Anytime we get our hands on a supercar it creates the more than usual excitement here at the DiecastSociety.com headquarters. One of the latest efforts from AUTOart is the Koenigsegg One:1. This one is a highly anticipated by many, including us here at DiecastSociety.com. Koenigsegg One:1 comes from AUTOart’s diecast/composite series and features a full assortment of opening parts. Somewhat of a departure from their last production Koenigsegg that was completed with diecast metal and plastic parts.
We’re not going to inundate you with various specifications of the Koenigsegg One:1. If more knowledge is paramount there is more than a wealth of information written about the car online and in print. What we will say is the goal of Koenigsegg was to attain the first power to weight ratio of 1 horsepower to every 1 kg of curb weight (this includes all liquids and fully fueled). They did achieve this and some, as they describe it, “it was completed through unprecedented weight saving measures”. Our focus is the scale model replica and provide you, the collector, a good base on what you’re receiving with your possible future purchase.
Out of the box, White exterior along side carbon fibre elements and Red accent bits look sharp! In our opinion the best colour option to be offered by AUTOart for 2018. It really brings forward the carbon fibre elements and the subtle styling cues of the One:1 design.
For the most part, AUTOart is successful in capturing the overall look and lines of the car. This model provides a full 360 access, something most competitors don’t provide today. And the only manufacturer who does (Fronti-Art) tips the scales at $1000CND+. Our example from AUTOart has a suggested retail of $349CND. Still not cheap but a far cry from the Fronti-Art specimen.
The paint application on the Koenigsegg One:1 is excellent. We find no issues from any angle. It definitely shows well. Where the exterior suffers some is the carbon fibre work. Seems AUTOart’s definition is slightly different when comparing photos to the original. Most areas are lacking the glossy look, especially evident in the wheels.
On the flip side, the One:1 has many areas that contain design elements were openings, aerodynamics and cooling intakes take centre stage. Each of these areas is completed with fully perforated grilles. Each is also nicely defined and finished. Some examples include the upper body intakes front and rear. Also the side intake front and mid feature the same clean execution. See photos above.
The front features a large chin spoiler. The design is completed well, though the carbon fibre work hints at the unpolished, flat finish we alluded to earlier. Seems the part is fabricated with the carbon weave into the plastic as opposed to layering on the carbon fibre material. A trend used on multiple parts found on the model. Same applies to the fins – right and left side.
Centre emblem is a quality piece and the carbon fibre work centre strip is better defined here as well. Headlight detail is very good. The LEDs train on the upper perimeter of the headlight is completed beautifully too.
As mentioned this is full 360 model, so we are granted full access to the inner working of the car. Note the great hinge work with strut supports left and right side. Those of you who are concerned about the use of composite materials over diecast metal, you have nothing to worry about here. The operation is flawless and doesn’t feel weak, flimsy or cheap. There is no room here to store your roof either. What is found is two large intakes taking over most of the available footprint. Again note the moulded carbon fibre work.
The rear is dominated by a large extended dual spoiler design. The bonus here it is functional! Movement is available up and down.
A large opening with quality perforated grille shows off some of the inner elements of the motor and exhaust. Before we go inside I wanted to note the quality taillights, the purple exhaust opening with the “One:1 Titanium” script (also applied to the inside section of the exhaust system) and emblems on the side of each upper spoiler arm. Lastly, note the Red light at the end of the roof-line fin. Nice attention to detail folks!
Access to the motor is completed without issue. The engineering used by AUTOart’s two hinges worked flawlessly here once again. And to those composite haters, the part does not feel weak or flimsy at rest or during operation. And one would think composite is more accurate to the original car than diecast metal would be, no?
The motor detail is surprisingly better than we thought it would be. Definitely not near Zonda’s of the past but this isn’t a Signature series piece either. And looking back at the CCX and Agera from AUTOart, the latter are executed better in our opinion. There is a good use of layers within the build. Basically, the team applies textures, colours and materials to complete the package.
