ccoyle

I believe you will find that GPM features and quality can vary from one kit to another depending on who designed the model. A good idea is to google search the particular kit you are interested in and browse some of the images that turn up in the various card forums, especially in Poland and Germany.

Doesn't sound like good modeling wood. https://www.wood-database.com/spanish-cedar/

Great model!

Except of course that this model is scratch-built. The ME kits are in 1:16 scale.

That's some fine skills on display.

Yep, you missed the Big Crash of 2013, though you'd be hard pressed to tell because of how swiftly our dedicated members added content to the new forum.

Welcome! I used to build rubber band-powered aircraft back in the day. Pretty quickly I got round to building them without motors -- much easier that way to resist taking them outdoors for the inevitable crash.

BTW, the coworkers LOVED your photo and commented on its excellent composition. A couple asked if they could also use it as a desktop image.

Pretty sure that's a design feature intended to make the kit more accessible to a younger modeling demographic.

I just realized that Wallace posted his picture as a high-res image. It is now the desktop image on my PC. With any luck, I will make you famous among my coworkers, Wallace. 😏 It really is a first-class photo.

The key word in your question is "favorite". They are both very nice models. I have seen a finished Latham at an exhibit, and it is really something special if one adds a full suite of sails -- the model in the box photo doesn't do the kit justice IMO. You should give some thought to which one really gets your motor running -- doldrums are inevitable in any lengthy build, and truly liking your kit subject goes a long way toward alleviating that malady.

Folks, It appears that the time has come for yet another gentle reminder about our site's build log naming conventions. If you browse through the build log titles, you'll notice that there is a consistency in the way that build logs are named. This is no accident. The consistency among build log titles is due to 1) an existing convention about how titles are to be constructed, 2) some members abiding by that convention but a fair number of members either not reading about that convention or else ignoring it, and 3) an MSW moderator following behind at some point and tidying up the mess. We have a build log naming convention for two reasons. First, the uniformity of build log titles improves the function of our site's search engine, making particular logs easier for our members to find. Second, a uniform style keeps our site looking neat. If you are new to our site or have never read the instructions for naming build logs, they are pinned at the top of both the kit and scratch build log sections and can be read here. After fixing a certain amount of build log titles, I always go back to that pinned topic to remind myself that the instructions are clear and easy to follow. They are. I know this to be so because every once in a while, a new member will create a build log and name it correctly on the very first attempt (thank you!!!). But some veterans are still not getting it. One fix that I seem to be doing a lot of lately is editing titles to include the builder's username exactly as registered. Another is editing finished logs to show that they are finished. You can do this yourself, and I don't mind at all if you do, but please -- the word to use is FINISHED in all-caps, and it should go immediately after the ship name and username, set off by hyphens as per other sections. Will it affect the search function if you put that particular appellation at the end of your title? No, but please see the second reason given in the paragraph above. This might all sound picky, but I am a member at other sites that have no such convention in place, and their build log indexes are all over the place; many of the titles are so vague that they tell a potential reader little if anything about what is being built. So help us keep our site looking like the top-shelf site that it actually is, won't you? Thanks!

That's a beautiful photograph. I used to have an oil painting of a square-rigger that a well-meaning friend of the family gave to me. I never much liked it, because it had obviously been done by a painter of middling talent who had little idea of what a real square-rigged vessel looked like. Moving across the country presented me with an opportunity to rehome it. I also have a framed photo of the marina in Morro Bay, California, which does mean something more to me, since two of my children lived there for a time.

Done.

Philo, Methinks I should split off those last couple of posts and create a build log for you.