was certainly a lot more flash on some parts on mine, (propeller shafts, and main guns for instance) while other parts are nicely flash free, and I've been replacing stuff anyway with a white ensign p/e set, as regards the numbers on the sprues, comparing my kit to yours, at some point in its life (and my box says this was tooled in 1960) the sprues had number tabs, and long flat runners that come out and around a line of parts with numbers on added, its only after seeing your genuine vintage kit, that makes this quite obvious. as regards fit, on mine part 17 that you point at was incredibly warped, and the hull halves, and decks were all warped to a degree, that required massive clampage to beat it into submission!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes they added numbers later, and that was the kit I built in the 60s. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@philsmodelmaking2260]

@@HarryHoudiniModels yeah just seen it, its always interesting to me how sometimes the kits have as interesting a history as the real things they represent!

[@nickbrough8335]

I built the 1/600 Airfix Hood from new in the 1970s. Its still has the 5.5inch secondary battery from the early 1930s fit out. I think inbuilt most of the RN ones apart from Belfast and Warspite (which i was given built and painted from a work friend of my dads). Happy days.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes they were happy days.. I practically built all the Airfix ship kits back in the 60s and 70s. But never one like this! See my pinned post at the top.

[@nickbrough8335]

@@HarryHoudiniModels my tools were small scissors, mums nail file and tube glue. I dont recall flash ever being much of a problem or being disappointed by seams (although i doubt i noticed as much.

[@ianbryceland5114]

Hi Harry. I am currently building a rerelease of this kit in the UK. It had serious fit issues the same as your kit, warped hull, loads of flash etc. I dont think i have ever used so much putty. That said, i am enjoying the build. I am using it to hone my skills. I even had a go a scratch building the gun barrels and blast bags.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Thanks Ian, and yes a release of the worn out 1964 moulds would of course have those issues after 60 years. However the Classic Airfix kits I built were never that bad back in the 60s, and other modellers have commented the same on here. This Airfix Corporation of America boxing is awful.

[@MillwalltheCat]

Just had a look at my UK Airfix Hood (Red Stripe Box) from the 'stash', and the spues are 'hexagonal' in section (apart from the hull attachments), unlike the 'round' section in your review kit. They are also numbered with the tabs as we're used to seeing. I also noticed the the 'Airfix' logo was crudely machined off from the underside of the deck on the review kit. Something's not right about it. Very interesting. Looks like some homework is required to solve this! Great vid by the way. Edit: Found out why the HMS Hood I have is so different. It's actually the Prinz Eugen in the Hood box. What a dope.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

LOL yes I reviewed the Airfix Prinz Eugen not long ago… lovely kit

[@erebus1964]

I built some Airfix 1/600 at an age of around 10-12 years (must have been in the mid '70s). I can only remember building the "Prinz Eugen" and the "Warspite" for sure, but there were one or two others which I cannot recall. I had a good memory of the kits and at an age around 45 or so, I wanted to give the kits another try with some more exprience. When I got them I was so disappointed that I sold them again. Same story with Heller 1/400. Times have changed and also what is provided by more contemporary manufacturers today. I still have other well-aged kits in my stash, just for sentimentality reasons (1/24 Revell Gemini Capsule for example) where I am aware of its weaknesses. But for the rather small ship models, I did not want to live with the outdated quality. But to each his own. If someone really likes them, why not building them today. They're a nice piece of modelling history. And I am really missing the old Airfix catalogues where I was browsing in back and forth as a kid.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes I used to drool over those catalogs

[@donnymurray7439]

Hi man I’ve recently purchased a brand new model of the HMS Hood and there is part numbers on all the parts and the mould quality it perfect perhaps your kit is a counterfeit, I’d love to see you make a build video of the hood and add a brass detail kit thanks man🤙

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Good to hear the Airfix Vintage Classic rerelease are a better mould. Who knows why this La’Merican version is so poor, but I hear they were like that back then.

[@MichaelCampin]

I've just looked at my models of HMS Hood and I agree with you the old models usually had part numbers stamped into them and the UK instructions also said " locate and cement " or locate but do not cement" I'm 64 so we are of an age

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes my build back in the 60s was so much better and I found out why. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

In answer to all your questions and mine about this kit: After some research and confirmation from viewers I now know this…. 1960 Airfix first tooled the Hood with no part numbers on the sprues or parts 1963 USA kit is a poor version of this tooling with very bad plastic moulding & instructions 1969 Airfix added the part numbers to the parts and sprues on their moulding 1969 I built this kit, so that is my memory of it with part numbers on the sprues and tabs on the trees. It was also a lot better moulded coming direct from the U.K. to Australia. This I believe explains the poor condition of this 1963 USA release and why my memory of the 1964 kit built in 1969 was so much better.

