Jump to content


1/25 Revell Mustang 5.0 LX Drag Racer


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

#41 martinfan5

martinfan5

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,212 posts
  • Location:Los Santos, San Andreas
  • Full Name:Jonathan Stephens

Posted 18 March 2014 - 03:47 PM

 

You can put all the cute animated gifs you want up, and that still doesn't answer the question as to whether they fixed the problems, or they live in some alternate universe where the problems don't exist.

 

One garners a great deal of respect from myself and a lot of the other "haters", the other just proves how far Ed has his head stuck up...the sand pile.

I have to agree with my friend here,  this kit is always going to be a hot topic tell Ed pulls his head out of the sand( if it is infact there) and they correct the body issue,  this kit, and the massive pile that is the body, is like a train wreck, you really cant help looking and talking about it.

 

I dont see what the issue is as long as all involved can remain civil towards each other and have a adult conversation about this kit and its problems, and or did they correct any issues, my money is on , no , they did not


Edited by martinfan5, 18 March 2014 - 03:49 PM.


#42 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

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

Posted 18 March 2014 - 03:50 PM

I just wanna know at what point the dead-horse-gifs themselves become blows against a dead horse of their own.

 

Think we crossed that line a few states back, actually....



#43 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,901 posts
  • Location:Men. Falls, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 18 March 2014 - 04:14 PM

that still doesn't answer the question as to whether they fixed the problems

 

 

They didn't. See below.

 

 

 

 

I've been told by Mr. Ed Sexton himself that this reissue is correct in all areas, no further modifications will be necessary:

I've asked him about the roof!! 

Here's the answer:

 

""

Hi,

The body is accurate and does not require any changes.

 

Regards,
Ed Sexton
Revell Inc.



#44 Rob Hall

Rob Hall

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,036 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Arizona
  • Full Name:Robert Hall

Posted 18 March 2014 - 04:16 PM

 

They didn't. See below.

 

 

 

If Ed actually believes that, he needs new glasses or should retire..



#45 martinfan5

martinfan5

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,212 posts
  • Location:Los Santos, San Andreas
  • Full Name:Jonathan Stephens

Posted 18 March 2014 - 04:23 PM

 

Hi,

The body is accurate and does not require any changes.

sprachlos040_zps13cb0991.gif

 

If Ed actually believes that, he needs new glasses or should retire..

sSig_agreed.gif



#46 Robberbaron

Robberbaron

    MCM Friend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 157 posts
  • Location:Northwest Indiana
  • Full Name:Robert J. Barron

Posted 18 March 2014 - 07:09 PM

[quote name="JTalmage" post="1141000" timestamp="1395170416"]The 2n1 and the drag version is based on my friend Mike Bell's NMRA Real Street coupe that he drag races. Revell came to his shop in Dayton, Ohio to measure the heck out of his car. He received the very first 2n1 version of the street car version w/ the police stuff. 
 
Do you know what kind of wheels your buddy had on his car when Revell documented it? In your pics it looks like he's running Bogarts (at least on the front), but from Revell's pic it sure looks like they're Drag Stars in the kit. Just curious if he had different wheels on the car at that time, or if Revell made a deliberate decision to replicate a different type of wheel. I'd be fine with either one.

For a wheel that's so popular in the 1:1 car world, I've never understood why so few Drag Stars have been represented in scale. Seems like this was a smart decision on Revell's part. I think more than a few of these kits will be bought just for the rolling stock.

#47 mikemopar70

mikemopar70

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 347 posts
  • Location:Quebec, Canada
  • Full Name:Michel Paquette

Posted 19 March 2014 - 01:28 AM

If Ed actually believes that, he needs new glasses or should retire..

When i asked Revell about the body issue, the answer was for this latest version of the drag racer, not the previous police package issue... 

So M. Sexton told me the the body was correct for this version (drag racer), not to misunderstand what he said to me!! 

 

If you look carefully to the picture of the model on their website , you can see that they corrected the top height, to be accurate.

 

I give a chance to Revell, because they did such corrections in the past, with the 1969 Charger (top issue) and lately on the 1969 Nova (gas tank was reversed) 

I sincerely think that Revell is expecting a lot on this Mustang tooling, and i'm pretty sure we will be pleased with this new issue of that famous Mustang!!

So, let it come in, before criticize please!!

 

Revell knows about the dissapointement that the first issue caused to modelers (and it's O.K. to tell them) and the answer to my e-mail to Revell dones'nt even take an hour to come in, and by M. Sexton himself.  



