Jump to content


Stacey David's Rat Roaster by : REVELL


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

#321 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

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

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:03 PM

It's funny you bring up the DOH example, Casey, 'cause it occurred to me too.

 

And while it's absolutely correct that the General Lee wasn't a single specific car, it's just as true that there probably wasn't one, among all the '69 Chargers sacrificed for that show, had a flush-mounted 500-style backlight instead of the standard flying buttress C-pillars.  That was a detail about the kit that had me going "wtf??" as an 11-year-old consumer, and it's the chief reason I think your basic point stands.

 

Like many of you, I think Revell kinda blew it by not taking advantage of all the Roaster's features to generate some bones to toss the trad crowd and herald another, even more traditional version down the line.  But I say this having to acknowledge some pretty strong work in their other new 2012 kits, and I think the good news here is that Revell has a way of coming around - which is why I would encourage the trad crowd to grouse loudly and repeatedly about the omissions here.  

 

I mean, I know the AMBR judges don't know squat ( :rolleyes: ), but even outside of that, traditional movements are building steam, and if you guys are loud enough, Revell might just catch the wave before it washes away.  And if there's another Revell Deuce permutation ahead to play the COPO Nova to the Roaster's Yenko, that would probably be a very good thing.



#322 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,774 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:18 PM

 

OUCH.

 

True, though.

 

At least Revell was clearly more serious about the Olds, 'Vette, and '57 Ford.

 

We should be glad that Revell wasn't in charge of the space shuttle program...



#323 Draggon

Draggon

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,886 posts
  • Location:Home of the Fremont Drag Strip
  • Full Name:Glenn Asher

Posted 06 February 2013 - 01:52 PM

 

Like many of you, I think Revell kinda blew it by not taking advantage of all the Roaster's features to generate some bones to toss the trad crowd and herald another, even more traditional version down the line.  But I say this having to acknowledge some pretty strong work in their other new 2012 kits, and I think the good news here is that Revell has a way of coming around - which is why I would encourage the trad crowd to grouse loudly and repeatedly about the omissions here.  

 

 

I'm hoping that this kit morphs into the McMullen roadster.

 

McMullenroadster_max+ful.jpg



#324 mrknowetall

mrknowetall

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 451 posts
  • Location:Wilmington DE
  • Full Name:Don Banes

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:25 PM

I wouldn't hold my breath, but you never know. I can see Revell doing a full fendered '32 roadster at some point, along with a '32 pickup. I'm sure they have other subjects in mind away from the 1932 genre. Just my guess. I'd rather see them do a line of Model A street rod kits, which has been a hot topic in the 1:1 street rod world for more than a few years. Again, I'm not holding MY breath on that wish either.

#325 samdiego

samdiego

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Location:Hi, Desert . . .AZ
  • Full Name:Sam Tate

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:54 PM

Overall, I'm still pretty stoked just that Revell took the time to do a rare single car subject that doesn't have numbers on the side. I'm not in love with this particular rod, but I like it enough to have picked one up. My issues are more with the tooling quality. Twenty years ago it would have been great but it pales slightly compared to the recent Revell stuff. The bigger problem was that my chrome was awful. Warped trees, white shadows and a blotchy topcoat. Replacements are still a few weeks away, so plan B turned out to be this, a car with numbers on the side.

This is a WIP shot of Sgt. Rat, box stock except for the decals and the shifter. I had clearance trouble with the fan motor also

RR022.jpg


Edited by samdiego, 06 February 2013 - 03:57 PM.


#326 southpier

southpier

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,926 posts
  • Location:northeast coast
  • Full Name:joe smythe

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:57 PM

speaking of '32 firewalls ........... why do they all have an open slot on each side so that light shows between it and the body?



#327 johnbuzzed

johnbuzzed

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,264 posts
  • Location:Indian Land, SC
  • Full Name:John "the Buzzard" Buzzerio

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:05 AM

Overall, I'm still pretty stoked just that Revell took the time to do a rare single car subject that doesn't have numbers on the side. I'm not in love with this particular rod, but I like it enough to have picked one up. My issues are more with the tooling quality. Twenty years ago it would have been great but it pales slightly compared to the recent Revell stuff. The bigger problem was that my chrome was awful. Warped trees, white shadows and a blotchy topcoat. Replacements are still a few weeks away, so plan B turned out to be this, a car with numbers on the side.