[@Sarah-JaneR32]

I remember building the HMS Hood in the old days, no way can I remember how it was though, was wondering if that was a later molding and put in the old box, or a copy of Airfix sprues, model on

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I suspect the same.. the old switch-a-roo to rip you off!

[@george_364]

A later moulding would have had part numbers. The Hood model in the Vintage classics range certainly has them.

[@davidorr6627]

The 1973 UK boxing has instructions with 3 sections but no written instructions. It's easy enough to build just from the diagrams. Mine had the same sinkholes, but they weren't hard to sort out. There was a sinkhole in front of turret 1 which was bit of a pain as I had to rescribe the decking. It also had a bit of flash, but again not too hard to remove. The only bit I had any issues with was gluing the upper deck on. It kept popping up and needed a few tries to get it all stuck down. The hull, main decks and all of the superstructure went together easily with minimal filling. Mine had numbers on the sprues and I think some parts had numbers inside them. If you are going to build it, make sure you don't paint the bottom of the hull red as shown on the box and the instructions. It was an undefined grey colour. I used SMS Have Glass Grey.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Thanks David.. turns out Airfix added tab and part numbers in their 1964 version, so this USA release predates what I experienced in 1967 building a much better moulded kit from the UK with numbering,

[@irontank1956]

Hello Mate, I started building models back in the 60's and I can remember and it was probably Revell Missouri . It had the the big guns and the secondary 5 in.turret guns, It was all good. But the antiaircraft turrets always looked odd and I noticed that when I was akid. They had no barrels . I wish I had one to compare it with the ones they make now. Love your show and I dont mind the waffling.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I never experienced Revell until after a decade of building Airfix kits. I found the Revell kits were awful compared to what I experienced from Airfix in the mid 1960s-70s. But then I have never built an Airfix Corporation of America kit before. They are very, very, different to what we had from UK Airfix back then.

[@Randomstuffs261]

Our fearless leader is back once again

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Bow and curtsy when you say that…. hehe

[@mh53j]

Can't say about US Airfix this early, but Airfix kits in the 70s that were released by MPC (like this one, check the instructions) were all molded in the UK. Usually was noted that kit was made in England but packaged in the US.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes they did… maybe this is a La’Merrycan moulded kit?

[@digitalcareline]

Is it possible the box had been kept and refilled with a later issue. - I would keep the boxes for the art (Admittedly flattened) - or maybe done in a rush for export

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I wondered about that too, but no, this is a dog of a kit. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@Adam_Boots]

I got a bit curious and did a bit of research on ebay. From what I am able to tell the very first editions of the Hood did not have numbers on the sprue. I wasn't able to find any 1964 editions on ebay unfortunately however I did find the 1973 edition and some of the sprues have had numbers added to them. The USA release was done in 1965 and there is a gap of 8 years between that one and the 1973 version which is the next release. My guess is after the 1964 the tooling was sent to America for their release of the kit. They were probably a bit worn at that point which is why there were a few issues. After that I would guess they were sent back and retooled to fix any issues. At that point the numbers were added to the sprues.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I also did some further research and discovered what happened. Please read my post pinned at the top.

[@MatterusOD]

Hi Harry. Thanks for the vid. Do you have a Airfix Bismarck? Is it as crappy? It's got even older moulds. I remember lots of ships boats and other such solid pieces often having sink marks in Airfix ship kits. I think it was a tech/materials problem in the day. Do new vintage releases have the same? Do they have less sink marks but more flash due the higher pressures/new plastics? Did they add numbers later? Do I need a good lie down? Did more tanks/planes as a kid so was a bit more of a Matchbox fan. My ships did tend to blow up quite a bit due to fire cracker related incidents in the neighbours pool. Cheers from South Oz.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes I knew about the Airfix Bismuck… and even avoided building it back in the 60s. However I did some research and discovered why this kit is so awful. See my pinned post at the top.

[@nigelconnor6960]

Welcome to my channel,- as regular viewers...? First time in UK I've ever seen you mate...great video, keep them being piped, bagpiped into the UK -, blighty!!!! 🇬🇧🇳🇿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿👍👍👍.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I always say G’day and welcome to my channel, workbench or hobby room. Whether you are a new visitor or a returning viewer my greeting works for all. Been on KZbin for over a decade.

[@judebrad]

Funny how our eyesight was better in the 1970's but we were blind to the faults and errors in the kits.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Minor faults and less detail sure, but going by the comments here I was right for the most part. I have since discovered Airfix added numbers on parts and sprues from 1965. My first Airfix builds were in 1967. This 1963 Airfix Corporation of America kit is just awful.

[@tonyhonour665]

I built one in the 1970's. I don't remember having any issues with it, apart from the Weldtite glue!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Seems the later 60’s release was better and had the sprue numbers and better instructions. Just like you, this was the kit I had built and enjoyed half a century ago.

[@davidjennings9128]

Hi Harry When i was building airfix hms hood the only think i had over come was gaps in the between decking and structure parts ,parts were numbers so that wasn’t a problem, I don’t understand why the parts are numbered ,as far as I remember airfix kits were number ,so is this a very early kit

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I found out why this kit has no numbers. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@85inexact]

How good was the QMHE this year? My first year entering and I got a highly commended, coming for a prize next year!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Well done matey… hope you get a win next year. I have a video with tips for doing what the judges want so you are pretty certain of a win. kzbin.info/www/bejne/j5bYdayJjL9_ac0

[@85inexact]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Thank you Harry, watching it now

[@paulcorrigan649]

I've not long since built a 60s Hood. This has to be moulded in the USA. I had numbers on the parts and fit was pretty good.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes you are right.. see my new pinned post at the top.

[@Tonys-Hobby-Room]

Very strange as the history seems to suggest airfix usa were importers rather than manufacturers. 1963-1965 : Airfix Corporation of America - This import company was set up in 1963 by Airfix to distribute the Airfix line in the USA and lasted until 1965 when MPC assumed the role, using the Airfix-Craftmaster logo. All of the Airfix Corporation kits appeared with the black background box-art and the Airfix-72 (or Airfix-32) logo.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes this is one of early bad releases by ACOA and probably why the La’Merrycans really dislike Airfix. I don’t blame them. We had a much better experience with the later UK kits.

[@eugenedubey1758]

Good grief, what a convoluted history. So no worries Harry, your memory is ok.

[@patrickrobinson-mh5jw]

I built all these ships in the late 60's/70's and all were put together never any problems and looked good all parts were numbered And only remember the odd sink holes. in fact never had any problem with Airfix in my 50 yrs of building wish they still named all the Parts 😁

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Same here and I found out why this kit is a dog. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@mikelewis7405]

I built an Airfix Hood about 1970. In fact I had most of the 1/600 Airfixship models. The best was the HMS Repulse. All the others needed a great deal of elbow grease to assemble. Unfortunately, there were a number of warships they missed such as the R class and the cruiser Exeter. Otherwise loved the 1/600 scale.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

My favourite scale too

[@carlwear1249]

Pyro did a model of HMS Exeter. I built it years ago and it came out quite well. Would have been better if I had built it properly the first time around. Then the cat did more damage to it then the graf spree when he knocked it off a shelf.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Bask Dercat knocked my Graff Spee off the bookcase many years ago. Now all models are locked up in display cases.

[@robbielee2148]

I managed to retain the my complete line of 1/600 Airfix WW2 warships from the 60s and 70s. Now I am creating new ones by kitbashing, so far: Unicorn, Norfolk, Uganda, Enterprise(HMS) and soon to come a R class. It is great fun being able to make all the ships I had wished for, takes a lot more time but the end result is so satisfying.

[@robertgrimsted877]

I got the trumpeter kit it’s a better kit but the fly hawk kit is on a different level love the vids harry

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Well you would hope so it… it was tooled nearly half a century later!

[@andrewcox4386]

Constant scale meant 1/700 for ships, 1/72, etc for aircraft rather than the Revell "whatever scale fits in the box".

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes I remember that on the catalogues, but 1/600 for Airfix, however never on the kit boxes.

[@glenchapman3899]

I wonder if it is a case of not knowing any better. Recently I got a copy of a car racing game that I loved in the 1990s I recalled how good the graphics were at the time. Fired it up and it felt like I was watching a bunch of tetris blocks move around a track

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I wondered if my memory was going senile… but no. I figured out what is going on here. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@cosmarendy8417]

Jealous Harry, I was supposed to attend the show but life got in the way. Loved.y kit?

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Not the kit I remember from the ‘60s but now I know it was a different version. See pinned post at rop.

[@andrewcox4386]

I built this kit as a kid in the UK in the 70s & even as a kid I remember the poor fit joint around the quarter deck step.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

That is true… however the missing numbers was a mystery until I found out why. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@Lambonights]

Oh! In other news Harry, also snagged an Airfix multi kit box of "Destroyers of WWII", no 05204. In it, it has the Cossack, Campbeltown, Hotspur and Narvik Class Destroyers, all in 1/600 scale. It's not arrived as yet but, as it is a kit from the early 2000s, I am wondering how its parts will be. I am expecting lots of flash but hope they will go together well with some clean up. 🤞

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

They must be tiny in that scale. My kraken diorama was a 1/700 scale destroyer and it was miniscule. Just one kraken mouthful!

