Jump to content


Stacey David's Rat Roaster by : REVELL


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

#341 Draggon

Draggon

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,769 posts
  • Location:Home of the Fremont Drag Strip
  • Full Name:Glenn Asher

Posted 07 February 2013 - 10:14 AM

Mines got the same imprint, and the same flash. Just compared chassis, and the reveal just before the rear wheel wells is different on the two kits, as are the rear suspension mounts. The kick up at the front of the frame seems different too, the frame rails ahead of the grille shell are more curved on the original highboy version. But the real question is why would Revell tool up an all new kit? The differences are so subtle, no one would ever notice. Well, except for us!



#342 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:09 AM

 

 

......... 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:

 

 

 

 

Thanks for posting the pix. No way I'm springing for tires I'll have to custom-machine wheels to fit. No RR kits for me.

 

By the way, I know I'm kind of pedantic, but "spindle mount" wheels don't HAVE bolts. They mount to the...wait for it...spindle. All that retains them is the wheel bearing nut / washer.

 

spindle.jpg

 

And "Sprints" don't have the center rib between holes like the "Salt Flats" wheels do.

 

Halibrand_sprint.gif



#343 johnbuzzed

johnbuzzed

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Location:Indian Land, SC
  • Full Name:John "the Buzzard" Buzzerio

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:11 AM

I think the real question should be: "If Revell tooled up an all-new kit, why is the kit not more accurate?"  "Close enough" is not good enough, especially when the real deal is in all probability readily accessible for research and reference.  The guy's name and picture are right there on the box cover, as is the real car- would he have said "No" to a good, close-up looksee by the people from Revell?



#344 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:14 AM

I think the real question should be: "If Revell tooled up an all-new kit, why is the kit not more accurate?"  "Close enough" is not good enough, especially when the real deal is in all probability readily accessible for research and reference.  The guy's name and picture are right there on the box cover, as is the real car- would he have said "No" to a good, close-up looksee by the people from Revell?

Yeah, what he said !!!



#345 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,524 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:20 AM

I think the real question should be: "If Revell tooled up an all-new kit, why is the kit not more accurate?" 

 

See post 400-402.



#346 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:32 AM

Thing is, they HAD to cut all new steel to make this thing...they didn't just pull an old tool of the shelf and 'modify' it. It doesn't work that way. Sooooooo, a little more effort on the CAD work could have EASILY and CHEAPLY resulted in what everyone seems to want...no more cash outlay than what it cost to do what they did. Unless of course they pay their CAD guys salaries like Wall Street brokers.


Edited by Ace-Garageguy, 07 February 2013 - 11:54 AM.


#347 johnbuzzed

johnbuzzed

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts
  • Location:Indian Land, SC
  • Full Name:John "the Buzzard" Buzzerio

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:39 AM

And, did Revell actually send anyone to examine the real car up close or were pictures used as reference?  I understand the $$$ situation, but, sometimes, you gotta spend money to make money.  Really, how much more would it have cost Revell to get some more accuracy?  No master cylinder -was it forgotten, overlooked or determined to be un-necessary?  This kit will probably grab the general public's eye more than the '57 Ford or '50 Olds kits will, yet from what I read, those kits are more accurate than the Rat Roaster.


Edited by johnbuzzed, 07 February 2013 - 11:46 AM.


#348 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,900 posts
  • Location:Men. Falls, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:53 AM


By the way, I know I'm kind of pedantic, but "spindle mount" wheels don't HAVE bolts. They mount to the...wait for it...spindle. All that retains them is the wheel bearing nut / washer.

 

 

Yes, I am aware of what a spindle mount wheel is and how it's retained, which I tried to convey in my comment using "style" to indicate the RR's wheels were similar to, but not exactly like the spindle mount Sprint wheels.

 

I think these'll be quite popular.  :)



#349 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 11:58 AM

Or...maybe they figured most of the guys sittin' on the couch watchin' Mr. David sort-of-do-something wouldn't notice a little thing like a missing master cylinder, or even know the difference between a tube axle and a beam axle anyway. Probably a lot of truth to that, too. Know your market, grasshopper.



#350 Guest_G Holding_*

Guest_G Holding_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 February 2013 - 12:26 PM

And, did Revell actually send anyone to examine the real car up close or were pictures used as reference?  I understand the $$$ situation, but, sometimes, you gotta spend money to make money.  Really, how much more would it have cost Revell to get some more accuracy?  No master cylinder -was it forgotten, overlooked or determined to be un-necessary?  This kit will probably grab the general public's eye more than the '57 Ford or '50 Olds kits will, yet from what I read, those kits are more accurate than the Rat Roaster.

 

 

Yeah....just a couple of old guys....Sexton and Harney....(I think they know more than most here)

 

I have read this whole topic, I am not sure why Revell would even think of making this "junk"    BUT they MUST have a reason And I think they will do fine while making a lot of money

 

22 pages of whining and moans.....I like the kit and will get a couple....And I am sure revell will send all the purists a master cylinder

 

 

SHEESH !!



#351 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 01:22 PM

 

 

Yes, I am aware of what a spindle mount wheel is and how it's retained, which I tried to convey in my comment using "style" to indicate the RR's wheels were similar to, but not exactly like the spindle mount Sprint wheels.

