Jump to content

At what point of modifications would a kit become "Kit Bashed"


thomaslambo

Recommended Posts

I wasn't sure where to post this topic/question....so I put it here.

 

 

I was interested to here from members as to what type of modifications/changes to a stock model kit would qualify a project as being "Kit Bashed" (how extreme would the modifications need to be)?

 

Any comments would be appreciated.

 

Boyd

Edited by thomaslambo

Boyd 

 

Current Build - HMS Bounty - Artesania Latina - Scale1:48

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I feel the term "kit-bashed" is being completely misused in the model ship building community.

 

Coming from a model railroading background, kit-bashing means taking something and turning it into a completely different model. Usually multiple kits are used, but occasionally one kit is heavily rebuilt to reflect a different prototype.

 

What I find here, is most builds labelled "kit-bash" are in effect super-detailing projects. Taking something, and increasing the accuracy and detail levels. Fundamentally, the kit remains what it is, as stated on the box, but more closely reflects its prototype, even if a major rebuild is conducted.

 

In other words, Dafi's HMS Victory build is a classic example of a Super-Detailing project. I also consider JGerson's Rattlesnake a super detailing project.

 

A kit bash, would be taking a Revell "Cutty Sark" model kit and turning it into the Great Republic. 

 

I'll step down off Mark's milk crate (or is it soap box?) now.

 

Andy

Quando Omni Flunkus, Moritati


Current Build:

USF Confederacy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's kinda what I enjoy doing........taking the hull of a known kit and turn it into some other ship.  your comment Andy,  makes a lot of sense......I never thought of it that way.

I yam wot I yam!

finished builds:
Billings Nordkap 476 / Billings Cux 87 / Billings Mary Ann / Billings AmericA - reissue
Billings Regina - bashed into the Susan A / Andrea Gail 1:20 - semi scratch w/ Billing instructions
M&M Fun Ship - semi scratch build / Gundalow - scratch build / Jeanne D'Arc - Heller
Phylly C & Denny-Zen - the Lobsie twins - bashed & semi scratch dual build

Billing T78 Norden

 

in dry dock:
Billing's Gothenborg 1:100 / Billing's Boulogne Etaples 1:20
Billing's Half Moon 1:40 - some scratch required
Revell U.S.S. United States 1:96 - plastic/ wood modified / Academy Titanic 1:400
Trawler Syborn - semi scratch / Holiday Harbor dual build - semi scratch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kinda like Andy's definition of kit-bashing vs. super-detailing.  However, around here I think you will find the two terms are used more or less interchangeably.

Chris Coyle
Greer, South Carolina

When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
- Tuco

Current builds: Brigantine Phoenix, Hawker Hurricane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to climb up on the soapbox with Andy.  The ship building understanding of kit bashing is totally different from that in model aviation where a bash is turning a known design into something else.  An F-22 biplane would be a good example.  This definition is consistent with the terminology used in model railroading.  But, this IS a ship building forum so I'll abide by the commonly used meaning here.

Augie

 

Current Build: US Frigate Confederacy - MS 1:64

 

Previous Builds :

 

US Brig Syren (MS) - 2013 (see Completed Ship Gallery)

Greek Tug Ulises (OcCre) - 2009 (see Completed Ship Gallery)

Victory Cross Section (Corel) - 1988

Essex (MS) 1/8"- 1976

Cutty Sark (Revell 1:96) - 1956

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

This really helps clarify the term as I was struggling with the concept here on MSW.  

 

I also have RC model airplane and model railroad experience so I was trying to make the connection with the logs I've seen titled "Kit Bashed" (that remained basically the same ship - with extreme details added).

 

I'm new to wooden ship building and already know after starting my first build log that more than likely I'll end up in kit bashing country....just to much opportunity to raise the bar with these kits.

 

FYI - I've seen many of you guys posts and build logs....thanks for the contribution.