[@Lambonights]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Well, I'll find out soon when they arrive. Already have the Fearless, love these kits, and, although a bit on the small side, they still have a good bit of detail. Obviously they won't match the battleship or carrier kits of a similar scale, but I am still very much a novice modeller Harry, not a master like yourself so, these will be good for me.

[@Lambonights]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Well the Destroyer kits arrived today Harry and my goodness were you right! They are so small! I'll build em anyway. The Narvik has great detail, more than the others, and the Campbeltown has charm. The other two are ok too. No sinkholes that I could see, at least. Good enough for a novice like me, I am happy with em. 🙂

[@1hackmodeller557]

Can't wait to see the final result. Love that old Hood kit.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Don’t hold your breath

[@1hackmodeller557]

​@@HarryHoudiniModelsGive it a go. Some PE, scratch building, a nice paint job with some weathering, rigging, and she'll look nice.

[@anthonylichfield3540]

Hello there mate i think you are right sure they had part numbers on the part or the sprue we are of a similar vintage i probly started building airfix around 1963 anyway as always happy modelling everyone 👍

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Maybe its a fake moulding or revised for the USA market?

[@pgtips9511]

Could this particular kit have been a test moulding, produced before the full production run?

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

A good theory but no. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@PiperStart]

Having built the Airfix HMS Hood, the kit is much better than the Bismarck, but worse than the HMS Suffolk. Admittedly, I built the white box Suffolk, and the other two were red box kits. The kit you reviewed could be a Lindberg or Revell mould.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes I wondered if it was a swap out but no. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@jayconstantine5928]

Harry, how do you know that someone in the past has not put a newer moulding into the old box and sold it onto the guy at the show as an original?

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I had considered that but no, this is just a dog of a kit. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@jetmec]

I built the airfix Hood, I remember it being better than what you have

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

So did I and that had me wondering if my memory was going senile. But no I did have a better experience. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@Buddieboy1957]

Me too. I built it in 1972 and as I remember it was a good kit for its day. I live in the UK.

[@SimbianMinistry]

You're right about the numbers Harry - I had a Hood a few yrs ago... maybe not quite as old as yours, but prob a 70s 'pop' from the mould. Definitely had number tabs attached to the sprues. That ain't a UK moulding, almost certainly as you think, moulded in USA I also remember a few sink holes and some flash, but nowhere near what you have there.

[@SimbianMinistry]

I've just looked it up on one of my favourite parts/instructions websites... www.super-hobby.com/products/HMS-Hood-28189673.html Same site is great for looking at the sprues before you buy, and instructions if you've lost/damaged them. Search at the top... they have a huge database of kit photos.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes they added numbers in 1964, which was the kit I built. See my pinned post at the top.

[@marklivingstone3710]

The thing I never got with Airfix is the choices they made. Most modellers want the HMS Hood in May 1941……..so they released a kit of it in (I assume) mid 1920s. The iconic aircraft of the Battle of Britain were the Spitfire Mk1A and the Messerschmidt BF109 E3 …..so they released the Spitfire Mk IX and the BF109 G6. The iconic passenger ship of the early 20th century was the Titanic with possibly the Lusitania as 2nd…….so they released the Mauretania. You get the idea. But then they got confused why people started looking for alternative kits of models people actually wanted.😊

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

The thing with Airfix, especially the kits tooled in the 60’s and 70’s, is the location, demographic, and history of their buying base. Post War English, who remembered and were still experiencing the later Spitfires, Messerschmitts and other iconic machines from WWII at airshows, museums and cinema. What was vougue back then and what the great unwashed got excited about is not what we experience half a century later. Their kits were produced from the rhythm of the times, and were spot on for their fans back then, hence Airfix massive success in the 60’s and 70’s.

[@ajivins1]

Could this be a recent, worn out kit put in a vintage box?

[@Lambonights]

No, because Harry said none of the parts were numbered. A tell-tale sign that this kit really is an early 60s one. Sad for him, I am, as it should be much better than this. I guess, maybe, it could be a kit from another manufacturer just stuck in an Airfix box but, by the looks of things, the parts still tally with the Airfix instructions in the kit. If it came from another kit maker, there would be differences in the parts. To me, this looks like a genuine American Airfix kit, but at least Harry's experiences here, serve as a warning to the rest of us as I also have a Heinkel He111, still factory sealed, from the same time period and also made in America. I am scared to open it now and discover what I'll find inside.....

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Actually the recent “Vintage Classic” release from Airfix is not too bad. I might get one to compare. The reason for the badness of this kit is in my post pinned to the top.

