# Revell/Germany Star Trek kits



## Guy Schlicter (May 3, 2004)

Hi Folks, On the Revell/Germany Website they have a built Enterprise and Klingon Ship pictured now and I want to say something. As great as the Revell Enterprise will be, it will not replace in my heart the Original A.M.T. Enterprise kit. I love that model inaccuracies and all. And remember its been out for 45 years even though the mold was changed in the mid 1970s to improve it. There is alot of history with that model and some of it is very good. Don't get me wrong I will appreciate the New Revell Enterprise and Klingon Ship and I know they will be outstanding but the A.M.T. Enterprise kit is not that bad and never was. And remember for it was the only kit available of the Enterprise for the longest time. O.K. now That Revell/Germany has the license for Star Trek, do you think they will be the most likely company to produce the J.J. Abrams Enterprise. I think it will either be them who makes it or Revell here in the U.S. What do you think? Thanks, Guy Schlicter.


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

Revell U.S. doesn't hold any Trek license and I don't see Tower (Hobbico the new owners) going after it for Revell or Monogram.

Revell AG has been a seperate company from Revell/Monogram from late 2006, Hobbico bought Revell/Monogram in 2007.

That also keeps them from importing and selling the kits here in the U.S. like the reissued Voyager kits.


----------



## BlackbirdCD (Oct 31, 2003)

There's a billion of those AMT kits out there, not including the R2 releases. It's not hard to get one if you really wanna run that nostalgia trip. I'm building one up now in between all of my good projects - it's my filler kit, something to work on while paint dries.

Bring on a good one.


----------



## BlackbirdCD (Oct 31, 2003)

As to the JJprise, nobody will touch that until we see if it's unaltered in the next film.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

Revell AG only has a license to sell Trek kits in Europe. Unless distributed here by a third party, they won't be sold here.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

You can rest assured that CultTVman, Starship Modeler and all the rest of the usual subjects will be carrying them. (This is not from any inside information, just an observation based on past results.)


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

The details on the _Enterprise_ prototype are an odd mix of idealized symmetrical details and a literal interpretation of the 11-foot model. In particular, the five rectangular viewports on the port saucer edge versus the two viewports on the port side of the sickbay module. 

Certainly not a criticism, just an observation.

I'm really looking forward to this kit. September is only six months away.


----------



## Y3a (Jan 18, 2001)

Gotta a linky? All I saw was the Star Wars stuff.


----------



## fire91bird (Feb 3, 2008)

Link: Revell Germany Star Trek Kits


----------



## swhite228 (Dec 31, 2003)

71 parts to the AMT's 24 .......Rats, now I want to see a kit scan to find out the differences.


----------



## spawndude (Nov 28, 2007)

So are these Revell-AG kits simply reissues or new tooling?


----------



## robiwon (Oct 20, 2006)

spawndude said:


> So are these Revell-AG kits simply reissues or new tooling?


All new tooling.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

spawndude said:


> So are these Revell-AG kits simply reissues or new tooling?





swhite228 said:


> 71 parts to the AMT's 24 .......Rats, now I want to see a kit scan to find out the differences.


Totally new tooling.


----------



## Marco Scheloske (May 16, 2000)

Paulbo said:


> Totally new tooling.


Exactly. And the picures that can be seen online (including the ones on the RoG website) are made from the STL-grown prototypes... which had only 4 (!) parts.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

Do you know if there'll be any engraved panel lines on it Marco?


----------



## veedubb67 (Jul 11, 2003)

Just looked at the Enterprise:

Scale 1:600 
Release date 09/2011 
No. of parts 71 
*Length 481 m *
Skill Level 3 

That's gonna be one big ship!!! :tongue:

Rob
Iwata Padawan


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

^^^ Couple inches shy of the "Cutaway".:thumbsup:
-Jim


----------



## USS Atlantis (Feb 23, 2008)

JGG1701 said:


> ^^^ Couple inches shy of the "Cutaway".:thumbsup:
> -Jim


And 1" longer than the classic AMT-650


----------



## Marco Scheloske (May 16, 2000)

SUNGOD said:


> Do you know if there'll be any engraved panel lines on it Marco?