 

And thanks much for the explanations  :)

 

Boyd

 

 

 

 

Boyd 

 

Current Build - HMS Bounty - Artesania Latina - Scale1:48

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do have a point.  I have yet to do a ship kit 'stock'.  There are always improvements that can be made, especially when you consider the lifetime of a ship was a bit more likely to involve trips back to the yard for 'repairs' that could involve practically a different ship coming out at the end.  Additionally, we seldom have the explicit detail information for a ship that can be found for a class of engine, for instance some of the Pennsy engines, so we're constantly having to interpret or go back to 'common practice' where that can be determined.

Taking a coach body and mounting it atop the boiler of an engine to make an inspection car would be a RR kit bash.  Adding better grab rails, replacing plastic parts with nice brass castings, and putting in feed water heaters or generators to an engine would be adding detail.  If the detail added was part of the original it would be just that; an improved version of the kit.  If you added to the point that it was no longer true to the original but became a different engine/car, etc. where does that leave you?

It all seems a bit blurry past a certain point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, like most, the answer is "it depends".   Replacing kit parts with other parts really isn't a bash.  It is in the broad sense, but it's like putting better tires on a car or pinstriping.   Drop a completely different engine and we're talking "bash".  

 

I suppose, opening up the gundeck and fully detailing it would be a bash... as would as other have said, about taking a kit and making into something else.  Or updating.. such as WWII New Jersey and turning it into a Vietnam era. 

 

But... unlike the other hobbies mentioned which have definitions that are pretty much hobby wide, shipmodeling doesn't at this point.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add spjce ... border between bashing and (semi)scratch ... where is it? Lines are not straight here, there are different shades of gray between black and white

In progress:

CUTTY SARK - Tehnodidakta => scratch => Campbell plans

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/2501-cutty-sark-by-nenad-tehnodidakta-scratched-campbells-plans/page-1#entry64653

Content of log :

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/2501-cutty-sark-by-nenad-tehnodidakta-scratched-campbells-plans/page-62#entry217381

Past build:

Stella, Heller kit, plastic, Santa Maria, Tehnodidakta kit, wood, Jolly Roger Heller kit, plastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see why there's all this so-called "fuzzy" or grey area.

 

If you start with "A" and end up with a highly detailed and hyper accurate "A" (even if you had to significantly re-build or modify it), it should be considered super-detailing.

 

If you start with "A" and end up with "B" OR if you start with "A" and "B" and combine them to get "C" it's kit bashing.

 

 

Andy

Quando Omni Flunkus, Moritati


Current Build:

USF Confederacy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As another with a model railroader (MRR) background, I agree with Andy. It's important to define, if we are going to an IPMS or NMRA event, when you have to categorize the models for a contest. As an occasional contest judge and model evaluator for model railroading, I've been in the cross hairs of some irate contestants. It's a tough spot to be in. I try to avoid contest judging nowadays, but still help to evaluate folks' work, normally in their homes. Can't haul your layout in to my place to look at track-work or scenery, can you? ;)

 

We don't judge here, we support and offer constructive criticism. Big reason why I'm here. For our purposes and  usage, super-detailing and kit bashing are equally valid terms and the MRRs here will occasionally slip and call these kit-bashes superdetailing. Let's not fall on our swords over a little semantic issue. C'est la vie! :cheers:

Ken

Started: MS Bounty Longboat,

On Hold:  Heinkel USS Choctaw paper

Down the road: Shipyard HMC Alert 1/96 paper, Mamoli Constitution Cross, MS USN Picket Boat #1

Scratchbuild: Echo Cross Section

 

Member Nautical Research Guild

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy,

 

I do agree... but what Ken said carries a lot of weight around here:

We don't judge here, we support and offer constructive criticism. Big reason why I'm here. For our purposes and  usage, super-detailing and kit bashing are equally valid terms and the MRRs here will occasionally slip and call these kit-bashes superdetailing. Let's not fall on our swords over a little semantic issue. C'est la vie!

 

It's like the definition of scratch build.  There's the contest view and the MSW view.  MSW's view has been if you make the keel and frames/bulkheads, it's scratch.  The world view is based on contests and their super strict rules.

 

I'd suggest that we're all modelers....  the terms are somewhat meaningless unless you're entering a competition.   Sort of like drag racing.. we don't have classes here.  Everyone just runs what they brung.

Mark
"The shipwright is slow, but the wood is patient." - me

Current Build:                                                                                             
Past Builds:
 La Belle Poule 1765 - French Frigate from ANCRE plans - ON HOLD           Triton Cross-Section   

 NRG Hallf Hull Planking Kit                                                                            HMS Sphinx 1775 - Vanguard Models - 1:64               

 

Non-Ship Model:                                                                                         On hold, maybe forever:           

CH-53 Sikorsky - 1:48 - Revell - Completed                                                   Licorne - 1755 from Hahn Plans (Scratch) Version 2.0 (Abandoned)         

         

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 ...MSW's view has been if you make the keel and frames/bulkheads, it's scratch.

And apparently if the only thing you don't make is the keel and bulkheads it's semi-scratch.  See my semi-build log of the semi-scratch Lexington.  I gotta add some more to that one of these days.  I see over 300 of you have checked it out so there is some interest.

 

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/9953-lexington-by-jbshan-dlumberyard-164-from-the-seaways-practicum-by-clay-feldman/

 

All you got were keel and bulkheads and a bunch of lumber.  I have bought anchor castings and eventually gun barrels (not sure if I'll use the ones you could order).

Edited by jbshan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging anyone or anything. I just feel it's time to expand the vocabulary a little bit to help people better understand the goals of other model builders. And maybe help bring model shipbuilding in line with other hobbies terminology. Might even help a few newcomers along the way.

 

Andy

Quando Omni Flunkus, Moritati


Current Build:

USF Confederacy

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear what you're saying, Andy, and like I said, I like the railroading/aircraft distinction between the two terms.  But don't expect MSW to issue a policy ruling on the matter anytime soon.  If the more universally accepted understanding of kit-bashing is to become the norm around here, it will have to be via that narrower definition coming into common usage among the members. 

 

Cheers!

Chris Coyle
Greer, South Carolina

When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
- Tuco

Current builds: Brigantine Phoenix, Hawker Hurricane

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had been thinking that "kit bashing" implied the production of a chimera -  a fantasy object.

In ship modeling the usual goal is produce as accurate a representation of an actual vessel as is possible - given the skill and data available.  If that is the result, then how you get there is not much of an issue.  There is no real "bashing" here.

When I read a post about a POB kit where the author states that the centerline keel piece, molds, and planking has been replaced with higher quality material - I wonder - why not just buy only the plans and hardware to begin with?  It has essentially become a scratch build at this point anyway.

NRG member 45 years

 

Current:  

HMS Centurion 1732 - 60-gun 4th rate - Navall Timber framing

HMS Beagle 1831 refiit  10-gun brig with a small mizzen - Navall (ish) Timber framing

The U.S. Ex. Ex. 1838-1842
Flying Fish 1838  pilot schooner -  framed - ready for stern timbers
Porpose II  1836  brigantine/brig - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers
Vincennes  1825  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers assembled, need shaping
Peacock  1828  Sloop-of -War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Sea Gull  1838  pilot schooner -  timbers ready for assembly
Relief  1835  ship - timbers ready for assembly

Other

Portsmouth  1843  Sloop-of-War  -  timbers ready for assembly
Le Commerce de Marseilles  1788   118 cannons - framed

La Renommee 1744 Frigate - framed - ready for hawse and stern timbers

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we are going to an IPMS or NMRA event, when you have to categorize the models for a contest. 

 

IPMS really only has three categories. 

 

Scratch

Out of Box

Not out of box (which most people at IPMS stuff call Kit Bashed).

 

Out of Box is quite strict, with only a very limited list of things you can do that aren't from the kit, and kit plans.

Scratch is of course, scratch - not using a kit in the build.

 

Which means that for an IPMS competition, anything else falls into that 'Kit Bashed' category.  If you use the wood in the kit, and scratch build a capstan instead of using the kit provided capstan, then it is no longer an 'Out of Box' legal build.  Likewise, if you replace the kit guns with Syren guns, or super-detail your Missouri model with a photo-etch kit, it's in that middle category as well.

 

Really though, except for entering into competitions, I don't see why it really matters if you call it a 'super-detail', or a 'kit-bash', and I'm sure that groups other than IPMS have completely different rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys have provided amazing information and insight into the term ‘Kit Bashed”….I can clearly see here at MSW this is a term open to interpretation (which I think is actually quite refreshing).

 

 

I’ve spent enough time competing in competitions that have very specific rule books, and while I understand the reason and purpose of such things….I much prefer artistic freedom to do as I choose.

 

 

Having read all the above comments the term "Kit Bashed" seems to imply the kit builder will spend a great deal more time and/or money on their build....to bring it to life as they imagine it should be.  

 

 

Perhaps another way to look at it would be; it fills the very large gap between stock box kit builds and scratch builds. 

 

 

So when I see a build log that says it’s a "Kit Bashed” project, I know the builder is going to step out of the box so to speak  :) 

 

I really appreciate all the comments and I’m going away from this question with a much better understanding of the intent.

 

 

Thanks again 

 

 

Boyd

Edited by thomaslambo

Boyd 

 

Current Build - HMS Bounty - Artesania Latina - Scale1:48

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used the term semi - scratch for some of my builds......where I tend to make the hulls from kit parts panels, and then scratch build the rest.  while I can agree with Andy,  for a better understanding {especially for the new folks coming in} of the builds they wish to do,  I agree that there no competition here,  so the need for such strict rules are given more freedom.   I'm sure this has been discussed before,  but it was probably on the early  MSW,  and lost in the crash.   we are all out to have fun...and from what I see on the site......we do,  with gusto!  I don't think it's a bad idea to better classify our builds,  it will give the follower a better understanding of the build's objectives,  and it will lay the groundwork for a more subtle change in the direction of the site as well.

 

thanks Boyd for posting this...it can be a win / win for both sides  ;)

I yam wot I yam!

finished builds:
Billings Nordkap 476 / Billings Cux 87 / Billings Mary Ann / Billings AmericA - reissue
Billings Regina - bashed into the Susan A / Andrea Gail 1:20 - semi scratch w/ Billing instructions
M&M Fun Ship - semi scratch build / Gundalow - scratch build / Jeanne D'Arc - Heller
Phylly C & Denny-Zen - the Lobsie twins - bashed & semi scratch dual build

Billing T78 Norden

 

in dry dock:
Billing's Gothenborg 1:100 / Billing's Boulogne Etaples 1:20
Billing's Half Moon 1:40 - some scratch required
Revell U.S.S. United States 1:96 - plastic/ wood modified / Academy Titanic 1:400
Trawler Syborn - semi scratch / Holiday Harbor dual build - semi scratch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I have no problem with bringing greater clarity and definition to the categorization of builds on MSW, I remain confused over just how that would be done here. Taking my current Essex build as an example, I still have no idea how you would classify it. I started with the kit plans and framing, but had to significantly modify the framing and disregard the plans. I replaced all of the visible wood, scratch built virtually all of the deck furniture and fittings ( but used some kit items like gun barrels) and added considerable detailing. I then added scratch masting and rigging to a kit model that was not designed for it. What have I got? I've called it "kitbashed".

 

Truthfully, I enjoy what I do and don't particularly care what label it is given, but I would be happy to adhere to any categorization that most could agree upon.

 

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a distinction to be made here.  If this were a contest or professional venue detailed specifications of catagores would be appropriate.  However I, and suspect many others here, build ship models as a hobby because we enjoy it.  I do not see what utility there is in making ridgid lines between classes.  Just my .02 for what it is worth.

My advice and comments are always worth what you paid for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After you've done one 'box' model, or have read enough so that the 'box' no longer satisfies, you are probably going to be in some sort of 'modified kit' category.  If you don't use any manufactured pieces from a 'box', but perhaps only use the wood that came with, then you are getting into a 'scratch' category.  By that point you probably aren't using even the (it seems so often inadequate) plans.  Some competitions allow rope, chain, maybe even blocks (if they are the correct size) to be purchased, so even there the line is blurred.