[@Lambonights]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Maybe you just got unlucky with your kit. An apprentice or something was on the moulds that day? I have an Airfix HP Jetstream Vintage Classic and that's a great wee kit. Maybe they spruced up those old moulds?

[@TringmotionCoUk]

I built it recently, and I thought it was pretty nice. Almost done and I thought it needed a small amount of rigging. Still waiting 6 months later 😂 Mine was brand new, it was far from perfect, but I didn't use bags of filler

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

The mouldings after 1970 were much better, which was more likely the Hood I built in my childhood. I already have a buyer for this La’Merrycan release who collects them. So I will look instead for a later moulding like the one I built half a century ago.

[@timroberts69]

I hope Becker's entries were better than Raygun's performance at the Olympics.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Ha ha.. well he won a handful of medals at least!

[@TheWombat2012]

Scale used to be a very variable thing back then. I recently build a 1960’s kit of the sailing warship HMS Victory, supposedly in 1/146 scale (not 1/144, 1/146 for some reason). After putting up with weird positioning of numbers on the sprue, I finished it and decided to fit some sailor figures to the deck, so ordered some 1/144 scale figures. They ended up looking like they would be sailors ten feet tall compared to the models size😂. I suspect the scale was just whatever they thought looked good on the box.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Actually Airfix do not post a scale for their sailing ships. The rest of their range were a constant scale in each genre. Sailing Ship kits were, and still are - I am looking you Heller and Revell - a very fluid (joke intended) scale thing. The scales were assumed later, not usually published on the Airfix box. This all had to do with the Wooden models they used to create the Sailing Ship plastic mouldings back then, of which scale was unknown, and in many cases the real ships they were based on had no accurate known size, like the St Louis. However the Poms do have a version of the Victory available so it’s real scale can be calculated as long as you use stem post to stern post measurements not over all length which varies for every ship depending on rig and refit. As for their warships in 1:600. I have found them all to be pretty close to scale size. My comment was Airfix in my 60 years of experience never put “constant scale” on the ship boxes. They listed scales in their catalogues, and did refer to the aircaft range as “1/72 constant scale”.

[@dougclingingsmith9412]

Reminds me of the old Lindberg line.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Wash your mouth out with soap! But yes you are probably right LOL

[@idiot-cd6pl]

This kit was originally released virtually in tandem with the Bismark. And when I originally made this kit on its first release I remember being very disappointed with it to me who had never even heard of the HMS Hood to me it looked very incomplete of course I later learnt that this model was as she appeared before the war basically in her 1920->30's guise. To me the Bismark was by far the better of the two kits. By todays Standard both kits are terrible, I remade the Hood kit about 10 years ago as a water-line model which greatly improved the look of the model but it was still a huge disappointment. In fact I personally think all these early Airfix 1/600 scale war-ships should be scrapped, or sold with a proper PE set to correct some of the major short-comings like railings.. Now if you compare these early kits with the much later models like the KG V these later kits are very good indeed. I started the KG V, also as a water-line model, few years back not really looking forward to it after my memories of the Hood. And was i in for a surprise It was actually a beautiful kit and a joy to build with minimal flash and although it did have sink marks they were no where as bad as the Hood, and surprisingly i enjoyed every bit of the build. The Airfix Hood together with the Graph Spee should both be dropped from a great height and never seen again. Anyway I hope you enjoy your Airfix HMS Hood it can be made into a semi decant model but to my eyes is it really worth it??

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I am on my 3rd Airfix Warspite build and have loved all 3 of them. Each time I brought more experience and skills to the build and took it further. The current build is on my channel. I agree with your comments on the Airfix Bismarck, it was a shocker but the UK version of the Hood wasn’t that bad when I built it in ‘67. However this USA ‘63 kit is just awful.

[@NorthDevonModelSociety]

I built a fairly modern boxing of the Hood. Yes, there were a couple of sink marks, but nowhere near as bad as your kit. The fit was good for a kit of its age. I think that my kit was 'popped' by Heller in Trun, using the softer grey plastic.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

If it was an 80’s kit then yes it probably was the plastic from Heller. However I did sort out the missing part number mystery. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@subliminalstyrene811]

As far as i'm concerned all kits produced in America are of inferior quality. I build a lot of 24 scale cars and trucks, the cars from companies like Tamiya, Aoshima, Fujimi, Hasegawa, and the trucks predominantly from Italeri and all those kits were excellent builds. When I was younger I bought a lot of AMT/ERTL, Monogram, Revell USA and the quality was always shit, everything was on trees instead of sprues, flash on every single part, often parts were not finished in the moulding process properly, had to take a few back to the shops for refunds as the body shells weren't completely moulded. Naaaah ! I tend to stay away from anything 'Made in the USA' and only buy a yank kit if the subject matter is not available elsewhere. I need to get an HMS Hood now, Thanks a lot Harry ;)

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

You are spot on matey. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@JoséSette-z9h]

I’ve never built this kit but I am sure that the mold used for the UK and US releases was the same. Early kits were very crude and it would have made no economic sense to make a new mold of a British subject first the US market (molds are very expensive). Your memory is letting you down, but I also like to look at the past thru rose-tinted glasses. Unfortunately, reality is often quite different

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Mould yes, plastic and instructions no. See my pinned post at the top.

