Comparing Ferrari 250 swb ESCI/AMT and Italeri kits. Is the ESCI\AMT kit a lost cause?

[Hoffman]

Pierre's got it covered!   ?

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

On 2/4/2024 at 5:31 PM, Matt Bacon said:

It's a great project, Pierre. Your model body photos are taken from a higher relative position than the ones of the real thing so the relative positions of different features may appear different than they are in real life. On the real-life pictures, the lower sills of the door windows are almost lined up, but the model pictures have a discrepancy of almost 20% of the door height at that point. It doesn't seem like a big deal for the vertical height of features on the near side of the car, but it'll throw off the lower corner of the rear valance quite a lot. I know you're constrained by photographing it in front of your computer screen so it's not that easy.

Depends on your camera, but for a compact DSLR you want 45mm focal length lens and a 50mm on a full frame camera to get a view like the human eye. I think you need to drop the "horizon" on your model body profile pictures to more or less line up with the lower door window sills to get a truly comparable image. If you do that with the right focal length lens, and pull back as far as you need to get the framing of the body the same as the "real-thing" pictures then you can compare like for like... You're probably just wanting to make the point, which is absolutely fair, but even the best thought-out photos need to be treated with scepticism unless you know the exact details of the lens and geometry of the set-up...

Bingo. And these effects form a large part of what's to blame for so many models being so badly "off".

Interpreting photos is a black-art, and it takes a considerable amount of experience, along with a finely calibrated eyeball, to make the necessary judgment calls.

Edited February 6, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy

[Classicgas]

And the older you get as a rule your eyesight isn't what it once was.

[Ace-Garageguy]

22 minutes ago, Classicgas said:

And the older you get as a rule your eyesight isn't what it once was.

And some people lack the judgment talent from the git-go...and it can't be taught in most cases.

EDIT: And don't y'all jump down my throat. Most people simply don't notice panel misalignments, gaps, sloppy work, or minor color mismatches when their real cars come back from the bodyshop. I've been astounded by the awfulness average people will accept.

We've had it demonstrated on this very site that a lot of people just don't see anything wrong with the proportions and lines of some kits, defects and inaccuracies that, frankly, jump out at a few of us, and can't be unseen.

It's the way it is, and a good reason 3D scanning of real objects is making inroads into model tooling design.

The scanner doesn't lie, or depend on subjective judgment ability that varies from person to person, or misinterpret what it sees, or try to make "artistic" modifications to reality...assuming, of course, it's under the control of a competent operator.

 

 

Edited February 4, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy

[Gramps46]

I had planned to do something with this BBurago SWB but after watching yuz guys it is going back on the shelf. 

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

4 minutes ago, Gramps46 said:

I had planned to do something with this BBurago SWB but after watching yuz guys it is going back on the shelf. 

What scale is that one? What year issue?

I've seen some BBurago models of that car that look very good at first analysis.

[Classicgas]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

 

..assuming, of course, it's under the control of a competent operator.

 

 

That's the key. There are kits from back in the day that look better than some recent offerings. I actually let the body shop use a fender on my old Saturn that was close in color but not exact. She had 200,000 plus on it and I figured I probably wouldn't have it much longer anyway so was able to pocket some of the insurance money. They paid me as they totalled it.

[Ace-Garageguy]

14 minutes ago, Classicgas said:

That's the key. There are kits from back in the day that look better than some recent offerings...

A big part of that particular truth is that American annuals were directly derived from promos that themselves were scaled from factory blueprints. No "interpretation" involved, and that's why most of them actually look like the real cars.

It's also apparent that some early tooling makers had a better grasp of the function of the parts they were representing in scale, and had access to the real things to get their dimensions from. The old Revell "parts-pack" engines are a good example. The old Revell Buick nailhead is better in some critical dimensions than the much more recent nailhead in the '29 roadster and '30 coupe kits.

[Gramps46]

15 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

What scale is that one? What year issue?

I've seen some BBurago models of that car that look very good at first analysis.

The BBurago SWB is 1/24 and was made in China but I do not have a date on it.  What bothers me are the side windows which seem to be too tall which makes the top look too thin.  But bear in mind I have a degree in mechanical engineering before digital computers and lack a good sense of proportion and shape unless drawn with a T square and compass.?

[Ace-Garageguy]

17 minutes ago, Gramps46 said:

The BBurago SWB is 1/24 and was made in China but I do not have a date on it.  What bothers me are the side windows which seem to be too tall which makes the top look too thin. 

