horsepower Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Just to straighten out a few minor things, (ironic that people complaining about a major company can get minor things wrong while doing it) all the paper printing is still done by the good old USA, & the '59 'Vette is based on the '58 not the other way around. Guess not even the perfect people that post on forums get it right all the time ;-) Edited May 24, 2014 by horsepower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Are the side coves on this kit seperate pieces? That should make painting the side coves easier to paint a different color than the rest of the body. I like that idea. Scott Edited May 24, 2014 by Brett Barrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 Don't know what happened there, but I can't edit my last post and it cut out my answer and photo. Stupid Internet Explorer, I'm sure... Just the deep part behind the "vent" is separate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 I'm not here to defend Revell (any more than I am to defend any of the other model companies), and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there are some statements in here that are, in my view, not accurate. * The 'cuda kit does not have significant proportional problems. There are about ten minor points in detailing of the body casting, that could be revised to be more accurate. But so are there similar detail mistakes in the '70 'cuda annual kit from MPC and the '71 'cuda from JoHan, kits we held as the "gold standard" up until this kit debuted. On the other hand, there is so much "right" about this kit on so many levels that it deserves every bit the accolades it has received from most modelers, and the near "sell out" sales results so far. * The conscious decision on the part of Revell to package the roof with the gasser version of the '62 Corvette, and the entire Paxton supercharger with a different kit of the '57 Ford, is a reality of today's model car world, where we get kits that far exceed the detail level of those tooled in the 1960's and '70's, but that sell in a small fraction of the volume that they did back then. Packaging different versions of the basic kit tool in multiple kits offerings (and the increased total sales that result) helps make the new tools affordable. And oh, by the way, a similar business model being is being followed by Moebius and (I'll speculate here on the future...), Meng. * Most of my Revell kits manufactured in China over the last year have NOT had Chrome plating issues. * Any debate on Revell should also include mention of the '50 Olds and "57 Ford kits - kits that are among the best new tooled model kits since the turn of the century, IMHO. Having said that, to err is human, and Revell has certainly had errors, some of which you and others cite above. And that becomes fair game on a forum like this one. But I felt I had to speak up here to make sure we have a balanced debate. TIM Well said, and I might add, if folks would quit fussing about the 90 LX and build one, they'd see that kit goes together quite nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blubaja Posted May 24, 2014 Author Share Posted May 24, 2014 Thank's Brett for coming to the rescue with pics! Well said, and I might add, if folks would quit fussing about the 90 LX and build one, they'd see that kit goes together quite nicely. Yes! What a great chassis and interior they make! And if they only included the wheels sown in the instructions as well! But just another-oops my bad-from Revell that we're supposed to forgive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horsepower Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Curiously enough, the pictures of the box side panels show the '59, it's missing the chrome spears on the deck lid. Another goof by the USA printers, or is the black one a custom version. (can't see the rear of the silver one good enough to see if the spears are there or not). Edited May 24, 2014 by horsepower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) Curiously enough, the pictures of the box side panels show the '59, it's missing the chrome spears on the deck lid, & the louvers on the hood. Another goof by the USA printers? Nope, it's a 58. Blame my crappy cell phone camera... Edited May 24, 2014 by Brett Barrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted May 24, 2014 Share Posted May 24, 2014 (edited) I'm not here to defend Revell (any more than I am to defend any of the other model companies), and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there are some statements in here that are, in my view, not accurate. * The 'cuda kit does not have significant proportional problems. There are about ten minor points in detailing of the body casting, that could be revised to be more accurate. But so are there similar detail mistakes in the '70 'cuda annual kit from MPC and the '71 'cuda from JoHan, kits we held as the "gold standard" up until this kit debuted. On the other hand, there is so much "right" about this kit on so many levels that it deserves every bit the accolades it has received from most modelers, and the near "sell out" sales results so far. * The conscious decision on the part of Revell to package the roof with the gasser version of the '62 Corvette, and the entire Paxton supercharger with a different kit of the '57 Ford, is a reality of today's model car world, where we get kits that far exceed the detail level of those tooled in the 1960's and '70's, but that sell in a small fraction of the volume that they did back then. Packaging different versions of the basic kit tool in multiple