New revell snaps

[blubaja]

It's not an misprinted box art! Ed Sexton said that it is the car on the flyer. No maybes. No possiblies. IT IS WHAT IS SAID. What are you not understanding????

[niteowl7710]

Assumed to be a 95-97.

I agree a snap '95-97 makes no sense, as there really isn't anything wrong with the Lindberg kit.

We had incorrect box art showing a 53-56 Ford C (actual kit is the long lived C-600 kit) a while back from Round 2, so I would get too crazy over the year of the Crown Vic just yet. It would be easy for someone to grab the wrong year to post on FB

Not assumed, heard directly from the source.

Why are people insisting about arguing about this? It is what is is, a Christmas time stocking stuffer for the little kiddies, just like the NEW Jeep kit.

[Chuck Most]

The Wrangler doesn't look like the Tomb Raider diecast/ "Trucks" series plastic release.

It's tough to make out in the small pic, but the snap kit to be released appears to have stock wheels and tires, fender flares,front bumper, and a hard top- while the current Wrangler Rubicon kit has Mickey Thompson tires, custom wheels and fender flares, a front bumper with brush guard and winch, and no top. Assuming the photo shown is representative of what the kit will feature it might be worth looking into if the Tomb Raider version doesn't "do it" for you. The fact that the current plastic kit requires glue for several parts would lead me to believe it's a mostly new kit.

The decision to do an all-new kit of the six-window Crown Vic when one already exists does baffle me a bit, but I'd like to get at least one of them, just to see how it stacks up against the Lindberg kit.

[Aaronw]

Read the thread, there is no "proof" given until the last couple of posts AFTER my post.

Quite a lot of this guy said, and I know but I can't tell anyone but...

Some serious attitude issues in here, thanks for reminding me why I spend less and less time here.

[Brett Barrow]

Asked Revell about the Crown Vic, they explained they chose it because they needed something that could be on the shelves in time for Christmas. The 15 Mustang was such a hit, they decided to create a new line of similar kit of that (lack of) complexity. In order to get these out in time for Christmas they needed to pick subjects that they had design work already completed (why the rest are snap versions of kits already in the lineup). I'm taking them at their word that it's not the Lindberg kit, but we'll see. It wouldn't shock me if it is, or at least based on the basic design (maybe that designer now works for Revell and brought it with him. Or maybe Revell started development of this years ago and shelved it when the Lindberg came out) So whatever, buy them, don't buy them, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the target market for these kits aren't MCM readers...

[blubaja]

They are new tools. There were not ever kits in these forms from Revell. Revell said they are new tools. It's very public info. Sorry you missed it.

4th post in. Again. Sorry you missed it. I don't know why you think I would make something up.

Edited September 1, 2014 by blubaja

[martinfan5]

Read the thread, there is no "proof" given until the last couple of posts AFTER my post.

Proof is on the flyer Revell put out. Edited September 1, 2014 by martinfan5

[MyBradKeselowski]

I don't mind if Revell chose the 97 Crown Vic, I will probably buy 1 or 2 just to have alongside of my Revell 92-93 Caprice's.

I personally would have liked Revell to come out with the 99-13 Crown Vic but they did not do that, so us modelers must go with what

they give us.

If you don't want it then it's purely simple "DON'T BUY IT". If you don't like it because the body proportions are not right or something else

is wrong with it then there is another simple solution "DEMO DERBY CROWN VIC".

Let's not make this another why I don't like this Revell kit subject, c'mon guys let's be adult modelers about this situation I myself are getting

frankly tired of all of the Revell topic's. If I don't like what they are producing then I won't be buying it, very "SIMPLE".

I myself have bought the new Revell Mustang LX drag version, 70 Sox/Martin Hemi Cuda and will buy the 67 Camaro as I'm very happy with the

kit's themselves and plan on building them. You take them as you get them or don't buy them and quit making long topics about what's wrong them.

