Revell Hms beagle is not hms beagle

[peterairfix]

A totally glaring mistake by revell I have a so called 1/96 hms beagle but the Hull halves are from the 1/110 hns bounty I just thought that it was bad luck that I had the wrong Hull halves but having a good Google it is the bounty Hull in both kits a mistake or just cheating.
Hms beagle
And the supposedly hms beagle by revell.
I could build it and name it hms boulge

[Bugatti Fan]

You have just bought a Revellism.
Big Cutty Sark hull was used for the Thermopylae and Pedro Nunes.
Likewise the big Alabama hull was used for the Kearsage.

They are purporting to be scale models.
One day someone will report them to trading standards about this sort of practice.

[adt70hk]

You have just bought a Revellism.
Big Cutty Sark hull was used for the Thermopylae and Pedro Nunes.
Likewise the big Alabama hull was used for the Kearsage.

They are purporting to be scale models.
One day someone will report them to trading standards about this sort of practice.

Interesting point...... How much it does something have to be to not be the thing it claims to be?!??

[Dave Ward]

HMS Beagle was a 10 gun Brig/Sloop, with two square rigged masts - the HMS Bounty was a converted collier - ship-rigged ( ie square rigged on 3 masts ). They were roughly of the same length, but one being built for the Naval service, and the other for commercial service would have a different hull form.
Looking on Scalemates at the boxart.................

They do seem to show the rigging correctly, but Revell seemed to have fudged it with a common hull, despite the differences!
They are both very old models, from the defunct Revell Inc. Neither appear in the Current Revell De catalogue
Dave

[skinflint]

Another use of the same hull by Revell was with the Nina and Pinta. Both kits are 1:90 scale yet the full-sized Pinta was a larger vessel.

When building Nina, there was a strange square cut-out piece in the deck with deck fittings on, just wondered why they did this. Only when I bought Pinta did it become apparent they have used the same hull and deck with the square cut-out having different deck fittings. Also when building Nina, why were there four holes for the canons when only the rear two are used, the forward two are for the Pinta.

Nina was such a pleasure to build, that I won't "loose any sleep" over this and am looking forward to building Pinta at a future time. None of these kits are currently available.

[Bugatti Fan]

Guys, if I were to buy a scale model kit of the Beagle, that is exactly what I would expect to see upon opening the box.
Not something cobbled together utilising a completely inaccurate hull for the subject by trying to penny pinch using one from another different type of ship kit altogether.

[Dave Ward]

Guys, if I were to buy a scale model kit of the Beagle, that is exactly what I would expect to see upon opening the box.
Not something cobbled together utilising a completely inaccurate hull for the subject by trying to penny pinch using one from another different type of ship kit altogether.

The Bounty model dates back to 1956 ( same age as me! ), and the Beagle to 1961, so the attitude to true " Scale " models was a bit different 60 years ago! Maximising use of moulds was obviously the Revell priority. References to correct scale plans can be difficult today - so at the time even more, especially for vessels that vanished before the age of photography
Dave

[Bugatti Fan]

The 'attitude' to true scale models may have been a bit different 60 years ago, but is that good reason to market that old kit that is completely inaccurate these days? That will do, not many people know about sailing ships to notice the difference, so we end up with many sailing ship models that are more like interior decorating objects than proper scale models.