Iron Modeler

More on older model kits...

Howdy, all...

The other night, I recalled that the Monogram 1/48th scale kit of the F-106A turned 40 years old this year, having hit the hobby shop shelves in 1983.  I recall this specifically because a college friend was geeked to the max over the kit and bought it as soon as he could get his paws on a copy.  We were both attending the summer term at Embry-Riddle that year, and he kept showing me the progress he was making.  He dropped one of the missile launch rails and detailed the cockpit with the pilot in the seat.

That model was a constant during the Fall semester.  He kept futzing over it incessantly until we finally told him to "finish the damn thing already!"  The way the rooms were in that particular dorm was such that they had a small "common" room that connected two rooms into a suite.  Well, he occupied that common room as his personal living space.  I recall when he painted the model--he closed the doors after supper on Friday night, and emerged in the morning--when he opened the doors, the unmistakable scent of Model Master enamel and thinner rolled out with him.  He did a great job, to be sure, but I still wonder how many brain cells he killed during that all-nighter paint session...

Anyway, back to the point...

It was a great time for modelers.  Monogram released the F-105G in 1982, the F-106A in 1983, a 1/72nd scale F-105G and EF-111A and a 1/48th scale F-84F in 1984.  The 1/48th scale F-101B followed in 1985.  And this was just Monogram.  Revell released their 1/48th scale B-1B and 1/32nd scale F-14A around the same time, Airfix had their 1/48th scale EA-6B, and Hasegawa released their 1/48th scale F-4, F-15, and F-16 families in 1/48th scale with 1/72nd scale versions to follow in the next several years. 

At the same time, we had the 1/72 scale aircraft and armor from ESCI, Hasegawa's 1/72 scale line continued to expand, and Tamiya added to their line of aircraft kits with the 1/48th scale A-10A and F-15A and the 1/32nd scale F-14A. 

And this was just in the realm of aircraft models.  The scene was similar in armor, ships, and autos.  Life was good...

As the years have passed, it is interesting to read the modern takes on these kits.  New modelers have become enamored of recessed panel lines and tight, precise fit.  Anything less makes the kit undesirable or "unbuildable".  A lot of these kits are dismissed out of hand because there are more modern kits available with the aforementioned recessed panel details.  I've seen the Tamiya A-10A dismissed as "garbage" and the Hasegawa Phantoms reduced to shelf-sitters due to their age.

As I said last time out, "New and Improved" does not always equate to "Better".  Since I'm building one right now, let's look at the Tamiya 1/48th scale A-10A.  It is a product of its time when it was released in 1977.  It best represents a preproduction airframe--it features the ESCAPAC seat, extended flap guides, and lacks the chaff/flare dispensers in the initial run (the latter were added in the 1991 reissue).  So, these days, it gets dismissed as being "not a good kit" simply because of what it is.

It has the dreaded "raised panel line" disease on the wings, tail, and aft fuselage.  If you think about it, back in the day that may have been the easiest way for a mold maker to simulate the raised rivet heads that are prevalent on those areas of the A-10A.  The forward fuselage has nicely engraved panel lines, so it proves that Tamiya did have the technology to mold them.

Back in the old Usenet days and the rec.models.scale group, the question "What is the best kit of a A-10?"  My answer was always the same--What era are you wanting to model?  To me, someone wanting an early 1/48th scale A-10A was set with the Tamiya or original Revell kit.  For a production Hawg through the Desert Storm period, Monogram's was the best--fit issues, warts, and all.  But some modelers don't see it that way--they believe that they need to start with the "best" kit and backdate or update as needed.  To me, that's akin to performing a tonsillectomy through the rectum--you create a lot more work and have the potential to cause a lot more problems that you solve instead of starting with an older, but potentially better, kit.

In the years since, a gaggle of new A-10 kits have come down the pike, and, with one exception, they all fall short.  The exception?  The new Academy 1/48th scale A-10C.  And yeah, being a definite fan of the A-10, I bought one.  Rumor has it that it may be joined by an A-10A at some point.  Me, I hope they decide to shrink it down to 1/72nd scale--both an A-10A and A-10C.  Otherwise, I stick with the Tamiya and Monogram kits in 1/48th scale and the Hasegawa 1/72nd scale Hawg kits, thanks...

