Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

CapSat 6

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by CapSat 6

  1. Fireball Modelworks does a gorgeous Mopar 440 Six Pack intake and carbs. They do them both in 1/24 and 1/25 scales. Add to your favorite 440 engine, adjust the details for the engine as needed.
  2. A Dajiban Drift Van would be pretty cool. I think that would almost be a new tool though. My understanding of that generation van is that the engine and or suspension were relocated slightly from where they were in the prior (pre ‘93) vans. Bare minimum, they would need a new body, grille, bumpers, revised rear cap, but also, an accurate Drift Van would be a shorter wheelbase window van. The interior had a different dashboard and steering wheel, and while they were at it, the 5.2 “Magnum” engine is very different from the older LA small block. They would have to add in the requisite Watanabe wheels and big brakes, headers and side exhausts, maybe a wing of some sort for the rear roof. A modern media set up and racing buckets would complete the look. Enough of it would be different that it really would be almost an all new tool. The race goodies could conceivably be used on other cars, and it would be a neat link to JDM machinery and culture. Sign me up for a few!!!
  3. It certainly couldn’t hurt them to pop out some Omni’s and see how they do. Perhaps the changes to the Corvette and Firebird bodies are pretty easily fixed. Those were nice bodies before the Monster Treatment. I would like to see these come back!
  4. Backdating the Dodge Van tool might be dicey. As Tom G. here has noted before, there were nearly yearly changes to the body. Still- a good start might be to work up a 1978 window van body, grille, and rear bumper and release it as a Cannonball Run van. They could add in the new steel wheels from the Dodge Monaco and ‘78 Dodge pickup kits to complete the look a bit. The original Cannonball Run van kit was incorrectly windowless, but they could do a window body, something that was never offered before for a ‘78 kit. The older (‘72-‘73) window body had windows and doors in different locations than they should be for a ‘78, so it would be a truly different body than the old window van was. They could follow it pretty quickly with a stock Sportsman version, with pretty two-tone paint, etc. Once the movie kit money starts rolling in and pays for the changes to the tool, then they could do a windowless ‘78 (maybe with “Street Van” graphics) and then add in some new custom gear for good measure.
  5. Retro box art? As a selling feature? To me, it enhances the product a bit, but it doesn't add much actual value. Personally, I like good box art, but just like any other art, there is good box art and bad box art. Box art being Retro doesn't necessarily make it good. My personal favorite old box art types are: the MPC '68 and '69 year boxes, and the MPC "Special Model" types from 1977-78 (the ones with photos of the real car, which was usually a special performance model, like: the Blackbird Firebird, Dodge Warlock and Little Red Express, Plymouth Volare Road Runner Super Pak, etc.). I'd love to see Round 2 offer a Dodge Macho Wagon 4WD pickup in the same graphic type box that the Warlock and LRX were originally offered. My least favorites were the MPC box art for their annual kits from 1970 and 1971. The graphics on MPC boxes in '70 and '71 were kind of silly to me. Also- I'm not crazy about some of the new retro-ish boxes coming from Round 2 right now: the boxes for the AMT '71 Duster, MPC '71 Mustang, '58 Edsel and '57 Chrysler 300 just rub me the wrong way. I get a LOT more out of the retro/revised/expanded decals that Round 2 is doing right now. When you see a new decal sheet that shows multiple stock stripe options/colors (some never offered before), as well as thoughtfully designed custom graphic options, that's something that adds actual value. The decals sheet in the '76 Dodge Dart Sport is a great example...Hang 10 AND Spirit of '76 graphics on the same sheet!!! So Round 2: keep the revised/ expanded decals coming (and jam in as much by way of stock graphics as you can), and yes, while you are at it, please include as many tires as possible in each box.
  6. Thank you for posting this! Talk about hustle…
  7. And unfortunately, I think the GP tool was simply a victim in all of this. MPC wanted to come up with a product that would cash in on the trend. In the Super Fly movie, it looks like the actual car was a Cadillac Eldorado, but MPC only had the GP tool, which they saw as the closest thing. For what it’s worth, I think the GP Grand Super Fly looks a lot nicer than the Eldo Super Fly.
  8. Steve- I can’t disagree with your perspective. The ‘69-‘72 GP’s were beautiful cars. I can see where the neoclassical treatment could be considered tarting up a beautiful design. A long time friend of mine has owned a ‘69 GP for nearly 30 years. If I weren’t so into Mopars, these would be the cars I would be in to. I would like to see Round 2 restore the tool to stock, but if they feel that they can make sales and generate cash with running it as they have it first, and then restoring it to stock, then I’m fine with that, too. I wouldn’t mind having a copy or two of what I consider the best looking Pimpmobile, even if it isn’t the best looking GP. To be honest, I would probably try to knock the rougher edges (no chandelier!) off of my build, and make it look more like a Blackhawk.
