Round2 Producing a 1/350 Star Trek TMP K'Tinga

Competing with Bandai requires some incredibly expensive molds (slide-molds and other "tricks" that cost a fortune). I have a test shot of this kit and I can tell you I was honestly blown away. I really wasn't expecting it to be as "crisp" and sharp as it turned out. It is much better than I'd hoped!

I didn't create patterns for the detail parts, those were done by the factory working only from photos. They did a better job than I expected. Things being "thickened up" were deemed necessary for molding. And I really don't see missing details in the example shown above. You need to realize the ship's detailing varied from one point to another and so appears different depending on the time the photo was taken. For example, those "gun barrels" on the disruptor turrets were present early on but later were removed. Some details were replaced, others were damaged and then reinstalled differently. Some parts even fell off during filming. Nailing down the exact configuration was like trying to hit a moving target. . .


Hey Charles, I visited your Facebook page, as a non-FB user, I can't view your photos. Just an FYI as StarshipBuilder.com indicates otherwise.
 
My apologies! I set all my albums to "public" but I did not realize that Facebook still required a log-in to view them. It seems I must publish a *link* to each album on my StarshipBuilder.com pages. I may not be able to update those for a while, so I'll post those links here for you:

First up, a link to my Polar Lights 1/350 album:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/...073741871.100000088429799&type=1&l=805c67b287

Next, here's a link to my album on the (re)creation of the Klingon Cruiser in studio scale:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/...073741841.100000088429799&type=1&l=ef0136358c

Finally, here's an album I started recently on the evolution of the studio model:
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/...073741872.100000088429799&type=1&l=eba0167fd6

ALL of these links should be visible to anyone -- regardless of whether they are a Facebook user or not. If you still can't view them, please let me know.

Thanks! :)
 
Final completed pics including box art:

http://www.collectormodel.com/round...ts-models-klingon-ktinga-buildup-process-pt-7

POL950-1-350-Ktinga-small.jpg
 
I don't understand how Round 2 can make such beautiful 1/350 kits, with near perfect accuracy, but then give their 1/1000 kits panel lines the size of the Grand Canyon. (Refit, Reliant, Defiant)
 
I would guess it all depends on what factory is doing the tooling. There are limitations and compromises needed to get fine, sharp details with injection-molded plastic parts. The companies that achieve this often have to spend a lot of money in order to do it.

TBH I wasn't expecting anywhere near the quality that was achieved with this new 1/350 kit. I thought the details would be much "softer" as I'd seen with previous efforts. But, in this case, I was blown away by the results.
 
I would guess it all depends on what factory is doing the tooling. There are limitations and compromises needed to get fine, sharp details with injection-molded plastic parts. The companies that achieve this often have to spend a lot of money in order to do it.

TBH I wasn't expecting anywhere near the quality that was achieved with this new 1/350 kit. I thought the details would be much "softer" as I'd seen with previous efforts. But, in this case, I was blown away by the results.

Do you know if R2 used the same factory that made the Hawk kit? The Hawk has some very fine sharp details and the K'Tinga seems to be at least on par with it.
 
A beautiful paint job by Small. I don't think anyone could have done better. Accurate to the filming model. Than tan/pink is just wrong for my taste.

TazMan2000
 
The fact that K'tinga's windows are so small that R2 has to include a PE window set, to me, is a pretty clear indication that the scale is too small for 1/350. If the cobra head is 2 decks tall (and I'm in the camp that believes it is), then it should roughly match the thickness of the refit's saucer edge (which is also 2 decks -- Klingons and humans being about the same size). And since Jamie has already said, "Feel free to call it whatever scale you want," I'll be taking his advice. :cheers It definitely won't stop me from getting the kit.
 
The fact that K'tinga's windows are so small that R2 has to include a PE window set, to me, is a pretty clear indication that the scale is too small for 1/350. If the cobra head is 2 decks tall (and I'm in the camp that believes it is), then it should roughly match the thickness of the refit's saucer edge (which is also 2 decks -- Klingons and humans being about the same size). And since Jamie has already said, "Feel free to call it whatever scale you want," I'll be taking his advice. :cheers It definitely won't stop me from getting the kit.

If it bothers you, just refer to it as 1/2 studio scale. :thumbsup
 
If it bothers you, just refer to it as 1/2 studio scale. :thumbsup

That's exactly what I'm doing. TBH, I've never been a stickler for scale. I actually like the size of the model. Any bigger and it would be impossible for me to display. I've had the PL Jupiter 2 sitting in the stash for a couple of years now and I have no idea where I'd display the finished model. My wife rejected the 'dining room table centerpiece" idea. :lol I could, I guess, just built all the kits in the stash and turn the stash shelf into a display shelf, but cleaning out the stash is crazy talk.
 
The Matt Jefferies size comparison (seen in TOS's "Day of the Dove" I believe) clearly shows the Klingon ship as smaller than the Enterprise--I agree the windows throw off the scale but they give a great look to the K'Tinga nose and who knows what Klingons think about windows. :)
 
This thread is more than 5 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top