#48 mikemopar70

mikemopar70

    MCM Avid Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 347 posts
  • Location:Quebec, Canada
  • Full Name:Michel Paquette

Posted 19 March 2014 - 01:41 AM

  1. http://downloads.hob...ew-releases.pdf

Here's the picture of the upcoming model of the Mustang, if you look carefully the top has been corrected (you can see by the windshield upper portion that doesn't fit. it probably comes from the previous version)

 

So if Revell ignore the issue, why have they corrected it for the picture model?? 

 

I'm sure we will se an accurate version of this Mustang very soon!! It's been mandated for a second quarter release.. 

I'm mostly a Mopar guy, but i will buy a few of this one and i support real Mustang fans..



#49 2000-cvpi

2000-cvpi

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Location:Kalamazoo, Michigan
  • Full Name:Corey Sarenius

Posted 19 March 2014 - 01:44 AM

If Revell did fix the roof height then I expect about fifty new posts from everyone offering apologizes to Revell and Mr. Sexton for all of the negative comments made about the kit.

#50 JTalmage

JTalmage

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts
  • Location:Sardinia, Ohio
  • Full Name:Jesse Talmage

Posted 19 March 2014 - 02:03 AM

Do you know what kind of wheels your buddy had on his car when Revell documented it? In your pics it looks like he's running Bogarts (at least on the front), but from Revell's pic it sure looks like they're Drag Stars in the kit. Just curious if he had different wheels on the car at that time, or if Revell made a deliberate decision to replicate a different type of wheel. I'd be fine with either one.

For a wheel that's so popular in the 1:1 car world, I've never understood why so few Drag Stars have been represented in scale. Seems like this was a smart decision on Revell's part. I think more than a few of these kits will be bought just for the rolling stock.

 

He's had the Bogarts on it for many years. being that theyre soo thin and deep dished in real life it was probably hard to replicate them. 


Edited by JTalmage, 19 March 2014 - 02:06 AM.


#51 JTalmage

JTalmage

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 725 posts
  • Location:Sardinia, Ohio
  • Full Name:Jesse Talmage

Posted 19 March 2014 - 02:06 AM

C'mon folks, there's a simple solution to the roof debate. Get over it. If it bothers you soo bad, don't buy one. 

 

Or buy a real one and build it your way. Like I'm doing.

 

2013-11-16%2022.15.39_zpsafsa8qe2.jpg

 

Take a step back, calm down, and realize it's just a plastic model not the end of the world, and build em to have fun.



#52 blubaja

blubaja

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 548 posts
  • Location:NJ
  • Full Name:Francis Xavier Tiewski 3rd

Posted 19 March 2014 - 03:03 AM

If Revell did fix the roof height then I expect about fifty new posts from everyone offering apologizes to Revell and Mr. Sexton for all of the negative comments made about the kit.

They will get much thanks for correcting the body, IF that's the case. But until we see anything, Ed's vague answer wasn't very helpful. It's not lilke he would come out and reply-"no, it's still the same heap as the first release" lol. 

And an apology?? I'm sorry your company made an incorrect product and got called on it multiple occasions that lead to photos of deceased equine abuse? LOL! 



#53 Rob Hall

Rob Hall

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,036 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Arizona
  • Full Name:Robert Hall

Posted 19 March 2014 - 03:06 AM

When i asked Revell about the body issue, the answer was for this latest version of the drag racer, not the previous police package issue... 

So M. Sexton told me the the body was correct for this version (drag racer), not to misunderstand what he said to me!! 

 

If you look carefully to the picture of the model on their website , you can see that they corrected the top height, to be accurate.

You can't really go by one photo at an angle, and we have no idea if that picture has been edited or not. We will only know when the kit is out and people compare the body to the police car version.  The roof height was only one issue with the body--the decklid shape was wrong, side trim was wrong, etc.



#54 johnbuzzed

johnbuzzed

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Location:Indian Land, SC
  • Full Name:John "the Buzzard" Buzzerio

Posted 19 March 2014 - 08:00 AM

If there was an opportunity to "measure the heck" out of an actual car, how did the dimensions go bad in the first place?  Sounds like the Rat Roaster having the incorrect front axle- wasn't that examined that live and in-person, too?

 

Either way, I will be getting one of the 5.0 drag kits, because I want to build one.  But I can still question the principles behind the errors.



#55 Rob Hall

Rob Hall

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,036 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Arizona
  • Full Name:Robert Hall

Posted 19 March 2014 - 08:06 AM

If Revell did fix the roof height then I expect about fifty new posts from everyone offering apologizes to Revell and Mr. Sexton for all of the negative comments made about the kit.

Why on earth would anyone 'apologize' to them for fixing what they screwed up?   If they had proper quality control and paid attention to what they were doing when they designed the kit in the first place, they wouldn't have received the well-earned criticism.