In the case of the Monogram 1/48th scale Century Series kits, they all (with the exception of the F-104) still stand above the more modern kits.  Trumpeter, Kitty Hawk, and Hobby Boss have tried to do the F-100, F-101, F-105, and F-106, but they all fall short.  The Trumpeter Hun has an odd inlet shape and vertical tail proportion errors.  Kitty Hawk's Voodoos have a rack full of issues, not least of which is being an over-engineered nightmare.  Hobby Boss tried, but missed the mark with their F-105's, as did Trumpeter with their F-106.  Of all the modern kits, I suppose the best of the lot are the Trumpeter F-106's, but any modeler who sticks with the Monogram kits won't be disappointed.

The F-104, incidentally, is covered quite nicely with the Hasegawa and Kinetic offerings in 1/48th scale...

I guess a lot of this comes from what we had back in the day.  Before the Monogram Century Series, we had nothing in 1/48th scale.  We did have the F-100, RF-101, F-102, F-105, and F-106 from Hasegawa in 1/72nd scale.  And outside that, there were F-104 kits available, executed in various degrees of success. 

When I downsized my jets (the first time, 1986), I collected the Hasegawa kits for later construction.  They were basically good kits--the shapes were there, the kit out of the box was adequate, and there was room for additional work for those who wished to go the extra mile.  The kit cockpits were nowhere near as detailed as we would start to see with the late 1970's Monogram kits, but with closed canopies (and the kits almost always were designed to be built with the canopy closed), they were fine with maybe a few tape or paper seat belts added. 

Back in the day, modelers who wanted detailed cockpits and the like expected to do that additional work, including vacuum-forming a new canopy to be posed open to show off that extra work.  I recall making a comment to a friend about the Hasegawa cockpit tubs--a generic, three-sided affair with narrow "consoles" that had humps at the forward end.  He said they used to vacuum-form copies of those cockpit tubs to use on kits that had no cockpit tub...

And yeah, this is another aspect of the hobby that does reflect when we joined it.  These days, new modelers experience such kits as the Tamiya 1/48th scale F-14A or F-4B, or the Eduard Wildcats and Zeros, and anything less leaves them disappointed because they had to do more work.  I get it.  And as much as I love kits that fall together, they always leave me a little empty, as if I missed something by not having to do even a little bit of problem solving during the process.  I guess it is why I'm actually enjoying the ride with the Tamiya A-10A (and the Hasegawa 1/72nd scale A-10A I'm building at the same time).

Once again, there are as many ways to enjoy the hobby as there are people enjoying it.  I don't necessarily knock the new breed of modelers when they dis a kit for its age, but I do wish they would see those kits in the context of when they were produced and what they meant to modelers at the time.  And maybe, just maybe, they can take one of those older kits and find out what we "old guys" already know...
~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
Something I also notice--apparently modelers are still unaware of this thing called Scalemates when they cite kit information.  For instance, I've seen the Monogram 1/48th scale B-26 Marauder dated to "sometime in the mid-1980's" on one of the YouTube channels--the actual release date was 1978 (I know this because I got one back then when I was out of school with bronchitis).  It takes literally a minute to check things like this.  Hey, if you hold yourself out as a authority, you need to be accurate with your data...
~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
I'm expecting an order from Plastic Models Store any time now.  If you want kits from the Ukrainian manufacturers at good prices (and don't mind waiting a few weeks), give these guys a try.  I've had nothing but great service from them--and they send a little bag of yummy Ukrainian candy with the order!  In my last order, I got the Dora Wings 1/48th scale Vengeance, the new ICM 1/72nd scale OV-10, and one of the ClearProp 1/72nd scale Seasprites.  This time, I got an early Seasprite, a Modelsvit 1/48th scale F-51H for the FANG collection, and the X-Scale 1/144th scale DC-8-32.  Kit prices were some 30-35% better than I could get through the domestic distributors, and I make sure to make the order large enough to qualify for free shipping.
~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
That's all I have for you tonight.  Thanks for reading.  Be good to one another, and, as always, I bid you Peace.

To Quote the Rossington-Collins Band...

Howdy, again!

I've heard from some people about my latest post:

"Why are you so against new kits"?

"If we didn't get new kits, we'd still be building wood models!"

Don't misunderstand me.  I love seeing new kits--from any manufacturer, of any subject, in any scale--whether it falls into my wheelhouse or not.  I hope they sell boatloads of them.  Why, if a new kit isn't my cup of tea, do I care? 

