John Goschke Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) In the initial thread on this kit there has been discussion over the shape of doortop and beltline since the first photos were posted of the test shots. Something seemed to be off, but without the kit in hand it was difficult to conclusively say that it was wrong. Now all these months later we can safely say that indeed it is wrong. Not to worry though... Fortunately, for once, here is a new kit nit-pick that's pretty easy to fix! Just get out your flat needle file and reshape the door top and the beltline into the dip in the top of the quarter panel so that it complements the curve of the body side molding. In doing so you'll lose the beltline molding, but that can easily be replaced with thin styrene strip. I haven't gone so far as to do the molding here, but mainly wanted to illustrate this fix that will go a long way in helping this kit realize its potential. Here's the driver's side with the doortop and beltline reshaped into the dip. I used my favorite flat needle file, followed by wetsanding with a fine grit sanding stick, then used a razor saw to recut the door line. Shown below is the unmodified passenger's side showing the unrefined contour of the beltline, where it's appears straight and level from the vent window, then seems to almost have a hump across the door line and into the dip. It took perhaps 15 or 20 minutes to correct the driver's side. In the view below from the passenger's side looking across to the driver's side you can a clear idea of how little material needs to be removed to fix the issue. Below that is a comparable view looking across at the passenger's side showing that there's plastic to spare for reshaping that contour. Doing this mockup, I also wanted to see whether the windshield would be an improvement over the similar assembly in the '55 ragtop kit. It does seem to be a significant improvement, with the frame fitting onto a recessed edge in the cowl, rather than on top of the cowl as on the '55 kit, so the lower molding on '57 the doesn't stick up so ridiculously high. The windshield itself is quite thin, with good clarity, and when installed doesn't look as bulbous as that on the '55 kit, however, it does still have a slight top to bottom curve which was not present on the real car. The shape of the vent window frame is very nice. The frame and vent window frames would probably best be stripped of their chrome, then meticulously fitted to the body and reshaped across the header to achieve the proper fit of the up-top, after which they could be foiled. On the real car the leading edge of the roof overlaps much farther onto the windshield header, which seems flatter in curvature than that on the kit. I think with careful work this is much more fixable than it was on the '55. For those who call this nit-picking, you might consider that the shape of the roofline, window openings, their proportions and their relationship to one another are arguably the most important factors in capturing the character of a car in miniature. A couple last thoughts... in looking at the convertible kit with roof and windshield mocked up, I couldn't resist getting out the dividers and comparing the height of the windshield opening at the center with that on Revell's '57 150 two-door sedan. The kit sedan's opening is slightly smaller than that on the convertible, which was not the case in the 1/1 world, where the sedans used a noticeably taller windshield. What's up with that? And a little further fiddling with the dividers reveals that the old Trophy Series AMT '57 BelAir roof would fit as nicely on this kit as it did on the '55 convertible! Edited August 16, 2014 by John Goschke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbwelda Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 wow they only had what, 57 years to get that right? now I am wondering if the door lines are actually supposed to curve forward like that as they approach the window sill? actually its all academic to me anyhow as I won't be bothering. but still its interesting. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrObsessive Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) For those who call this nit-picking, you might consider that the shape of the roofline, window openings, their proportions and their relationship to one another are arguably the most important factors in capturing the character of a car in miniature. John, I couldn't have said it better myself-----I've had this position for years! Very good modification of the door sill and, with some .010 x.020" (or thereabouts) styrene strips, this should handle the beltline trim. In answer to JB's question about the door cut line-------yeah, it might be a bit too curved on the model. Another easy fix however, especially for those of us that might cut open the doors! Edited August 15, 2014 by MrObsessive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danno Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Good stuff, John. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC Norton Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) no one will like this comment, however I have to say, its typical revell.......they never get it correct,,, never back in the day, even way back,...and still to this day. if its not the big 3, amt, mpc, or johan,,,, i'd rather leave anything revell on the shelves for the other guys..............a.c. Edited August 15, 2014 by AC Norton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Goschke Posted August 15, 2014 Author Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) no one will like this comment, however I have to say, its typical revell.......they never get it correct,,, never back in the day, even way back,...and still to this day. if its not the big 3, amt, mpc, or johan,,,, i'd rather leave anything revell on the shelves for the other guys..............a.c. Well, AC, while I'll admit that I wasn't terribly surprised to see that once again there were "issues" with a new Revell kit on its arrival, that were discussed at some length (ad nauseum?) here and elsewhere months before its release, I wouldn't go so far as to completely agree with your statement. I can cite more than a few less than stellar kits from MPC, Johan, and AMT. In the case of the latter, no more need be said than "'58 Plymouth Belvedere!" I just can't make a blanket statement about the kits of one company and say "they're all junk." Even Palmer, with their ridiculous cars, made some brass era truck kits that were real nice replicas. Today's Revell is a much different company with a whole different generation of personnel than back in '50s and '60s. Just like the other kit companies, though, it's still run by humans, so errors are bound to creep in. Some I'll choose to fix, if I can, on the kits of subjects I care about, some I'll live with and hope the next kit of that subject will get it right. However, it could be a LONG wait till somebody does a new kit of, for example, a '50 Olds 88 club coupe! Sometimes you gotta work with what you get! That said, it would be really terrific to see one of our current 1/25th scale kit manufacturers hit one 100% out-of-the-park perfect! (Moebius, I'm looking at you, and your '61 Pontiacs...) Edited August 15, 2014 by John Goschke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeBee Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Even without the corrections made to the belt line, it looks to me that if you want a '57 Chevy convertible in your collection a good clean build of this one with a terrific color scheme should yield a neat model of a cool subject. And, if you must, it's an easy fix. Nothing beyond the norm, really. Model Building 101. I don't think I've ever seen a 100% accurate scale model anyway. From any of the manufacturers. Pretty much an impossibility if you think about it. As for Revell, to my eye they came reasonably close on several subjects; the '69 Camaro, and the '67, '68, C5 and C6 Corvettes come to mind (the rear window on the '68 Corvette coupe is clumsy, however). PB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC Norton Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 john, my opinions are just that,,,mine,,,and I personally am very old school in most aspects about my models. that's to say that I am well aware that old mpc, amt, and johan kits are not perfect in many ways,...but keep in mind that their designs were cut 40-50 years ago, in most cases. you usually ended up with, and still do, a nice rendition of the vehicle in question. simplicity and down right fun and excitement are sometimes more of a thrill to some of us than repairing, fixing, and already over complicated model kit. with todays high tech world, revell seems to drop the ball more than not,,,,, the slingster dragster kit the exception here. just my thoughts.......a.c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Goschke Posted August 15, 2014 Author Share Posted August 15, 2014 No problem, AC! I just didn't want this to turn into a kit manufacturer bashing free-for-all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AC Norton Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 glad, john, that you said it in that way. this the first time I have ever made a comment about any model company on this forum. I stay away from long, draw out bla bla bla on most subjects I see guys going back and forth about. I guess I am one of those guys who never really ever got used to any car kits that didn't have that made - in - Detroit way about them. I suppose we are all car model lovers for a zillion different reasons....opinions and all.......lol....best to you, a.c. the ace....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Kourouklis Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 Little bitty change that pays heeeeUUUUGE dividends. Thanks, John! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim boyd Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) John....excellent post and photos....really well done. ***** AC....not to take issue with your comments, but to make a blanket statement like that about all Revell kits just doesn't correspond to my view of Revell, or any of the the model car manufacturers. For instance: - Revell '32 Ford Street Rod Series - Revell '50 Olds Custom - Revell '57 Ford Custom All three are examples of what results when Revell does their homework and gets it right. Each of these are - by a wide margin - the best of their respective breed (e.g. kits of those topics). What Revell (and the other manufacturers - every last one of them, in my book), need to work on, is getting a level of consistent excellency/accuracy on their new tooled kits. A level of execution that meets the standard they've set with the best of their prior kit introductions. What is evident is that Revell, and again, a number of the other guys, really need to concentrate on developing a kit creation method/protocal that provides consistently good body casting results on model topics where OEM factory CAD info on the body proportions is not available. This seems to be a particular challenge right now for Revell, but others often face the same issue (it's just that some of you haven't really found their errors yet). Just my view... Cheers...TIM Edited August 15, 2014 by tim boyd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry P. Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 wow they only had what, 57 years to get that right? now I am wondering if the door lines are actually supposed to curve forward like that as they approach the window sill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Hall Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) The '55-57 Chevy hardtops used the same doors and quarter panel, didn't they? Revell already had several toolings of those for reference... The hardtop seems to have the same slope.. Edited August 15, 2014 by Rob Hall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffs396 Posted August 15, 2014 Share Posted August 15, 2014 The accurately shaped body already exists with Revell's snap hardtop, just cut off the roof! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbwelda Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 the problem with (presumably) randomly selected photos off the internet is you just don't know what you are looking at. both of those photos do resemble the area of the model, but seems to me that curve of the doorline is more pronounced on the model than the real thing. now understand that if I were building the model, I wouldn't worry myself one bit about it, it was just an observation of where exactly do you stop when attempting to accurize something. when I start getting really picky I notice that the distance along the curve formed by the back side of the side V at the window sill, to the same curve of the chrome trim below and to the right of it, seems a lot bigger in the model than in the photos above. might be camera angles, but also that curve does not follow the curve of the chrome at the beginning of its rise and widening, which it does seem to do almost perfectly in both the photos above. but you know, at some point you just got to say its good enough and that's probably what happens around Revells tool making facility especially when the deadline approaches. like I said, they really have only had 57 years to get it right...actually a few less if you figure they literally released a 57 within a couple years of the real thing. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keyser Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Thanks John, nice pictorial. Easy fix, molding fix pretty easy. I really wanted an accurate 57 cvt, and agree greenhouse/DLO is crucial. Broke down and bought one after cancelling long back-ordered kit. Body has 10-15 degree warp. Too annoyed to bother straightening body first for symmetry then fixing door sills. Bottom of the pile it goes. Didn't even start engine block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Janssens Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Maybe John can make a template to help modelers, correcting the body contour. Then post it here and send it to the person who will be doing the review for MC magazine so it can be included in the article..... Just thinking out loud.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exotics_Builder Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Taken at Thursday's Barrington Cruise Nite. Don't forget to deal with the rear window also, as fully down it still sticks up a tad (if you are really going for rivet counting accuracy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Janssens Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 (edited) Don't forget to deal with the rear window also, as fully down it still sticks up a tad (if you are really going for rivet counting accuracy) I'm sure the right term for it, is 1/4 window. ;^) Edited August 16, 2014 by Luc Janssens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakshow12 Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Just to throw this out there. all 57 Chevys used the same windshield glass so the statement about the different size is incorrect Coupe,convertible and wagon = same windshield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 (edited) Just to throw this out there. all 57 Chevys used the same windshield glass so the statement about the different size is incorrect Coupe,convertible and wagon = same windshield Nope, hardtop, convertible and Nomads used a shorter windshield. Sedans and regular wagons used a taller windsheid. Take it from someone who has first-hand dropped a tri-five hardtop windshield into a sedan (wrong windshield was delivered by accident) there's a big difference (about 4", IIRC). Edited August 16, 2014 by Brett Barrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakshow12 Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Really? Danchuck lists one windshield and one weatherstrip for all models. I have no first hand experience though as I'm a ford guy lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Goschke Posted August 16, 2014 Author Share Posted August 16, 2014 Really? Danchuck lists one windshield and one weatherstrip for all models. I have no first hand experience though as I'm a ford guy lolNo they don't. Same part for '57 ragtop, hardtops, and Nomad (and Pontiac ragtop, hardtops, and Safari.) Different part fits '57 Chevy and Pontiac sedans and non-Nomad/Safari wagons.Because of their higher cowl '55s and '56s Chevys and Pontiacs use different windshields than '57s. '55-'56 ragtops, hardtops, and Nomad/Safaris use the same windshield. '55-'56 Chevy/Pontiac sedans and non-Nomad/Safari wagons use the same windshield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brett Barrow Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Really? Danchuck lists one windshield and one weatherstrip for all models. I have no first hand experience though as I'm a ford guy lol 100% sure. Converts, hardtops, and Nomads = short windshield Sedans and regular wagons = tall windshield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts