What quality improvements should be made by KC and would it affect your purchases? (1 Viewer)

Canadian Samurai said:
Hi guys,

Finally comes polystone. I read that K&C introduced polystone to this hobby – I very much wish they had not. Polystone is extremely heavy, brittle and unable to hold the fine details that plastic and metal can. The only reason K&C vehicles are so nice is because they’re painted so well, in spite of the cheap material used. No working treads or hatches (like 21st Century/Forces of Valour vehicles) – just a lump of painted stone. The only advantage of polystone as far as I can discern is that it’s much cheaper than plastic or metal for the manufacturer to produce in limited runs yet its heaviness deceptively conveys the feeling that it must be valuable and well made. I can only think that early on many collectors mistook K&C’s excellently painted vehicles for metal which allowed polystone to get a foothold in this hobby. Thanks to polystone we end up with tanks and artillery pieces with barrels that curve at odd angles, among other problems.

I’ll give two examples of poor K&C polystone pieces. My “beautifully executed winter Kettenrad” (in Louis’ words) is not particularly well executed at all. The top-mounted tubing superstructure is warped out of shape. I sent for a replacement kettenkrad but its tube rollcage was bent a different way and there was a spot of black paint right on the nose of the driver. Likewise, the K&C 8th Army 25lb field gun is seriously lacking in fine details (such as elevation cranks). It looks, as befits the name polystone, like a piece of soapstone carved to resemble the artillery piece rather than a scale representation of the real thing. I understand the 25 pounder was an earlier K&C mould but I wonder whether any of the newer guns are really any better given the detail limitations of polystone (and the propensity for warped barrels). The W. Britains 25 pounder, also polystone, is no better.


Thank you.
Click to expand...

Dear Canadian Samurai,

Welcome aboard! Very well written and interesting first post. You are not the first person to complain at length about polystone vehicles. Allow me to again quote from my forthcoming book on K&C:

"The first two polystone vehicles, an LVT2 Amtrack (IWJ7) and Sherman Tank (IWJ11), were released in January, 1999 with the original Iwo Jima release. As is mentioned in Chapter 5, K&C lost its Philippine factories several months earlier due to a combination of a volcanic eruption temporarily closing said factories and Andy’s impatience with the “cheeky devils” so unreliably operating them. Andy, who had been looking around for a less expensive option for producing armored vehicles in limited numbers (die cast was not an option according to Andy, because the expense of tooling the molds requires the sale of 50,000+ vehicles to break even) than the wood Philippine models, started checking out the local market places in Hong Kong.

He found the solution in a “polystone” (pressed porcelain) producer’s stall, where among tiny reproductions of ladies shoes, Christmas ornaments and animals, there were some approximately 1:35 scale cars, including a U.S. Army Jeep. Andy contacted the producer of these vehicles, and asked if their factory could make tanks. They invited him to tour the facility, where they showed him a prototype armored vehicle they had produced, a German super-heavy “Maus” Tank. Andy was given or purchased the “Maus” and asked them to produce some other sample armored vehicles, this time in 1:30 scale to Andy’s specifications. The original “Maus” factory sample was later sold to the author through K&C dealer Tony Ciccarello of the Toy Soldier Gallery, who brought it back from Hong Kong in 1999.

When the samples arrived at K&C’s office, Andy was pleased, and gave the go-ahead on production of a run of 300 of each sample. The factory owner said, “300,000, no problem.” Andy had to explain to the factory that he meant 300, not 300,000, but they were still willing to produce the vehicle.
These vehicles were a fraction of the price of the earlier wood vehicles, and could be reliably produced in the hundreds or even thousands. Until late 2006, however, they were not even close to the quality and realism of the earlier wood, metal and resin vehicles.

