Revell 1/96 Saturn V

[DutyCat]

I asked this over on SSM, so if you saw it already, sorry about that.

Do you guys think that the old Revell 1/96 Saturn V is still a viable build in the wake of the Dragon 1/72 release? Even though there are some reported inaccuracies already, it seems like the Dragon kit would be a much better starting point than the old Revell legacy kit. Plus it is bigger. What do you think? I ask because I have two Revell kits in the stash that I am thinking about unloading. I am glad I haven't yet pulled the trigger on all of the New Ware stuff for the Revell kits.

So far I have not seen a really comprehensive review of the new Dragon kit...just the prebuilt. Had anyone actually built the kit version?

Gil

Edited July 18, 2013 by DutyCat

[habu2]

I have the pre-built Dragon Saturn V. IMO it is so inaccurate I am considering getting rid of it. Size Schmize, the big Dragon kit just has so many problems that it will be easier to restore the old Revell 1/96 kit I built as a kid many years ago.

[DutyCat]

I have the pre-built Dragon Saturn V. IMO it is so inaccurate I am considering getting rid of it. Size Schmize, the big Dragon kit just has so many problems that it will be easier to restore the old Revell 1/96 kit I built as a kid many years ago.

Interesting. You wouldn't think that would be the case given that this is 2013, not the 1960's.

Could you be a little more specific? Are the inaccuracies carried over to the plastic kit? I have no problem building up the Revell if it is better, in spite of its known shortcomings.

*Edit*.....Here is a pic I discovered over on CollectSpace that shows the two side by side. This is actually the pre-built version. There is a BIG differnce betwen 1/96 and 1/72. IMO, the new 1/72 is just spectacular in comparison to the old 1/96. Whatever inaccuracies there might be...engines shapes, etc, have to pale in relation to its overall value as a presentation piece. Wow.

I am getting the model version and put it right next to my 1/72 Monogram shuttle stack(when it is complete, of course).

Edited July 19, 2013 by DutyCat

[spellbinder99]

The inaccuracies have been documented by others more knowledgeable than me, I suggest a look at the Yahoo Space Modellers group as a start. I have two of the pre-built versions and one of the kits and I think they are all worth what I paid for them. Indeed, the Dragon 1/72 kit version cost me under $140 Australian while the Revell 1/96 kit cost just under $200 the last time I saw it in shops.

To make the Revell close to presentable it needs the New Ware resin set and all the body tubes replaced, the Dragon suffers more with lack of detail and some erroneous parts like the shapes of the F1 engine fairings.

I guess it is all down to what looks good to you, but I have always found adding detail fairly straightforward and quite fun.

Cheers

Tony

[habu2]

Could you be a little more specific? Are the inaccuracies carried over to the plastic kit?

All of them. wrt detail, the kit is the same as the pre-built release, just unassembled and unpainted. As Spellbinder mentioned, there is an extensive list out there detailing the inaccuracies. The frustrating part is that excellent drawings are available but Dragon didn't bother to research the subject.

[davegee1]

That's really unfortunate. If Dragon would have only asked for input from modelers prior to going into production, they would have had a much better model offering. For the most part, I think, Dragon makes pretty good stuff. But there are always errors that could have easily been picked up prior to going full production. I used to have the 1/96 scale Revell model back in the day, but it is up in model Heaven now. It was fun to display, but it was of an early version that needed many upgrades from third-party parts makers. Perhaps they will do the same for the Dragon 1/72 scale Saturn V someday.

davegee

[habu2]

Expounding on my criticism of the kit, let me say this: it is if the Apollo portion of the kit (from the IU up) and the Saturn portion (from the IU down) were designed by two different groups/companies. Except for a small issue with the LES truss the Apollo part is quite well done. The problems are with the accuracy of the Saturn booster.

wrt restoring the old Revell 1/96 kit, I found mine is missing the SLA section. I am considering rebuilding it as a Saturn/Skylab and displaying it with my 4D 1/100 Apollo Saturn.

[stevenichols]

I built this a few years back and there a couple of mistakes on it but you can get the idea of how well the old Revell kit can look. The only parts from the kit used were the interstage's and they were re-skinned with evergreen sheet to better replicate the corrugation on them. I used New Wares detail set, PVC pipe for the tanks and a set of SMS decals. I also used my Mattel vacuform to make a BPC and quite a bit of plastic card on the 2d stage.

Edited July 22, 2013 by stevenichols

[spellbinder99]

And there in lies the question. Given that the Revell kit requires almost 100% replacement and redetailing to approach a satisfactory display piece, is that really so much different to the Dragon kit? Yes it is dissapointing that so many years later the kit is not better but it is still very impressive as it stands.....it could have been so much better.