#56 johnbuzzed

johnbuzzed

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Location:Indian Land, SC
  • Full Name:John "the Buzzard" Buzzerio

Posted 19 March 2014 - 08:18 AM

Why on earth would anyone 'apologize' to them for fixing what they screwed up?   If they had proper quality control and paid attention to what they were doing when they designed the kit in the first place, they wouldn't have received the well-earned criticism.

"I concur, in spades."  Revell should be apologizing to the consumers.



#57 Casey

Casey

    MCM Ohana

  • Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,901 posts
  • Location:Men. Falls, WI
  • Full Name:Casey Littmann

Posted 19 March 2014 - 09:28 AM



if you look carefully the top has been corrected (you can see by the windshield upper portion that doesn't fit.

 

That appears to be a dark tint band at the top edge of the windshield when you zoom in:

 

lxdrag.jpg



#58 DaveM

DaveM

    MCM Friend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 113 posts
  • Location:Michigan
  • Full Name:Dave Manley

Posted 19 March 2014 - 09:38 AM

If they did fix the roof, I will buy several.  But...I'm going to wait until I see the kit in person, or see some very detailed pictures on here before I plunk down my hard earned cash for them.  (My days of blindly buying the new Revell releases without vetting them first is long past.)  I hope that someday, they will also run another batch of stock ones with corrected bodies.  This is the car that pretty much was the backbone of the muscle car scene for the best part of a decade.  It sure deserves a good kit, and should be pretty popular with a whole generation of new builders.  



#59 Chuck Kourouklis

Chuck Kourouklis

    MCM Ohana

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

Posted 19 March 2014 - 12:51 PM

Painting the drip moldings and door frames black does minimize the problem somewhat. Looks pretty much the same to me, straight down to the 5.0 badge pre-correction, if that ain't a decal  - but hey, I'm ready and willing to be surprised and delighted, and I'll be hollering A T T A B O O Y Y! from the rafters if they have indeed fixed it. 

 
But an apology? I've dropped more than fifty bucks on a pair I don't know if I've got the time to make acceptable, and I ain't lookin' for an apology! An apology to Revell is appropriate if the criticism is off-base and incorrect, but Mike Schnur - though he doesn't like to make a big deal of it - has demonstrated conclusively with his vastly improved body shell that the criticism is bang on-target (the upper-echelon's apparent attempts at whitewashing it all to the contrary). So the very concept of an apology to Revell for getting around to what they should have done in the first place is "are-you-putting-me-on??" LAUGHABLE.
 
But with all due respect, that mentality once again demonstrates that what really needs to be "gotten over" is this same old allergy to kit criticism that like it or not, is entirely topical to the subject at hand.
 
When a model has visual deviations from the prototype, it fails to live up to its very reason for existence.  I'm going to borrow somebody's notion of "reasonable expectation", except that I'm actually going to be more REASONABLE about it: while this chimerical, straw man diversion of the "perfect kit" is anything BUT reasonable to hope for, a roof height without a clearly visible variance from true scale IS a reasonable expectation.  
 
Now let's try another angle: just how exactly does a discussion thread pointing this out, asking if there's been any progress from one release to the next, fail to meet the reader's expectation? Long as there are no personal attacks, that too-low roof IS on topic, and what's more, some folks actually come in with the objective of FINDING OUT about problems like this. So not only is the "don't like it, don't participate" approach just as apt here, it is in fact MORE appropriate. After all, it's not as if any of you has been waiting over two decades to drop your cold cashish on some sunshine-and-ponies Stepford thread about a problem kit.
 
In the case of the model, it plainly does not live up to its own stated mandate of being 1/25 the size of the subject in all dimensions, so discussion of that in a thread about the very kit is not only logical and on-topic, it's inevitable.  That a truly topical discussion should somehow be muted in pointing out all these problems is the expectation that's actually irrational.  It's really the people with that expectation who need to "get over" the fact that a topical discussion will include pointing out problems with the kit.  
 
And If you don't like it, don't read it.
 
Btw, notice how THAT suggestion doesn't nick Revell's bottom line.


#60 martinfan5

martinfan5

    MCM Ohana

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,212 posts
  • Location:Los Santos, San Andreas
  • Full Name:Jonathan Stephens

Posted 19 March 2014 - 01:16 PM

If Revell did fix the roof height then I expect about fifty new posts from everyone offering apologizes to Revell and Mr. Sexton for all of the negative comments made about the kit.

Oh heck no, I will not apologize,  if they do fix the roof height, I will say, great job Revell for correcting the issue, and listing to us, but that is as far as that will go.