Andy believed that these affordable vehicles would draw many new collectors, and take K&C to the next level. The author strenuously argued with Andy, believing that the burgeoning quality of K&C figures was expanding the collector base, and discerning collectors would not want such “pressed porcelain pieces of junk”. Needless to say, as K&C’s collector base has expanded exponentially since the advent of these extraordinarily popular vehicles (some of which sell in the secondary market for 2-3 times the retail price of the expensive wood vehicles), Andy was clearly right on all counts."

As you can see, I also have long hated polystone vehicles, but they sell like hotcakes and are here to stay. I do miss the original wood, metal and resin vehicles with hinged opening hatches and extraordinary realism. I have at least one of every single wood, metal and resin vehicle K&C produced and sold back in the 1990's, and they are magnificant. Now that Andy has started making wonderful strictly limited wood warbirds again, I hope he will have this studio do strictly limited armored vehicles and helicoptors as well.
 
Better protective packaging. I stopped buying due to inadequate packaging. Figure vs. figure with each bashing the other into worthlessness during shipping.

Dealing with sellers that insinuate you dropped or damaged the item yourself was exasperating in the extreme and soured me right quickly.
 
Welcome Canadian Samurai!
I guess I must be the single luckiest collector in the field.Most of my purchases have had almost no or very few problms and as I am able to repare and repaint farely well most damage has not been that much of a problem for me.
Also I am fortunate to have a good established dealer with a long reliable record close by. I know they go through their in coming product and assure its' quality.
I have found most of my damage from shipping things back form shows. It seems no mater what or whom the shipper is from Chicago I get damage. But it beats handling it back my self through the airports!
O.C.
 
I understand the concern but this part of the hobby (and this forum) wouldn't exist without polystone. As Louis rightly points out, polystone is primarily responsible for King and Country's popularity.

However, Louis' antipathy to polystone is well known so you have to take what he says with a grain of salt. It's kind of inside joke.

As far as making vehicles of a quality similar to the Warbirds, I doubt that the market exists for both it and the Warbirds. There are only so many dollars to be allotted to this hobby by consumers.

I'm pretty happy with polystone and from the looks of it so are other companies and collectors.
 
jazzeum said:
I understand the concern but this part of the hobby (and this forum) wouldn't exist without polystone. As Louis rightly points out, polystone is primarily responsible for King and Country's popularity.

However, Louis' antipathy to polystone is well known so you have to take what he says with a grain of salt. It's kind of inside joke.

As far as making vehicles of a quality similar to the Warbirds, I doubt that the market exists for both it and the Warbirds. There are only so many dollars to be allotted to this hobby by consumers.

I'm pretty happy with polystone and from the looks of it so are other companies and collectors.
Click to expand...

I think HB has the right strategy for the hobby with the brass and brass etched acc. and detail. it allows an edging closer to the really fine detail that I think we would all like to see without the outragous price increases the detail might otherwise cost.
Ray
 
Thanks everyone for welcoming me to this forum. I hope I can contribute constructively to helping others and making this hobby even better.

As for King and Country's popularity, I would very much contest that polystone is primarily responsible. Instead, I think K&C’s popularity has much more to do with their impressive historical accuracy*, the dynamic yet realistic poses of their figures, the overall high quality of their painting (in spite of my previous concerns), their wide variety of ancient and modern lines, and their business model (quick releases, flashy marketing and the ominous shadow of set retirement).

Greatly aiding the success of K&C's vehicle line is that until very recently, it faced no competition. If you wanted a 1:30 scale vehicle to complement K&C's excellent figures, you had to purchase one of their polystone pieces because there were (and are) no metal or plastic alternatives at this scale. The scale issue is primarily why I own the few polystone pieces that I do.

Ask yourself this simple question: if Forces of Valour or 21st Century had their excellent metal FLAK 88s available at 1/30th scale, would K&C's fragile polystone version be worth the pot of gold it is currently going for on ebay?

Of course, this was no doubt part of Andy's ingenious plan - develop a monopoly over 1/30th scale.

