Pointing out ‘small flaws’ should be accepted.

Your comments are well said and well received. Thank you. I see balance and wisdom in what you say. However, we should keep in mind a few things as we critique a model:

• The demand for absolute conformity to the brochure in color and trim can inadvertently slam a model for portraying a special order or seasonal offering of color or trim. I'm not saying, "Don't point it out." But I am saying we don't have to accuse the maker of being careless or lazy. A little grace and some small measure of humility can go a long way toward not muting the joy someone else may have in that model.   
• We hear a lot about the size of white walls and continental kits. I grew up in those times. Some cars had continental kits, and some had *gasp* skirts. When the narrow white walls began to show up, many owners exchanged them for wider white walls because they liked the older look better. The same thing happened when performance cars began showing up with raised white letter tires. For a few years, some owners insisted on replacing them with white walls. So, there were actual cars on the streets with all kinds of sidewalls. I understand that some folks only want to collect models that look just like the brochure. That's OK. We all have our own motivations for buying. But in the real world of the fifties and sixties, all bets were off on color, trim, tires, wheels, and accessories. Many dealers offered options on all those items, including unique two-tones and total repaints. They were profit centers. 
• If we're not careful to temper our comments, we can pull the rug out from another collector who has just proudly exhibited his new purchase. If I put up a new model and said, "I really like this new Bulgemobile. I've been looking for one for a long time." and someone comes back and says, "Those wheels are crappy. The maker should know better!" I would be hesitant to share my next purchase. 
• Finally, before we get too negative and insist that models be made our way, we should try to keep in mind that the maker has already purchased his inventory and now has to sell it to stay in business. So, pointing out a flaw can be helpful to him for future releases. But constantly going back to the same item and insisting that there is something wrong with the model can be harmful in the long run. This is exactly what helped to bring the near-demise of the 1/24 scale, self-proclaimed experts complaining about every little detail. Several 1/24 makers and a few 1/18 makers threw in the towel and just gave up. Very few people seemed happy with their products, and they had large unsold inventories on their shelves. 

Please don't misunderstand me. I a NOT saying, "Don't point out flaws." But I am saying let's not rob the maker or his customers of their joy...and try to be at least as encouraging as we are critical." "I'm glad Mr Model Maker came out with this model. I'm uncomfortable with the (white walls, antenna, bumper guards, color, cont kit, etc) and will probably not buy it." This is much more helpful to all than "I can't believe this guy is so blind that he can't see that those models didn't come with those thingys." 

@jkuvakas 

Well said. This is a hobby to enjoy. Are any of my models (cars, planes, trucks, trains) perfect? Probably not, but they look nice and I enjoy looking at them, and for the trains, running them.

- Couldn't agree more.  Facts, probabilities, certainties, overwhelming circumstantial evidence, skepticism, denial, down-right stupidity, and open/frank discussions are all part of "continuous improvement."   However, being incredulous about every detail that's discussed/debated/proven-more or less, doesn't really ever move the "manufacturing improvement bar."   If any company doesn't know they've made a mistake, how then can they ever fix it?

True enough, no scale model is ever perfect, but why replicate "obscurity"  when contrary data clearly identifies it as such.  My tank analogy stills rings true:  If company A produces a 1943 PINK Sherman tank.... Is it correct?    Well, if one guy in Ohio has one painted PINK, then that's an accurate model of ONE tank.

But what about the other 16,653 painted green?

If company B produces a 1970 Camaro with "wide-whitewall tires"  (seen on 1950's cars) is it correct because a collector in MO owns one just like it?   What about the other 124,900 that left the assembly line without "wide-whites?" 

@chris, it  really comes down to what you believe to be "correct." If a pink tank actually exists, does that make that tank "incorrect?" Furthermore, why would we slam a maker for making a model of it? Why does the model have to be like the majority?

Furthermore, don't miss my point. Tone is important. It keeps us all involved and avoids making someone feel embarrassed by their choices. How about this, "Wow! I know only one pick tank exists. It's not my style, but I'm glad someone will enjoy it."

Posted by: @jkuvakas

If a pink tank actually exists, does that make that tank "incorrect?"

That's not what I said.

