Check out the Revell 62 Impala

[Len Carsner]

First installment of the buildup has been posted to the "On the Workbench" forum.

[Harry P.]

More than likely I'll build it sometime, as I like this body style a little better than the bubbletop.

On that point I'd have to disagree 1,000%...

[peterk]

AMT original 1962 chev is an Impala only, both conv & hardtop. So this is not the first time. This was in 1962

[OSLRod]

Revell, don't toy w/us like u did w/the '87 Cutlass & Regal donks; b4 i preorder this kit, i need 2 be sure it's 4 real & not a test run.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

The '87 Olds and Buick kits never made it to the boxcover stage, OSL, or into a previewer's hands. This one looks ready to go.

[Len Carsner]

Revell, don't toy w/us like u did w/the '87 Cutlass & Regal donks; b4 i preorder this kit, i need 2 be sure it's 4 real & not a test run.

Uh, are you watching the buildup going on in the "On the Workbench" forum?

It's very real, my friend or my imagination has gotten WAY out of hand!

Len C.

[jbwelda]

well heres something a little different: how is the 409? has revell ever issued a 409 before or is this a new tool, or maybe both? i take it theres just one 4bbl carb or maybe cant even see it under either air cleaner? how about suspension...anything special for the race version? looks interesting and i especially like the bench seat idea with a 4 on the floor and a 4 speed DECAL? you gotta be kiddin me!

im looking for an unusual motor to put with a resin austin body i have and a 409 with little hilborn injection stacks is looming large in my mind!

[cruz]

As usual, I will wait to see what my boy Bill Geary has to say about this kit, he has such a great eye in spotting the little, disproportioned issues on these kits.....

[jbwelda]

so i take it the motor and other details just bleedin pale in significant compared to some dumb wheel arch line?

this forum is becoming less and less interesting every day.

yeah i checked the on the workbench thread.

thanks.

[PITTSBURGH412]

does Revell provide anything to replicate the engine turned rear trim panel? the picture shows the whole panel to be plated and it appears to be smooth. i don't see anything on the decal sheet for this, or am i missing something?

Dave

just foil it, with the alum BMF

[Chuck Most]

well heres something a little different: how is the 409? has revell ever issued a 409 before or is this a new tool, or maybe both?

Dave mentioned the '65 Imp, and they've also have a 348 in the '58 Impala kit. The engines have a few differences in 1:1, but I doubt anyone would notice in 1:25.

[horsepower]

well heres something a little different: how is the 409? has revell ever issued a 409 before or is this a new tool, or maybe both? i take it theres just one 4bbl carb or maybe cant even see it under either air cleaner? how about suspension...anything special for the race version? looks interesting and i especially like the bench seat idea with a 4 on the floor and a 4 speed DECAL? you gotta be kiddin me!

im looking for an unusual motor to put with a resin austin body i have and a 409 with little hilborn injection stacks is looming large in my mind!

To date the best 409 released was a Revell engine that was in the ORIGINAL release '55 Chevy it was not entirely stock, & unfortunately was not offered in this version again, not even in their engine kits of the era, the closest engine to this one is the current release (?) of the '54 Chevy sedan from Model King. it is a hot rod engine that you may want to look at for the little Austin.

[Len Carsner]

does Revell provide anything to replicate the engine turned rear trim panel? the picture shows the whole panel to be plated and it appears to be smooth. i don't see anything on the decal sheet for this, or am i missing something?

Dave

Only the SS models had the engine turned insert in the side moldings and rear deck molding. This being an Impala it would have the silver/light argent panel on the trunk.

What I'm planning to do is mask my bumper and the surround molding for the rear panel then air brush some aluminum Alclad on the surface. Wish me luck!

Len C.

[horsepower]

So, after all of the hoopla (that I personally could care less about) When is this supposed to hit the shelves?

[Len Carsner]

So, after all of the hoopla (that I personally could care less about) When is this supposed to hit the shelves?

Bill and I get ours about six weeks before they hit the shelves to do our review and buildups. That should put their arrival in stores at around third week of May.

I'm curious though about the "hoopla" you're talking about. Is it our buildup thats bothering you, or are you referring to the discussion/criticism along the way?

[horsepower]

Bill and I get ours about six weeks before they hit the shelves to do our review and buildups. That should put their arrival in stores at around third week of May.

I'm curious though about the "hoopla" you're talking about. Is it our buildup thats bothering you, or are you referring to the discussion/criticism along the way?

I was referring to the "discussions about whether or not this is an accurate representation of the '62 Impala or not. I consider us VERY lucky to get these great kits, I can remember when you got some balsa or basswood, 4 wheels & tires (airplane ones at that) & some pictures, & that was a model car kit, I guess we should remember what my maternal Grandma once told me, "If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all". Thanks for your reply, Del Streetman

Edited May 20, 2010 by horsepower

[spkgibson]

I thought "The Old Reliable" was a bubbletop?

It was,But they also ran an Impala,I have some photos in an old muscle car magazine from 1984 that shows the Impala and the Bel Air ,If I could scan the artical,I would share....

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Eeeyup! My pusher got theirs in yesterday too.