  9. Ok- I certainly get that the Grand Superfly isn’t everybody’s cup of tea. I still would argue that it is culturally significant. The tangent to which it’s features pointed was “neoclassical”, which was pioneered by Virgil Exner in the 60’s. This is a cousin to the older Renwal modern classic kits. While Exner’s designs never made production, they foreshadowed the Stutz revival - which had some rather famous and wealthy buyers - like Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley. Also, the stock Grand Prix itself, with it’s sculpted hood, faux “freestanding” headlights, and upright grille borrowed this look. For better or worse, most American intermediate cars more or less became part of this design movement - for instance- the first small Chrysler- the Cordoba, which helped keep the company afloat during the 70’s. With rising insurance rates and gas prices, it was thought that it was better to be classy and cool than fast- practically overnight. Torinos became Elites, and Chargers became- well, Chargers, but they looked like Cordobas (which looked like Monte Carlos).
  10. I just watched the review. Those little ram stickers on the decal sheet were used on a LOT of Dodge Trucks from about ‘82-‘85. Now I need to build a stock ‘82 Dodge Van just to use some of those on it!!! Forgot just how nice the rest of the kit is, too. And who won’t love the cases of Coke?
  11. Haha! In 1:1, those tires would be about $350 each! Most of these probably got Pep Boys $35 specials… 🤣
  12. I think the kit has 6 lug wheels, too- they’re just about 8 scale inches too wide! The wheels themselves look pretty accurate as stock wheels, except for the wideness. Cut them down from the back with a razor saw, find some much skinnier tires, and you should be good. My neighborhood Chrysler Plymouth Jeep dealer- Golden Motors in Roxborough, Philadelphia, had an Arrow pickup as a parts runner for many years. Basically a stock pickup in white with Golden CP graphics in gold. They ran that thing for nearly 15 years from what I remember. That might be something I have to build.
  13. Oh, and I seem to remember the Super Fly had a chandelier for the inside. 😁
  14. Not quite. I had both at different times. I think the main differences were that the Super Fly had a horn on the hood, a stock forward roof, rear window plug, and side pipes (which may have been the same as the custom option pipes in the annual Grand Prix kits). The Sweathogs Dream Machine had a targa top (molded that way, no roof insert or option to fill it in), no side pipes, and I think no rear window plug. Also, it had the figures, which weren’t that great. They looked sort of…human… Same whitewalls, same wheels (stock GP caps as far as I remember), same front and rear bumpers. Maybe both had stock interiors? I have said this before: Round 2 should run some of these off using whatever tool they have, with all of the parts unblocked. No licensing deal, just call it a Neoclassical Custom. I’d be in for a few. I agree that it’s a much better looking custom than many others (I considered buying a Californian- and passed- because that thing is just plain ugly). After that, they should fix the front end, and do a stock GP. I REALLY wish somebody would do a Stutz Blackhawk, but this is probably as close as we will ever get.
  15. Ooohh…we did get this one back recently. And will again soon. The stock MPC Challenger body became the funny car- where all of the stock details got “wiped” off. It was last seen as the Soapy Sales Funny Car, and will be with us again as the Ramchargers FC. This makes it less likely that we’ll ever see the MPC Challenger again, but then again, maybe it would be a good candidate for the Round 2 Clone program. Round 2 could conceivably redo the ‘72-‘74 Body, changing it with different hoods and bumpers for stock and pro stock versions…develop a simplified but nice looking chassis…and maybe do a ‘71 variant.
  16. That looks really nice! That is the only '72-'74 Barracuda body currently available, and it does make a good starting point. As I owned a '74 Barracuda for quite awhile, I will say that the shapes are right on that MPC body, unlike some other more recent efforts ("koff-koff-Revell '70 Cuda...")The kit itself builds up pretty easily. The kit and body could use a little work in some areas. This is because MPC had first tooled up the annual kits, then turned it into a short track car, then re-modified it into a street car. The headlight buckets and rear license plate areas are flat instead of tunneled, and the lower grille is missing the turn signals. Now that I'm seeing what Round 2 is doing with some of their other older tools, I'd like to see them revisit this kit. If I ran Round 2, I would fix the headlight, license plate and lower grille areas, as well as modify the chassis or come up with a new one that has better inner fenders and more complete wheelhouses. I wouldn't go crazy on the chassis- I would just improve it's appearance but keep it simplified. Not every kit we get has to have 50 piece chassis, they just have to look right when built. A new twin-scoop hood would be nice, as well as '72 style bumpers with no/ smaller guards, and full stock '72-'74 decals sheets. The Premium box treatment that Round 2 does certainly wouldn't hurt. While I was at it, I would tool up a simple but good-looking 340-360 4 bbl engine that could be dropped into that engine bay. Maybe they could tool one up with decent detail and scale fidelity that they could also throw into the box for any further releases of the '75-'76 Dart that they do. The 360 in that kit is way underscale, and like the '71 Duster 340 that they do, a lot of kits could be sold just for a nice 340-360. While I was at it II: I'd tool up a Hellcat engine and transmission as the custom option. Again, I think they would sell a ton of kits if they had a nice extra Hellcat engine in them.