Now I will grant polystone it's one due, and it is an economic one - it has provided Andy with a way to make small affordable runs of more obscure vehicles that larger manufacturers largely ignore due to the high tooling costs. For example, I just purchased a polystone New Model Army Sdkfz 222 armored car (currently half price on Treefrog) because no other company makes a pre-made one at any scale.

However, that does not change the fact that polystone as a material is, as Louis described it, more or less junk. It is only good because it is inexpensive for the manufacturer to produce. Therefore, in any discussion about what quality improvements we would like to see, it’s shortcomings must again be stressed. If this discussion were about quantity (i.e. what material can K&C use to give me the most tanks for the lowest price), then a strong case could be made for polystone. But concerning quality, I cannot see any advantages to it over metal or plastic.

Given the large sums floating around on ebay for K&C's retired pieces, I wonder how long it will be before a larger company like FOV or 21st Century decides to tackle 1/30 scale to share in these profits? If polystone should one day face competition from mass-produced metal and plastic 1/30 vehicles with (and I stress this) quality paint jobs, then the generic K&C WWII vehicles (Panthers, Tigers, Shermans, jeeps etc.), even retired ones, will depreciate in relative value because the shortcomings of polystone/porcelin will become apparent when they are side-by-side with true competitors. If, as Louis described above, the entry of Honour Bound into the market offering competing polystone offerings was enough to set off a minor revolt among collectors of K&C’s vehicles (regarding tank track shortcomings), can you imagine what effect metal/plastic competitors would have?

I for one would be willing to pay for the quality that metal/plastic provides over polystone. Perhaps it’s time Andy started offering his Strictly Limited editions in these improved materials to properly justify their higher price tags.


*Of course there is also room for improvement in terms of historical accuracy… but I will leave that discussion to others, and to another time.
 
All to true CS, and for some time I have been beating the drum for better detail in K & C tanks and vehicles to match their well detailed figures. And I have to say K & C have indeed made some improvements to their polystone products recently, and we also now have Honour Bound and NMA as alternatives.
 
As CS says the attraction for me about K&C is Historical accuracy and the realistic poses of the figures.Whilst i am very happy with Polystone if Andy experimented with another material for his vehicles i would happily give them a go.Although i wonder if wooden vehicles just wouldn't have the realism of Polystone(i can't confirm this as i don't have any wooden vehicles)I must say i think the improvement in K&C vehicles has been considerable in the the last year or more,just look at the difference between say the Summer Panther and the Hummel or M10.The fact that the 'Big Three' are producing better and better vehicles can only be good for us collectors.(although i still think HB have some work to do on their figures)

Rob
 
Canadian Samurai said:
Greatly aiding the success of K&C's vehicle line is that until very recently, it faced no competition.

Ask yourself this simple question: if Forces of Valour or 21st Century had their excellent metal FLAK 88s available at 1/30th scale, would K&C's fragile polystone version be worth the pot of gold it is currently going for on ebay?

I for one would be willing to pay for the quality that metal/plastic provides over polystone. Perhaps it’s time Andy started offering his Strictly Limited editions in these improved materials to properly justify their higher price tags.
Click to expand...

Thanks CS for another interesting and thought provoking post. I have to agree, with virtually everything in it, and especially with what you wrote in the three highlighted passages above.

It's a well known and widely acknowledged fact that polystone doesn't offer anything like the level of fine detail afforded by plastic or metal - it's the same story with wargames models, with which I am currently more familiar - 1:72/76 scale plastic models are infinitely more realistic both in terms of scale and fine detailing than their resin equivalents. If FOV or 21st century produced 1:30 scale models, I for one would certainly buy them - don't get me wrong, I like the K+C vehicles, but from a realism, and dare I say value for money, point of view FOV vehicles are better - the 88mm you refer to has won a great deal of critical acclaim - and as for paying over inflated prices for the PS products - no way :eek:
 
I think that what is being forgotten here with regards to the polystone verses plastic/metal price and quality debate is what Andy has said before...the price of tooling for FOV vehicles etc is a small fortune and as such sold in tens of thousands compared to the moulds for the polystone equivalent and the much smaller runs made.