The STL prototype has some veeeeeeeery fine panel lines, but it is not decided yet if they'll be on the final product, too.


----------



## SUNGOD (Jan 20, 2006)

Marco Scheloske said:


> The STL prototype has some veeeeeeeery fine panel lines, but it is not decided yet if they'll be on the final product, too.




I hope they are. I'd like to see the version with the fine grid pattern engraved on the saucer.


----------



## tripdeer (Mar 7, 2004)

USS Atlantis said:


> And 1" longer than the classic AMT-650


1" longer? Try 18,919 inches longer!!! (I think veedubb67 was commenting on the fact that the size is mistakenly listed as 481 *m* on the Revell Germany website)


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

I was really never very good with the "metric system".
-Jim


----------



## USS Atlantis (Feb 23, 2008)

tripdeer said:


> 1" longer? Try 18,919 inches longer!!! (I think veedubb67 was commenting on the fact that the size is mistakenly listed as 481 *m* on the Revell Germany website)


Probably - but I missed the irony 

Chalk it up to the fact I do most of my reading/posting either real early in the morning or just before bed


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

tripdeer said:


> (I think veedubb67 was commenting on the fact that the size is mistakenly listed as 481 *m* on the Revell Germany website)


Either that, or the stated 1:600 scale is _*WAAAAAAAAAAY*_ off!


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

the more i hear, the more excited i get!


----------



## Warped9 (Sep 12, 2003)

SUNGOD said:


> I hope they are. I'd like to see the version with the fine grid pattern engraved on the saucer.


At that scale even finely engraved lines would still be out of scale. I'd rather they didn't. If someone wants them then they can add them with little problem. But if you don't want them then you've got a job of filling them in.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

tripdeer said:


> 1" longer? Try 18,919 inches longer!!! (I think veedubb67 was commenting on the fact that the size is mistakenly listed as 481 *m* on the Revell Germany website)



I'm sure they meant *mm*. 481 mm works out to a little over 19 inches.


----------



## Seashark (Mar 28, 2006)

Warped9 said:


> At that scale even finely engraved lines would still be out of scale. I'd rather they didn't. If someone wants them then they can add them with little problem. But if you don't want them then you've got a job of filling them in.


I agree, the last thing I want to do is try and fill seams on a model in that scale; that said, I'll still buy one regardless.


----------



## fluke (Feb 27, 2001)

So the bottom line is ...if I am correct...1" longer than the old AMT kit. 

Well it's not 1/350 but *NEW TOOLING!* :thumbsup:

Now a quote from* ELP*

*....oooooh what lucky men...we are!*


----------



## veedubb67 (Jul 11, 2003)

tripdeer said:


> 1" longer? Try 18,919 inches longer!!! (I think veedubb67 was commenting on the fact that the size is mistakenly listed as 481 *m* on the Revell Germany website)


We have a winner!

Of course it's supposed to be "mm", but I thought it was funny (especially with all the talk of a 1/350 kit).

Rob
Iwata Padawan


----------



## Larry523 (Feb 16, 2010)

481 m comes out to 1578 feet, or about 50% larger than the real ship is supposed to be. That'll be a helluva kit! :thumbsup:


----------



## publiusr (Jul 27, 2006)

Something you might want to do. Send some images of Shaws fine work showing Datin's nacelle placement vs Jefferies, and his work replicating the three-footer. It would be nice to see Revell go with a saucer like the three-footer.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Bump,

Is it too early for some test shots?


----------



## Marco Scheloske (May 16, 2000)

mach7 said:


> Bump,
> 
> Is it too early for some test shots?


Yes...


----------