It isn’t all good news. What we didn’t like was the cross member apparently missing between the hatch supports. Also the lack of detailed carbon fibre wrapping on adjacent and surrounding components. The large intake was once again completed using the moulded method of carbon fibre, whereas the original has a more refined polished look.
Looking at the underside of the rear hatch you can see the inner and the outer cooling crafted as solid pieces. We would have preferred the same attention to detail used in the front rendering. A cost-saving measure for sure.
If you aren’t aware of the Koenigsegg One:1 is shipped with full carbon fibre wheels. Though AUTOart did provide the carbon fibre treatment and a nicely crafted wheel the overall impression is off from the 1:1 design, which are polished. We consider this the weakest link in the overall exterior design.
The tires are quality too; note the script that is now part of the overall finish. A step up from their past efforts. The remaining apparatus which includes the calipers and rotors are quality items too. The complete package does look the part.
We didn’t comment on the shut lines and panel gaps until now. Overall AUTOart does a decent job based on the complexities of the door design. The biggest challenge with our example is getting the doors to sit flush with the body. It required a little more finesse than one would like. Especially for a model near for $400 range. During the video shoot, we gave up trying to get proper alignment with our example.
It should not be a challenge to achieve proper shut lines. Possibly the lighter materials of the composite doors are not helping. We do see the implementation of small magnets within the design; maybe increasing size, location, strength or a combination can aid in better shut lines?
Access to the cabin of the One:1 can be done via the doors or removable roof. The engineering of the doors still puts a smile on our face even today with the cool pullout, turn up function. Both sides of our example worked flawlessly.
The roof is a simple clip in rear magnet hold front. Again operation on or off is quite simple and easy to do. Shut lines and gaps are very good here too.
We’re not sure if there are various options from Koenigsegg offered to customers for interior design. AUTOart’s direction is quite simple. A basic theme of Grey and Red with the added carbon fibre elements makes up the interior. Overall we give it decent marks. And it definitely isn’t on par with the interior from their last Koenigsegg release, the Agera. We found the Agera slightly more refined.
On the plus side, we liked the addition of fabric seat-belts and metal buckles. The definition of the interior dash and centre console are good. The negative would include the dull carbon fibre work on the door cards, lack of textures to seats, steering wheel and rear section of the interior.
There is no doubt AUTOart Koenigsegg One:1 is a great model. Based on exterior design, the given ability to access all areas of the model make it extremely appealing to supercar collectors and the occasional sport car fan. When we factor in the price, overall fit and finish and level of detail compared to competitors it seems like a bargain. But is it? The model interior and motor finishes aren’t on par with their past releases. The question is why? With the move to composite one would expect the same level of execution, especially at this price point, though a good model it doesn’t live up to its predecessors.
So what would it take to get this model from great to excellent? First, more attention to carbon fibre work outside and inside (interior, storage, and motor) and more attention to the interior on the whole – as mentioned we found the previous CCX (slightly) and Agera (more so) more refined. Personally, based on the price tag we believe it should have leaned more towards the excellent side. At $349CND this replica is not cheap and pushing nearly $400 with applicable taxes here in Canada. I hope AUTOart revisits these misses and suggestions in their next production run, it won’t take much to improve on an already great base. Enjoy the pics!
Thanks for the great review! Definitely going to get my hands on the silver one
You’re welcome. Enjoy the model!
Might be the lack of diecast rose tinted glasses but looking at this all I get is an overwhelming feeling of cheapness. From the “carbon” to the doors, to the weird rear wheel fitment.
I think cheap is a strong word. I think the model is decent, but it is a slight step back from the Agera.
No you can’t use the word cheap for an Autoart. The Pagani Zonda Cinque from Motormax can be described as cheap. Have you hold the car in your hands?
No but I held the P1 and that was enough to convince me
Then you wouldn’t mind them charging another 100 to 200 dollars. More detail costs more money. Its probably very difficult to satisfy the people who want more detail and keep the price down all at the same time.
We have to disagree. This is $400CND based on suggested retail. What is pointed out won’t break the bank.