Cheers

Tony

[DutyCat]

Steven, your Saturn V is beautiful, but as spellbinder suggests...., if it all has to be replaced, what is the point? I guess the point is that there are parts available so that you CAN make an accurate Saturn V out of it....maybe more so than you can do with the Dragon kit. But frankly, I am not that concerned that the Dragon kit is not gnat's *** accurate. It would be better if it were, but it is what it is. All kits have inaccuracies and I am not that much of a rivet counter...most of the time.

I just want an impressive display piece for a classroom.

Edited July 24, 2013 by DutyCat

[stevenichols]

Steven, your Saturn V is beautiful, but as spellbinder suggests...., if it all has to be replaced, what is the point? I guess the point is that there are parts available so that you CAN make an accurate Saturn V out of it....maybe more so than you can do with the Dragon kit. But frankly, I am not that concerned that it the Dragon kit is not gnat's *** accurate. It would be better if it were, but it is what it is. All kits have inaccuracies and I am not that much of a rivet counter...most of the time.

I just want an impressive display piece for a classroom.

Gil you are absolutely correct. I own the Dragon kit what they got right is actually quite nice. You have those out there who don't like the Dragon kit but as they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And Yes to correct the issues on the Dragon kit would be less work than the Revell surgery. I know Tom at at New Ware is currently developing a detail set for the Dragon kit and if you listen to him you would not even want it(but I still like it). I can be and I usually am a rivet counter but the shear size of the Dragon kit is most impressive. At least dragon has a block 2 CSM whereas you have to completely rebuild the block 1 CSM in the Revell offering.

Edited July 22, 2013 by stevenichols

[crowe-t]

Steve, Your Saturn V is amazing! It's the best Revell build of the kit I've seen.

As stated above none of these kits are 100% accurate but if they were that wouldn't be any fun! :lol:

The shuttle kits from the various manufacturers also suffer from lack of details and simplified details as well as incorrect shapes. I'm always amazed when I see someone put the time in to 'accurize' these kits.

Mike.

[habu2]

As Spellbinder mentioned, there is an extensive list out there detailing the inaccuracies.

Found the list, here's a link: Dragon 1:72 Saturn V Error List

[stevenichols]

Steve, Your Saturn V is amazing! It's the best Revell build of the kit I've seen.

As stated above none of these kits are 100% accurate but if they were that wouldn't be any fun! :lol:/>

The shuttle kits from the various manufacturers also suffer from lack of details and simplified details as well as incorrect shapes. I'm always amazed when I see someone put the time in to 'accurize' these kits.

Mike.

Thanks Mike. I know what you are capable of so your words mean alot. It is nice sometimes to just build a model out of the box and not worry about this or that. In the case of which Saturn to build I guess you can say whichever one is the lesser of two evils.

[crowe-t]

Thanks Mike. I know what you are capable of so your words mean alot. It is nice sometimes to just build a model out of the box and not worry about this or that. In the case of which Saturn to build I guess you can say whichever one is the lesser of two evils.

Steve, I do like correcting the issues on these kits but sometimes a simple detail or details is wrong or missing altogether. It's like the manufacturers just make things up and don't look at any pictures of the real subject. It is nice sometimes to build something that doesn't require a lot of scratch building to get it to look accurate.

Edited July 23, 2013 by crowe-t

[mynameismatt]

I'm in the process of building the 1/72 dragon kit....OOB. Mostly because I'm not an saturn V expert by any means, and because it is darn impressive in 1/72 scale. In the end it looks like a Saturn V to me, and I'm the only person who is ever going to see the thing.I will say that the dragon instructions leave MUCH to be desired....very poor.

One edit: I suppose it not truly OOB as I'm using culttvman's excellent 1/72 decals.

Edited July 23, 2013 by mynameismatt

[DutyCat]

Well, I went ahead and pulled the trigger on the Dragon kit. It was just too big and impressive compared to the Revell 1/96 that I just couldn't see myself getting through this life without building one.

I tell you what, though....it is going to be mostly OOB. I have learned my lesson about excessive scratchbuilding. The Shuttle Wars project has been sitting on my bench for a year and a half and I am only now barely getting within sight of the end on the Monogram stack. After that, I still have to finish off the Revell kit. I had hoped to have them both done this summer. Now, I am just shooting for Jaxcon in February.

So now, what to do with my two Revell 1/96 kits? I need to unload them.