Let's use the new 1/48th scale Airfix Westland Sea King as an example.  It looks to be a neat kit, but being a 1/48th scale kit, it doesn't fit in my rotary wing collection--I build helicopters in 1/72nd scale.  But my take is this--if the kit sells well, it puts money in the bank for Airfix.  With that money, they can later produce other kits.  At some point in time, they will produce something I will want to buy and build.  Its as simple as that.  It goes for any manufacturer--keep producing kits that sell well, so you can invest the money in even more new kits.  Sooner or later, there will be something I'm interested in.

Another comment--"I don't like to wrestle with ancient kits, I'd rather build a State-of-the-Art model!"

What makes you think I find wrestling with a rough kit fun?  I know where this person is coming from--they're "kit replacers".  For example, they had several Otaki P-51's in their stash when the Hasegawa kits came out in 1991.  So, they sold off their Otaki kits and replaced them with Hasegawa kits.  A few years later, they repeated the exercise when Tamiya's P-51 came out in 1995.  The scenario was repeated again with the Meng kit, the Airfix kit, and, most recently, with the Eduard kit.  And look, I'm cool with that--your model, do what you want.

I still have at least one each of the Hasegawa and Tamiya kits hanging around here, but that did not stop me from buying a couple of the Airfix kits and the "Chattanooga Choo-Choo" version of the Eduard kit.  And I'll probably buy more, as the need arises.  But at some point, I'll probably still drag out a Hasegawa or Tamiya kit and build it.  Why?  I have it in my possession--I don't need to spend more money to get a decent Mustang model.  Same goes for the Grumman Wildcats and Focke-Wulf 190's (a few Tamiya and Tri-Master/Dragon kits rest in the stash, but I have one or two of the Eduard kits, too) and Mitsubishi Zero (Hasegawa, sure, but I also have the new-ish Tamiya kits.  An Eduard version isn't outside the realm of possibility, either...)...

Quite honestly, a new kit doesn't always make an older kit obsolete.  I give you the Trumpeter F-105's in 1/72nd and 1/48th scale.  They may not fill a magazine rack, but they still have issues.  Frankly, I still find the 1/72nd Revell and Monogram kits (I divested myself of all my 1/48th scale Thuds) to be better in all aspects than the Trumpeter kits--raised panel lines and all.  And again, here we are--yo' pays yo' money, yo' takes yo' choice.  Some people will do anything to avoid a kit with raised panel lines, and will opt for Trumpeter, warts and all.  And again, that's cool.  As I've said before, there are as many different ways to enjoy the hobby as there are people enjoying it...

Whether a newer kit is "better" than the "ancient" kits of the same subject is a personal matter.  I say the same thing about modelers who brand people "rivet counters".  Without the "rivet counters" (and I loathe that term, by the way), we wouldn't be seeing these wonderful new kits.  Whether or not you personally buy and build them, or stick to the older kits is your choice.  Whatever you do, enjoy the ride. 

~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
If you've paid attention, the 2023 IPMS/USA National Convention was held in San Marcos, Texas last week.  Two items of note:

1.  Apparently, there has been a rash of Covid infections amongst the attendees.  While I hope everybody affected gets well soon (I am just over a very mild case, myself), I have some heartburn here.  We all saw the same thing play out after last year's Convention--no sooner did people get home, reports of Covid infections started to hit the forii.  This year, as the photos from San Marcos started to roll in, I noticed that there was nary a mask in sight.  Didn't we collectively learn anything from the Vegas show?  C'mon, guys and gals...

2.  "Cell Phone Guy" has probably become a popular meme.  In case you missed it, a photo of a judge holding an armor model over his head while examining the underside using his cell phone light is making the rounds.  It has spawned bushels of debate.  So...

I get it--the IPMS/USA Competition Handbook says clearly that judges will be allowed to pick up a model.  However, Cell Phone Guy had to do some fancy juggling to get the model in the position shown in the photo.  Plus, he was bare-handing the model--no gloves, just his naked meathooks.  I don't think this meets the "greatest care" clause in the CH.  Apparently, this guy was also absent from the Judges' Meeting.  Why he was allowed to judge is a mystery.  Why no other judges called him out is even more curious.

In all the comments, it has been also brought to the world's attention that several (I've seen as many as a dozen or more) models were damaged during judging.  One had a prop sheared off when a judge dropped his flashlight.  One figure fell off the base when the judge decided to see if the modeler painted the underside of something.  A few aircraft had landing gear or landing gear doors sheared off.  

