Small Scale Military Headquarters

Hey Guys,
I just got the lastest Fine scale mag. It brought back memories of a heated discustion regarding a certain model's main gun being too short. Some of these guys didn't know how to slide a decal off of it's backer paper and they were slamming the model makers accuracy of scale.
Has anyone ever checked to see if these models (1/18 ) are spot on? Has anyone cared? I for one have never done so and probably will not. I have held two models of the same kind (P-51's from BBI and 21st) up and compared how they matched. The oveall comparison is that 21st does deep panel lines and BBI shows rivet deatails. My personal opinion is the overall look. Some guys have said things about the P-40 canopy and other have made mention of the P-38's landing gear not being right. But is the want of a certain plane or tank more pressing than an EXACT scale product? Close enough as long as it looks good?

Nope not to me. ... I integrate 1:18 w/ 1/16. Not a big deal to me either. I also integrate 1/35 w/ 1:32. If used together correctly using common sense your creativness and imagination will not compromise a dio. ..... Ofcourse there are some ex-act scale fanatics on here which would disagree.

As long as it's reasonably close to 1:18 I wouldn't know the difference. But I don't mix 1:16 with 1:18 - that's too much of a scale difference for me.

It's probably not as big a deal as some might have you believe. As MG-42 said, some common sense and creativeness will usually solve any "exact scale" issues you might encounter. for example, many HO scale (1/87th) structures will work just fine in a 1/72nd diorama, or at least that has been my experience.

I think I mentioned in one of my custom posts that when working with a 120mm resin set (which is nominally 1/16th scale), I discovered that the 120mm M-16s and M-60s were the same size as ones I had in my spares box that came out of 1/18 sets and that weapons size varies not just between manufacturers, but varies with time, even from the same company.

So, to me "exact" scale has NEVER been important.

pickelhaube wrote:Hey Guys,
I just got the lastest Fine scale mag. It brought back memories of a heated discustion regarding a certain model's main gun being too short. Some of these guys didn't know how to slide a decal off of it's backer paper and they were slamming the model makers accuracy of scale.
Has anyone ever checked to see if these models (1/18 ) are spot on? Has anyone cared? I for one have never done so and probably will not. I have held two models of the same kind (P-51's from BBI and 21st) up and compared how they matched. The oveall comparison is that 21st does deep panel lines and BBI shows rivet deatails. My personal opinion is the overall look. Some guys have said things about the P-40 canopy and other have made mention of the P-38's landing gear not being right. But is the want of a certain plane or tank more pressing than an EXACT scale product? Close enough as long as it looks good?

Here's my take on your post buddy. I too have compared the 2 P-51's from 21st and BBI. Both have their good points and bad. Such as BBI's Mustang lacks the forward rake and wing dehedral (or whatever you call it) of the real Mustang while 21st's Mustang has them both spot on. Then you have BBI having their Mustang look more like a war veteran and not a show bird with rivet detail which many have said that real Mustangs did not have and I have pics to show they did. For the 2 Mustangs like I said they both have their good and bad points and the "spot on" thing is really no big deal to me when it comes to my beloved Mustang. So I like both. I like you have a thing for the "overall look" of the plane or whatever it is I'm collecting. If its close enough and it looks good then I'll buy it no questions asked.

Just my 2 cents worth.

The only 1/18 subject I've taken the time to really measure is the Sherman tank. It's very accurate for overall dimensions.

Most details area accurately sized as well. I required this exactness when I was creating my Firefly. I overlaid exact 1/18 scale plans derived from accurate 1/35 scale drawings I picked up from a Military Modelling mag & confirmed them against some drawings I had from the Sherman CD which included scale drawings, as well as other sources. I was very pleasantly surprised at the accuracy of what was there in this S1 release.

There are lots of problems, such as not having a complete turret shell. But what was there was good to work with. Also, I believe the main gun is slightly undersized. Having said all that, there was a lot of work to add missing items and make existing details accurate.

Usually, thickness is the major flaw for all 1/18 subjects. However, this has a lot to do with the materials used, strength required, and logistics of how components fit together, and most importunately, durability for its supposed intended audience / consumer - kids. Although I bet adults are the real driver’s behind this scale.

After all, what kid is going to play with a 1/18 scale B 25 that they can scarcely lift, let alone afford?

I think all he 1/18 scale makers are driven to producing very accurate subjects, despite the inaccuracies or deficiencies of any one particular subject, because that’s what we want.

Compared to the original S1 releases, the latest efforts are approaching scale model kits.

Also, if it's too perfect, there is nothing to modify or customize. We wouldn't ant that would we?

Well maybe...

HD

For me the correct scale is imoprtant and i am really desappointed by the difference between my F 16 & F 18 (i immediately saw that there was a problem and there was numerous forum thread about it ...the F 16 is too big and the pilot feel dwarfed inside ... the missiles are so differents that i removed them !)

this is the only vivisble thing

all my other aircrafts match more or less each other .

