# Polar Lights 1/1000 U.S.S. Reliant decals rant



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Didn’t want to hijack an existing thread with this rant, so I’ve started my own.

I just purchased the Polar Lights 1/1000 U.S.S. Reliant this past week and for the most part, it’s a nicely done kit. Except for the decals. As I show in the attached photos, there are a number of issues.

A) The phaser banks, thrusters and Starfleet insignias are all misprinted.
B) There are no decals in the kit for the windows on the VIP/Observation deck or the thin red stripes above and below these windows. You have to purchase the Aztec decal set to get this. (CORRECTION, These windows are NOT on the Aztec decal set either!)
C) There is no decal, in either the kit OR the Aztec decal set that includes the shuttle docking doors behind the bridge. All you get is a blank, plastic wall!
D) 4 hatches just forward of the “roll bar” are missing, but are included in the Aztec decal set (sorry, I didn‘t scan a picture of this).

To me, there’s no excuse for these errors/omissions. While you can argue wither or not the Aztec panel decals should have been included in the kit (I’m on the side of including them, like they did with their 1/1000 Refit kit), Round 2 should at least include all the decals (minus the Aztec panels) needed to finish the kit correctly. The box says registry and markings are included. If so, why are the red stripes I mentioned missing? Why are all the windows included except for the ones I mentioned? 

To make matters worse, the included decals are misprinted. Round 2 has had issues with their decals since they started producing Star Trek kits. Many people, including myself, have complained about this. I don’t understand why, after all this time, the decals still have errors. Perhaps they need to find another company to do the decals for them. 

The decal issue was also mentioned in a You Tube video, so my kit is not a lone example. Even if I do request a new decal sheet from Round 2, will it have the same issues? And what about the Aztec decal set, will it also have issues with printing?

Which brings me to my last point, why aren’t the Aztec decals included? On his blog, Jamie Hood said they wanted to keep the kit at a certain price point. If you buy both the kit and the Aztec decals, the total cost is over $50 (and you still don’t get a decal representing the shuttle docking doors). Is he saying that if they included the Aztec decals, the kit would be MSRP $50? The Refit sells for less then the Reliant, and that kit includes the Aztec decals. I’m starting to wonder if their just trying to make more $$$ by selling the Aztec decals separate.

Again, overall, it's a nice kit. I know that Jamie and company are trying to give us quality kits that we all want. But, IMHO, they need to step up their game when it comes to the decals they provide. And it would be nice if the Aztec decals would come with the kit too.


----------



## holt35 (Aug 15, 2013)

A lot of people have expressed disappointment about the decals that come with the kit and your right about everything you said but I don't see Round 2 fixing anything on the decal sheet. They are in need of better quality control. Also one thing you missed the registry numbers on the back of the engines are to small.


----------



## Lou Dalmaso (Jul 13, 2004)

So glad I'm not alone in thinking these decals are sub-par (to be kind)

I went on a bit of a rant myself
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ4SoXH8m_0&list=UUiiEox7-YK3zFuWZ3Nxi2Mw

also missing.. the yellow boxes on the rollbar at the top of the pylons and the yellow thrusters on the nacelle fins


----------



## goodtexan (Dec 31, 2009)

They know that they are the only game in town for Trek models and when you have no competition quality will suffer in anything. Charging extra for the aztec decals is just another way to gouge customers & if people are willing to pay it, you really can't blame them for gouging. Maybe if people refuse to buy this kit and it's overpriced/poorly produced decals they will be forced to up their game and give their customers a quality product. However, if everyone goes out and buys one they will have no reason to make a better product or give people more for their money. It is after all a profit driven corporation. They are trying to make money, not friends. The market will decide.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

What exactly is wrong with the Starfleet insignia decals??? Because I could not see anything wrong with them.
And the thruster decal the only thing wrong that I could see was the on the top where there should be a round black hole instead of a square one. And the decals for the saucer phasers don't have any detailing to indicate phaser banks. But that's ok because I'll probably just drill a tiny hole and glue in a piece of plastic rod the correct size if they aren't already there.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

irishtrek said:


> What exactly is wrong with the Starfleet insignia decals??? Because I could not see anything wrong with them.
> And the thruster decal the only thing wrong that I could see was the on the top where there should be a round black hole instead of a square one. And the decals for the saucer phasers don't have any detailing to indicate phaser banks. But that's ok because I'll probably just drill a tiny hole and glue in a piece of plastic rod the correct size if they aren't already there.