Without polystone where would K&C and it's army of collectors be?

Just my opinion.

Jeff
 
Hi Guys,

A warm welcome to “Canadian Samurai”...it’s always nice to see fresh blood on the Forum.

Now, although new to the Forum he’s certainly not backwards at coming forwards with his personal views and opinions on a great many topics relating to the hobby and business of toy soldier/military miniature collecting

As you might expect however I do take issue with him and even my good friend Louis Badolato on their oft professed opinion that “polystone is, more or less junk”.

Polystone, as stated many times before, has allowed K&C (and many other companies who have followed us) to produce a huge range of fighting vehicles at an affordable price both for the production company and importantly the collector.

Plastic and metal vehicles without doubt also have many advantages but, importantly, not for the small and medium sized manufacturer. The cost of plastic and/or die cast tooling is prohibitively expensive for companies like ourselves, and many others.

In order to justify the huge investment large numbers of models must be produced (and stored). To justify those multi thousand “runs” you are then forced to deal with “TOY ‘R’ US”...“WALMART”...“TARGET” etc. These big companies are the kiss of death to many companies — even some large ones. I could tell you horror stories of the hassles 21 Century had with “TOY ‘R’ US” a couple of years ago...they even went into Chapter 11...The fact of the matter is this...the Toy Soldier hobby and business is still a “niche” hobby and industry. It is, despite our best efforts, only reaching a few thousand collectors worldwide. Now, it is growing but it will never be any threat or of major interest to the Hasbros or Mattels of this world. Even “Forces of Valor”, (which I personally consider to be the best of the 1:32 scale mass-produced military models) is scaling back its production. Now, why is that? Perhaps our friend from north of the border can explain that one...

I believe Canadian Samurai is looking, albeit closely, at a relatively small part of a much, much bigger picture. If he is so convinced that K&C has got it wrong in so many ways why not set up his own company to do it better and smarter.

And I mean that sincerely...I am not being facetious but it’s easy to criticize...much harder to do.

Best wishes and...happy collecting!

Andy C.
 
The use of the word "junk" is being used pejoratively. I don't think it's that at all. Any kind of material is a mass of junk until it's formed into its desired shape.

Let's look at the alternatives: platic or metal/wood/resin.

Plastic? No thanks, not for me and I don't think most collectors would want that. Too toylike.

CS (and welcome) and Louis have mentioned metal and Louis has wistfully talked about the old wood/resin/metal vehicles. If you look at Sager's site, you'll see that the price for these almost 10 years ago was nearly 400 a pop. They would be prohibitive in today's economic climate.

If Andy, Ana and Blake could find a way to make them affordable, I'd be for that but I doubt that's possible.

Until then, polystone will continue to be the preferred alternative.
 
Canadian Samurai,

Interesting points you bring up.

I collect 1/32 and 1/30 scale WWII figures and vehicles from all of the usual companies. Each of them has their own qualities. I love FOV and sometimes even 21st Century produces a great model. However, each has there own distinct market segments and unique distribution chains.

IMO, The biggest barrier for a FOV/ 21st Century in producing 1/30 scale vehicles is the market they depend on to recoup their DIE CAST investment and ultimately remain profitable. That is, Toy’s R US, Wall Mart, Target, etc, which require them to produce massive quantities to supply these retail units at the retail price they demand.

True, 1/30 scale market have greater margins however, IMO they aren’t enough Collectors (I wish there were) to generate the profitability necessary for them to retool and produce 1/30 DIE CAST quality.

If you disagree, then you assume the mass of existing 21st Century/ FOV customers that depend on these retail outlets will embrace the new 1/30 scale production over 1/32. I don’t have a crystal, but I’d bet against it.

Carlos
 
Gentlemen

I have been sitting here for the last few days biteing my lip over CS and Louis reference of polystone as "junk" and that King and Country vehicles are something less than the wonderful product they are - I am not angry with the remarks, I just disagree with them.