" P U R E L Y S I M P L E "

[martinfan5]

I think this sums things up rather nicely

"Adult modelers want accurate kits. Kid modelers & those who only see rainbows and ponies want easy to assemble and possibly accurate toys."

Credit The Wheelman

[J Morrison]

I don't understand why people who want a kit to be more accurate from the factory are always demonized. What gives people the right to say (paraphrased) "Take it or leave it, stop complaining." Taking companies to task & pushing them to be better is what makes companies improve and advance. Revell has shown they have the capacity to produce accurate kits. It's their consistency of accurate products that is the real issue. A question to everyone who says leave Revell alone....Do you settle for mediocrity in every aspect of your life or other hobbies? If not why settle for it in the model car hobby?

[jefropas]

If the CV is as nice as the 15' Mustang is, I'll buy a couple. As a police officer, the 95-97 CV's were a helluva lot funner to drive than the piggish 98-11's anyway....

Jeff

[Harry P.]

The target is probably not kids, but police car bulders.

The kit is clearly part of the "Build and Play" series, emphasis on play. These are obviously aimed at children, they are basically unassembled toys, not accurate scale replicas meant for adult modelers. How many adult modelers build a kit and then play with it? How many adult builders would prefer a model they can play with over a well-detailed kit?

[disabled modeler]

The Starsky and Hutch Torino will make me happy...

[Rob Hall]

If the CV is as nice as the 15' Mustang is, I'll buy a couple. As a police officer, the 95-97 CV's were a helluva lot funner to drive than the piggish 98-11's anyway....

Jeff

Weren't they essentially the same car other than the roofline and other sheetmetal and trim differences? The dirty bits didn't change much from '92-11...there were some suspension and chassis changes around '03 iIRC.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Rob Hall

[Danno]

Read the thread, there is no "proof" given until the last couple of posts AFTER my post.

Quite a lot of this guy said, and I know but I can't tell anyone but...

Some serious attitude issues in here, thanks for reminding me why I spend less and less time here.

Amen, 10-4.

[Danno]

Lindberg already did the '95-97 in snap kit form. What is the point in duplicating what's already been done? I could see if it was a snap '98-11, that would make a lot of sense.

Exactly. It would cost no more to new-tool a '98-'11 CVPI than it cost to new-tool something that's already been done to death. That's the part I don't get.

It's not that I don't get the point that it is what Revell is doing*; the part I don't get is why they are doing it.

(Although at first I didn't think Revell would do it, apparently they are doing it, as the experts say.)

*Assuming all these 'best friends of Ed' have it right and that's really the gospel he whispered in their ears.

It's really ironic that a couple of guys who have so incessantly, thoroughly, and viciously beat up on Revell for so long are now suddenly the inside-sources and scoop-buddies of their prey. And, now defending Revell for copying Lindberg's worn out CV, when they were so apoplectic over the Mustang 5.0 roof.

I sure hope for the sake of all this newfound Revell-love that this 'new' old CV's roof isn't "chopped," too.

[Rob Hall]

Exactly. It would cost no more to new-tool a '98-'11 CVPI than it cost to new-tool something that's already been done to death. That's the part I don't get.

It's not that I don't get the point that it is what Revell is doing*; the part I don't get is why they are doing it.

I sure hope for the sake of all this newfound Revell-love that this 'new' old CV's roof isn't "chopped," too.

The 'why' is unknowable, Revell has their reasons..it may look like incompetence to us, but to them,, they have business reasons for their choices. As far as the accuracy, if the same people make the same poor decisions that resulted in recent poor efforts, then who knows.

[blubaja]

Not at all defending Revell lol. I thinks it's very moronic to produce this body style Crown Vic when Lindberg's is still readily available. And yes, would be all over the kit if it was the newer body style.

This kit is not meant for model builders. It is for children to play with. If any kids actually buy them, is another story. If these are only being sold in hobby stores, chances are, kids aren't going to be any wiser. I did see the mustang snapper in a few walmarts this weekend.

