[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
!:1200 Renwals (and Eaglewall )Re: Renwal Kits
The 1:1200 Renwal kits were not all that great. Good thing they were very rare. Especially bad was the nuclear sub (George Washington) with 8 missile tubes. etc. However, they ere light years better than the Pyro produced 1:1200 WWII US and Japanese warships. They were truly awful. The Pyro's of English and German ships were of course from Eaglewall molds and MUCH better that the other 1:1200 Pyro kits.
By the way, the 1:1200 Renwals were sold in a set of 12 with vacuform base, two sets of six (same ships) and four sets of three (still the same ships). No single kits were ever released.
In other news related to posts in this thread, the Eagle kits were produced from September 1, 1959 to approx. Jan 1963. The Airfix kits came MUCH later and if memory serves were late 1969 to early 1970's (too lazy to look it up!) The Airfix kits were NOT from the 1950's. There was an article from a UK magazine about the Airfix Bismarck. It mentioned that the hull for the 1:1200 Bismarck was way too short!
I still have a Renwal North Carolina/Washington (yay!), a flat-bottomed Missouri (yuck!) with ridiculous representations of AA in the tubs, and one really nice cruiser which I believe to be the USS Saint Paul. In addition, I have the ubiquitous box scale Arizona with the horizontally split superstructures and pillbox guns. I put equal amounts of effort into them all, fifty-some years ago. And it's real obvious which are the better kits when you see them side by side on the shelf.
Yet I love them all.
I absolutely agree that Renwal was lightyears ahead of others with the detail they put into small AA and bulkheaddetail. I loved the North Carolina and CVA kits and could not understand why Revell couldn't match them by 1965 or so. And the the AKA, AKA and AG - they were terrific! Which is to say that any accuracy faults in them were too subtle for me to recognize. Flat bottoms were a fact of life and it took me years to dislike that.
I agree that the CLG kit was almost accurate and extra 6" turrets made it a fair kit. But the "King" - nope. Individual weapons problems or not, It just didn't come very close to much of anything in Jane's Fighting Ships.
We are most definitely in a Golden Age now, when we can pick the manufacturer whose engineering priorities most closely match our priorities. And if we want to complain, there are so many dimensions to complain about that you can spend all of your modeling time writing to dozens of forums and enthusiast pages about why you are not pleased.
Life is good!
Rick, how can you disparage Renwal kits? After all the the box top showed precision measuring instruments and measuring pad, how can they be in error? Who else in the dawn of plastic modeling had individual Oerlikons with guns shields? Their North Carolina Class kit had them, just don't look to closely at the helicopter on the quarterdeck. However, compare the Renwal Oerlikons with the Steve McQueen blobs on the Revell Iowa Class kits.
SteelNavy.Com Home Page