This is a WIP shot of Sgt. Rat, box stock except for the decals and the shifter. I had clearance trouble with the fan motor also

RR022.jpg

I really like this one, Sam.  I think it's more... appropriate than the original car.  Along the "Sgt." lines, I would like to see Revell invest some $$$ and do a GOOD replica of Sgt. Rock; maybe a 2-in-1 kit. 



#328 mrknowetall

mrknowetall

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 451 posts
  • Location:Wilmington DE
  • Full Name:Don Banes

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:12 AM

Nice build! 



#329 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,598 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 05:35 AM

I wouldn't hold my breath, but you never know. I can see Revell doing a full fendered '32 roadster at some point, along with a '32 pickup. I'm sure they have other subjects in mind away from the 1932 genre. Just my guess. I'd rather see them do a line of Model A street rod kits, which has been a hot topic in the 1:1 street rod world for more than a few years. Again, I'm not holding MY breath on that wish either.

You can already build a full-fendered '32 roadster using all Revell parts. The roadster body fits the fenders in the 3 and 5 window kits with a little work.

 

What they NEED to do is a generic traditional chassis with front and rear suspension and axle options. I've offered to design it for production to fit their existing bodies, but no one seemed to notice. Many MANY rods are built on '32 rails, and having an injection molded-alternative to the expensive resin that's available currently could up the demand for the existing-tool kits as well.

 

As for model A streetrods, Revell produced a '30/'31 sedan delivery, a '30/'31 woody, and a '28/'29 roadster / closed-cab pickup, (ALL of these have been released multiple times, in multiple versions and lotsa different box-art) and are readily available. ALL of them on a GREAT A-model chassis with nice stock and dropped I-beam front ends. Any of the OTHER 1/25 Model A (like the AMT '29 roadster) kits will fit the excellent Revell chassis.

 

As far as what-fits-what-perfectly-out-of-the-box...come on man, hot-rodding, whether in 1:1 or in 1/25 scale is about MAKING STUFF FIT that's not designed to work together.


Edited by Ace-Garageguy, 07 February 2013 - 05:41 AM.


#330 Brett Barrow

Brett Barrow

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,267 posts
  • Location:Deep in the swamps of Jersey
  • Full Name:Genius billionaire playboy philanthropist Brett M. Barrow, Esq.

Posted 07 February 2013 - 05:52 AM

Overall, I'm still pretty stoked just that Revell took the time to do a rare single car subject that doesn't have numbers on the side. I'm not in love with this particular rod, but I like it enough to have picked one up. My issues are more with the tooling quality. Twenty years ago it would have been great but it pales slightly compared to the recent Revell stuff. The bigger problem was that my chrome was awful. Warped trees, white shadows and a blotchy topcoat. Replacements are still a few weeks away, so plan B turned out to be this, a car with numbers on the side.

This is a WIP shot of Sgt. Rat, box stock except for the decals and the shifter. I had clearance trouble with the fan motor also

 

That car works so much better with that paint job and the dulled-down engine parts.  I like it! Got me thinkin'...  Thinkin', thinkin', thinkin'...

MachoManRandySavage.jpg


Edited by Brett Barrow, 07 February 2013 - 05:59 AM.


#331 Brett Barrow

Brett Barrow

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,267 posts
  • Location:Deep in the swamps of Jersey
  • Full Name:Genius billionaire playboy philanthropist Brett M. Barrow, Esq.

Posted 07 February 2013 - 06:24 AM

You can already build a full-fendered '32 roadster using all Revell parts. The roadster body fits the fenders in the 3 and 5 window kits with a little work.

 

What they NEED to do is a generic traditional chassis with front and rear suspension and axle options. I've offered to design it for production to fit their existing bodies, but no one seemed to notice. Many MANY rods are built on '32 rails, and having an injection molded-alternative to the expensive resin that's available currently could up the demand for the existing-tool kits as well.

 

As for model A streetrods, Revell produced a '30/'31 sedan delivery, a '30/'31 woody, and a '28/'29 roadster / closed-cab pickup, (ALL of these have been released multiple times, in multiple versions and lotsa different box-art) and are readily available. ALL of them on a GREAT A-model chassis with nice stock and dropped I-beam front ends. Any of the OTHER 1/25 Model A (like the AMT '29 roadster) kits will fit the excellent Revell chassis.

 

As far as what-fits-what-perfectly-out-of-the-box...come on man, hot-rodding, whether in 1:1 or in 1/25 scale is about MAKING STUFF FIT that's not designed to work together.

Yeah, but Revell's A's are 50+ years old, fiddly, and pretty much slap worn-out.  It's high time for a modern A...   