So i display my F 16 alone

Take a look at the S1 Me 109 pilot and S1 Sherman tank commander figure and then place then next to the latest Avenger crew.

Those two S1 figures seem to be dwarfs.

DH

Many years ago I knew a gent who built model aircraft one of two ways; each one would either represent a particular airframe as it was at a particular time (ie all "kill markings", crew names, stencils, camoflage scheme/colours and any other details - weapons loads, cargo, etc - as exact as he could find reference for) or he would "trim" the model to the exact scale dimensions for the "real thing"... down to an accuracy of 1/1000th of an inch (on the model, that is!) - if the real thing was 18 foot long then the model would be exactly one foot long, not 12inches-and-1-thou or 11-and-3/4inches but spot-on 12 inches.

If I showed him the 1/18th stuff staight out the box - especially the aircraft - he'd be pretty horrified at the "lack of attention to detail"... Someone else recently posted a link to the Large Scale Planes forum - just pop there if you want to see the sort of lengths some people go to.

But for me, if it looks right then it's close enough. (Except that loo-sa mess on the front end of the BBI Apache - that's just WRONG! One day I'll get round to fixing it, but don't hold your breath!)

Exact scale doesn't mean as much to me as the piece itself.

There are times (like the Pershing availability in 1/16 and not 1/18 ), when you consider the idea that the Pershing was larger than the Sherman and the fact that it really doesn't look bad in a 1/18 group.

Also given the fact that we are short on cargo trucks, that you can paint up a Highway 1/16 Ford and put it in the same group as 1/18 and it is large, but not bad looking.

We 1/6 guys have been faced, for years, with the fact that the 21C line of vehicles is off scale and not perfect 1/6. Not as bad as Hasbro, but the bolt counters keep telling us has some serious scale problems. Well, guys, I'm not a bolt counter and I really like 21C products, so I'm happy with 21C stuff.

AND, if the B-25 that we will see, relatively soon, is not a perfect 1/18.....I don't care, I'll just gladly live with it.

TTT

Scale is very important to me. I will not mix 1:16 and 1:18 or 1:32 and 1:35. And if I find something is not scale, I ditch it. I guess I'm weird.

I try not mix scales, but if it's a piece that I need in a dio and it looks OK, then I will use it.

ahhh who cares

I know Bbi F-16 is alllllllover the palce in terms of scale....

Its like three different departments that did not communicate designed the Bbi f-16 model.

For scale accuracy I say for figures & acc`s it`s a given,they have to be or at least customizable to fit in.

As for vehicles & aircrafts,well as we know we all have our own personal wish lists of what we`d like & some of us here (Inc Me) are willing to make the accurate scale part less regulated if the vehcile/aircraft at least fits in & actually fits the figures.

I think as long as it`s functional & at least looks good with figures if underscale/overscale well that`s not too bad.

ja

i used to be a stickler for scale accuracy but have 'mellowed' a bit over the years. I have some 1/20 in my collection and a bit of 1/16. Bugs me a bit but i've pretty much gotten used to it and in the final analysis, it really doesn't matter, especially if you know they're a bit off scale, since you can sort of 'adjust' for the difference in your mind. If you hope to have decent variety in 1/18 i think you almost have to compromise a bit or you'll be wanting for many items your whole life.

Compromising a bit has gotten me a variety of wwi planes, a tiger moth and V-1, a PT boat, two C-47's (one of which will eventually be an AC-47), a t-34 (which i will probably ditch if 21c ever does an XD version), an F-16 (it's actually a very constant 1/16.9 scale), and a few other items i forget off the top of my head. For me it has just been a matter of finding a palatable compromise between variety and scale accuracy.

As far as the BBI F-16...the only goof they made was when the did their initial research. They looked up the dimensions for the F-16 but misinterpreted them. The standard quoted dimensions for an F-16 include the nose probe and wing tip missile rails. But when they made their F-16 they applied those dimensions to just the fuselage length (without nose probe) and just the wingspan (without the launch rails). By coincidence it made both the length and span about 5.5% too big, making the overall model 1/16.9 scale.

They then made the ordance to be to scale with the plane (i suspect by this time they realized their goof but were too far along in development and were committed).

Anyway, it's still a nice toy, mildly annoying that a company whose logo is 'accurate 1/18 scale' could make a gaff like that though..

I am a stickler for exact scale when it comes to collecting. It was frustrating as a kid when the GI Joe scales were all over the place. I myself, consider 1:16 in a different realm and would not buy any because I do not want to get out of scale and into a new one.

I would rather have scale fidelity than oversized working parts. I'd rather have no detail than shoddy detail. I mostly model in 1/6 scale and have seen models built that were scaled up from not so accurate 1/35 models. What happens there is a blob of plastic in 1/35 that is suppose to represent a hatch will be a bigger blob of plastic in 1/6. I'd like everything to be as accurate as possible, but realize there's some limits we have to accept.