Being a scale purist can be a vice of mine. Funny thing is that I'm not nearly as much of a scale purist as some people think. I just think that deviations from scale should be based on practicalities of building or a deliberate choice to build something creative, rather than from following bad information by scaling up a kit.
For instance, the PML and Estes AMRAAM kits all have 4:1 ogive nosecones. The real cones were much stubbier. If you build, say a BT-50 AMRAAM, it would be no harder to use a closer nose cone, like an Alpha nose, rather than the longer 4"-long one, and you'd get a more accurate model.
Now, I fully appreciate that compromises are necessary in scale modeling, and I don't mean to harangue anyone who builds their V-2 with the wrong curvature of boattail. I've been devoting my life for 15 years trying to get people to actually build scale models without being intimidated. There is no law that says that an Aerobee with a nose that is 15% too short is an abomination. Heck, I will be kitting a Saturn V with oversized fins (nose weight for accurate fins would be prohibitive). It's just that people need to be aware that you can't trust a flying model kit to be an accurate source of data on the real thing. For whatever reasons--compromises for stability, simplicity of construction, mistakes on the part of the kit designer, or use of pre-existing molded parts--most flying model rocket scale kits are not particularly accurate.
So don't let me discourage anyone. I'm just saying that if you get a mind to build a scale model, eye the existing kits with suspicion.