#332 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,598 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:04 AM

Yeah, but Revell's A's are 50+ years old, fiddly, and pretty much slap worn-out.  It's high time for a modern A...   

Interesting perspective. I've never found any of them to be particularly fiddly or worn out. They DO take some skill and patience to assemble...well. What am I missing? I thought skill and patience were parts of what we do. The AMT 'A' kits are easier to build, but with less accurate results.


Edited by Ace-Garageguy, 07 February 2013 - 07:06 AM.


#333 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,302 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:10 AM

speaking of '32 firewalls ........... why do they all have an open slot on each side so that light shows between it and the body?

 

This gap, where to locating pin on the backside of the firewall meets the inside corner on the body's cutout?:

 

deucegap.jpg



#334 mrknowetall

mrknowetall

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 451 posts
  • Location:Wilmington DE
  • Full Name:Don Banes

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:18 AM

That's always been somewhat of an issue, but an easy fix.  I added some material to the lower body side in this so-so pic...

 

DSC00016-vi.jpg



#335 Brett Barrow

Brett Barrow

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,267 posts
  • Location:Deep in the swamps of Jersey
  • Full Name:Genius billionaire playboy philanthropist Brett M. Barrow, Esq.

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:19 AM

Interesting perspective. I've never found any of them to be particularly fiddly or worn out. They DO take some skill and patience to assemble...well. What am I missing? I thought skill and patience were parts of what we do. The AMT 'A' kits are easier to build, but with less accurate results.

Sorry, I've got my businessman's hat on right now and not my modeler's hat...

 

Revell's A's remain good sellers despite their age, especially when they threw in the new-tool "rat rod" wheels and tires. And they're certainly not a kit I would recommend to a beginner. Plus there's nowhere to go with them regarding future variations.  None of AMT A's are in current production.  Revell and AMT aren't making any money off eBay or swap meet sales.  So, from a purely business perspective, a new-tool Model A series would be a wise choice.    



#336 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,302 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 07:35 AM

I'm focused on anoth project I'm trying to get done by next week so I haven't moved on to the chassis as yet, but an initial examination indicates that the RR frame is very close to, if not identical to, the older issue chassis.

 

The RR chassis/frame/floorboard piece appears to be a copy of the same part in the '32 Ford 5-window Deuce kit (which is what I have have on hand for comparison), but the mold half joints are slightly different, as are the ejector pin locations. The sides of the engine mounts on the Rat Roaster are slightly beefier and run the full width of the mount, but for all intents and purposes, the two chassis should interchange with little or no modification necessary.

 

aa5b0eca-393d-4a6c-8b7f-7eeda1ef8254.jpg



#337 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,302 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:25 AM

If you want to use the inset firewall front the other kist there's a gap you'll have to fill because the edge in the bodywork for the firewall is much slimmer on the Rat Roaster.

 

 

 

Tried it (the RR firewall) on the 5-window.  Needs the side locators trimmed off, but the top locator lines it up right.  The other hoods will need some trimming to work with the firewall, as the RR hood is very thin on the back edge.  

 

It looks to me like using the RR firewall on the Revell Dueces (at least my test subject 5W) isn't going to be as straightforward as I thought it might be. I don't know how close to stock or correct(?) any of these firewalls are, so with that said, here are some more comparison shots of the RR and 5W firewalls and hoods:

 

Here's a face-to-face firewall comparison, but the general difference is the RR's firewall is more squared off, while the 5W's is more rounded, especially at the top corners. The 5W's firewall is also more tapered toward the bottom:

 

4ccbf4b5-bf37-4435-9186-e6bbd26e9163.jpg

 

 

Looking at the hoods next, we can see the rabbeted rear edge on the RR's hood Brett mentioned, while the 5W's hood remains a consistent thickness:

 

9d9a8569-31b2-43a9-9091-924335e5547d.jpg

 

 

The below image shows the slight width difference between the two hoods, a difference which is confirmed when comparing the cowl area of both bodies:

 

decddaa9-000f-4fec-84c6-5e4fd7e52b48.jpg

 

8425b623-6c4e-42e1-a07b-2c7afcb69a10.jpg

 

 

What this all means is the RR's firewall will not simply swap over to the existing Deuce body shells without any other modifications. That was probably expected by most, but in order to use the existing Deuce hoods and hood sides (the RR sneakily avoids the hood side fit issues, as it include no hood sides) you'll need to either re-contour the perimeter of the RR firewall or modify the hood and hood sides you plan to use with the RR firewall. I don't think adding a small, thin, consistent rabbet to both the Duece hood and side panels will be an easy task, and my fear with modifying the RR firewall is that the perimeter bead will be lost at the upper corners, leaving the firewall looking, well, hacked up looking for lack of a better term.