Some photos of a BBurago 1/24 scale model of the car in question appear to show some elements of the shape none of the plastic models got right to be done quite well by Bburago...like the constant downward trend of the top of the front fender line from the base of the windshield. (The low angle the shot was taken from makes the roof look too thin, too.)

HOWEVER...photos of the same model from other angles don't appear to be quite so well representative of the real thing, which reinforces the point Matt made about accurately interpreting shapes from photographs.

Edited February 5, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy

[Matt Bacon]

I have the Michael Zumbrunn “Ferrari Legends” book. I won’t paste the picture in here, but take a look at the yellow 250SWB here:

https://en.wheelsage.org/persons/158403/author/rp1srp
 

He’s one of the most sought-after photographers for auction catalogues, with cameras, lighting and skills to match. Look at that picture and tell me it doesn’t look as if there’s a curve in the fender over the front wheel…

best,

M.

[Pierre Rivard]

Well... the curve of the front fenders on the AMT kit is... shall we say a lesser problem than the curve of the rear fenders?

The whole back end looks like a brazilian butt lift gone bad, very bad!

Oh oh... I feel the censors coming in...

[1959scudetto]

4 hours ago, Gramps46 said:

The BBurago SWB is 1/24 and was made in China but I do not have a date on it.  What bothers me are the side windows which seem to be too tall which makes the top look too thin.  But bear in mind I have a degree in mechanical engineering before digital computers and lack a good sense of proportion and shape unless drawn with a T square and compass.?

This was released in the "Le grandi Ferrari" diecast series in Italy in February 2017 as a 1959 model which is totally wrong - it is a 1961 version:

http://diecast1-24.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2017-02-12T22:00:00%2B01:00&max-results=5&start=34&by-date=false

 

[Hoffman]

On 2/5/2024 at 9:34 AM, Matt Bacon said:

I have the Michael Zumbrunn “Ferrari Legends” book. I won’t paste the picture in here, but take a look at the yellow 250SWB here:

https://en.wheelsage.org/persons/158403/author/rp1srp
 

He’s one of the most sought-after photographers for auction catalogues, with cameras, lighting and skills to match. Look at that picture and tell me it doesn’t look as if there’s a curve in the fender over the front wheel…

best,

M.

I see it, Matt. Agreed. It's probably safe to say you can replicate 'A' 250 GT SWB, as opposed to 'THE' 250 GT SWB, as they're all hand made with each slightly (or greatly) different from the next.

[JHart Modelworks]

On 1/26/2024 at 6:13 PM, MrObsessive said:

While a bit nicer than the Esci, that one always seemed too "wide" to my eyes. MFH made an EXCELLENT 250 SWB a while back, but they're pretty much unobtainium, and if you come across one, you can betcha they'll fetch a mighty pretty penny.

Other than 3D files of the car which I have, there really have been no other good 1/24-25 scale glue kits of this car sadly.

Hi,

Sorry to resurrect an old post but...  I am very curious about the 3D files you've mentioned. 

 

I have the Italeri 250 swb kit, It was one of my holy grail kits. However, tragically, during shipping the back end of the body split straight up the trunk. I have been toying with the idea of cutting the trunk out and trying to 3d model a replacement and print it, but with my meager 3D skills, if someone else has already done it, why re-invent the wheel?

Which files are you talking about? Would they work for 3D printing? Any way to just print the hood and would it fit the kit? Could you point me in the right direction for them? 

[MrObsessive]

1 hour ago, JHart Modelworks said:

Hi,

Sorry to resurrect an old post but...  I am very curious about the 3D files you've mentioned. 

 

I have the Italeri 250 swb kit, It was one of my holy grail kits. However, tragically, during shipping the back end of the body split straight up the trunk. I have been toying with the idea of cutting the trunk out and trying to 3d model a replacement and print it, but with my meager 3D skills, if someone else has already done it, why re-invent the wheel?

Which files are you talking about? Would they work for 3D printing? Any way to just print the hood and would it fit the kit? Could you point me in the right direction for them? 

The files I have were from a video game------I think one of the Forza series. I don't recommend trying to retrofit a printed part to a model kit, because I can almost guarantee the part will not fit. We're talking two very different design origins.........same car and scale notwithstanding.

Unless the designer has the kit in hand and can do measuring and possible scanning, I wouldn't take a chance on a part fitting because it'll be a real crapshoot at best.

Frankly, it'd be better to get a 3D file of the car (they're out there, but might be pricey), and start with a new model of the car as an entire print. That's the route I would go.

I can say that the particular file I have would need a TON OF WORK before it ever saw the inside of a USB drive. Because the file was meant for a video game, there's a lot of work to be done on its surface as it's what I'd call very low poly, and would not print well at all as is. Doing that type of work is not for the faint of heart, and one would need to know the 3D programs out there to not only fix the surface, but then to make it printable afterwards.

[JarJar01]

Hi, 

 

I am new in this forum, My name is Jorge and I am originally from Colombia but i live in Germany.  I have in my stash the 3 Version of the 250 SWB (ESCI, Gunze and Italeri). I will add some pictures comparing the 3 of them. 

 

 

[JarJar01]

 

Hi All, 

I finally had some time to take pictures of the three models and make side-by-side comparisons (I should have glued the bumpers to the Italeri kit, but I did not have the time). 

The Italeri kit is the smallest among the three and, as discussed before, it is the one that most accurately captures the scale of the actual car. However, in my opinion, the Gunze kit better encapsulates the spirit of the car. By examining the pictures in "Ferrari 250 Grand Turismo" from HEEL, I noticed that while the Italeri kit is closest to the reference measurements, the back appears somewhat narrow. In contrast, the Gunze kit gives a more accurate impression of the car's essence, even though it appears broader and off-scale. 

The ESCI kit occupies a middle ground regarding measurement but fails to detail the rear part satisfactorily. One observation from the HEEL book photos is that the car’s rear seems elongated, and the distance from the rear frame mirror looks smaller—something the ESCI kit captures. This artistic decision may explain why the model's rear is made wider. 

One point of discussion is the arch on the front fender. In the Italeri kit, it looks more like a straight line, whereas the ESCI and Gunze kits depict it with a bump. However, looking at the car from the rear, as shown in the HEEL book, the front part appears to have a very round bump, similar to the Gunze kit, rather than the straight line seen in the Italeri kit. This might also be due to perspective, as the real car’s bump does not appear as curvy as in the Gunze kit. 

In the pictures below, you will find ruler references where I took the time to measure various parts of the models for comparison. 

Kit Design: 

Overall, all three kits are good options if you want to recreate this remarkable car for your collection. To rank them, I would place the Italeri first, followed by the Gunze, and lastly, the ESCI. 

In my personal opinion, the Gunze kit best captures the racing spirit of the car, despite being slightly wider than the Italeri, yet still closely resembling the car's design. The sculptors at Gunze typically do this to evoke a racing aura, which can also be seen when comparing the 250 GTO to Italeri's, Revell (Protar), and Fujimi's versions. 

Bonus: Ferrari California and Ferrari SWB (Italeri Kits) 

One noteworthy aspect of the Italeri 250 SWB kit is that it shares parts with another Italeri kit (the Ferrari 250 California). In the pictures below, I compare the engine, interiors, and chassis parts, and they are identical except for small modifications like door panels. This may explain why the sculptor needed the SWB kit's measurements to match those of the California kit (assuming the California kit is older given the numbering: 662 for California and 674 for SWB). 

 

Reference Book  

Ferrair 250 Gran Turismo 

HEEL  

https://www.zvab.com/9783898804868/FERRARI-250-GRAN-TURISMO-3898804860/plp

[LDO]

Forgive the slight hijack, but on another forum there was a discussion about the then new Fujimi 250 GTO vs the old Protar. I mentioned that the Protar was not so bad, and had a nice engine. Another poster referred to me as an “apologist”. I mean GEE, it’s not like the Protar kit tried to exterminate other GTO kits. 

[JarJar01]

Hey Lee,

 

While having a look at the 250 GTO from Italeri, i also notice that they share the same parts for engine and and interior and chassis. While having a look at the data sheet of the cars provided on the HEEL book i make sense as the car shares the same wheelbase, making them at wheelbase aspects and engine design closer to the actual vehicle. 

Regarding the comparison, the 250 GTO from Revell / Protar is not a bad kit,  (I have 2 Revell and 2 Protar in Storage) 

 

I found a while ago a post on the Brit Modeler website where Coppercat  makes a great side by side comparison. So to not reinvent the wheel here is the link:

 

https://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/235094636-ferrari-250-gto-124/

 

Edited October 10, 2024 by JarJar01

[Ace-Garageguy]

On 10/7/2024 at 1:54 PM, LDO said:

Forgive the slight hijack, but on another forum there was a discussion about the then new Fujimi 250 GTO vs the old Protar. I mentioned that the Protar was not so bad, and had a nice engine. Another poster referred to me as an “apologist”. I mean GEE, it’s not like the Protar kit tried to exterminate other GTO kits. 

Sounds like some smoothbrain learned a new word.  

Edited October 12, 2024 by Ace-Garageguy