Jump to content


1/25 Revell '70 Plymouth HEMI 'Cuda 2'n1


  • You cannot reply to this topic
715 replies to this topic

#121 MrObsessive

MrObsessive

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,892 posts
  • Location:Steelton, PA

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:16 PM

Yeah, I'm looking at a bunch of 1:1 pics on my hard disc of that car, and the test shots original wheelwell flares are a bit too much. Stu, your pic manipulation DOES make them look a lot better!

 

It's an easy fix if Revell doesn't address this, but still........... :unsure:



#122 azers

azers

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • Location:sultan
  • Full Name:Joe l. Spitzer

Posted 10 December 2012 - 12:45 PM

Sorry about the convertible. Lol.

#123 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:Fairfax/Bay Area, CA

Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:48 PM

 

I was hoping nobody would bring that topic up.  :(  :lol:

 

I'm sure there will eventually be a convertible version, much like Revell did with the '69 Camaro kits.

 

And then the version AFTER that release will have the up-top.

 

B)



#124 azers

azers

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • Location:sultan
  • Full Name:Joe l. Spitzer

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:17 PM

Yup. Lol

#125 charlie8575

charlie8575

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,628 posts
  • Location:Marlborough, Ma.
  • Full Name:Charlie

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:04 AM

I wonder if some of it could be those silly oversized wheels playing tricks on your vision? I'd want to see a painted sample compared to a real car, but anything off to my eye is slight enough that it wouldn't bother me.

 

For the shock factor, I might build one of these with a Ross Gibson Hyper-Pak Slant Six and 14-inch rims, painted metallic tan or something equally plain.

 

Charlie Larkin



#126 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:Fairfax/Bay Area, CA

Posted 13 December 2012 - 10:52 AM

Mmm, I dunno - I think some of the problems actually get louder as the wheel diameter goes down:

 

203-vi.jpg

 

Actually, the rear ain't lookin' so bad, but man, that front...

 

One of the photo manipulations I've wanted to try (brace yourself for the irony: I've been too busy on an ACTUAL BUILD) is to sneak the shadow of that mid-body crease up just a smidge, just marginally.


Edited by Chuck Kourouklis, 13 December 2012 - 10:53 AM.


#127 Erik Smith

Erik Smith

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,867 posts
  • Location:Spokane, WA
  • Full Name:Erik Smith

Posted 13 December 2012 - 11:15 AM

I think the angle of the photos and the focal length may be playing a part in the look of the fender problem - maybe. The whole front of the car looks oversized - like a mild fisheye distortion. Hard to say without a good side profile shot.

#128 horsepower

horsepower

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 916 posts
  • Location:Redding, California

Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:09 PM

I think the angle of the photos and the focal length may be playing a part in the look of the fender problem - maybe. The whole front of the car looks oversized - like a mild fisheye distortion. Hard to say without a good side profile shot.

By George! I think we actually have a winner!!!



#129 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:Fairfax/Bay Area, CA

Posted 13 December 2012 - 01:20 PM

You can account for the fisheye effect and still find those upper surfaces a bit broad.  This isn't the only angle which appears that way, and the obvious excess and flatness of the wheel arch lip stands no matter what the angle and lens distortion.

 

Which isn't to say that there isn't a whole lot about this body shell that's much, much closer than the last two attempts - the last AAR took those same areas and made them way narrower for scale than these are wide.  But as for "winners", my vote goes to Stu from page 9, who made a visual adjustment that resulted in an actual improvement.



#130 SteveG

SteveG

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 627 posts
  • Location:Medina, OH

Posted 13 December 2012 - 03:02 PM

I think the angle of the photos and the focal length may be playing a part in the look of the fender problem - maybe. The whole front of the car looks oversized - like a mild fisheye distortion. Hard to say without a good side profile shot.

 

I have to agree, those photos were taken in a rush under less then ideal conditions, with an inexpensive point and shoot digital camera.  I know that because I took them.  I only posted the ones that were in focus enough to use here. Keep that it mind before you get to crtitical. You can go to my album to see some other views starting on page 5. http://public.fotki....-nationals--33/  

 

I saw it with my own two eyes standing next to a couple of die hard mopar guys who aren't known for holding back opinions and we all agreed while isn't perfect it looked pretty darn good, certainly Revell's best E-body to date. I know I'm looking foward to getting one or more, perfect or not .....

 

Steve 



#131 Erik Smith

Erik Smith

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,867 posts
  • Location:Spokane, WA
  • Full Name:Erik Smith

Posted 13 December 2012 - 03:09 PM

Thanks for that link Steve. I looked at pic 212 - one 'Cuda in the background looks good. This will be a great kit for Revell, no doubt.