In my opinion - the products being made by K&C in polystone have dramatically increased the appeal of Toy Soldier Collecting and the beautiful detail work that we do receive from them. I also disagree that the wood / metal model were better looking - although they do have moving parts that really doesnt matter when the model sits on a shelf or in a curio cabinet. The K&C vehicles of today are twice as good as the 1990's versions and the detail is simply outstanding IMO.

The great thing about this hobby is - "to each their own" for their collections. King and Country puts out a terrific product at a great price. Yes, there are times when sets could be smaller and at a better value - but, overall King and Country is the best. You dont become an industry leader by making "junK" or products of lesser quality.

Hey everyone is allowed there opinion and CS and Louis have theirs and I have mine. No one is right or wrong in these cases. But, I believe that Andy is the one man responsible for changing the Toy Soldier Collecting World for the Better.

Ron
 
I have to agree with Ron here,i saw some wooden tanks of yesteryear as it were and whilst i know they are extremely valuable,i would not want to swap them for the quality of Polystone.

Rob
 
What got me back into collecting WW2 vehicles was the early polystone efforts ( K/C Lee ) of K/C.....Unlike some, I accept them for what they are, excellently painted, reasonbly detailed, and wonderfully priced for the overall quality that you get...As for F.O.V., plastic and some metal still leaves it as a toy, while I consider K/C an artful sculture. Most of the F.O.V that I bought, I ended up repainting because they looked unfinished..Michael
 
Rob said:
I have to agree with Ron here,i saw some wooden tanks of yesteryear as it were and whilst i know they are extremely valuable,i would not want to swap them for the quality of Polystone.

Rob
Click to expand...

Rob,

If you saw one of the very early primitive wooden tanks from 1991 I could understand the comment, but if you are speaking about the 1996 vintage K&C wood tanks, they are so superior to polystone it is not even funny. The very best Honour Bound Polystone vehicle is not nearly as nice as the STUG III and STUG IV K&C produced in wood and metal, with hinged opening hatches and tons of detail.

That being said, polystone tanks have improved dramatically from the early 1999 efforts I referred to as junk. The 2007 K&C and Honour Bound polystone armored vehicles are a very nice product, especially considering the price (the original wood vehicles retailed for around $400 in 1996 money). However, as Canadian Samurai notes, there are limitations to the level of detail you can get from pure polystone. Honour bounds addition of metal detail pieces, and Figarti's use of as much metal as polystone in its superior vehicles have begun to overcome these shortcomings, and K&C product constantly rises to the challenges and improves, so I would again opine that polystone is here to stay, and we will have to watch the major players for continuing improvements.

Finally, with regard to Canadian Samurai's statements concerning the development of K&C not having much to do with polystone, I (who followed the development from 1993 through the present) would have to respectfully disagree. As my quote from the forthcoming book demonstrates, I took CS' stance with Andy back in 1999 when the first polystone vehicles were release, and I was wrong about their effect then, as I believe CS is now. They were an affordable (to both the manufacturer and collector) means of making armored vehicles available to 1:30 scale collectors. The numbers speak for themselves. When I started collecting, dealers couldn't give away the wood vehicles, as superior as they were, because they were just too expensive. I often bought them at a fraction of retail, because dealers just wanted to move their stock. Today, rather than 25-50 of a vehicle being produced, and not all of them sold, 1500-2000 are often produced, and very often the runs completely sell out. Polystone has brought a lot of collectors to the hobby, even if you (and I for that matter) do not think it is the best material for collectible armored vehicles.

I would still love to see some vehicles from the studio making those wonderful aircraft in wood and metal, but right now that is just a wish.
 
Louis
That 1999 Hanomag that came out shortyly after the first polystone Stug does not feel like polystone. I think it is metal. Could you enlighten me a bit about this piece
Regards
Damian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top