Page 1 of 5

NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 7:47 am
by JSB33
Please show any issues you have with quality control or errors with NEO models in this thread.

Remember photos of the equivalent 1/1 are very important to demonstrate the issue with the model.

Constructive critiscm is the aim

Re: NEO

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 9:14 am
by bomber21
This RS2 should not have passed the Quality Control.

Image

Re: NEO

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:49 pm
by sheepCrusher
Maybe this thread should have a different title to distinguish it from a regular NEO thread. Sometimes they do good stuff too. Like "NEO Issues" or something.

Re: NEO

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:51 pm
by sheepCrusher
Dodge Dart Swinger, met.-beige/beige, LE 500 1973
Model Car World Exclusive
Image
Quoting DeadCanDanceR
The front end angle is not correct, and neither is that low roof line. It looks chopped!

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:08 pm
by sheepCrusher
1972 Pontiac Grand Prix Hurst SSJ
Image
Quoting 43rdMuscle
The peak seems too flat. The Hood/Bonnet is not correctly proportionate (seems too short).
Image

Seems like they are missing a set of headlights too. Unless I have the wrong picture. Anyone?


Upon further review perhaps this car is falsely judged. Here is the one that looks like they modeled from.
Image

Guess this thread can be NEO's savior as well. If there was a previously thought wrong car and someone can show NEO was correct that would be helpful too.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:10 pm
by scalainj
sheepCrusher wrote:Maybe this thread should have a different title to distinguish it from a regular NEO thread. Sometimes they do good stuff too. Like NEO Issues or something.
Thats done - i've added miscues to the title

Remember we need to add equivalent 1/1 pics to illustrate the points made

Cheers

Andy

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:12 pm
by sheepCrusher
LTD
Image
Quoting k1w1taxi
WOW, even this car looks wrong to me!
The front fenders are too high, the back's slant it too severe, maybe tail-lamps too low, what a mess.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:15 pm
by sheepCrusher
The infamous Camaro and its roofline.
Image

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2011 1:52 pm
by sheepCrusher
If anybody knows the correct pictures of that Dart, LTD and Camaro I will stick them in my posts.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:03 am
by DeadCanDanceR
Wrong size whitewall for that year!

Image


Nothing better than an original ad to illustrate it:

Image






The day Neo fixes the whitewall size on this model, I'll gladly buy it... :geek:

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 8:21 am
by JSB33
sheepCrusher wrote:LTD
Image
Quoting k1w1taxi
WOW, even this car looks wrong to me!
The front fenders are too high, the back's slant it too severe, maybe tail-lamps too low, what a mess.
I agree on the back window being to slanted. The Front fenders look off as well.

Image

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 8:23 am
by JSB33
sheepCrusher wrote:The infamous Camaro and its roofline.
Image
The Neo Camaro looks more like a Firebird. Its a mess.
Image

Re: NEO

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 8:27 am
by JSB33
sheepCrusher wrote:Dodge Dart Swinger, met.-beige/beige, LE 500 1973
Model Car World Exclusive
Image
Quoting DeadCanDanceR
The front end angle is not correct, and neither is that low roof line. It looks chopped!
Yes and yes. So close but so far away
Image

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:43 am
by The CSL
I still reckon the roof height is fine, as the windshield looks to be in proportion, but the header rail above the side windows is too thick.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 12:11 pm
by Ubradewunner
I'm observing this Sub-forum route with great intrigue... One thing I've noticed about the comparisons to the 1/1's here, is that due to the photographed angles the compare and contrast pics shown in such cases, opinion can perhaps teeter more unfairly.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 12:45 pm
by scalainj
It's exactly why we wanted this to be a discussion with examples.

Sometimes the manufacturers get it wrong, sometimes we do

Here we can discuss this through without rancour and come to a opinion we can base on fact

Andy

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:00 pm
by Ubradewunner
Stating the obvious like the silly sausage I am, :idea: it probs will be best if we photograph our models at the same angle etc. as the 1/1 example we're judging, as such real cars aren't erm as obtainable as our 1/43's :) (told you I was a silly sausage)...

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:27 am
by JSB33
The CSL wrote:I still reckon the roof height is fine, as the windshield looks to be in proportion, but the header rail above the side windows is too thick.
Look at the side window opening. It like a chopped top.

I have a feeling having grown up around this car, it makes it a bit easier to spot an issue right away.

