56 replies to this topic

[Edsel-Dan]

Maybe as long as the put the Stock parts back in them.

Most of those Old Full functioning kits have been altered to Hot-Rod status and 

can not be built stock anymore.

 

I would not mind having a few of those again.

[charlie8575]

If they do it, this is what I'd like to see and I think would sell well.

 

1. 1955-57 Olds 88 2-door sedan (stock and NASCAR) and convertibles for the obvious reasons- it's a convertible.

 

2. 1957 Pontiac Bonneville. Do I need to say more?

 

3. 1957 Olds Fiesta or Buick Cabellero

 

4. 1955-57 Pontiac Safari

 

5. 1955-57 Pontiac Chieftian 2-door sedans (again, NASCAR).

 

6. 1955-57 Buick Century. A '55 2-door sedan could be used for a police car or for some type of racing. Rivieras and convertibles would simply be a nice addition to any shelf. A Roadmaster would also be welcomed.

 

If they pick the subjects right, they'll probably sell reasonably well.

 

I'd really like to see a real gamble taken and offer something like a Roadmaster or Olds 98 four-door.

 

Charlie Larkin

[2002p51]

Earlier in this thread we were talking about the interchangeability of '55 - '57 Chevy parts. Here's a perfect example! 

 

[Art Anderson]

One of the characteristics that gets looked at anymore when considering a new kit of any model car is what I would term "versatility".  That is, does the subject have some "legs" to it, or can it stand alone, as a "one hit wonder".    By "legs", I mean can the subject be presented in different "roles" from say "factory stock" to drag racing, to Nascar, perhaps even a street rod, or does it have enough popularity to make it sell successfully just showroom stock.  

 

Just the sheer number of kits that must be sold in a reasonably quick time from introduction practically dictates the type(s) or make and model of cars that make good subject matter.  How many?  Well of course, model kit manufacturers are loathe to reveal numbers of that sort, but rest assured, it's many 10's of thousands of any one model car subject.  It takes sales of such a magnitude to replenish the bank account after paying for all the development and tooling that goes into any new model car kit--and that kind of money will still buy a very nice house, or a VERY serious exotic sports car!   Now, 50-some years ago, model companies almost could not miss--the market for model car kits was made up largely of kids, mostly in the age range of say, 10 to perhaps 16 or so (you know,that age when guys discover real cars and girls), who gladly scraped together allowances, paper-route and lawn mowing money to fund trip after trip to the hobby shop, variety store or wherever they spotted model car kits.  Considering that in those years, several 10's of millions of potential model car customers having very little in the way of "competing" activities (cable TV had yet to be invented, computers were massive consoles with flashing lights and bearded scientists in white lab coats, electronic and digital games had yet to be dreamed of--all of that).  Model companies were not that far out of their infancy, so the choices of kits was a lot smaller than it is today and model kit manufacturers were virtually guarranteed that whatever they tooled up to squeeze molten styrene plastic in would sell, and often in HUGE numbers.

 

Contrast all of that today:  While kids certainly do build model cars nowadays, their segment of the market is much, much smaller than it was in say, 1963; the bulk of the model car kit market being adults--the oldest of whom still remember being teenagers in the 1960's and 70's.  In addition, where a half-century ago, in any given month of the year, there might have been 50-60 model car kit subjects available, today there are several hundred, if one takes into consideration not only the American brands, but also model car kits from Europe, Japan and of course Korea and China (hey, there are even model car and truck kits being made in Russia!).  All this means that any new model car kit subject that reaches store shelves has to be able to make an impact sufficient to pull sales from all those other competing products.  Any time that a new model car kit can be laid out so as to be able to produce several versions of the actual car, that's a huge plus--often that alone is the "make or break" or "go-no go" decision point.  A 1956 Thunderbird is a 1956 Thunderbird, about the only option being to include the lift off hardtop or not, while a '55 Chevy came in several different body styles, and I've not even mentioned the concept of a racing version.  In the latter case, provision must be made, going in, to make possible future variants--once that steel has been cut, it is both expensive, and rather "iffy" as to the idea of doing even a second version "after the fact" can mean very expensive tooling alterations which may or may not be possible to undo later on (Revell's '57 Country Squire of 55 years ago comes to mind--the tooling was irrevocably changed to produce a Ranchero a year or so after the Squire was put on the market.  So such planning almost has to be done from the get-go. And these are but a few of the decisions that must be made, and of course, the subject matter being considered, and how that might be produced weigh in very heavily indeed.  Too many kits generating mediocre sales and the company may well not survive.

 

So, today much more than in the distant past, careful subject selection is key to the success of any model kit manufacturer.

 

Art

[Dan Helferich]

I'd love to see any '50's BOP or even an early to mid '50's Caddy. Having said that I still would rather have a nice new tool '53 or '54 Chevy. This kit is long overdue. The Monogram kit is caricature like and the Revell kits are not quite stock either. A nice current standard new tool would be a big hit as these cars are very popular in the full size world. Drew, you're one of my favorite modelers but we disagree on '58. To me it was '59 that left me wondering what the heck happened. '59 Fords still leave me cold.

[2002p51]

Drew, you're one of my favorite modelers but we disagree on '58. To me it was '59 that left me wondering what the heck happened. '59 Fords still leave me cold.

 

The '59 Chevys were very strange looking in '59 too, trust me. As for Ford they took a really good looking car in '57 and just messed up enough of it for '58 to make it ugly. However, I do remember that, in '59, I thought the '59 Fords were among the most beautiful they had ever done. (Obviously I hadn't seen the '61 or '63 yet, but that decade is a topic for another thread!)

 

It has always amazed me that, given the cost of completely remaking a car over from one year to the next, that Chevy did what they did in '57, '58, and '59. We've already talked about how the '55-'57 shared so many parts, but the '58 was a completely different car in every way. Except for the drive train, the wheels, and a few minor interior pieces like the door handles, nothing from the '57 was carried over to the '58. No sheet metal, no glass, nothing. Then they did it all over again in '59!  When you consider that the design cost to go from the '55 to the relatively minor change for '56 was over one million dollars you can only imagine what it must have cost GM to start with a nearly clean sheet of paper two years in a row!

[Greg Myers]

Earlier in this thread we were talking about the interchangeability of '55 - '57 Chevy parts. Here's a perfect example! 

 

 

All I can say is WOW!. I saw  one similar during my collage days, it was only a '55-'56 though. Sill it had me going both ways.

[Greg Myers]

. . . and Art, most eloquent.

[Craig Irwin]

Earlier in this thread we were talking about the interchangeability of '55 - '57 Chevy parts. Here's a perfect example! 

 

That can't be done without cutting and welding. Thats either a 57 Chevy with a 55 / 56 cowl or a 55 / 56 with 57 quarters fitted.

Edited by Craig Irwin, 01 March 2013 - 12:40 PM.

[2002p51]

That can't be done without cutting and welding. Thats either a 57 Chevy with a 55 / 56 cowl or a 55 / 56 with 57 quarters fitted.

 

You'd have to see the firewall to be sure but I suspect it's the latter. The dash is '55/'56.

Edited by 2002p51, 02 March 2013 - 01:46 AM.

[peekay]

Art, speaking of versatility, wouldn't a 1952 Lincoln fit the bill?  It could do everything the Moebius Chrysler and Hudson kits have done.

[Eshaver]

Gee, a 1952 Lincoln would look superb within one of my up coming dioramas ..............

[Art Anderson]

Art, speaking of versatility, wouldn't a 1952 Lincoln fit the bill?  It could do everything the Moebius Chrysler and Hudson kits have done.

 

 

Nice car of course, but I would wonder if it has the desireability in mass numbers?

 

Art

[Eshaver]

Art, I bet the same questions were asked on the 55 Chrysler too !

[Art Anderson]

Art, I bet the same questions were asked on the 55 Chrysler too !

Ed, the '55 (and now forthcoming '56) Chrysler C300 had a lot more going for it.  First of all, across the range of car enthusiasts, the first two years of 300 letter cars will turn heads--on the street, on the shelves of the hobby shop, and I would suggest on display tables at a model car event--far more emphatically than a '52-54 Lincoln, simply due to their literally legendary status.  Those years of Lincoln, on the other hand, while they would fill a void in a fair number of model car collections, just do not have that almost built-in recognition unfortunately.

 

Granted, the 52-53 Lincolns did well in the Carrera Panamericana (Mexican Road Race), but that was about it and those were sedans.  Couple that with the rather stodgy styling of the 52-55 Lincolns (little more than gussied up Mercurys, which in themselves were basically a longer version of the Fords of those years, a Mexican Road Race Lincoln wouldn't be much in the way of customizing material either I suspect.

 

Now, this is not to say Lincoln didn't produce some cars that would make great model kits, for they did:  Any '36-'39 Lincoln Zephyr coupe would get my vote in an instant, given that such a kit would build up sharp as a stock model, and the customizing possibilties are nearly endless.

 

It's even amazing that the Lincoln Motor Car Company/Lincoln Division even managed to survive to reach the 1961 model year, given that from Lincoln's inception in 1921 through the 1960 model year, the company (sold in 1922 to Ford) never even managed to break even, let alone turn a profit, in spite of being assigned the production of Ford and Mercury bodies from the middle 1930's well into the 1950's.

 

Art
 

[Art Anderson]

Art, I bet the same questions were asked on the 55 Chrysler too !

Yes, and the team that came up with that idea for Moebius was able to note a lot of reasons for the fame of the first Chrysler 300's:  Styling was one, certainly the first 300hp (354cid Hemi) was another, that being the first mass-produced automobile with 300bhp (yes, the Duesenberg SJ reached 320hp, but only about 25 of those were built (doesn't count Model J's that had superchargers added after the fact) 1932-37, which does not qualify that version of the Duesey as mass-produced; and last but not least, the '55-'56 Chrysler 300's dominated Nascar both years, with FAR fewer cars in the race fields than Hudsons enjoyed 1952-54.  In addition, '55-56 Chryslers period have a fair level of customizing potential.

 

All of those characteristics gave the nod to the Chrysler, for their potentially "long legs" as model kits out there in the marketplace.

 

Art

[MachinistMark]

I'd much rather have a 53/54 caddy coupe due ville