[blubaja]

I really see zero logic in releasing this CV. Whoever is currently managing Revell is turning it from a previously reputable hobby company, into a half witted toy company.

[keyser]

I'm just baffled by the new snap kits of old cars. Kids aren't THAT stupid. '07-'14 Audi R8, unreleased '11 Raptor, ancient CV (When most PD's using Explorers, actually).

Jeep apears to be current version, 4 door would be wiser choice as more popular it seems, but it looks different than the older Tomb Raider DC/glue kit.

New R8 due any minute, sister car Huracan is out, spy photos out. New all aluminum Raptor spy pics out, due shortly after regular new F150.

I get annoyed about screwups that are avoidable, e.g. Fox top, 57 sills, and the "it's good enough" philosophy. Not personal for me, but I agree that outta hand and ironic. Tim Boyd got pounded yesterday inappropriately by Frank, and that's rude. Tim contributes more than most, and is pretty unbiased. He can stand up for himself, but no mod knocked off the drama. Someone needs to do so.

[Rob Hall]

I'm just baffled by the new snap kits of old cars. Kids aren't THAT stupid. '07-'14 Audi R8, unreleased '11 Raptor, ancient CV (When most PD's using Explorers, actually).

Jeep apears to be current version, 4 door would be wiser choice as more popular it seems, but it looks different than the older Tomb Raider DC/glue kit.

New R8 due any minute, sister car Huracan is out, spy photos out. New all aluminum Raptor spy pics out, due shortly after regular new F150.

looking at the pic, the Jeep looks like an old TJ like the Tomb Raider version, not the current model.

[keyser]

looking at the pic, the Jeep looks like an old TJ like the Tomb Raider version, not the current model.

Great, so '15 Mustang and '14 Vette current, that's it. Ask Mattel what it's like serving outdated toys or movie flops up to kids, whether they buy it anyway. NOT.

Link, newer one than first I posted.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/07/17/why-you-shouldnt-panic-over-mattels-earnings.aspx

Edited September 1, 2014 by keyser

[blubaja]

New or old raptor kit is welcome:) The tires alone are really decent looking! Yes, I have seen and fondled this kit in person.

Not personal for me, but I agree that outta hand and ironic. Tim Boyd got pounded yesterday inappropriately by Frank, and that's rude. Tim contributes more than most, and is pretty unbiased. He can stand up for himself, but no mod knocked off the drama. Someone needs to do so.

No mods locked the thread, but the OP. I know his reputation, I know he's been around for a long time. That doesn't make his opinion less disagreeable by someone as outspoken as myself. But there were no unbiased words in his post. His defending of revell seemed entirely bought and paid for.

[niteowl7710]

I certainly NEVER defended Revell's decision to release a new kit of an old car. Go back to when it was announced and you'll see I said it was a stupid idea along. All I've said here is that the kit isn't some top secret surprise, it's also not the old Lindberg tool. But is IS THAT old Crown Vic no matter how hard people speculate that it's not. Ed DOES attend model shows, like the NNL East, NNL in Toledo, and the like. He's not holed up in some bunker some place, although I bet he needs a couple of showers after meeting with the adoring public. He's not Revell, Revell is not Ed, he's just the messenger who sits in the grassy meadow between the customer mountain and management mountain, and sufferers the run off from both camps.

Edited September 1, 2014 by niteowl7710

[Harry P.]

Whoever is currently managing Revell is turning it from a previously reputable hobby company, into a half witted toy company.

I think maybe you're missing the point. These kits are intended as toys, not "serious" models, and they are certainly not aimed at serious adult modelers. The "Build and Play" series is obviously an attempt by Revell to entice kids into taking up the hobby. As so many of you guys are always saying, the future health and viability of the hobby rests on the next generation taking it up... so why then carp when Revell is trying to do exactly that?

Take these kits as "serious" models, and yes, there would be plenty to complain about. But you have to take them for what they are and remember who they are aimed at. If you do that, they make perfect sense.