The Starfleet insignias, phaser banks and thruster decals have a band of color, that is darker then the main color, at their edges. They should have a singular, solid color instead.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

Lou Dalmaso said:


> So glad I'm not alone in thinking these decals are sub-par (to be kind)
> 
> I went on a bit of a rant myself
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ4SoXH8m_0&list=UUiiEox7-YK3zFuWZ3Nxi2Mw
> ...


Glad I watched your video, now I know to wait until aftermarket decals come out for this kit! As for other missing details that you and holt35 mentioned, the more you compare this kit and it's decals to the filming miniature, the more errors you find. It's the gift that keeps on giving!

And I agree with what you said in your video, regarding Tamiya paints, great for airbrushing (after thinning), lousy for hand painting. I've heard that some people add retarder to the paint to prevent it from drying so fast, haven't done this myself.

Overall, I think Round 2 is doing themselves a big disservice in releasing the kit with these poor, to say the least, decals. As provided, the decals are incorrectly sized, misprinted, missing details and go on horrible. Basically, the included decal sheet is unusable which means you have to hope someone in the aftermarket makes a replacement sheet. Which means it will add to the cost of the kit. I thought Round 2 had gotten their act together when it came to the decals, guess not.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

holt35 said:


> A lot of people have expressed disappointment about the decals that come with the kit and your right about everything you said but I don't see Round 2 fixing anything on the decal sheet. They are in need of better quality control. Also one thing you missed the registry numbers on the back of the engines are to small.


Hopefully people are expressing their disappointment in the right directions.
Such as writing a politely worded note to R2, listing all the issues. 

Just complaining on various boards and Youtube does not guarantee that those issues will reach the ears of the right people, allowing them to be addressed and fixed.


----------



## edge10 (Oct 19, 2013)

Thanks for the video Lou. Really shows the highs and lows for the kit. 

I am truly glad I don't have to pay for the wallpaper decals! Money saved to buy your templates and an after market decal sheet.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

spock62 said:


> The Starfleet insignias, phaser banks and thruster decals have a band of color, that is darker then the main color, at their edges. They should have a singular, solid color instead.


If the phasers and the thrusters are the wrong colors then why not simply paint them the correct color of yellow???


----------



## jgoldsack (Apr 26, 2004)

irishtrek said:


> If the phasers and the thrusters are the wrong colors then why not simply paint them the correct color of yellow???


That's not the point they are making.

R2 released a model kit with shoddy decals, missing decals, and simply incorrect decals. A highly desired kit, and not to mention it is a completely new tooling. The decals really detract from the overall quality of the final product.

They should be taking a bit more care in their QC before releasing the product.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

jgoldsack said:


> That's not the point they are making.
> 
> R2 released a model kit with shoddy decals, missing decals, and simply incorrect decals. A highly desired kit, and not to mention it is a completely new tooling. The decals really detract from the overall quality of the final product.
> 
> They should be taking a bit more care in their QC before releasing the product.


That's exactly what I meant. The decals that are provided should be complete, accurate and go on well. The one's provided in the kit fail on all accounts and are, quite frankly, worthless.

I'm sending an email to Jamie Hood at R2 regarding the issues with the decals, hopefully the powers that be at R2 will see fit to redo the decal sheet.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

jgoldsack said:


> That's not the point they are making.
> 
> R2 released a model kit with shoddy decals, missing decals, and simply incorrect decals. A highly desired kit, and not to mention it is a completely new tooling. The decals really detract from the overall quality of the final product.
> 
> They should be taking a bit more care in their QC before releasing the product.