#132 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 881 posts
  • Location:Fairfax/Bay Area, CA

Posted 13 December 2012 - 04:50 PM

Okay, so you can take a more straight-on profile shot like this:

 

2012-10-06160608.jpg

 

note that it's a bit elongated by the lens, and still correctly reckon that the upper surfaces look a bit disproportionate.  You don't really need to take measurements to note that the top surface seems close in height to the surface directly below it, as defined by the mid-body crease and the one just above the rocker panel.  Whereas in a side profile of the 1:1 - 

 

737825_3138137211413_Original.jpg

 

the difference between the upper and lower expanses is a little clearer.  

 

Though if you DID take measurements based on photographs - right at the midpoint between the fender and the front door line -  you'd find that the upper surface on the model is about 80% the height of the surface just below it, where the 1:1 hovers around 70% - not a huge difference, but noticeable.   Any number of factors can lead to this (is the center crease too low, is the rocker crease too high), you can point out that we won't know for sure until you take a tape to the car and the model, and you'd be right - but the two-dimensional analysis from photographs is close enough to start drawing conclusions.

 

Now if we were talking deviations of hundredths, the "perfect model" concept might enter the discussion. But no, we're talking tenths - subtle, but visible to the unassisted eye.  And nowhere is it in dispute that even with this deviation, it still blows the carp out of any 'Cuda Revell/Monogram has done before.



#133 1972coronet

1972coronet

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,438 posts
  • Location:Murrieta (South-West Riverside County) , Ca
  • Full Name:John Shoe

Posted 13 December 2012 - 05:47 PM

Thanks for the in-depth examination of the kit , Chuck .

 

One thing as a reminder to all -- myself included : in 1:1 , the wheel well arches are "generously-proportioned" ; a fact which is exasperated when normal 14x6" wheels with , say , F78 tyres ( the AAR pictured above has F60-15 and G60-15 tyres on 15x8 wheels) are seen inside those fenders !

 

Too bad that revell didn't mould the test shot with black interior and wheels , as that stupid grey doesn't look decent on film .

Makes the roof look too-low , just like the '70 AAR from a few years ago ...

 

On the good side , the lines look nice , crisp and very well-defined !



#134 Drake69

Drake69

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 551 posts
  • Location:Central VA
  • Full Name:Allen Manley

Posted 10 March 2013 - 06:54 PM

This was my attempt at a "conversion", with resin pieces off of fleaBay for the front and rear changes to the '71 Hemi Cuda kit...

 

Cuda62.jpg

 

Cuda58.jpg

 

Cuda56.jpg

 

Cuda68.jpg

 

Wheels are from the Lindberg Dodge 330 kit.



#135 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,226 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 11 March 2013 - 10:47 AM

I'll grab one right away to compare to my original mpc , if it passes muster, I'll order a case asap

 

I can assure you no metal axle rods will be included with the forthcoming Revell kit.  :D

 

Seriously, though, I think the Revell 1/25 '70 Hemi 'Cuda will surpass the 1/25 MPC kit(s) in every way, save for maybe some minor areas on the body.  :)



#136 gtx6970

gtx6970

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • Location:Northern Ky
  • Full Name:Bill Allphin

Posted 11 March 2013 - 12:48 PM

 

I can assure you no metal axle rods will be included with the forthcoming Revell kit.  :D

 

Seriously, though, I think the Revell 1/25 '70 Hemi 'Cuda will surpass the 1/25 MPC kit(s) in every way, save for maybe some minor areas on the body.  :)

 

 

I'm good with the lack of metal axles  so thats a good thing .

 

The current AMT Duster is equal to the original MPC 71 I have and if the Cuda is at least equilivant to that,,, I'm good with it . And I REALLY am hoping for a drag car version shortly after the stock issue is released.


Edited by gtx6970, 11 March 2013 - 04:50 PM.


#137 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,226 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:06 PM

And I REALLY am hoping for a drag car version shortly after the stock issue is released.

 

I think that's all but guaranteed. A Sox & Martin Pro Stock kit is a "must happen" modified reissue, much like the Sox & Martin '67 GTX Super Stock kit before it.

 

I've got a feeling this kit will take the place of Revell's "old reliable" 1/25 '69 Camaro as the kit which spawns multiple modified reissues and stays in the lineup for 20+ years.



#138 martinfan5

martinfan5

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,374 posts
  • Location:Los Santos, San Andreas
  • Full Name:Jonathan Stephens

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:17 PM

 

I can assure you no metal axle rods will be included with the forthcoming Revell kit.  :D

Well looks like I wont being getting this kit now, I am very disappointed by this and Revell,  with out the metal axles, I cant roll the car around on floor going vrooom vrooom!



#139 spkgibson

spkgibson

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 855 posts
  • Location:Grand Blanc Michigan

Posted 12 March 2013 - 12:07 AM

I see myself building a Gran Coupe out of one of these.....Already have a resin flat hood for it.



#140 gtx6970

gtx6970

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • Location:Northern Ky
  • Full Name:Bill Allphin

Posted 12 March 2013 - 06:28 AM

I've got a feeling this kit will take the place of Revell's "old reliable" 1/25 '69 Camaro as the kit which spawns multiple modified reissues and stays in the lineup for 20+ years.

 

I don't have a problem with that.