That's 3 distinct categories which, for here, may be plenty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In section "Kit build logs" can be seen many examples with leaving kits plans/instructions in different stage of build, and go forward by another plans not included in kit, often with different material than in kit, with more/less detailing than in kit. This builds stay in this category, even you can classify them in a scratch in present stage. Opposite way I did not notice. It seems to me that most often, crossroad is somewhere during/after hull finishing

Edited by Nenad

In progress:

CUTTY SARK - Tehnodidakta => scratch => Campbell plans

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/2501-cutty-sark-by-nenad-tehnodidakta-scratched-campbells-plans/page-1#entry64653

Content of log :

http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/2501-cutty-sark-by-nenad-tehnodidakta-scratched-campbells-plans/page-62#entry217381

Past build:

Stella, Heller kit, plastic, Santa Maria, Tehnodidakta kit, wood, Jolly Roger Heller kit, plastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like GuntherMT's (Brian's) easy way of breaking this down. It makes more sense to me anyway for what we do in this hobby. I don't think that there has been anyone who has gone out and bought two or more wooden ship kits at hundreds of dollars each to try to combine them into something new. That definition of "bashing" makes sense for the plastic car hobby but does not seem applicable in this hobby.

 

In our hobby, I guess I would call what I am doing with my whaleboat kit "super detailing" and something like what rafine (Bob) is doing with his Essex as "kit bashing". In the end, I think we are both having a blast and that's what is most important.

-Buck

 

Current build: AL Morgan's Whaleboat (1st build)

 

Kits in the ships locker: I cannot confirm nor deny that there may be a few kits in there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When all else fails, wiki it. The kit bashing definition at Wikipedia makes a lot of really interesting points and comparisons across modeling in general. Professional modelers(move props, competitions, etc) and hobbyists(modeling for the fun of it) seem to have more in common than not.

 

"The kitbash in such cases can be as simple as painting or redecaling a model, or as complex as tearing the model down and adding scratch-built components, followed by custom decals."(quoted from Wikipedia)

 

For arguments sake, a person who cuts down a tree takes it home, cures it and then mills it down to the size that is needed, could argue that his way is a true scratch build. Also one could argue that taking parts from everywhere to make a conceptual or fantasy model, one that is unlike anything and one of a kind could say that's a bash.

 

It all seems to be in the eye of the beholder. I've yet to see a modeler here that doesn't gain joy and satisfaction from not only their work, but the work of all others as well. I think for most the goal is to take at kit and really make it their own, unique piece that is truly "one of a kind". My point being, that we're all here because we love building and creating things from a box full of pieces. Some try to attain the highest degree of accuracy, reading and researching to the finest details. Another might not like the color and change it to one that is uniquely different from the supplied kit and instructions.

 

I agree with the comments of shades of grey. To me, a build that follows supplied instructions and materials to a T would not be a bash. A builder that plants a tree, cuts it down and mills his own wood, could definitely be called a scratch builder. Those are two ends of the spectrum that most of us don't fall into, hence the grey area.

Matt - aka The Squirrel Whisperer

 

Current builds - Benjamin W. Latham by Matt

 

Competed builds - USS Ranger by Matt

HMS Bounty Launch by Matt

18th Century 10" Sea Mortar by Matt

18th Century Naval Smoothbore by Matt

 

Future builds - Willie L. Bennett Chesapeake Bay skipjack (MS) Half Moon (Corel) Emma C Berry Lobster Smack (MS)US Brigantine Eagle (Corel) New Bedford Whaleboat (MS)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said, Matt. 

 

While a little off topic, I just wanted to say that I find it a true delight to look closely at all the different versions of a given kit.  Even when the builder is basically following the practicum, differences in interpretation begin to appear.  I'm not talking about the difference in skill level or the use of after market improvements.  But after a few years, you can almost tell who the builder is by the overall appearance of the model.  In essence, you see not only the model, but the builder.  Each and every one is different, yet the same.  And all are special in their own way.

Augie

 

Current Build: US Frigate Confederacy - MS 1:64

 

Previous Builds :

 

US Brig Syren (MS) - 2013 (see Completed Ship Gallery)

Greek Tug Ulises (OcCre) - 2009 (see Completed Ship Gallery)

Victory Cross Section (Corel) - 1988

Essex (MS) 1/8"- 1976

Cutty Sark (Revell 1:96) - 1956

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...