Yes I do realize that was simply making a suggestion is all, unless he would prefer to wait and see if Jamie will send him some improved decals for free as an apology for the crappy ones already coming with the kit.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

It looks to me as if they were attempting to give a 3D shaded effect to those phaser and insignia emblems. Note that the insignias have the darkened edge in different locations as if the light was hitting a 3D raised emblem and casting a shadow.


----------



## robn1 (Nov 17, 2012)

charonjr said:


> It looks to me as if they were attempting to give a 3D shaded effect to those phaser and insignia emblems. Note that the insignias have the darkened edge in different locations as if the light was hitting a 3D raised emblem and casting a shadow.


Don't give them credit for poor registration. The insignias were not three dimensional, they were flat solid colors.

I can even see rows of dots in these decals in Lou's video, just awful. Of course that's nothing new, I remember seeing that in ERTL decals over 20 years ago. But R2 has done a much better job with other kits, so why drop the ball here?


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

charonjr said:


> It looks to me as if they were attempting to give a 3D shaded effect to those phaser and insignia emblems. Note that the insignias have the darkened edge in different locations as if the light was hitting a 3D raised emblem and casting a shadow.


3D effect??? The original filming miniature had no such effect on the insignia. Besides, the phaser banks are raised details on the kit, why would you even need to simulate a 3d effect for that?

Like robn1 said, the decals have poor registration, R2 screwed up, plain and simple. Since most of the decal's are a) undersized, b) poor register or c) just plain missing, the decals can't be used and the kit can't be completed. Not what I paid $25 for.

Check out Lou's video. He did a great job assembling/painting, only to have the decals ruin the overall look. Not Lou's fault, but R2's.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Decal quality control has been an issue for a couple of years now- the Chinese rush production and concentrate on shipping volume. Both Moebius and R2 have had this problem and quite frankly if I was doing a serious buildup I would just go with aftermarket decals as a first option. A good set often costs more than the model you are getting them for, but I want to be happy with what I put on my shelf.


----------



## eimb1999 (Sep 8, 2007)

I have to admit to being amused as people complain that the aztec decals are not included in the base kit when some also complained that aztec decals WERE included with the "Refit" kit and bemoaned the idea that the kit "did too much" and that "you should have to paint it instead" or some such thing back a few years ago. 

Just goes to show that no matter what you do you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.


----------



## john_trek (Apr 13, 2000)

Oh for heaven's sake.... the decals have a few problems, but are hardly junk. 

I also found the NCC decals on the rear of the warp engines very undersized and just could not bear to put them on the model. Aside from that, even though some of the other decals were a bit off I went ahead and used them, and...... gasp.... they went on just fine and looked good after putting Tamiya clear flat over them.

As for the phasers and RCS thrusters decals not being up to some people's standards, I do not see why you are complaining. those areas are very easy to hand paint. 

So basically, I used the decals, hand painted a couple items that I figured did not require decals, and ended up with a damn nice looking model. 

I am trying not to flame too much, but some people need to get over it and just build the darn model.

Sorry if there are things in this kit that are not absolutely perfect right out of the box, but we are supposed to be modelers, and there is the idea that "some assembly and painting is required"


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

eimb1999: Wither or not the people want/don't want aztec decals in the Star Trek kits is a matter of "taste", so to speak. Some people want them (like me), some would rather buy aftermarket decals, some would rather paint them on, some don't like aztec at all and leave their builds "clean". There is no wrong or right here. 

Based on what Jamie Hood wrote to me, the cost of the kit, if it included the aztec decals, would roughly equal what it costs to buy the decals seperate from the kit. Also, keeping the kit at a lower price range helps "sell" the kit to retailers who wouldn't carry a higher price kit. I can understand their thinking, so it is what it is.



john_trek: Everyone on this forum has a right to their opinion, as long as said opinion is respectfull of all parties involved. To me, your reply comes across as belittling of me and others. Also, it's a way to boost and tell everyone what a great modeler you are based on how you dealt with the kit's decals.

Your statement; "Sorry if there are things in this kit that are not absolutely perfect right out of the box, but we are supposed to be modelers, and there is the idea that "some assembly and painting is required", proves my point. 

First, your not sorry, right? Second, all model companies strive to get their kits perfect, out of the box, as much as humanly possible. If you check my other thread, the one with Jamie Hood's response to my email, he (and R2 in general) takes fulll responsibility for the mistakes. He said; "The bottom line is that a few things got by us and we take that seriously.". Third, there is nothing wrong with a customer expecting a new-tool kit to be complete and accurate, especially when the company that makes the kit goes on to say how accurate their kits are (on their website, on the kit boxes, etc.). Fourth, all kits need assembly and (usually) painting, that's why their called kits, that's why we're in this hobby, to assemble and paint kits! 

Like you, I am a modeler. But, it seems, unlike you I expect the companies that make these kits to get the basics correct and if they don't, I will critique the kits and contact them with the hopes that they correct the errors. Apparently, you, on the other hand, would rather put up with bad decals, not be bothered contacting the company and just live with whatever the companies give you. Instead, you use your time to rag on those of us that dare to critique a kits errors and are actually trying to get the companies to correct those errors. If the errors were minor, easy fixes for the modeler (and some are to be fair), then you'd have a point. But, when the decal sheet has details missing, printing errors, etc., I think your argument is on weak ground.


----------



## john_trek (Apr 13, 2000)

spock62 said:


> Like robn1 said, the decals have poor registration, R2 screwed up, plain and simple. Since most of the decal's are a) undersized, b) poor register or c) just plain missing, the decals can't be used and the kit can't be completed. Not what I paid $25 for.
> 
> Check out Lou's video. He did a great job assembling/painting, only to have the decals ruin the overall look. Not Lou's fault, but R2's.


A few points.

I completely reject the notion that the decals are junk. I was able to build a model that people really liked at the local modeling club meetup. 

For $25 you seem to be expecting perfection. At that price I expect a few problems. The only one I couldn't live with was the registry numbers on the warp engines, so rather than just complain and leave the kit in a box, I built it.

For all your concern about respecting fellow modelers, where is the respect for R2? This thread is a good example, IMHO, of the kinds of things that led the Moebius people to stop moderating the Moebius board here. 

I will apologize for my sarcastic tone of the previous post. I was trying to be gentle and not be too nasty, but would agree I failed at that. 

So, abandoning all sarcasm: The decals have problems, but I do not think they are junk. I do think people are really over reacting and if they spent as much time actually building the model as they did complaining about it they might be looking at a nice model on their shelf right now.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

john_trek said:


> A few points.
> 
> I completely reject the notion that the decals are junk. I was able to build a model that people really liked at the local modeling club meetup.
> 
> ...


For the last time:

a) When the decal sheet has mis-colored decals, missing decals and undersized decals leaving only about 50% or less of the sheet usable (if you want to make the kit as it is depicted in the instructions), the decal sheet isn't a good one. Call it junk, garbage, worthless, no-good, whatever, the point is the kit can not be finished properly using the supplied decals and as shown on the instructions. Even Jamie agreed they slipped up on this.

b) As for people liking your build, that's fine. Has nothing to do with wither or not the decal sheet is bad.

c) I never said I was expecting perfection. But, poorly done decals DO distract from the overall look of the finished kit, which is why I feel R2 should look into a fix.

d) Where, exactly is my disrespect for R2 or anyone who works there? All I've said is the R2 screwed up the decals, which Jamie agrees with. Just because you think the decals are fine, doesn't mean they are. And it doesn't mean I'm wrong in saying so.

e) As for stopping complaining and building the kit. To me, I'd rather hold off until either R2 fixes and reissues the decal sheet or an aftermarket company makes one for this kit. Seems silly to me to put all the effort into building and painting a kit and then using sub-par decals that will end up distracting from your efforts in building and painting. Maybe I'm in the minority, but that's how I feel.

f) And finally, "decal rant" is part of the title of this thread and even though it upsets you that people are complaining about this, you came in here anyway. Not to offer constructive comments, to put down those of us with an opinion different from your own. What part of "decal rant" did you not understand? Why did you bother to read and then comment on this thread to begin with? I clearly labeled this thread so people who don't like to deal with critical threads could avoid it.