Edited July 24, 2013 by DutyCat

[DutyCat]

Found the list, here's a link: Dragon 1:72 Saturn V Error List

That is quite an extensive list. Jeesh, given the level of effort required to produce a product like this, you would think that they could have invested a little more time and effort to get it right. Slide mold technology or whatever they call it is great, but like always, there is no substitute for basic research. A missed opportunity for Dragon. Unfortunately, that seems to be the norm for most of their new real space kits....beautiful moldings and packaging...with some inaccuracies. Still good kits overall, but rewarding and frustrating at the same time.

However, here is the thing...in spite of their inaccuracies, for the most part, the new Dragon kits are better than what came before. And the Saturn V...even though is if off a few mm here and there and is missing this and that...it still looks like a Saturn V. Unless you are an Apollo-phile and are going to pull out a ruler and start measuring skirts and interstages, and counting ribs, you would never know.

What we sometimes lose sight of, as OCD model building personalities, is that kits are representations of real objects, not exact duplicates. There is always going to be some degree of inaccuracy. We each decide how much to tolerate.

One thing I don't understand is why model companies do not 'beta test" their new products before producing thousands of copies. In this day and age, it would be relatively easy to pop out a few samples to well known builders within a genre. Just a few expert modelers tackling a product would provide loads of valuable feedback. Then you could make corrections before going into production.

Or alternatively, just invest enough time to be SURE your product is well researched and engineered.

Edited July 28, 2013 by DutyCat

[niart17]

...One thing I don't understand is why model companies do not 'beta test" their new products before producing thousands of copies. In this day and age, it would be relatively easy to pop out a few samples to well known builders within a genre. Just a few expert modelers tackling a product would provide loads of valuable feedback. Then you could make corrections before going into production....

One reason that isn't feasible is because it is very expensive to make the dies and to run the line. No injection company is going to want to run a short shot and have to pull the line since run-time is money. Having to make a die, run a small run of kits, getting them out and then pulling the dies off-line to make corrections would be REALLY REALLY expensive. Some corrections wouldn't be too bad, such as adding a feature here or there such as when Trumpeter changes some of their kits on the second runs. But things like changing the diameter or correcting the amount of stringers etc...would mean practically machining a whole new die section and that's not cheap at all. I think the best hope companies have of correcting errors is getting the 3d models and/or mock-ups into the hands of the right people to check these things. And of course like you say, nothing compares to up front accurate and thorough research.

Bill

[Modelmkr]

So now, what to do with my two Revell 1/96 kits? I need to unload them.

Supa-mega shuttle with twin Saturn V booster rockets?... You'll have to post that one in the Sci-Fi forum though ;)

That is quite an extensive list. Jeesh, given they level of effort required to produce a product like this, you would think that they could have invested a little more time and effort to get it right. Slide mold technology or whatever they call it is great, but like always, there is no substitute for basic research. A missed opportunity for Dragon. Unfortunately, that seems to be the norm for most of their new real space kits....beautiful moldings and packaging...with some inaccuracies. Still good kits overall, but rewarding and frustrating at the same time.

After studiying my kit and the tweaks list, I'd say it's best to create a shopping list of what you WILL do. There are many areas that correction will be too extensive for me to bother with (F-1 fairing shape for example). A lot of the details in that list are not incorrect on the kit, just missing... those will definately be added to my shopping list. Coupled with that, I'm going to get a set of David Weeks' drawings to aid in the placement and details of the missing bits.

Marc B.

[johnlove_mk_II]

This is about as far I got with my Revell Saturn V before I started in on my current 1/72 Saturn V.

I was getting super-mega frustrated with the LM ascent stage ... the tooling was so old, I was considering rebuilding the whole thing ... then came along the Dragon Apollo 10 kit. Since I was already, mostly, committed to scratch building most of the stack I decided to just restart and build it at 1/72 scale.

I'll likely go back to it some day, just not anytime soon.

Edited July 26, 2013 by johnlove_mk_II

[habu2]

There are many areas that correction will be too extensive for me to bother with (F-1 fairing shape for example).

I have considered buying the Apogee parts (1/70 scale) to fix the F-1 engines, fairings and fins. I have already purchased the Apogee decal sheet.

[spellbinder99]

Great minds Habu. I am almost certain that the Apogee F1 fairings could be adapted to "fix" the Dragon ones, just needs a brave soul to be the first to try....:)

Cheers

Tony

[habu2]

I think you'll need both the Apogee fairings and the thrust structure wrap, removing the oversized Dragon fairings will leave gaps in the Dragon thrust structure.