Great review! The car looks awesome, but not a cheap price considering the downsides to it. I think that Autoart really have a problem with carbon fiber, which get me nervous about the upcoming Centenario that I want to buy in carbon from them…
Hm, I already have the matte blue one in pre-order, but the white one looks really good as well with the carbon contrasts… tough choice. And 2 colors of this is really expensive. I’d hope to catch a white one in a future sale of one of the modelcar websites, but I fear that this might be sold out rather sooner than later…
Ah, the decisions… thanks a lot for the detailed review though! Been looking forward to it.
Great review! I was really looking forward to adding this to compliment my Agera but I can’t justify that price, especially since it feels like the old Agera is superior. At almost $400 after taxes, that’s more than my monthly car payment!
Decent Model I have one. The model is so light that it does feel cheap. I do however feel it presents it self well compared to its older siblings. Again I miss the metal bodies. I will be getting the silver and blue. The white seems to be selling out fast.
Thank you for the full and detailed review DS. One question: you make repeated references to “composite materials”. Pray tell, what exactly is a composite material? To call plastic “composite” is to fall into Autoart’s marketing trap of glamorizing a poor substitute for metal something fancier, as if we are referring to carbon composites.
To call even the model as a whole a composite is misleading, hybrid model would be more accurate since some (most) parts are plastic and some (hidden inner) parts are metal. Composite implies a material that is a physical mixture of two or more materials, often with one of them being a substrate and one of them providing structural strength through a specific layout.
Why not call the panels of this (and other Autoart models) what they are: plastic! Since when did plastic need to be called “composite”? Again: a plastic component (door, body panel, wing, etc) is not a composite material.
I do love the One:1 and would like to get a model, and if Autoart had done in their old style Signature (i.e. actual diecast) I would have gotten it. Paying €300 for a plastic model would be a tough pill. But what infuriates me is Autoart’s dishonest ploy of calling the models as being made of “composite material” and hence I will not buy any of this. To each their own, and those not opposed to plastic and who like this model I am happy for you.
I think the question has been asked many times. There are a few articles written to define the principles of what composite is from AUTOart’s perspective. Yes, if you want to call it plastic, please do so, but stop with the repeated question. It is no secret! Metal panels. wood panels or plastic panels we don’t care, what is the main discussion is how the models are executed in final form. As we mentioned in the review, composite materials are closer in reality to the 1:1 which is mostly constructed in carbon fibre. Which we would conclude in more in line with a composite material than metal. In the end, each collector can make their own decisions on what they choose to buy. In the end, we have the right to define materials as we choose fit. I’ve provided a definition for you as well.
“A composite material (also called a composition material or shortened to composite, which is the common name) is a material made from two or more constituent materials with significantly different physical or chemical properties that, when combined, produce a material with characteristics different from the individual components. The individual components remain separate and distinct within the finished structure, differentiating composites from mixtures and solid solutions.”
I already said “to each their own” :) This hobby and what each collector wants is hugely subjective, I think we can agree on this point at least.
So, yes you and other collectors don’t care what the parts are made of, I will never begrudge this, again a very subjective matter of taste.
However – by the very definition you have copied of a composite material – plastic is NOT composite. You are right of course in that often the modern cars being replicated used composite rather than metal body parts. If the replica were ACTUALLY made of composites (carbon fiber or even fiberglass) that would be something else and fully deserving of the “composite materials” reference. For the manufacturer to use plastic might be a decent approximation of the material of the real car, but it can’t be called composite (again, please refer to your own definition)
Anyway your site and thus your rules, if you want to continue to call plastic parts as “composite materials” then have at it :) Autoart certainly must be happy that industry reviewers are not calling them out for their disingenuous nomenclature.
Can we truly be sure that their material is not a composite recipe? I task you to have their material tested. If results prove to be authentic plastic we’ll blow the whistle on AUTOart. To be serious, if they are ‘disingenuous’ with given ‘nomenclature’ shame on them. As for the results, other than the weight the models are basically the same. Now our example had some shut lines issues, I rather focus on that rather than material.