  17. Thank you, Steve! I'm sure the design approach was carefully considered. At a minimum, the body looks good in the rendering, and the figures & gadgets should be boss. I'm looking forward to this one!
  18. It for real alright, this project has been underway for well over a year. Jamie was finally satisfied enough with the 3D design progress to announce it. Hopefully we'll have the first mockups of it to show off by this fall. Still a small window to have it out by the end of 2022 but early or mid 2023 is more likely. -Steve Steve, I know you might be limited as to what you can say about this one. Can you tell us if it's all new or if it will be based on the old AMT tooling? If not, I'll wait patiently for details If it were based on the AMT tooling, then perhaps Round 2 could also bring back some sort of stock kit. While the Hobby Lobby Market might not necessarily clamor for a stock '64-'66 Imperial, I could see that subject having some appeal with the hobbyist crowd, and it also might be a way of Round 2 getting more use out of the tool, and if the parts were "backwards compatible" with the original annual kits, I could see them being used to restore older builts and parts kits. Personally, I'm on board for this kit. The Black Beauty was a really cool TV car. I can see myself getting a few of these and trying different things out with this kit.
  19. That’s exactly where the chassis and engine from the Coronets ended up. The ‘74 Charger’s body is a bit of a hot mess, though- as it went from ‘71-‘74 annual updates, to Richard Petty NASCAR body, and then back to stock.
  20. For the late 60's/ early 70's era, the Charger and Coronet chassis were pretty good. What they actually lacked was front suspension detail, and they were kind of gappy in the wheelhouses. In the 80's, the MPC '68-'70 Charger chassis, which was very similar to the Coronet chassis, was actually considered the hot ticket for B Body builds for a little while, and an upgrade to the Jo Han Plymouths (Road Runners, GTX's and Superbirds) because it had separate exhausts and rear (never mind that the exhausts and rear were molded as a unit). If I were to engineer a better version of that chassis, I would make the exhausts and rear axle separate (as it sounds like Round 2 is doing), reduce the gaps in the wheelhouses (as it sounds like Round 2 is doing), and tool up some add-on pieces for the front suspension (lower control arms & sway bar). While I was at it, I would work on the brake booster and reshape the front inner fenders a little. With those changes, you would improve the look of the kit pieces greatly. Would it be state of the art? No. Would it make the finished product look much better? Yes- you would be surprised as to how far those things can go. The results will depend upon whether or not these fixes (some of which have been confirmed) will be done right. I recently added some extra front suspension pieces from a Revell '70 Hemi Cuda to a Jo Han Pro Stock Cuda chassis (it was a car I built nearly 25 years ago, and I didn't want to completely rebuild it), and it improved the look of the front suspension greatly. I get that the building experience itself might not be ideal form some people- that a new tool should really be new. The problem is: there might not be a business case for every subject to get the "ground up/ state of the art" treatment. I don't take this as Round 2 ripping anybody off. My guesses are that 1) they have determined that a somewhat Retro style release will be exciting for a good portion of the market for this subject, 2) the body- which to me is an extremely important hardpoint to start with- is a solid starting point for this subject, and 3) it might actually be a little less time consuming and/or expensive (definitely less risky) to take this design approach. I think the order might actually be 3, then 2, then 1, but 2 and 1 help 3 along here. I do find their recent design choices interesting. Many, many people seem to be happy with the Nova Wagon. I'm just fine with all of this.
  21. OK, my flame suit is on. 😄 I think Round 2 has been ramping things up slowly - first, by adding new variations to older kits (as in their '70 Camaro full bumper conversion), and second, by cloning old tooling (as in the Cutlass and Nova Wagon). The '68 Coronet project might represent their "Phase 3"- cloning old tooling while making engineering and accuracy improvements. From Steve's comments so far, it seems that while the basic design of this kit will lie somewhat in it's 1967 roots (much like the '65 Cutlass and Nova Wagon projects), some engineering improvements will be made: separate exhaust/ rear axle, no "hole in block" for the engine, semi-platform interior, fewer gaps in chassis, improved appearance and accuracy of the body, engine and trim. It really seems like they're taking a thoughtful approach to it- making improvements where they really show and count. To knock this approach as "old technology" might be premature and/or inaccurate. I would imagine that cost might also come into this- it MIGHT be less costly to clone and re-engineer a subject where at least the body is known to be mostly accurate, rather than measure, scan, and engineer an all-new, full detail kit from the ground up. I'm no industry insider, so I don't know for sure - that's just my guess. They might be working towards a sweet spot between "old school" and "new school" parts content and detail, which I think can be found. Personally, I'm very happy to see that the body is going to be virtually guaranteed to be reasonably accurate- the shapes & trim are mostly right on the old MPC '68 Coronet- no need for radical body work on those. An utterly replaceable, old school chassis is a small price to pay for a good body in my book. I have been burned the other way, pretty badly- how many times have we gotten "state of the art" kits with awful bodies? