i was looking thru a few of kits the other day ranging from 30 parts to about 250 parts, and was wondering if there is such a thing as too many parts in a kit?

how many parts would put you off building a kit?

or even buying it?

is there an optimum number of parts beyond which it just becomes overkill?

does the scale (above 1/72) really make that much difference as parts just get bigger...



paul

For me it isn't so much the number of parts in a kit so much as the assembly. You could have a kit with 1,000 parts (I haven't seen an aircraft kit like that yet but I'm sure they exist) that all fit well and it's no problem. If you are doing sub assemblies then each step is like a small model in itself. Engine, cockpit, landing gear, if it all goes together it's manageable. On the other hand, a kit with 100 parts that don't fit well seems like too many for me.

In many instances, the more parts a kit has, the more unused parts there will be. In armor kits, I just built one kit that had 200 individual track links and almost 100 spare parts. Lots of aircraft models have options for two different variants. I have the Tamiya P 47M with four different props, two cockpit floors, optional weapons. The Eduard F6F-5 has two different fuselages.

It isn't so much the part count as parts fit and kit options.

Hi Paul

For me, the answer is "Yes, but it all depends...."

Building on Russ's points. Many short-run kits have to break assemblies down into more parts than you'd like ideally - and then fit does become an issue. Likewise, mainstream manufacturers are frequently accused of "over-engineering" their kits - usually to allow multiple versions of the subject to be produced from a core set of moulds. (Eduard are notable in at least trying to avoid this, despite the overall complexity of some of their kits, by providing complete new fuselages etc. for different vaiants).

How many parts is too many? There's no answer, really. It's so subjective. As Russ says, it all depends on how well they go together. 1000 pieces that fit perfectly may keep you happy for months - 20 that refuse to go together may end up in the trash after a week!

Buildability doesn't always releate to the number of parts. A very complex kit might be far easier to complete successfully than a seemingly "simple" model that is actually a nightmare...

All the best

Rowan

The more parts, in a kit, the fewer aftermarket parts you need to buy; simple equation, really.
Edgar

i agree that its the quality of the parts that makes or breaks a kit etc. i.e. not having to get rid of join lines on every single part is going to be a major bonus but having more parts doesn't make it better, someone will bring out an etch set or resin bits that "you must have" even though the kits already loaded with parts...

Yes … and no.

As a rule, more parts allows greater fidelity to the original, but it can’t guarantee it. All modelling media have their limitations and there’s no way you can reproduce every component to scale, so you need to compromise. As a very wise modeller said on some site or other today, the aim is to simulate, not replicate. Another gross generalisation is that the larger the scale, the more parts you’re likely to have, since being able to “see” elements more clearly means that you need to represent them more accurately, and the way to do that is very often to add parts. Even if it’s only a matter of needing four parts instead of two because your mould can’t handle undercuts.

More parts doesn’t always mean greater fidelity, though. It could mean:

* More elements of the original represented - eg fifteen “more” parts because your kit has an engine and mine doesn’t. Whether that engine is any good is a separate question.

Or:

* Mould limitations that require multiple parts where another company, with different equipment, could achieve the same effect with only one.

Or:

* Multiple versions of the same basic kit, with inserts and alternative parts being more economical than re-tooling entire sections. This can result in greater fidelity but, again, it can’t be guaranteed - mainly because the reason here isn’t to assemble elements out of more accurate parts, but to cater for large-scale differences in shape.

Every additional part means more mating surfaces and more scope for mis-matches in shape and outline. All you need to do to avoid these problems is to be Tamiya or Hasegawa, it would seem. Even then, we’ve all run into the problem that the engine inspection panel fits fine if it’s open but is no use at all if you want it shut.

Whether more parts reduces the need for AM stuff is variable. Sometimes you really do get everything you could want in a kit, but that’s not always because they’ve got to a four-figure parts count. Hasegawa’s Japanese fighters are a good example: there’s a fair number of parts in the cockpits, for instance, but not excessively so, and they give a very good representation of the real thing. So much so that, for some, there’s still no replacement cockpit. Equally, some kits are stuffed with PE and resin and still leave you wanting more - or rather, wanting better, since what you get may not be all that good.

I personally have no problem with high parts counts or low ones. As others have said, it’s fit and finish that matter. Two thousand parts hold no terrors at all, so long as they go together logically and then stay together. This is why I’m leery of getting into my Dragon armour with all the separate track links - they look great but have a terrible reputation for being absolute buggers to assemble. I’m also not looking forward to anything by Trumpeter with metal aileron hinges - now that is an example of unnecessary over-complication.

Number of parts you say !

Well that real never bother me all that much if a kit one has lets say 20 parts and builds nice okay then . If a kit has 200 parts no problem . It's related to what your skill level is at . A beginner who never has built a kit might be very over whelmed on the number of parts but not so on a kit that has 45 parts .

Detail is another thing as well , some modellers are happy with what they get in side the box while others just cry for more detail . Being a WW1 modeller we don't have a lot of choices when it comes to AM stuff , so scratchbuilding comes in to play . One build I did a year ago now on a Albatros D.Va I didn't use any kit parts for the cockpit at all . Everything was built from scratch totalling over 200 parts in the cocpit .

Well, I've got a kit waiting to be done which has over 140 parts in the cockpit. I wouldn't say that puts me off, it's just that I keep finding reasons to build other kits, some of which have less parts than that in the entire model!
Steve

IMHO NO !!,With kits now climbing into triple figures i do`nt want a "five minute build".It would also be nice if everything was included (photo-etch etc.) in the box,having to buy aftermarket stuff to get round a manufacturer`s short cut really "pees" me off !!.
On the flip-side of things,being so expensive is killing off the beginners market - getting my two sons to follow in our beloved hobby is a no-go for loads of reasons.