PS – Email received. No harm no foul. Thanks.
Hi DS team,
First of all, I feel it is important I apologize here and publicly, as soon as I posted my earlier comment I wanted to edit it but such functionality is missing, so I should be more careful in pressing submit in the heat of the moment! I certainly have no doubts as to your unbiased and fair reporting and reviews. You have proven this time and again by calling out the manufacturers, not least of all that legendary expose of Frontiart’s Koenigsegg resin model’s innards. I can therefore also link to your editorial on December 21, 2016 https://diecastsociety.com//autoart-concept-behind-composite-models/ wherein you blasted Autoart for their lack of quality in their (then new) “composite” lineup.
Furthermore I think the confusion and argument is all about terminology. I refer to Autoart’s original press release http://www.autoartmodels.com/article.web.ViewArticleDetails.do?articleId=129. The crux of it all to me is their statement:
“In our composite models, we pair a die-cast interior with a newly developed injection Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), a thermoplastic polymer with special blend of different materials for reinforcement of the body, utilizing the benefits of both materials to create the highest quality models our company has ever produced.”
This combined with “At the same time, we know that a model’s heft is important to collectors, and the average weight of our composite models with their die-cast interiors is not much less to the weight of a zinc alloy die-cast body model car. In other words, the composite model feels as good to the hands as our metal ones. ”
Leads me to conclude that the term “composite” is intended to mean that the model as a whole is composed of more than one material type (ABS plastic outside, with a metal skeleton.
Lastly, the challenge you have set me to prove that their material is not actually a composite is of course not something I can take you up on, I am not going to spend thousands of dollars to hire some chemical lab to conduct the analysis. But that is not needed anyway. I think once Autoart have said their material is ABS plastic, that should settle the matter, since this material is a “terpolymer” (more info of course as Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrylonitrile_butadiene_styrene and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copolymer#terpolymer)
ABS compposites DO exist, (e.g. https://www.elix-polymers.com/news/28/elix-polymers-introduces-new-generation-of-abs-polymer-composite-material) but I doubt Autoart would be using such a fiber-embedded composite and not advertise the fact. They only use ABS plastic and ABS composite in their press briefing.
Anyway, I think I will let the matter rest now. You are right, the actual construction, fit and finish and details matter and you rightfully point out such flaws when they occur. From what I’ve read there are issues with these ABS models, such as creaking doors or even translucent panels.
Bravo on your excellent review and thanks for listening :)
Thanks Uzair on spending all that time on setting the facts straight regarding the ABS material used by AutoArt. Even if that was discussed many time in these pages before and it may not be the primary concern of most collectors we still believe this point is very important especially for all engineers and scientifics reading this great website.
Wow, I can’t believe people actually bought this piece of crap, I bought mine in brand new condition and I have to say that I am very disappointed. The spoiler fell off when I opened the box and the left side mirror of mine was placed incorrectly. I returned the item and got another one. This time the 2 wheels fell off from the chassis due to a fracture in the connection joints. I have to say that I will never buy any new model from AutoArt ever again and people hate composite for a reason.
Sorry to hear about the drama with both models, but what do these issues have to do with the model here being made of composite?
I think i may have over criticized composite model, but, especially since implementing composite materials on their models, AutoART QC has dropped significantly compared to their older diecast line, my friend had a defect Rocket Bunny and a Hurricane, which are both composite. Their older series may have small flaws but nothing major like the one’s with this car and other newer released composites. Sure composite may have their advantages but that should not be at the cost of decreasing quality.
We tend to disagree. We’ve seen our fair share of AUTOart models, overall good marks for QC.
Is it limited edition?
No. The model will go through various production runs. Could sit in a dormant state for years and then placed into production again. Licensing is a part of it as well.
Got mine today … for 239 €, when prices elsewhere are 300-329 €.
Greetings From Germany. Usually I Enjoy Your Reviews But I Have Mixed Feelings With That One. I’m Not a Composit Hater But I Also Don’t Feel the Need To Defend It….