kits offerings (and the increased total sales that result) helps make the new tools affordable. And oh, by the way, a similar business model being is being followed by Moebius and (I'll speculate here on the future...), Meng. * Most of my Revell kits manufactured in China over the last year have NOT had Chrome plating issues. * Any debate on Revell should also include mention of the '50 Olds and "57 Ford kits - kits that are among the best new tooled model kits since the turn of the century, IMHO. Having said that, to err is human, and Revell has certainly had errors, some of which you and others cite above. And that becomes fair game on a forum like this one. But I felt I had to speak up here to make sure we have a balanced debate. TIM I can speak from my experience in retail that a lot of beginning modelers find the 2 n1 or 3 n1 kits a bit overwhelming and prefer them to have fewer options. Was I disappointed the stock 62 Vette didn't have a hardtop? Yes, but that disappointment quickly faded when I saw how cool the Gasser kit was, it has great engine and suspension parts that will find their way into other projects so if you rob the top the rest won't go completely to waste. Same with the 57 Ford, the Fireball Roberts version is probably the best 50's Nascar kit anyone's done to date, it has more than just no back seat and steel wheels, they really did a good job with that one. If they had just blocked the supercharger parts off the chrome sprue in the first kit we would have never known. I'm glad they split it into a 2nd kit and did the Nascar version properly instead of just having it as 2nd building option like the 57 Chevy Black Widow. Edited May 24, 2014 by Brett Barrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 I'm not here to defend Revell (any more than I am to defend any of the other model companies), and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but there are some statements in here that are, in my view, not accurate. * The 'cuda kit does not have significant proportional problems. There are about ten minor points in detailing of the body casting, that could be revised to be more accurate. But so are there similar detail mistakes in the '70 'cuda annual kit from MPC and the '71 'cuda from JoHan, kits we held as the "gold standard" up until this kit debuted. On the other hand, there is so much "right" about this kit on so many levels that it deserves every bit the accolades it has received from most modelers, and the near "sell out" sales results so far. * The conscious decision on the part of Revell to package the roof with the gasser version of the '62 Corvette, and the entire Paxton supercharger with a different kit of the '57 Ford, is a reality of today's model car world, where we get kits that far exceed the detail level of those tooled in the 1960's and '70's, but that sell in a small fraction of the volume that they did back then. Packaging different versions of the basic kit tool in multiple kits offerings (and the increased total sales that result) helps make the new tools affordable. And oh, by the way, a similar business model being is being followed by Moebius and (I'll speculate here on the future...), Meng. * Most of my Revell kits manufactured in China over the last year have NOT had Chrome plating issues. * Any debate on Revell should also include mention of the '50 Olds and "57 Ford kits - kits that are among the best new tooled model kits since the turn of the century, IMHO. Having said that, to err is human, and Revell has certainly had errors, some of which you and others cite above. And that becomes fair game on a forum like this one. But I felt I had to speak up here to make sure we have a balanced debate. TIM What Tim said. Also, the Pro Modeler issue of the 58 had 2 sets of tires, the whitewall pwoer cusions, and Revell's Goodyear Polyglass tires as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Suburban Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 These are nice kits and it great to have at least one of them back. My 58 promodeler kit was missing the printed white wall tires. anybody willing to trade a set of those tires? I have a spare hardtop from the 59 kit. BTW the 59 kit had black walls only for the stock version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spooky Benson Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 (edited) Well said, and I might add, if folks would quit fussing about the 90 LX and build one, they'd see that kit goes together quite nicely. Well, to paraphrase Samuel L. Jackson in "Pulp Fiction," a sewer rat might taste like pumpkin pie, too, but I would never know because there's no way I am gonna eat one. Seriously, regardless of how nicely a model builds up, if it fails to accurately represent its 1:1 counterpart ... which the LX does in spades ... it fails in its mission as a model. Edited May 25, 2014 by Spooky Benson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horsepower Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Brett Barrow: I didn't make my post completely clear, in the pictures on the side of the box the picture of the black far in the top view showing the interior is a '58, but the split picture that shows the front view of the silver car, & the rear view of the black car the black one doesn't have "the chrome spears on the rear deck, it's not a bad picture,they're just missing. Kinda strange? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Hall Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 Brett Barrow: I didn't make my post completely clear, in the pictures on the side of the box the picture of the black far in the top view showing the interior is a '58, but the split picture that shows the front view of the silver car, & the rear view of the black car the black one doesn't have "the chrome spears on the rear deck, it's not a bad picture,they're just missing. Kinda strange? Look again..the split picture shows it with the decklid open, so the spears aren't visible.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordairgtar Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 How can anyone not see that the trunk was open? The spare tire cover is clearly seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike 51 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 (edited) How can anyone not see that the trunk was open? The spare tire cover is clearly seen. Some people from Redding are known to frequently have trouble understanding what they see or hear....it's an unsolved mystery...so far. Edited May 25, 2014 by mike 51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 How can anyone not see that the trunk was open? The spare tire cover is clearly seen. Because facts can get in the way of a good rant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
High octane Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 If modelers have issues with the way Revell makes their kits, there is a SIMPLE solution, and that is NOT to buy any more Revell kits. I'm sure you can find other products to build and to complain about as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 (edited) Well, to paraphrase Samuel L. Jackson in "Pulp Fiction," a sewer rat might taste like pumpkin pie, too, but I would never know because there's no way I am gonna eat one. Seriously, regardless of how nicely a model builds up, if it fails to accurately represent its 1:1 counterpart ... which the LX does in spades ... it fails in its mission as a model. Someone with common sense Edited May 25, 2014 by martinfan5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horsepower Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 (edited) After getting home where I could look at a real picture instead of the postage stamp sized one on my cell phone it's clear that the trunk's open. When we true Northern Californians are back in our clear air we can actually see quite clear thank you. It's when we get away from our clear, clean, fresh air that we have problems. Edited May 25, 2014 by horsepower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horsepower Posted May 25, 2014 Share Posted May 25, 2014 (edited) And just when I was bragging to the RC guys that the people on the Model Cars forums were a lot nicer & didn't make snide unwarranted personal attacks on people they didn't know I get proven wrong. Sorry, I must apologise to our regular followers, I see that it's a relatively new poster that hasn't caught on to the nice people we usually have here, at least in one case anyway. ;-/ Edited May 25, 2014 by horsepower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike 51 Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) And just when I was bragging to the RC guys that the people on the Model Cars forums were a lot nicer & didn't make snide unwarranted personal attacks on people they didn't know I get proven wrong. Sorry, I must apologise to our regular followers, I see that it's a relatively new poster that hasn't caught on to the nice people we usually have here, at least in one case anyway. ;-/ I live here too.. I attempted to make a joke and failed.. it seems odd to make a statement about something you can't clearly see on your phone withoout mentioning why you couldn't tell it was a '58. But I am sorry,I meant no offense. Edited May 26, 2014 by mike 51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blubaja Posted May 26, 2014 Author Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) If modelers have issues with the way Revell makes their kits, there is a SIMPLE solution, and that is NOT to buy any more Revell kits. I'm sure you can find other products to build and to complain about as well. I'm sure most of the people that write the reviews for the magazines DO NOT actually pay for the kits. So if you don't like HONEST reviews from people that so actually pay money for them, maybe this is not the place for you. Sorry if you are offended by reality. Edit-and yes. I'm sure I will find other kits to "complain" about any issues they have. This will also be known as a review. Edited May 26, 2014 by blubaja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 (edited) I'm sure most of the people that write the reviews for the magazines DO NOT actually pay for the kits. So if you don't like HONEST reviews from people that so actually pay money for them, maybe this is not the place for you. Sorry if you are offended by reality. Its be known that Revell does not like having honest reviews of their kits made Edited May 26, 2014 by martinfan5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike 51 Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 Does Revell spend enough on model car magazine advertising to exert that kind of editorial influence? The various web sites seem to allow very "frank" reviews of ALL the manufacturers. Not interested in starting a debate..just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Suburban Posted May 26, 2014 Share Posted May 26, 2014 This did not start out as a review. The first post was about the only flaws in the instructions. Nothing about the actual kit other than the fact that it did not have the hard top that the original 58 kit did not contain either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.