If I were a modeler walking in to the display room on Saturday and found my model damaged with a Post-It note that only says, "Sorry", I would be livid.  

All of this could be avoided by two changes:

1.  Contest staff members do not touch the models.  At all.  Ever.
2.  Judge the model as presented by the modeler, i.e., as it sits on the table.

There is no reason at all for any judge at any model show to touch a model.  None whatsoever.  Never.  Ever.  

You can try to debate me on that all you want, but you will be wrong.

"But we're trying to find that one thing that separates 1st from 2nd..."

Of course, this stems from the IPMS/USA "triage, 1-2-3" judging system.  The judges have to compare the models to each other, and if they can't find anything on the readily visible areas of the model, they have to dig.  Upturning models, sticking those million candlepower TactiCool flashlights up exhausts and down inlets, using 20X magnifiers, measuring wingtips with a caliper--that's why these stupid methods are employed.  Heaven forbid there ever be a tie in the IPMS squared circle...

This is yet again being used as an argument for juried exhibition style shows.  But the IPMS Purity Posse won't budge: 

"It says 'Contest', what part of that don't you get?"  I dunno, I don't understand the bloodlust some modelers have to get some trinket that proclaims that they are Number One on that day for something they do as a hobby.

"We've always enjoyed this healthy competition!"  Healthy?  I've told this story before, but when a modeler threatens to beat six shades of s*** from a contest judge because "My model shoulda won!", that's "healthy"? 

I like the Shep Paine approach.  "Wanna compete? Go play tennis..."

At our show--a juried exhibition--judges are reminded that if a model needs to be moved, we will find the modeler and let them move their own model.  We do not pick models up during judging.  We allow flashlights to illuminate the visible areas of the model--face it, most venue lighting is piss poor.  We do our best to judge the undersides and hidden areas, but the mantra is "if you can't see it, leave it be".  We do not allow magnifiers (reading glasses, yes, if the judge requires them), we don't allow judges to measure anything--either with a measuring gauge of some sort or the old "finger ruler" or "pen gauge".  Why?  Because we don't see the need.

All participants are reminded to be careful of camera straps, hanging jewelry, and hats.  We don't use lanyards for ID badges.  All that dangly stuff can wreak havoc on a table full of models in a nanosecond.  We also remind judges not to hold lights or pointers (we prefer laser pointers or bamboo skewers) directly over a model--if they drop is, it has less chance of becoming a missile.

I can tell you this--I've been judging model shows (of all types) since 1989.  In that time, I have never picked a model up, turned a model over, or damaged a model. Why?  There's simply no need to do so.  If you don't touch the model, the chances that you'll break something are minimized.  There's never a 100% guarantee, because stuff happens, but the  danger is minimized.

~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
On a positive note, I am overjoyed to see the Madison guys working to have dedicated space for non-competitive groups--Special Interest Groups, Group Builds, and Display Only--at next year's show.  It just might get me to go to the show next year.

~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
As I said above, we're getting over a few mild cases of Covid at the house.  My wife got the fever, headache, sort throat, and cough.  I got the mental fog and lack of energy.  I'm just now, two weeks later, starting to regain a little spring in my step.

I shudder to think what it would have been like had we not boosted our immunity via vaccines...

Covid is still with us, and a new variant is making the rounds.  Please be careful.  It might not be as deadly as it was in 2020, but it'll still knock you in the dirt.  I don't know about you, but I don't like being sick.

Thanks for reading.  Be good to one another, and, as always, I bid you Peace.

Turning Corners and "From the Mouths of Babes"

Howdy, all!

Do you remember the projects you completed where you thought you had “turned a corner”—that is, you finally put a group of skills together into one project and brought it to completion?

Given that this blog is centered on scale models, I can think of a few projects that fill the bill.  I consider these the first real fruits of my labors after discovering  Scale Modeler (and later, FineScale Modeler) magazine, Solvaset, and Squadron Green Putty, and after acquiring an airbrush.

1979-ish, Monogram 1/48^th scale Hawker Typhoon.  It was the first model where filled seams and painted with an airbrush.  It turned out fairly well, all things considered.  I think I was still using Propel cans, and the limitations with them didn’t help the project.  I seem to recall that shortly afterwards, I got a compressor for the airbrush.  For the life of me, I have no recollection of what became of the finished model.

