Aoshima Bomex Supra...repackaged AMT?

[exhaust smoke]

I never saw the initial thread, but...

YUK!! That is disgraceful! I was so looking forward to the Aoshima version, hoping that it would be an improvement over AMT's.
Lucky I didn't waste my money on that. Thanks for the heads-up.

[Vric]

Originally Posted by Modgod

Thats why I never will buy Aoshima only tamiya and revell,

this is sad, you will pass over some really good RX-7 kit (Bomex and C-West)

[008]

I don't own either Enzo kit so I'm just guessing here. The layouts of the trees and the way the parts interface may be different, but have you actually measured everything? Once the tool is made to create the molds, the molds can be manufactured per model makers' request. Repositioning parts and adding extra parts to the trees (such as reissues of older models to make updated kits) is easy enough once the mold tooling exists. From pics I've seen here, don't they mount their wheels the same way?

Back on topic, how much does the Aoshima Supra normally cost vs. the AMT one?

[Chuck Kourouklis]

...things could have been worse. The Supra may have its little hiccups, but Aoshima could have reboxed the Eclipse, which is an all-around dog. Warning to Aoshima - you want to keep your credibility somewhat intact, you'll stay miles away from that one.

To answer the Enzo question, The Tamiya and Revell kits are simply leagues apart, though it must be noted that the Revell kit is surprisingly competitive. The latter is an excellent kit in its own right; it's just that the former is so innovative and beautifully engineered, even other Tamiya kits suffer by comparison.

The Revell kit has fixed doors and a more conventional body-floorpan interface, while the Tamiya kit has opening doors and a fully depicted monocoque frame. The Revell kit features its own new set of tires that appear more dimensionally accurate than Tamiya's, but also far less sharp in their detailing. And no, the wheel mounting system isn't the same - Tamiya uses its traditional nylon-washer-in-the-brake-rotor method, while Revell traps its rotors between wheel halves to get rolling wheels.

You can train your eye to look for copyright dates and mold scratch patterns on the trees and parts to determine what's shared between one kit and another. But you don't even have to go that far between the two Enzos. Compare the engine halves or the brake rotors, for example, and you'll see that Tamiya's treatment is far superior. Check out those little cylindrical suspension servos or the aforementioned tire dimensions, and Revell pulls a small but surprising edge.

Each of these is entirely distinct. As were the F50 and Testarossa models, too. Now if you were to check out German Revell's Mythos show car against Monogram's Testarossa, you would find that although each has its own mold, Revell AG clearly worked from Monogram's master patterns for the Testarossa runing gear...

[hirofkd]

>008
I have both kits, and they're entirely different. Wheel mounts are not even close. Same with Testarossa or F50. If you look at each part in person, you can tell. While, you're right about moving around each pieces to rearrange the runner, but that degree of mold arrangement is not common in plastic model kits.

As for Aoshima's Bomex Supra, I don't know the reason, but at least Aoshima has the rights to FF and 2F2F products in Japan. I'm looking forward to a good news next year.

[CamaroSSBoy346]

well.... the directions are atleast in japanese

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

You'd think from all the complainers around here that anything from AMT is automatically considered crap.

The Supra is a pretty decent kit. Considering it's available in the US for about 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of today's hideous Fujimi monstrosities it's a damned fine deal.

The pics of the build kit look pretty good:

BOMEX Supra on HLJ

Maybe a resin company will do a little surgery on the nose to make it better. I complain a lot about models with small inaccuracies (or the RX-8 I'm working on with big inaccuracies), and then when I build them and see them finished, it's not so bad (and the RX-8 is lookin' good). A finished model, no matter how many inaccuracies there are, is ten times better than one sitting in a box because it's "not good enough". I've seen it countless times...a kit that gets no respect, when built nicely, still looks good. The F&F/Bomex Supra is a good kit, and if you live in the US and can buy them for under $10, they're a steal.
And I dare say that many guys here would kill to build a model that looks as good as the BOMEX Supra that was on display and is pictured at HLJ. The boxart artists are the ones to blame! Their renderings look too good!