Bottom line, you and I do not see eye to eye on this. And that's fine with me. We can go round and round forever (or until the moderator says "Enough!"). So let's just call it a draw so things don't get out of hand. Besides, I've really have nothing more to say about the matter. Besides, how many different ways can you say the same thing?


----------



## john_trek (Apr 13, 2000)

I agree: call it a draw. Really, I'm not trying to sneak in another dig. The argument is over, I agree to disagree and all that. 

I did enter into a "rant" thread, and should maybe have known better. I conceded as much in my last responce.....until my browser refreshed and erased everything I wrote before I hit "submit reply". When I recomposed the response, I didn't get the "rant" concession reference back. 

But this brings up an internet etiquette problem. I think it is fine for people to go on a forum like this and air a concern, complaint, and for that matter compliments on products in the scale modeling world. But I do not accept the proposition that someone can make a statement, complaint, political stand, or whatever and then insist that no one is allowed to dispute their statement. Labeling the thread a "rant" does not grant anyone the right to be free from a counter opinion from being aired. 

Next time around, I will try to be less sarcastic (and frankly think I do a pretty good job on that compared to a lot of internet trolls.... and I am not refering to anyone in this theead, just in general). But no matter what a thread title says, I think people are within their rights to make a counter argument.


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

john_trek said:


> I agree: call it a draw. Really, I'm not trying to sneak in another dig. The argument is over, I agree to disagree and all that.
> 
> I did enter into a "rant" thread, and should maybe have known better. I conceded as much in my last responce.....until my browser refreshed and erased everything I wrote before I hit "submit reply". When I recomposed the response, I didn't get the "rant" concession reference back.
> 
> ...


Sounds good to me. I actually agree with everything you wrote above. My point to you regarding the "rant" label was not that I was against a differing opinion then mine, I was hoping to avoid replies from people who seem to want to rag on the poster (me) as opposed to offering a constructive counter-point, which is how you came off sounding, to me, when you gave your opinion. My apologies if I made it sound otherwise. Oh, and I still think the decals stink!


----------



## john_trek (Apr 13, 2000)

OK. That is the last straw. If you are going to insist on being nice to me and polite, I am leaving. Just what kind of a rant thread is this anyway? :tongue:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I usually wait (even if I have funds available) for a kit to be out there for a couple of months or so for the reviews, critiques, building tips, aftermarket and company corrections to settle out before getting one. Saves a lot of grief and some of the insights and work arounds for kit issues are very helpful when I start my build...


----------



## spock62 (Aug 13, 2003)

john_trek said:


> OK. That is the last straw. If you are going to insist on being nice to me and polite, I am leaving. Just what kind of a rant thread is this anyway? :tongue:


Wait, don't leave! Did I mention the lousy decal sheet? 



Richard Baker said:


> I usually wait (even if I have funds available) for a kit to be out there for a couple of months or so for the reviews, critiques, building tips, aftermarket and company corrections to settle out before getting one. Saves a lot of grief and some of the insights and work arounds for kit issues are very helpful when I start my build...


But, but, I just had to have it right now! Patience is one of those virtues I'm in sort supply of!


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Back in the mid '90s there were some aftermarket decal sheets for the AMT Trek kits that had an assortment of decals for the different kits, too bad they are no longer made because it might solve the problem with the decals for the 1/1000 Reliant. Attention aftermarket decal makers hint, hint.


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I'm almost certain JT Graphics (or the like - _is_ there a like?) will come out with a set of replacement decals that will satisfy everyone. No doubt with real silver arrowheads on the banners.


----------

