# Correction on Aurora's Molds



## docplastic (May 10, 2003)

This is Tom Graham, author of "Aurora Model Kits." Please pardon the personal approach of this message, but it will help to show the evolution of my own knowledge of the subject of the Aurora molds.
First off, I must admit that I have published information that has misled the modeling community. In my book I imply that in 1977 Monogram Models purchased all the surviving inventory of Aurora Plastics Corporation's molds. This was what I had read from previous writers on the subject and, in fact, was what the ex-Aurora employees I talked with assumed. This turns out to be incorrect.
The first inkling I had that this might not be true came abut 2000 when LAPO issued its Fokker E-III that was evidently produced by an Aurora mold. Then in 2003 when I interviewed Bob Reder, the co-founder of Monogram, for my Monogram book, he stated that Monogram did not buy all of Aurora's molds. 
What nobody in the modeling community knew was that the molds left over after the Monogram purchase were reacquired by Joe Giammarino, co-founder of Aurora, and his cousin Gennaro. These are the molds now in the possession of the new Aurora Plastics Corporation.
A second misleading thing that I have written is that Aurora almost never made duplicate molds for the production of its models. The only two I knew of were the original Frankenstein and Dracula. However, at least some other molds were also duplicated. The new Aurora has furnished me with test shots from one aircraft and two ships previously issued by Monogram. (And also another Aurora ship that was never reissued by Monogram.) I can compare two of the models with Monogram issues that I own, and they are not from the same mold. I don't have the Monogram issue to compare the third one, but I believe its is also from a duplicate mold. These were originally popular models, attested to by Monogram's reissuing of them, so making duplicate molds must have made good business sense. How many more duplicate molds were made remains to be seen.
I have been surprised (and pleased) by the discovery of the unaccounted for Aurora molds and hope that the new Aurora Plastics Corporation will succeed in its attempt to bring back some of the spirit of Aurora.
By the way, I don't have any business or financial connection to the new Aurora; I'm just a fan and wish well to all others who like Aurora's classic kits.


----------



## Duck Fink (May 2, 2005)

Thanks for posting this Tom. Test shots from the new Aurora is the first positive thing I have heard so far about these guys from a reliable source. Thanks also for sharing the inconsistentcies regading mold information. I will sit back and see how things unfold.


----------



## TAY666 (Jan 8, 2000)

Thanks for that info Tom.
And I know that I for one would never doubt your word, or your intentions.
You have always been a straight up guy, and an asset to the modeling world.


----------



## THRUSH Central (Feb 20, 2003)

Tom - Have you thought about updating your AURORA book? Could /would you advise in print about the trade in original AURORA factory built/painted models? No one has tried to cover that and you are the man it seems to me if you were so inclined. Thanks. Thrush.


----------



## Scott Hasty (Jul 10, 2003)

CRIPES, will this stop?!?!

Mr. Graham has no links to these test shots or attached photos of them. Personally, I find it a shame that these bamboozalers are allowed to post and spread this shite.

They have nothing but a name, and even that is suspect...


----------



## portland182 (Jul 19, 2003)

Aurura used to have a UK branch which appeared to make kits in England - presumably they must have been using duplicate moulds?

Also the same may be true for Canada?

Jim


----------



## THRUSH Central (Feb 20, 2003)

The Netherlands, I believe. Holland. Thrush.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Thanks for the post.


----------



## ChrisW (Jan 1, 1970)

Tom, on another site the Giammarinos imply that you are involved in the "rebirth". You may wish to discuss that with them.

Yes, thanks for the information - everyone looks to you as a trustworthy source.


----------



## MadCap Romanian (Oct 29, 2005)

"Rebirth" or "Still birth"?


----------



## Scott Hasty (Jul 10, 2003)

MadCap Romanian said:


> "Rebirth" or "Still birth"?


Since we had Aurora, Cinemodels, PL and now a "rebirth" of _actual_ companies producing kits, currently, I would have to put these guys in the "afterbirth" catagory....


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

Gross.









Can we have a new metaphor please?


----------



## phrankenstign (Nov 29, 1999)

Lower Berth.


----------



## docplastic (May 10, 2003)

*Revision Correction*

I must revise a couple of statements from my posting that began this thread. I made the posting because I thought I had plastic-in-hand proof that the new Aurora really does have old Aurora molds.
The new Aurora gave me some bagged pastic kits, including a test shot done for them by Revell-Monogram. I jumped to the conclusion (all on my own) that the other bagged kits were also modern test shots from molds owned by the new Aurora. The fact that the plastic did not match the Monogram reissues of these kit seemed to indicate that they came from duplicate molds. However, at the time I did not consider an alternative hypothesis: that the plastic might be 30+ year old shots from the original Aurora. I now think that this is the case. So plastic-in-hand proof of the existence of lost Aurora molds is, at least in my mind, still lacking.
The rest of my posting still may be true. (There is paper evidence that it is true.) However, proof in plastic has not been produced.
So now I will keep silent and wait to see what comes from the new Aurora in the next year or so.
I apologize for adding more confusion to a controversial subject.


----------



## Duck Fink (May 2, 2005)

We are all right there with ya, doc. We know you are a reliable source and appreciate all of your info and insight. I am waiting in the bushes as well to see if anything gels with the new Aurora Company. Thanks again for the post!


----------



## the Dabbler (Feb 17, 2005)

Thanks doc. It's easy to respect a man who corrects his own errors.


----------



## TAY666 (Jan 8, 2000)

Ditto what Dabbler said.

No need to appologize. You were kind enough to keep us in the loop with information you had.
And you are good enough to revise that information as more unfolds.
What more could anyone ask?
As far as I see it, you are doing us all a favor by sharing.


----------



## Zorro (Jun 22, 1999)

Doc - as a long time Aurora collector I have great respect and admiration for your expertise. But I've got to ask. Are these guys trying to snow you too?


----------



## ShadOAB (Apr 29, 2007)

Sorry...I'm losing faith in you Doc. The warning signs have been posted for months about these guys...actually for about seven years. And...I know you've been warned about their instability, from reputable people in the hobby.
...yet ...


----------