As for the AMT Eclipse...go ahead, skewer them...
Wait for Revell's plastic Eclipse. It will be the antidote.

[larrygre]

Originally Posted by ZoomZoomMX-5

You'd think from all the complainers around here that anything from AMT is automatically considered crap.

The Supra is a pretty decent kit. Considering it's available in the US for about 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of today's hideous Fujimi monstrosities it's a damned fine deal.

The pics of the build kit look pretty good:

BOMEX Supra on HLJ

Maybe a resin company will do a little surgery on the nose to make it better. I complain a lot about models with small inaccuracies (or the RX-8 I'm working on with big inaccuracies), and then when I build them and see them finished, it's not so bad (and the RX-8 is lookin' good). A finished model, no matter how many inaccuracies there are, is ten times better than one sitting in a box because it's "not good enough". I've seen it countless times...a kit that gets no respect, when built nicely, still looks good. The F&F/Bomex Supra is a good kit, and if you live in the US and can buy them for under $10, they're a steal.
And I dare say that many guys here would kill to build a model that looks as good as the BOMEX Supra that was on display and is pictured at HLJ. The boxart artists are the ones to blame! Their renderings look too good!

As for the AMT Eclipse...go ahead, skewer them...
Wait for Revell's plastic Eclipse. It will be the antidote.

Bob, amen to that. The AMT Supra is actually a pretty impressive little kit. Yeah, there's stuff to be worked on, but I never met a kit that DIDN'T have stuff to be worked on. I'm about 9/10 done with my build and detail article for MCM and I can tell you, it shapes up pretty nicely.

I believe Aoshima imports AMT to Japan via something called SKYNET. I'm not sure if it only involves the F&F/2F2F stuff (called "Wild Speed" in Japan) though.

Man, they do have some fine builders in Japan. My hat's off to them!

The R-M all plastic Eclipse will be worth waiting for. The engine, interior, and running gear from the Revell offering at least are a starting poiint to a really nice model. The engine is a 4G63, not a block of plastic as on AMT. The chassis looks like a chassis not a flat pan toy as on AMT.

What amazes me is that even after all this time (1999-present), Racing Champions has no idea of the difference between the model kit market and the toy/diecast market, nor do they seem to care. Modelers tend to be a lot more critical and expect something a lot more detailed, or a lot more realistic-looking, of a current "state of the art" plastic model kit. After the release of the Eclipse abomination and the ridiculous '70 (?) Charger, I'm pretty much convinced that the Supra being good is a fluke. It's a lot like back in 1983-1986 after Ertl bought AMT and proceeded to turn it into a laughingstock through horrible management that did not know what its target audience WAS. Until someone who knows their butt from a hole in the ground (i.e. knows how to market model car kits to the right target audience - US) is given the reins of model kit marketing at RCErtl, I'm damn sure we can expect nothing but a lot more of the same-o same-o crap-o crap-o. I think it's a given at this point that when shoddy engineering is shared between multiple products (all of RCErtl's Eclipses, kit and diecast) all those multiple products turn out shoddy.

As for Aoshima's R34, let's not pass any judgement until we see the actual kit. The pics of the blue body mockup on HS and HLJ are just that: mockups. You can't really judge anything from a mockup except what it MIGHT look like.

All I can say is, it's a modeler's horserace!

Take care, guy.

[tonioseven]

Originally Posted by ZoomZoomMX-5

You'd think from all the complainers around here that anything from AMT is automatically considered crap.

The Supra is a pretty decent kit. Considering it's available in the US for about 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of today's hideous Fujimi monstrosities it's a damned fine deal.