Around the same time, I built a Guillows’ 1/16^th scale stick-and-tissue Spitfire model, just to show Dad that I could…

1980, Revell 1/32^nd scale F4U-1 Corsair.  I was inspired by Sheperd Paine’s “Pilots, Man Your Planes” article in one of the “Special” issues of Challenge Publications’ Scale Modeler.  He had done his usual superdetail job on the model.  I tried to duplicate some of what he did to his model.  I used masking tape to make seatbelts, I made the landing gear springs from wire, and I cut and dropped the flaps.  I left the wings unfolded, and didn’t do a whole lot to the rest of the model.  Like the Typhoon, I was still using the little square bottles of Testors Flat Enamels, so the colors were a little bit weird.  I also went my own way with the markings—I built the model as Tommy Blackburn’s “Big Hog”.  I painted the letters freehand, and rather than seek alternate markings with the red surround (not that I could have afforded such a luxury), I used a 3/0 brush and Testors Flat Red to “convert” the kit insignia to the pre-September 1943 version.  Again, I was rather pleased with the end result.  The model went to a friend and I never saw it again.  I have a strange feeling that it became an air rifle target…

1981, Otaki 1/48^th scale F6F-3 Hellcat.  This one put everything I had learned to that point  together.  The model was built, the seams were filled, and the scheme was airbrushed.  I applied the decals with Solvaset, and I did a little “toning down” and “weathering” with some washes.  I added some paint chips, and I was really happy when I finished the model.

1984, Nichimo 1/48^th scale Ki.43 “Oscar”.  This was a further extension to the process started with the Hellcat.  In this case, I did more paint chipping using an alternate method—I used a silver Tamiya paint marker on certain areas of the airplane before I added the camouflage colors.  I had switched to Polly-S acrylics, and I “chipped” them with a tight roll of masking tape right after the paint had started to dry.  I added more chips to the markings once the decals were on using the paint marker again. 

1985, Monogram 1/48^th scale P-51B converted to an Allison-engined P-51 with the Koster Aero Enterprises vacuum-formed conversion kit.  This was my first vacuum formed kit.  Also, using the knowledge I gained from reading Bob Steinbrunn’s cockpit detailing article in FineScale Modeler, I did a lot of scratch detailing in the cockpit.  I really started to learn how to use alternate materials—the injection molded cannon barrels from the Koster kit were rather softly detailed, so I removed the various details and replaced them—I used vinyl tape for the bands and fine wire for the recoil springs.

From this point on, I coasted on my abilities.  I was back in college, so my model building time was a bit limited.  It didn’t stop me from scratchbuilding a seat or adding plumbing to landing gear, but those were the exception rather than the rule.

After college, I started hanging out in the hobby shop.  And I started learning more.  One of the locals brought some models in that had a really convincing finish—the camouflage colors weren’t “solid”—the upper surface olive drab was actually many different shades of olive drab, and the panel lines were highlighted.  In a sense, it was probably what “The Spanish School” was originally devised to be.  This was in 1988, and it was about the time Verlinden was really making inroads into the American modeling scene, but the guy told me he had been doing it for years.  He said all you have to do is vary the colors and make the whole thing look good.

Undeterred, I took a Tamiya 1/48^th scale F2A Buffalo from the shelf and refinished it.  I removed the decals and smoothed the paint, much as I did on a Monogram B-17 in 1984.  This time, when I painted it, I thought about those other models I saw, and tried to emulate the procedure.  It worked.  The result was rather nice, if I do say so…

1989, Monogram 1/48^th scale B-29.  This was the first model I totally rescribed.  It was an eye-opener, for sure.  I used a lot of filler to cover my mistakes, of which there were many.  In the end, I was happy with the result.  The model was sent to the Valiant Air Command museum.  I have no idea if it still survives…

1990, Revell 1/72nd scale F-89.  My first really successful bare metal finish was achieved with Floquil silvers.  Since then, I have tried several methods.  My go-to these days are the Vallejo Metal Colors, but for a while I used a highly thinned mix of Isopropyl Alcohol, Future, and Tamiya X32 Titanium Silver over a gray primer base.  The impediment to continue using this method is the fact that SC Johnson discontinued Future, and I'm not convinced any of the alternatives folks are using would work.  With the Vallejo stuff available, there really is no need to look elsewhere.

