|
|
|
| Welcome to Swifty's Garage. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Thank You, The Swifty's Garage Team Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features. |
| Lamborghini LM002; Kyosho vs. Matchbox | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 29 2015, 10:30 PM (1,764 Views) | |
| 250 TR | Jun 29 2015, 10:30 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
The Lamborghini LM002 is one of my all time favorite vehicles. The "Got To Have It Now" bug hit me big time with this Matchbox version. The real LM002 is such a striking design, and still to this day one of the meanest looking SUV's ever built. I've seen a real one in person and it is massive and imposing. The size of the real LM002 is part of it's character. That's why the Matchbox is such a disappointment to me. First, here are some pictures of just the Matchbox. They did a great job on the casting. It is extremely accurate, and very well detailed, with very crisp and athletic lines and a nice stance. The wheels are a great choice as well.![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Looks great right? Well as I mentioned, one of the things about the LM002 that gives it so much character is it's size. I don't expect accurate 1:64 scale on Matchbox, but had it been the size of the Ghe-O rescue, I would have been happy. But what is this? The scale is marked on the base. I haven't seen that on a Matchbox in quite some time, what scale are they saying this one is? ![]() Yup, right on the base, it says 1:64 scale. We all know that Kyosho is true 1:64 scale, so let's see how it stacks up. Yup, not even close to 1:64: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() And with a Matchbox Porsche Cayman for reference: ![]() So when I do these reviews, it's fully expected that Kyosho will be better. Given the price difference, that should be expected so it's not fair to compare apples to apples when it's apples and oranges. But I like doing these to get an idea of how close different manufacturers can come. In this case, comparing the accuracy of the castings themselves there is little to complain about. Matchbox did a phenomenal job capturing the lines of the LM002. And as I said before, I don't expect true 1:64 scale. But when a vehicle like the LM002 is done that part of the charm of the real thing is it's imposing size, it shouldn't be smaller than a Porsche Cayman from the same brand. It's worth picking up whenever you can find it, I know many of you will be thrilled to have this vehicle in your collection, but it could have been that much better if only they hadn't shrunk it down so much. |
![]() |
|
| Z28HO | Jun 30 2015, 07:19 PM Post #2 |
![]()
Fullsize
|
Maybe its metric 1/64 |
![]() |
|
| jedimario | Jun 30 2015, 07:48 PM Post #3 |
|
RAWR
|
Wow, that really is tiny. A shame, because it looks great by itself. I will probably still pick one up! |
![]() |
|
| jtl46 | Jul 1 2015, 09:11 PM Post #4 |
|
Subcompact
|
Nice write-up Ben. I have never paid too much attention to scale, as it is more about what fills the blister than how a model compares with another. That being said, the LM002 is quite small. Nice on its own, strange next to others. If you look at the 3D print, it is obvious that this went through some heavy modifications from the original design. The original was longer and bigger. You wonder who was behind that. |
![]() |
|
| funeralxempire | Oct 7 2015, 12:33 PM Post #5 |
|
SUV
|
It probably looks okay when it's mixed in with cop cars and Hummers though, since they're all roughly 1:72 as well. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Inspection Station: Reviews · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
3:11 AM Jul 11
|




























3:11 AM Jul 11