 

I think these'll be quite popular.  :)

 

My apologies then. I do think the wheels look good and agree that, with the tires in the kit, they'll be popular. ;)



#352 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,524 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 07 February 2013 - 01:46 PM

I have read this whole topic, I am not sure why Revell would even think of making this "junk"    BUT they MUST have a reason And I think they will do fine while making a lot of money

 

22 pages of whining and moans.....I like the kit and will get a couple....And I am sure revell will send all the purists a master cylinder

 

 

SHEESH !!

 

But don't you question at all why a newly-tooled kit of a very specific car, not just a generic '32 Ford, has so many inaccuracies? I realize we're not talking about the fate of civilization here, but considering that this is a model car forum, you don't question that? At all?



#353 mrknowetall

mrknowetall

    MCM Avid Poster

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

Posted 07 February 2013 - 03:41 PM

Bingo! Lots of pissing and moaning about this, that and the other, as regards the Rat Roaster kit. The Rat Roaster isn't perfect. We know that. It could be better. We know that too. Will Revell sell a bunch of the kit? No doubt.

They (Revell) had to start somewhere, and I'll bet that the proceeds from the sale of the RR will bring us sometning "more better".

BTW, I know Ed Sexton on a professional (business) basis. Fairly well. He's paying attention to the various model forums, as is Roger Harney. They do what they can do, given the amount of money they have to invest in new tooling. More often than not, they do an excellent job, as witnessed by their recent '57 Ford, '50 Olds, and '62 Corvette kits. All released in the past four months.

No plastic kit is EVER perfect, and they know that.


Edited by mrknowetall, 07 February 2013 - 03:48 PM.


#354 Longbox55

Longbox55

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,567 posts
  • Location:Danville Il
  • Full Name:Bill Burmeister

Posted 07 February 2013 - 03:51 PM

I'm amused by the whining about the "missing" master cylinder! :lol:  :lol:  It's not even visable from underneath on the actual car, as it's hidden inside a frame cross member.

Check at 0:14, you'll see where it is.


Edited by Longbox55, 07 February 2013 - 03:52 PM.


#355 mrknowetall

mrknowetall

    MCM Avid Poster

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

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:11 PM

Not entirely true, but close. The '32 five window body has a completely different firewall that matches the curvature of the five window body, but not the roadster or three window bodies. Go figure. The nineties '32 three window and roadster kits share the same firewall. You'll find that the mid-nineties '32 roadster body, in terms of cowl proportion and dimension(s), is very close to the Rat Roaster body, and the RR firewall is a fairly decent fit on the older '32 roadster body.

Does all that make sense?

Edited by mrknowetall, 07 February 2013 - 04:11 PM.


#356 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

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

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:25 PM

Well first, the master cylinder seems as if wouldn't be invisible, but second - check out the 1:1 frame crossmember and the rear suspension arms, for example, and the master cylinder kinda recedes into the least of the problems with the undercarriage.

 

We're rather far from even the zipcode to pretend anybody's asking for a perfect kit here.  Pointing out deviations Stevie Wonder would notice doesn't exactly a "whiner" make.  Let the record show who's turning it personal.  Again.



#357 Guest_G Holding_*

Guest_G Holding_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:36 PM

Bingo! Lots of pissing and moaning about this, that and the other, as regards the Rat Roaster kit. The Rat Roaster isn't perfect. We know that. It could be better. We know that too. Will Revell sell a bunch of the kit? No doubt.

They (Revell) had to start somewhere, and I'll bet that the proceeds from the sale of the RR will bring us sometning "more better".

BTW, I know Ed Sexton on a professional (business) basis. Fairly well. He's paying attention to the various model forums, as is Roger Harney. They do what they can do, given the amount of money they have to invest in new tooling. More often than not, they do an excellent job, as witnessed by their recent '57 Ford, '50 Olds, and '62 Corvette kits. All released in the past four months.

No plastic kit is EVER perfect, and they know that.
 

 

I would say THANKS to both !



#358 Ace-Garageguy

Ace-Garageguy

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,524 posts
  • Location:Down two, then left.
  • Full Name:Bill Engwer

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:36 PM

Man !!! I just got a GREAT idea !!! Revell should make a reality TV show with all of us shouting at each other about the RR kit, it's shortcomings and why some insist they don't matter. Betcha THAT would rack up some sales, eh? Models getting thrown against the wall, stepped on, all KINDS of good stuff. Am I a genius, or what ??? :lol: :P



#359 Harry P.

Harry P.

    MCM Ohana

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,524 posts
  • Location:NW suburban Chicago
  • Full Name:A mere layman...

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:44 PM

But then is MCM's  cover date accurate ? Does Either matter     NOPE    ;)

 

If I had control over it, the cover date would be accurate. Every time.

 

And by your own admission, you never build any model stock or straight out of the box, so obviously accuracy or fidelity to the subject matter doesn't mean much to you!  But not everyone approaches the hobby the same way that you do. To a lot of people, accuracy does matter, and they do expect a kit to have the details done right.



#360 Longbox55

Longbox55

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,567 posts
  • Location:Danville Il
  • Full Name:Bill Burmeister

Posted 07 February 2013 - 04:45 PM

Man !!! I just got a GREAT idea !!! Revell should make a reality TV show with all of us shouting at each other about the RR kit, it's shortcomings and why some insist they don't matter. Betcha THAT would rack up some sales, eh? Models getting thrown against the wall, stepped on, all KINDS of good stuff. Am I a genius, or what ??? :lol: :P

Can't be any worse than the bulk of the "reality" shows that are already on the the tube! :lol:  :lol:  ;)