My point is why replicate "obscurity?"    Yes, a pink tank could very well be accurate because there's one just like it in FL, for example....  But why replicate that ONE when 16,000 others left the factories painted green?

It makes more business-sense to replicate common, mass-produced, accepted as "accurate"  versions first, then produce any many "obscure"  variants you think you can sell.  Why manufacture "obscure & rare"  examples first?

Posted by: @chris

Why manufacture "obscure & rare"  examples first?

So often....  collectors are excited about scale new tooling, the replica is released but it turns out to accurately represent just a handful of actual existing vehicles.  I don't get it?   Whay not replicate the "thousands" that all left the factory looking a "certain"  way....... THEN release all the obscure models you want.

Posted by: @jkuvakas

Why does the model have to be like the majority?

I could care less if any given model is "liked by the majority,"   That's not my point.   I say, "Why doesn't new-tooling look like the majority of actual 1:1 vehicles produced?"   Why are some new scale models released that only represent a HANDFUL ever configured that way?

@chris, mostly because they are the maker and we are not. They get to make what they want. Why would we criticize them for their preference? Why not just pass?

Furthermore, I repeat, tone is everything. We can debate motivations forever. But when it becomes contentious or overly critical, or we begin to take a position of superiority and make others feel smaller, I think we're out of line. 

Posted by: @jkuvakas

We can debate motivations forever. But when it becomes contentious or overly critical, or we begin to take a position of superiority and make others feel smaller, I think we're out of line. 

Agreed. Clearly any company that's not mine or that I don't control may expend their capital any way they see fit. Period.  Who am I?   

My "concerns"  are just a long-time pet-peeve (no kidding, right? ).   I have very thick-skin (VERY! ) perhaps some may view all this as a "rant."   Trust me, I can get more excited about passing butter at the dinner table.  🙂 

It's all good.

People who claim to have absolute knowledge or will demand to have what they "know" to be "correct" are being simply contentious and making an attempt to show off their alleged knowledge ...... and thus be "superior" to to the rest of the "ordinary" collectors.

Get what you like and enjoy it. Having someone loudly points out what they see as "wrong" is generally quite tiresome. The perfect model has never been built .....and will never will be. Unfortunately, I know there were a very small number of such "know it alls" on the old Diecast Pub and I think they lived just to try and find a "mistake" in a replica.

Posted by: @jkuvakas

Furthermore, I repeat, tone is everything. We can debate motivations forever. But when it becomes contentious or overly critical, or we begin to take a position of superiority and make others feel smaller, I think we're out of line.

What are you talking about? I have never read overly critical comments about models here that are purposely and intentionally written to discredit any manufacturer and cause prejudice to other member's own opinions.

What do you mean by position of superiority? I think you create a fuss with absolutely nothing.

@nickies, Thanks. You make my point quite well. I'm trying to moderate and suggest encouragement instead of harsh criticism, and you're blasting with a shotgun. Ease it down a bit, Nickies.

As one who builds and modifies a few models from time to time I never am FULLY satisfied with my end result but that leads me to have exceptional respect for the, i guess young ladies across the Pacific or the Atlantic,  who hour after hour day after day, produce these incredible miniatures,   Try it yourself sometime.  I enjoy being more than just a buy it and display it type of hobbyist.

One thing that will always puzzle me is the collective passivism among some collectors. They never admit a mistake (by every known metric ) has indeed been made. Finding ways to "explain away"  every possible production possibility is a mystery.  There are instances when scale-mistakes are produced, understanding, of course, that it's a sliding scale.

For example, an upside-down badge or too-tall seats are undisputed mistakes, whereas specific colors or tires are perceived as less egregious, considered rare & less probable but not necessarily a mistake.

I'll site my most recent example (SORRY IT'S NOT A 1/43 ) of a mistake, literally posted 39 hours ago:

My 1/18 Greenlight  1981 Ford Mustang Cobra has the 5.0 V8 engine, but this a mistake. Period, no exceptions.  5.0 V8s weren't even being manufactured in 1981; Cobras had 4.2 V8s.  Even Greenlight's  own 1981 Cobra box highlights the correct pertinent information.

But I'll bet, some collector, somewhere is explaining this away.   All my pea-brain can do is simply ask the obvious question, "Why?"