Jairus makes some very valid points here: In truth, it is virtually impossible to make any model car kit that we'd buy in any quantities that will be PERFECTLY accurate. Any really close inspection of the real car vis-a-vis the model will surely show up some compromises, someplace.
Some of us are "the older generation", myself for example: I've at least waved my hand over virtually every 1/25 (even 1/24!) model kit that's been done of an American car since 1958 (or even before that with several of the Premier kits that came out just about 60 years ago), and have seen compromises. Why?
Well, for starters, those of us in this "older generation" voted strongly, vociferously for model car kits having 1-piece body shells for example--that happened with the very first AMT 3in1 Customizing kits in 1958. All of a sudden, the then newly introduced Revell kits of say, the 1957 Ford Country Squire, with their multipiece body shells were ancient technology--not many of us then 13-14 year old kids bought those, one-piece body shells in those AMT kits took a LOT less work. But, a unitized, one piece body shell, certainly in the case of American cars of the day certainly had its compromises in some areas, simply because what AMT was replicating in one piece were car bodies which in real life, had at least a couple of dozen INDIVIDUAL sheet metal panels, with a lot of sculptured shapes. In some subjects, there exist what would be called in a plastic model, rather severe undercuts, particularly with those cars having dramatic tail fins--for example, where the tailfin "sculpture" meets the beltline, which was more often than not within the bottom edge of the rear quarter window openings of a hardtop body (Think almost every Chrysler product 1957-60, and certainly 1957-59 Ford Motor Company cars--not a one of those body shells has quite the correct contour of the inner side of the leading edges of their tail fins due to the limitations of injection-molded plastic in steel dies IF the body shell is to be done as a single part. Look at a JoHan or Revell-Monogram '59 Cadillac: Do you see any fairing detail on the inner side of the fins, forward of the taillight bezels that is molded as a shape part of the body shell? No, of course not--that's virtually an impossible shape to capture in the tooling for a one piece body of any 1959 Cadillac. (JoHan took care of that by molding both the inner and outer taillight fairings in unit with the taillights & bezels, and the chrome "cap" at the rear of the fins, which Revell provided those "spear-shaped fairings as separate parts to be glued in place. (AMT and Polar Lights, with their snap-tight iterations of the Ecto-1a and Ecto-1 had to make the fins as separate, add-on parts, due to the impossibly tight areas between those fins and the rear sides of the basic Miller-Meteor ambulance body.
Other areas of model car kit bodies have their "compromises" as well, again part of the problem of creating in one piece what Detroit used multiple complicated sheet metal panels to achieve. Model kit "glass" is almost always (and this includes those kits from just about every manufacturer of plastic model kits) far thicker than the real glass is--even the .020" thick Pet-G clear plastic that the top resin casters use for vac-forming windshields and back glass scales out to 1/2" thick--more than twice the true scale thickness of real automotive glass. Under the hood, similar compromises often exist, given that sand-cast iron cylinder blocks, bell housings and certainly transmission cases can and do have raised details on just about every plane--something that cannot be accurately represented in injection molded plastic without much more expensive and fussy tooling or say, an engine block made up of 4 or more individual parts. The same is also true of frames, particularly those having X-members with lightening holes punched into them--almost always, this is/has been a place of compromise. Even wheel rim lips generally are far thicker than they would be if truly in scale.
I know, long story here: But, for the vast majority of builders, the Revell '57 Ford looks pretty decent, even if it hasn't got exactly the right front splash pan. But that's something a serious modeler can work beyond, IMO.