 

Hopefully you can make out the perimeter bead in this comparison shot:

 

47d85d81-8104-4b11-93fc-febcd62ab582.jpg

 

 

 

This (poor quality, low contrast) pic shows the how the RR firewall look on the 5W body, with emphasis on the top edge:

 

5216241c-4788-4524-b4e1-366db40415b5.jpg

 

 

Here's a pic taken a bot lower, in which you can see the difference between the RR's firewall sides (much straighter) and the 5W's cowl (more curved, with a more "bulge"):

 

4b3b6598-fa96-4b28-b507-48f032d3d773.jpg

 

 

There is good news, though. The grille shells should interchange without any modification:

 

1aa43d23-413a-41a7-b149-426ed99ada30.jpg



#338 Bernard Kron

Bernard Kron

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,717 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Full Name:Bernard Kron

Posted 07 February 2013 - 08:49 AM

Thanx for the updates Brett. I hadn't gotten that far in my comparisons but this is pretty bad news since the hood in the RR is so specialized. It implies that there is no stock hood available from another kit for the RR since the cowl is significantly wider on the RR. Slimming down a stock hood is not a job I would look forwad to. As I said earlier, the more I look the less I like...



#339 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,302 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:09 AM

those dang tires are so nice! And they fit the AMT 40 ford steelies!

 

 

The tires may be the best part of the kit and are probably the best tires Revell has produced in a long, long time. $20 is a fair chunk o' change to drop on only a set of tires, but these might be worth it to some. That said, I wonder if this new style of one-piece wheels and matching tires is going to turn a lot of people off, as once they get the kit home, the tires out, and dry fit the wheels they planned to use with the tires, the incompatibility with traditional kit wheels becomes painfully obvious. No matter how thin the wheel's lip/rim, they aren't going to look right when used with these tires. Some people won't notice and others might not care, but to me, it sticks out like a sore thumb.  :(

 

I have no idea if the tires are true to the 1:1 tires Mr. David used on the Rat Roaster, but they are nicely molded, crisp, a are totally lacking the "re-blended" mix of not-quite-fully-mixed vinyl I've noticed with some of AMT's slicks ('76 Gremlin M&H's for one):

 

a12c7a8a-f798-41f7-8b9f-32f430cec714.jpg

 

 

Front tires:

 

96698b40-a785-426d-ab64-5f60f2459d30.jpg

 

 

All together now:

 

2b099d64-f1e5-4a5a-9590-2d777f08ac6f.jpg

 

 

I placed some 1/25 scale wheels in the tires, so you can see how the wheel lips are still very prominent and noticeable, even when fully seated:

 

8d721e98-f668-41af-8996-0cd621b6a09d.jpg

 

 

The below AMT Minilite 8-spoke wheel had he thinnest lip I could find, and still, not good:

 

081fa956-1ebb-4bfb-b78e-31e49a1180f2.jpg

 

6ed13645-13d2-406c-b0db-fbce1168400c.jpg

 

 

And a wheel test fit inside the rear slicks:

 

71688c59-1f4c-49fd-b856-4bd122bed7a1.jpg

 

f622cb92-4285-43a7-b936-2ae2e8ee1a31.jpg

 

 

I'm sure with a lathe or with lots of careful, consistent sanding your wheel of choice could be snugged down a little closer to the tire's sidewall, but this is a bit of a buzzkill for me. I realize these new style tires and wheels are here to stay, but it's gonna take time to get used to them.  -_-

 

 

As with the tires, the wheels are gorgeous, too. I don't think there have ever been a set of 5-slug (or any lug-mount style for that matter) Halibrand spindle mount Sprint style street wheels, but there are now:

 

09796235-d263-4a53-9897-94804534efff.jpg

 

18c9ba7f-df14-4d78-b716-fa44558f2d77.jpg



#340 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,302 posts
  • Location:Milwaukee, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 09:17 AM

I just picked up a Rat Roaster a few hours ago. As indicated in Dr. Cranky's unboxing, some of the parts are surprisingly flashy for a new tool kit.

 

Danny, what's the date code on the topside of the floorpan on your kit?

 

Mine, and the only flash on the entire kit, around the transmission case:

 

b2a4fae0-d1fc-436f-96e7-defbaaf78d4e.jpg

 

09957365-3297-418e-8d2b-4e40b1cf3d22.jpg