About a Week Ago I Bought a New Model Online. What I Received Was Not Pretty. The Roof Won’t Fit Properly, Shut Lines And Panel Gaps Looked Just Awful And One Of the Doors Was Almost Broken. Very Loosent, Just Hanging There Ready To Fall Off At Any Moment. When the Door Was Closed You Could See a Giant Gap Between Door Window And the Roof. Basically the Model I Received Was Absolutely Everything It Should Not Be According To Your Review. If You Open And Close the Rear Cover a Few Times In a Row It Sounds Like Freakin’ Spongebob Is Dancing On Your Desk. Seriously, Just Put Your Model On Your Desk And Try To Move It Forward. All the Cracking And Scratching, It Sounds Terrifying, Doesn’t It?
For the First Time In My Life I Had To Return a Model Car. I Feel Sorry For the Seller. He Has To Deal With It Now. My Question Now Is: How Was That Garbage Able To Pass Autoart’s QC?
I Bought Another One From a Different Seller. The Quality Overall Is Much, Much, Much Better Now. Panel Gaps And Shut Lines Are Good and Both Doors Close With No Issues. I Have Only One Problem With That Model. The Side Mirror On the Passenger Side Is Pointing Slightly Upwards. But I Don’t Care. You Can See It Only If You Know What You’re Looking For. I Don’t Want a Replacement, That’s For Sure. Who Knows What I Get Next Time Around?
So Yeah, It Can Go Both Ways.
Anyway, We Should NOT Buy Into Autoart’s Marketing Strategy. Apparently It’s Easy To Create More Detailed Model If They Use Plastic Instead Of Metal And Yet the Most Detailed Model I’ve Seen So Far Was Zonda Revolucion With Body Parts Made Of Metal. And Apparently Autoart Decided To Go With Composit Because It Supposed To Make the Models More Affordable…. Well, a While Ago I Payed 200 Euro For My Diecast Veyron And 2 Weeks Ago 250 Euro For My Chiron Made Of Plastic. So Where Is That Promised Price Reduction Now?
Alright Guys. If You Really Want This Model Then Buy One And Cross Your Fingers. There Is So Much That Can Go Wrong. And Get a New One From Seller With a Good Return Policy. Personally I Don’t Think I Would Like To Buy a Used One….
We’re not sure how the model passed the QC test. What this store sample sold as new? The problem a lot of collectors are facing today is the loss of brick and mortar locations. It’s rare today you can go out, see a selection of the models then make a purchase. The ability of inspection is lost too.
We’re not defending AUTOart’s action to more to composite, you don’t need to be a genius to know that $$/margins factored into their decision making. Brands like Almost Real and LCD Models are plugging away if they figure out speed to market and distribution channels they will definitely take market share. As for QC, we need to say out of all the brands we’ve studied they are definitely on top.
Yes, It Was Sold As New. Both Models I Received Were Sealed the Exact Same Way. I Am Always Very Careful When I Open a New Model For the First Time. Usually I’m Using a Small Ruler To Push the Corners Of the Box Down From Inside And Then Pull…. That Way the Box Has Zero Damage And I Can See If Someone Tried To Open It Before. The Tape On the Shell Itself Was Fully Intact As Well.
Margin Is the One And Only Factor.
As Mentioned Before, I Have No Problem With Composit Material. I Own a Bunch Of These Myself And I Am About To Buy Even More. But I Can See Why So Many People Don’t Like Composit Models. Yes I Know, I Am the Part Of the Problem. But I Can’t Just Ignore Autoart. I Mean, Where Else Do I Get Clear Carbon Version Of Centenario Or That Awesome Looking Huayra BC?
Autoart’s QC Is Okay. It Could Be Better. I Am Not As Lucky As You Guys Are I Guess. Many Of My Models Have Small Issues. For Example, My Huayra BC Is Missing Some Painting On a Belt, My Apollo Arrived With a Scratch Right Under the Passenger Door And So On…. Really, Same Amount Of Issues I Have With Other Brands. So In My Opinion Autoart QC Is Nothing Special.