[@JoséSette-z9h]

@@HarryHoudiniModelsyou’re right! And you say so right at beginning of video. How did I miss that? My bad

[@Reds_Scrapyard]

it looks like the molding equipment wasn't quite up to operating temperature.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Somebody stuffed up

[@idiot-cd6pl]

You'll need to shim the rear of the main to weather deck.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

That is true and not a major problem

[@Lambonights]

Well, this video scared me, Harry. I have an American Airfix white box of the Heinkel He111, but It's still sealed, never been opened since it left the factory in the 60s. Am I going to find a horror when I finally break those seals? 😬 For what it is worth, your kit looks no worse than the ones from the 90s and 2000s Harry, but like you, I was expecting something much better given its vintage. Disappointing yes but still worth building I thinks. It's just going to need more TLC to get a result.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes my reaction was partially based on rose tinted glasses and nostalgia when thinking back to the kits I built in the 60’s. But also I was right, Airfix put numbers on the parts and sprues after 1965, and the first Airfix kit I built was in 1967. So my memory was half ok. But the depth of sink holes and general bad fit was not typical of the kits I made then either, as confirmed by many responses in the comments. I have built 3 Airfix Warspites, 1967, 2010 and 2022, the latter being red boxes, and despite their age with worn out moulds and the new horrid plastic, were still far better kits than this USA release of the Hood.

[@Lambonights]

@@HarryHoudiniModels Feel sorry for you Harry but, as I found out myself, just because a kit is very old, it isn't always a guarantee the moulding will be perfect and Airfix isn't the only offender here either. I have two Revell HMS Mayflowers, as I love that ship. A recent brand new one and another from the late 60s, early 70s. The newer kit has far less flash. Makes no sense to me at all. 🤷‍♀

[@markforrest2864]

My UK made hood has numbers on the sprue

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Sure has…. that’s the one I built back in the early 70s

[@neilhughes9310]

This appears to be a Hood from an alternative universe. Those are definitely UFOs firing death rays on the cover. Luftwaffe '46? I built the Airfix 1/600 Hood (UK boxing) about 20 years ago and it was way better than this. Not perfect but not at all bad.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes that alternate universe is La’Merry car. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@onixfieroandscalemodelworks]

I e run into a few kits with no part numbers, most date back to the 50s and 60s. I don’t know about airfix back then but some of the american kits from back then were horrible. Even to the 80s some of the Japanese kits were pretty bad. Maybe I’m crazy but I like those kits that make me work for it.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Go for it matey…

[@crabfat1494]

OMG...When the first look at the instructions shows "The HMS Hood".....you know it's not British. Then the instructions show the model being built from the Stbd side aspect...you know it's not British. And as for the box art 🥵

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

It certainly is not British! Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@crabfat1494]

@@HarryHoudiniModels I know what you said...i was pointing out the ways you could tell without getting as far as looking at the contents. . I would reseal the box keep it as a rare collectablre .

[@georgecoventry8441]

I remember the Airfix Hood well. I bought it in the mid-1960's and attempted to build it, but it really was a very poor quality and frustrating kit. I don't think I ever finished it. Poor fit, warped hull, poorly detailed, just downright disappointing. Their Bismarck was not very good either. The best Bismarck in the 60's turned out to be Revell's kit in, I think, 1/570 scale, which was quite good for the time, although it has been greatly surpassed since. Now, Airfix did many kits in the 60's that I really liked, and I built a ton of them........but HMS Hood had to be one of their very worst. A pity, because it's such a classic and beautiful ship!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I knew the Airfix Bismarck was awful so never built it in the day. However I have fond memories of the Airfix Hood and it was placed in the front of my display cabinet. My kit had sprue and part numbers, and of course the better UK Airfix instructions and box art. Maybe the latter lent to a more enjoyable experience?

[@georgecoventry8441]

@@HarryHoudiniModels - Maybe so. I don't know for sure if mine was produced in the USA or the UK, but I did buy it in the USA. I can't remember which box it was in, having seen so many different box art versions in the many years after.

[@tedjohnston9314]

I called this one the “Searchlight Hood” haha

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

why?

