Looks very nice and quite a clean build. A small suggestion for your next project if you'll indulge me. Your return springs are a bit on the large side. Keeping everything in scale against each other will go a long way towards giving you a more realistic look.
The problem with Revell test shots being shown here is it's not Revell sharing them like Moebius did/does. Revell takes the test shots to shows and modelers in attendance take pics & post them here & other places. Since Revell didn't make the posts there is no one monitoring these posts like there is from Moebius. That could be a big reason why never hear responses from Revell on whether or not they know about the flaws or have any intention of fixing them. Or if what some say is true, Revell doesn't pay much attention to forums.
Not really. We are not Revell's end user. The distributor is. The distributors buy from & pay Revell/Hobbyco for the kits. Then it is up to the distributors to get them sold. If they sit on the shelf & don't sell or go on clearance and then sell for a loss it's no skin off Revell's nose, they already got paid.
microwheel, Please read this carefully. The problem is NOT with the glass. The problem is with the body and the opening in the body for the side windows not being large enough. Leaving the glass out would NOT fix the problem. Again, the problem is not with the glass it is with the body.
The reason your son has never seen a Grand Torino is because there is no such thing. They are Gran Torinos. The "D" is so silent it is not there. Small point I know but being accurate helps further your argument instead of people dismissing what you say. Also they are called ejector pin marks, not push pin marks.
Again NO one ever said, asked, or demanded the perfect kit. Yes they have done a lot to improve the quality of the kits but it's amazing that they could get kits so right 20 years ago (69 Camaro, Ford Thunderbolt, Buick GSX) yet today get kits so wrong (prime example 90 Mustang LX)
BTW not bashing your opinion, just clarifying some points.
microwheel, Unfortunately the glass is not the issue. it is the shape of the door leading into the bottom of the quarter window. Fixing it would require reshaping the body. Leaving out the rear quarter glass would not help the issue the body has right now. Hopefully Revell fixes it. As someone mentioned it would be relatively easy for them to do as it involves removing material from the mold to slightly, but noticeably, the increase the size of the side window opening.
Good to see others "get it". I don't ever recall anyone who pointed out inaccuracies in a kit ever saying they wanted a perfect kit. I'd really like to know where that started. If the body shell was more accurate on the Torino for example, it'd be a lot easier to give a pass on the wheels and engine bay. Heck the marker lights could even be accepted as that's a relatively easy fix. However toss the inaccurate body into the mix & the sum of the flaws overshadows the kit regardless of the subject, see the LX 5.0 as a prime example of that.
I respectfully disagree, models are not toys(barring the snap & snap & play kits). How many times have you built a model & got down on the floor when you were done, pushed the car around and said "Vroom, Vroom!"?
Again, NO one every said the models should be perfect but they should be a bit closer than they have been lately. Wheels being the wrong offsets could be easily dealt with but why should we have to? I understand there were different variations on the cars used in the show so I could see giving Revell a pass for that. The side marker light can be fixed but hopefully Revell will move it forward before the final version is released. What isn't such an easy fix and we all hope will taken care of before the final version is released is the side window issues. Some hobbyist can fix that but not all. Again, why should we have to?
"This is what make this hobby great once we have it in our hands we can change them and make them how we like them."
That line of thinking should apply to customizing a model, not reverse engineering one to stock specs.
"So once again GET the kit out so we can buy them and MOVE ON.!!!!!!!!!!!"
By all means state your opinion on the kit and your willingness to buy it but please do not tell those of us who want a little more accuracy to MOVE ON. Thank you.
Just read Casey's post so I am adding this to steer it back on topic of the kit....
If this is the final version of the kit how would you, those of you who will fix it, go about doing that? I'm suspect the use of templates to insure equal modifications side to side at the very least. Possibly even a contour gauge. Another issue that may arise is if the glass doesn't go down far enough after the windows are reshaped. Also if the interior bucket goes higher than the new window opening that will have to be addressed.
When did this misplaced sense of superiority become so prevalent in the hobby(and society for that matter but that is a topic for a different board)?!
You don't like the Torino, great. I respect that as I'm sure many others do. No one is making you buy one. I happen to like the Torino but according to you that is unacceptable. Taking the quality of the Torino kit out of the equation a lot of people are interested enough in the Torino to purchase at least one if not more than one kit. A rational adult would accept that fact, respect the people's purchase of said kits and realize that the profit made from the sales of the "piece of carp" Torino kit may free up tooling dollars for something they are interested in. Of course "rational adult" is apparently a stretch these days.
When was your coronation to become King Of The Hobby? I must have missed that announcement. Seriously though, who are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell people who want more detailed kits "quit yur bitchin"?! Revell will never stop producing new kits because, unfortunately, the people who fawn at every kit Revell makes & so vocally accept and even embrace kit errors & proclaim they will buy them no matter what outnumber the hobbyists who want more detailed kits somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 to 1. The sad thing is the "enablers" have more sway with the manufacturers than the hobbyists who want more accurate kits. By unconditionally accepting whatever the manufacturers put out gives them no incentive to produce better kits. If there's no consequences for poor performances or products there is virtually no hope for things to improve.
Let's say for example you had a good stretch at work doing your job very well. Then for some reason your performance becomes hit or miss. Now your boss(es) evaluate your performance and tell you that no matter how you perform you will still get paid the same salary no matter how bad you mess up. Where would your incentive be to perform at your best all the time?
Another example. You go to your favorite nationally known restaurant that has hundreds of locations and you receive poor service. You start voicing your displeasure, however everyone else in the restaurant says the service is fine and tells you not to make a scene or say anything because the restaurant and all its locations may go out of business. Surely that would upset you wouldn't it? Surely you could understand the unlikeliness of the scenario of the company closing its doors playing out.
Those of us who would like to see more detailed kits respect your opinions that kits are fine. No one is telling you not to buy them, Hell many of US still buy the kits. Why can't that same respect be extended to those who want more accurate kits instead of being vilified and talked down to?
That really wouldn't work if you're going for realism. When teams aren't advertising for their sponsors on the track, they're advertising for them on the streets(see below). A couple decals in the corner aren't gonna cut it. I would suggest getting some pics of the trailers you want to replicate and see if someone could make them for you.
Hearing some more of the back story does seem to eliminate the "home cooking" issue so that is a plus. I definitely see why you entered some kits especially in classes with no entries.
From what you describe the issue is sore losers who don't have the ability to match yours. Nothing wrong with you being a good modeler. The problem is how they are reacting to losing to a better model. Very poor behavior on their part.