Of course, my weekend schedule will prevent me from getting mine till Sunday...

[elan]

A '62 Chevy is not something I'd build. I'm just thrilled it isn't another '32 Ford. Kudos to Revell.

[jbwelda]

been away for awhile so didnt get a chance to get back here till now.

>the closest engine to this one is the current release (?) of the '54 Chevy sedan from Model King

thanks for the tip...i am going to chase that down. off topic but i should mention i am tempted to use the small hemi out of the ala kart reissue but a real boat anchor like a 409 would be interesting for nostalgia if nothing else, hence my interest in this topic.

thanks again and cheers!

[horsepower]

got mine Friday, I think it's better than the review says it is, almost got the body ready for paint if it weren't for the sink marks on the front of the fenders, & the minor sinking at the back of the roof, & the ejector marks in the headliner it would be ready, they just took a little filler to fix. But now I have to wait for them to cure.

[Tom Kren]

No one around here has it The one lhs sold out !

[Chuck Kourouklis]

By the way, Monogram released its '59 Impala in 1993, so we've had a good idea how Revell/Monogram is gonna handle a w-series big block for what, 17 years? And as mentioned before, the '65 Impala convertible has had a 409 - for around 12 of those 17 years.

The new one, shockingly, looks rather like those. It's got a separate oilpan and a dual-carb intake. Detail and parts breakdown are very similar otherwise.

Oh, and the factory stock tires are new, for anyone who pays attention to that sort of thing. Similar to the now de-branded G@@& Y#@% Power Cushions that debuted in the '65 Impala hardtop and are now seen in the '66 Impala, but not the same. Bit narrower in the tread, raised rim for a whitewall on the sides.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Chuck Kourouklis

[Len Carsner]

It was,But they also ran an Impala,I have some photos in an old muscle car magazine from 1984 that shows the Impala and the Bel Air ,If I could scan the article,I would share....

Are these close to what you're looking for?

Len C.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Here are some peripheral notes, a few of which address some questions in this thread. If it gets too dull for anyone, I'm sure the next post will be more interesting.

The following notes come from a quick side-by-side comparison between the Revell body shell and a 1:1 '62 Impala SS hardtop: the more critical among you may wish to examine the cowl curvature, the drip moldings, the overall roof profile at the windshield header, and the much-discussed wheel arches; I’m just going to point out those areas and leave 'em to you to judge when you get a chance. I might be able to supply direct photo comparisons this weekend. The wheel arches present the most obvious deviations; put another way, if you look at the profile shot on the side of the box, and you can deal with the wheel arches, you probably won't find the rest of the body objectionable.

Beyond the body: you're likely to find cross-pollination between this kit and AMT's '62 Bel Air a little tricky, because there are surprising dimensional differences between the two; the Revell kit is enough wider and longer that it almost reads as a 1/24 kit to AMT's 1/25. I was willing to bet the AMT kit was undersize, but this body shell looks a little massive even next to Revell's own ’64 from 2000, arguably still the finest Impala kit ever (and not to be confused with their cruder ’63 Impala from the same year).

It looks as if Revell missed the lens engraving on the signal lights just under the headlights; otherwise, Revell’s front grille and bumper parts are far enough superior to AMT’s that you might want to use them to improve your Bel Air, and the size discrepancies will make this difficult. If you just wanted a sharper set of tires for the Bel Air, however, Revell's all-new rubber looks like it'll slip on the AMT wheels after you trim the locator ring from the inside. Those of you who have always thought AMT’s dog-dish caps were a bit large might want to have a look at the Revell caps, which are notably smaller in diameter.

You may notice from the profile shot on the side of the box that the front axle center line sits too far to the rear; don't worry about that, because it looks as if Revell caught the problem and adjusted the pin bosses forward on the front suspension piece to correct it. I'm betting Len's and Bill's cars will bear this out when they're finished.

For those of you who might want to go this route, RC2's nice new pie crust slicks will fit in the rear wheel wells, and you won't have to use the larger-diameter wheels Revell supplies for its slicks. Take the factory steel wheels instead, and push the back halves about 1/8 inch into the RC2 slicks, and that will compensate for the width of the axle. The fastidious among you will want to trim the rims off another set of wheels to finish the inside surfaces (and grind the grease caps off the outside halves if you're not using the dog dish caps), but otherwise, it's a simple operation.

As for getting the nose of the drag version properly in the air, though, it depends on the level of detail you want and how far you’re willing to go. You might try pirating AMT’s raised suspension from its Bel Air drag cars, then maybe grafting on Revell’s more complete tie rod system if you want to keep that level of detail. If you’re more ambitious, you could also look at the separate suspension arms and raised springs from Revell’s ’64 – probably the most realistic option; but since the new kit lacks the ‘64’s separate frame, you’ll need to either graft in the ’64 crossmember or rework the ‘62’s.

The simplest option may be the raised front suspension piece from a lowrider version of Revell’s ’63 Impala, if you can dig one of those up. Get that in place, and the ’62 wheels should pin right in.

If I find anything else of interest bashing around with other Impala kits, I'll drop another line.