[@tedjohnston9314]

See the searchlights on the upper right side of the box art? I built an entire all British 1/600 Airfix fleet in the 1960’s: Hood, Nelson, Warspite, Ark Royal, Victorious, Tiger, Suffolk, Devonshire, Daring, Hardy, Cossack, plus a 1/600 Aurora KGV. Took up 3 shelves and a whole wall in my room.

[@rickoverink9778]

At least Becker doesn't do breakdancing😅

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

He might! LOL

[@briannelson6054]

They were the products of their time! What do you expect from 60+ year old kits! When I was growing up in the 50s/60s you were happy just HAVE a kit and honed your skills improving it. At least Airfix kept to constant scales so a collection was comparative. Revell scaled their kits to fit the damn box! All the early kits ie Airfix,Revell, Aurora, Lindbergh etc were ALL primitive. Don't just knock Airfix. With etched frets and all the after market items and paints available nowadays, we tend not to build "out of the box" - exactly as we did all those years ago but without the extras !!!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I’m not knocking Aifix. I love Airfix and built this kit in the day, as well as enjoying the “Vintage Classic” releases today. I have even rebuilt the Airfix Warspite after first doing it in 1967, then 2010, and currently have a full update build going. So I am well aware of Airfix’ short comings from the 60’s, what I am knocking is this surprisingly poor release from America. The Yanks have ruined this kit.

[@robertgrimsted877]

Belfast is the only good kit and the new type 45 distroyer kit that airfix has done well

[@PeterAblitt]

HMS Belfast in the 1970s kit format was good, destroyers were fiddly in my opinion.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

The Airfix Warspite was always a nice build. I really enjoyed mine in the 60s and even had fun with it lately with a Red Box moulding. All depends which era kit you first experienced.

[@duck853]

Naw man, that's what Airfix was like for me in the 70s. Exactly like this. I've always wondered why Brits and Aussies would get all excited about Airfix and this whole time us Americans are thinking you guys don't know quality. I've never had a "good" Airfix kit growing up.

[@raymondwoods2410]

Me either ! They were nightmare kits!

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

It seems the USA released kits were awful. We experience the better later UK versions with much cleaner moulding and parts numbered. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@Joepacker]

Maybe you got sold a newer injection kit using an old mold and put inside an old box to make it look like its and old kit to get more money for it.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I wondered that as well but no. The USA ‘63 release was an awful kit. See my pinned post at the top.

[@nigelconnor6960]

......no numbers on the sprews...🤔...that's strange for old Airfix....

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

It is and also the first time I have seen it, however I have since learned that they apparently only started adding numbers to the kit parts from 1965 onwards.

[@roberthenderson2580]

The short answer to your question is yes.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

The answer is no… I built the UK version of this kit back in ‘67 and it was fine, as have many other commenters. This ‘63 USA kit is a dog.

[@roberthenderson2580]

@@HarryHoudiniModels I say "yes" because I was cursed by having only US version of Airfix kits back in the day.

[@johndavis5835]

I built kits in the US in the 70s, most kits were ok but when I put together my first Tamiya in the early 80s I knew all the previous kits were sad and lacking.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes the quality of USA kits was awful back then, no wonder Tamiya made such an impact and the opinion of many LaMerrycans to this day is to dismiss all older kits. However my experience back then with Airfix, and to this day reviewing their old classic kits, has been very different until now. Seems the USA back then could even mess up a joyful Airfix kit which the rest of the world loved at the time.

[@tonygary7611]

👍

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Good on you Tony

[@billevans7936]

Nifty❤

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Hmmm maybe not….

[@AaronOxfordExmouth1989]

I definitely know that is 100% American moulding, made in the US.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

This explains a lot!

[@brianartillery]

I'm not a fan of those 'USAirfix' kits - the box art, for a start - compared to the precision of the Roy Cross art, the box art is rather amateurish and unrealistic. There always seems to be a lot of flash on parts, too. Some models were made in America, and those mouldings are not particularly crisp, and, to be blunt - a lot of the moulding is bloody awful. 'Slipshod' doesn't even begin to cover it. I'm like you - I love Airfix kits, but I have bought five or six American ones, of varying subjects, and they were all wanting in some way or other. I've built the Hood in the normal UK version, and it was nice and crisp. Likewise, the HMS Nelson. But I won't be buying any more American made ones.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes my Hood back in the 60s was a good kit for the time, and I found out why this USA version is a dog. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@nigelconnor6960]

American 'Airfix' and UK Airfix, are we talking about the same AIRFIX? Did Airfix copyright their name/logo? Others could copy/use the same brand/name, for same purpose, kit making say in USA if not protected by international copyright???????

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

They had independent distribution and packaging rights. Not sure if they also injected the moulds. Either way this is not the quality I experienced from Airfix in the mid to late 60s from the UK kits.