The pics of the build kit look pretty good:

BOMEX Supra on HLJ

Maybe a resin company will do a little surgery on the nose to make it better. I complain a lot about models with small inaccuracies (or the RX-8 I'm working on with big inaccuracies), and then when I build them and see them finished, it's not so bad (and the RX-8 is lookin' good). A finished model, no matter how many inaccuracies there are, is ten times better than one sitting in a box because it's "not good enough". I've seen it countless times...a kit that gets no respect, when built nicely, still looks good. The F&F/Bomex Supra is a good kit, and if you live in the US and can buy them for under $10, they're a steal.
And I dare say that many guys here would kill to build a model that looks as good as the BOMEX Supra that was on display and is pictured at HLJ. The boxart artists are the ones to blame! Their renderings look too good!

As for the AMT Eclipse...go ahead, skewer them...
Wait for Revell's plastic Eclipse. It will be the antidote.

Thanks for that much-needed statement!!! Just build something!!!

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

AMT is capable of far better. And they do far better when their feet are to the fire.

Case point is their upcoming American Graffiti '56 TBird. It's unbelievable, seeing it in two iterations of test shots in Chicago shows they can do good stuff when the license holder holds their feet to the fire. The one that looks perfect was being dissected and still not approved w/o a few more tweaks. This is because the licensing arm of Ford, the Beanstalk Group, and Patrick Mulligan, who was taking great pains and great enjoyment of making sure AMT's kit was worth putting the Ford license on it. Kind of puts a whole new spin on licensing, if it's going to produce better kits of at least some company's products. I suspect the crappy kits we see from AMT and Fujimi are because the license holders/decision makers are pretty stupid and can't tell a good model from a bad model.

The upcoming TBird proves AMT can do very good, if not great kits when given the proper guidance. Thankfully not all licensing arms are run by greedy people first and foremost, over ones who see the value in making the models right in the first place.

[fujimituner235]

that sux...I figured aoshima would have done a better job

[larrygre]

Originally Posted by ZoomZoomMX-5

AMT is capable of far better. And they do far better when their feet are to the fire.

Case point is their upcoming American Graffiti '56 TBird. It's unbelievable, seeing it in two iterations of test shots in Chicago shows they can do good stuff when the license holder holds their feet to the fire. The one that looks perfect was being dissected and still not approved w/o a few more tweaks. This is because the licensing arm of Ford, the Beanstalk Group, and Patrick Mulligan, who was taking great pains and great enjoyment of making sure AMT's kit was worth putting the Ford license on it. Kind of puts a whole new spin on licensing, if it's going to produce better kits of at least some company's products. I suspect the crappy kits we see from AMT and Fujimi are because the license holders/decision makers are pretty stupid and can't tell a good model from a bad model.

The upcoming TBird proves AMT can do very good, if not great kits when given the proper guidance. Thankfully not all licensing arms are run by greedy people first and foremost, over ones who see the value in making the models right in the first place.

Not to mention a Best Supporting Engineer award to John Mueller!

[larrygre]

[quote=008]willing to bet my AMT Eclipse engine that Revell and Tamiya got their Enzo molds from the same manufacturer. Same goes for their F50 and Testarossa.QUOTE]

Not exactly. Revell AG (Revell of Germany, not the US company) actually boxed two different Testarossa kits at different times in the 1990s - Italeri's and Monogram's. The Monogram kit was the "Miami Vice" edition that was a pretty nice replica of a US-spec car. Italeri's is a Euro-spec late-production TR where Tamiya's was an early production TR. Neither Italeri's nor Monogram's share anything except subject matter with Tamiya.

Revell's F50 and Tamiya's F50, ditto, are totally different tools. Revell's F50s are their own tooling, and considering, they really didn't do a bad job on them - just that Tamiya's finesse is THAT good. Same goes for the Enzo's.

Now why don't we have a decent 1/24 550 or 575 Maranello!!! WE NEED ONE. Ooh, if Tamiya would do one of those!

[Modgod]

Originally Posted by Vric

this is sad, you will pass over some really good RX-7 kit (Bomex and C-West)

I might haft to change my ways, I had forgotten about the Rx7's and Velside skylines.