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:28 am
by JSB33
Ubradewunner wrote:Stating the obvious like the silly sausage I am, :idea: it probs will be best if we photograph our models at the same angle etc. as the 1/1 example we're judging, as such real cars aren't erm as obtainable as our 1/43's :) (told you I was a silly sausage)...
That would be ideal, Mr Sausage :mrgreen:

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:14 am
by The CSL
JSB33 wrote:
The CSL wrote:I still reckon the roof height is fine, as the windshield looks to be in proportion, but the header rail above the side windows is too thick.
Look at the side window opening. It like a chopped top.

I have a feeling having grown up around this car, it makes it a bit easier to spot an issue right away.
That's what I mean. The side window is lower, making a thicker header rail.

Leaving it up to you to see if this is closer to reality, because as you say, you've been exposed to these cars. Just a crude photoshop to bring the top of the window to meet the windshield line, as it does in the 1:1 picture. I won't argue the front being too angled, as it's obvious even to me.

EDIT: This is a second attempt, as looking at the 1:1 on this page, the windscreen wasn't wide enough either, leaving a thick a-pillar. Actually I think that's it. Rather than being too low a roofline, the pillar work is so off that whereas the 1:1 has a narrow A-pillar and the door meets close to the pillar line, this model's window line is further back from the door shutline and then with the thick header rail as well, it throws off the proportions all together. If I were Neo, I'd rework the whole glass area, as front and side it's way off.

Image

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:00 am
by DeadCanDanceR
Great photoshopping skills!!! ;) It now looks much better than NEO's version!
The CSL wrote: ...If I were Neo, I'd rework the whole glass area, as front and side it's way off...
...they should probably consider doing a Dart convertible instead... 8-)

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:46 am
by Ubradewunner
At the moment, the Neo model 1/43's I've purchased so far, seem bang-on. Being, Porsche 930 Flatnose, and Saab 9000 Turbo. However, (sighs)... I've been planning on buying a black E39 Beemer lately, and like so many other models Neo has made, there seems to be a problem with the crispness of their edge-lines - which seem to either be too soft, thick or bulge. I suppose this is due to resin materials in comparison to metal. The best analogy I can come up with at the moment, is if you've ever got bored at school many moons ago, and made a small scale model car out of "bluetack", then there's a similarity there in their outcomes. :roll:

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:38 am
by JSB33
The CSL wrote:
JSB33 wrote:
The CSL wrote:I still reckon the roof height is fine, as the windshield looks to be in proportion, but the header rail above the side windows is too thick.
Look at the side window opening. It like a chopped top.

I have a feeling having grown up around this car, it makes it a bit easier to spot an issue right away.
That's what I mean. The side window is lower, making a thicker header rail.

Leaving it up to you to see if this is closer to reality, because as you say, you've been exposed to these cars. Just a crude photoshop to bring the top of the window to meet the windshield line, as it does in the 1:1 picture. I won't argue the front being too angled, as it's obvious even to me.

EDIT: This is a second attempt, as looking at the 1:1 on this page, the windscreen wasn't wide enough either, leaving a thick a-pillar. Actually I think that's it. Rather than being too low a roofline, the pillar work is so off that whereas the 1:1 has a narrow A-pillar and the door meets close to the pillar line, this model's window line is further back from the door shutline and then with the thick header rail as well, it throws off the proportions all together. If I were Neo, I'd rework the whole glass area, as front and side it's way off.

Image
Amazing what you can do with a bit of Photoshopping in that you did a better job in an afternoon than NEO did with unlimited time.
Ubradewunner wrote:At the moment, the Neo model 1/43's I've purchased so far, seem bang-on. Being, Porsche 930 Flatnose, and Saab 9000 Turbo. However, (sighs)... I've been planning on buying a black E39 Beemer lately, and like so many other models Neo has made, there seems to be a problem with the crispness of their edge-lines - which seem to either be too soft, thick or bulge. I suppose this is due to resin materials in comparison to metal. The best analogy I can come up with at the moment, is if you've ever got bored at school many moons ago, and made a small scale model car out of "bluetack", then there's a similarity there in their outcomes. :roll:
You will always get crisper lines with Resin than Diecast metal.
It wasn't the materials fault for what they did. :lol:

Re: NEO Miscues

Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2011 12:39 pm
by Ubradewunner
Deja vu :D (...told you I was a silly sausage)...