[@karljones9357]

What can I say Harry, that’s the bloody yanks for yeah. Buy the best buy British. lol 😂

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

You are not wrong there mate!

[@james19eighty]

😅😅😅

[@VR-ym8ys]

I did modeling in then seventies in Germany, and Airfix was known as the garbage brand where nothing really fit together.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Goodness. You Germans are a tough crowd, and this is from the country who gave us all those awful Revell kits LOL

[@malcolmmacdougall]

maybe this Hood was from much earlier and sold to the Yanks and rebranded............. maybe your Hood was from much later but i expect you've forgotten how bad yours was as well, like i forgot how utterly bad the Vulcan bomber was until i brought it again............ but the latest Vulcan is excellent........... this is exactly the same as doing photo etch and suddenly remembering how hard it was to do last time especially on 1:500

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

The Hood kit I built must have been the early 70’s version. I made so many of the Airfix battleships from the mid sixies onwards I forget the order. But yes, mine had sprue numbers and did fit a lot better, as confirmed by other modellers responses here. Might get the recently released Vintage Classic version and do a comparison video.

[@malcolmmacdougall]

@@HarryHoudiniModels back in the days when models were fun to make......... but now they're too hard; especially battleships.......... the PE is way too much, it's quite depressing

[@FredWilbury]

They probably were crappy in them days perhaps we didn’t moan as much just build it and wing it 🫤

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

And yet we have many comments here agreeing that the slightly later moulding from the UK with part numbers and better instructions was, as I remembered it, a much better build than this La’Merrycan release.

[@williamking1554]

yes they were terrible warped parts and missing parts

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Not my experience from Airfix of the UK back in the mid ‘60s. If this Airfix Corporation of America kit is typical of what you experienced then I can understand your comment.

[@petermillecento4906]

I build recent 2 re-issued AMT car kits and they have no partsnumbers. Looks something typical american i think.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Could be. I did some more research on this kit. Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@billmorrison3993]

If I remember accurately, both the HMS Hood and the Bismarck were released close together. At least the Hood can be reasonably into a model of the real ship. Bismarck is horrible, The dimensions are grossly off, the overall detail is simply nonsense, and any effort with that model kit is doomed to fail. So, before chastising the kit of the Hood, realize that the times were different, but at least the Hood is salvageable.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Yes the old Airfix Bismarck is a shocker… but I had fond memories of the Hood when I built in the early 70’s

[@Thessalonikios7890]

Το έφτιαξα το 1978 με χαρά και λαχτάρα γιατί περίμενα να το δω τελειωμένο τώρα είναι εδώ και 40 χρόνια κλεισμένο σ ένα χαρτόκουτα μαζί με 100 αλλά και δεν μπορώ να νιώσω όπως τότε πνιγμένος στα προβλήματα της ζωής

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I also built the later Airfix kit, probably the early 70 mould with part numbers on the sprues and much cleaner plastic injection. It was fine for the time and a lot of fun. I have even had modellers say they have tried the newly rereleased Vintage Classic version, and that was ok. However this kit from America is very lacking.

[@StevenRogers-hw9dj]

I built 1/72 aircraft in the '70s and '80s, and it didn't take long for me to learn to just say no to Airfix. Raised panel lines and rivets the scale size of snuff cans annoyed the hell out of me.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

Did you build Monogram, Heller or any of the others that had raised panel lines too? Many Airfix kits in the 80's were reboxed awful cheap Heller kits.

[@StevenRogers-hw9dj]

@@HarryHoudiniModels I built a few from Heller and they seemed okay. I generally stuck with Tamiya, Fujimi, Italeri and the occasional German Revell. I don't remember building any Monogram aircraft until their B-36.

[@johnscarsandstuff]

Who are you and what have you done with Harry Houdini? I thought 1960s Airfix could do no wrong? But, in all seriousness, it's nice that you aren't blinded by favouritism for a particular brand. That looks worse than any 1960s Airfix moulding I've seen, how are you supposed to assemble a kit with no part numbers? I hope you didn't spend too much money on it.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

It was only 2 shekels… found out why it is so bad. See pinned post at top.

[@garyjordan4735]

Probably made crap on purpose, no nos on sprues, rubbish instructions etc, in order that Airfix fails in the American market.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

You wonder if that might be true but no, Please read my pinned post at the top.

[@markmccann5711]

Thats H ,yep its the old plastic but how bad is it ,the last Hood l did was very good for its age but crap material, anyway lm sure you will build it and turn it into a master piece.

[@HarryHoudiniModels]

I am a fan of the old plastic, but usually it is better moulded. I did some research and found out why this kit is so bad. Read my pinned post at the top.