1999/2000, Hobbycraft 1/48^th scale P-26A.  I had rigged models before, but none was really that good.  This time, fresh off a trip to the IPMS National Convention and armed with some nifty stainless steel orthodontic wire, I set out to change that.  The Hobbycraft Peashooter is a fabulous kit, and I did little additional work on the kit.  When it came time to rig it, I cut lengths of the aforementioned wire and glued it in place with small drops of white glue.  The model still sits in the display case, although it has developed a twist in the aft fuselage over the years.  I should probably build another one of these gems soon…

The next big leap came only a few years ago, when I remembered that “This is just a plastic model, there isn’t a lot I could do to screw it up.”  The model was the 1/48^th scale Special Hobby Macchi C.200 that I’ve shared previously.  I took the time and effort to detail things a bit more.  I added the landing gear trunnions to make the main landing gear more authentic.  And I added more and more of those little details to the model.

What I learned on the Peashooter and Macchi was put to use on the Aeroclub 1/48^th scale Gloster Gamecock I finished last year.  It was a vacuum-formed kit of a biplane with a scratchbuilt cockpit, wing struts, a lot of little details, and it was rigged.  The rigging was different, though--I used Davis' Invisible thread looped through tiny "rigging blocks" and "turnbuckles" made from stretched Evergreen styrene tubing, secured with CA.  It featured a metallic finish (aluminum dope), and most of the markings were painted on.

I used the latter skill to also paint the huge checkerboard patterns on a 1/72nd scale Fujimi Phantom FG.1,  I like the method so much that I bought a Cameo Silhouette with the intention of cutting masks for my paint schemes instead of using decals.  I'm not living under the illusion that I'll never use decals, but knowing how to do this frees me of the limitations of decals, namely being able to do subjects that are never covered by any of the aftermarket decal sheets.

To add to the story, today I bought some UV cure resin and a UV light to make my own lenses.  With MV Products lenses being difficult to obtain, this will allow me to "roll my own" when I need them.  Another tool in the toolbox, another skill in the portfolio...

What is the moral to the story?  Keep exercising your skills, whatever your craft or hobby might be.  You might not realize it right away, but these skills build upon each other through the years, and one day you complete a model that puts it all in play.  And you’ll wonder—for a minute, maybe—how could you have done such work?  Then you recollect all the projects that came before and led up to this latest effort…

It goes back to what I said a while ago on these very pages—it only takes an investment of time and a little effort to do good work.  Keep on trying…
~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~     ~~~~~
Something I’ve touched on before has risen again on the various forii.  I always get a kick out of the comments that come from the under-30's in the hobby.  You know, the kids, the noobs, the folks who have only recently discovered the hobby.

I saw someone speak in glowing terms of the yet-to-be-released Magic Factory 1/48^th scale F4U-2 Corsair, and how it is “head and shoulders better than the ancient Tamiya kit!”

Ancient?  Tamiya’s kits arrived on the scene in 1996.  They fit like a glove and exhibit Tamiya’s standard of excellence.  I won’t rush out to buy the Magic Factory kits just yet… 

Recall, too, that before the Tamiya kits made their debut, the options for a 1/48^th scale Corsair were the 1996 Hobbycraft kits (which, had Tamiya not produced their kit, could have been a contender had there not been some unfortunate issues with the fit), the 1980 Mania/Hasegawa F4U-4 (still the standard for the -4 after all these years), the 1977 AMT F4U-1, the 1976 release by Otaki (still a fine kit, as I demonstrated a few years ago), the 1973 Monogram F4U-4, and the 1956 Lindberg F4U-5. 

After the Tamiya kits came the questionable Academy/ Minicraft “reworking” of the Hasegawa -4 (that somehow acquired a bloated fuselage), the absolutely awful Minicraft F4U-5/5N, and the superb Hasegawa F4U-5/-7, and AU-1 kits, followed by what I can only determine to be the hit-or-miss Hobby Boss kits.

My point?  Be careful when you call a kit “ancient”.  By the same standard, the Accurate Miniatures 1/48^th scale TBF/TBM and SBD kits are also “ancient”, but back in the day they were seen as absolute wonders.  Before they came along, you built the Monogram kits (or Nichimo knockoffs) and either did DIY detailing or, after they appeared, used the Medallion Models resin sets. 

Bottom line: these kits might be ancient to you, young pups, but to those of us who made do with the early 1950’s kits for years, they were—and still are—wonderful kits.

That’s all I have for now.  Until next time, be good to one another.  As always, I bid you Peace.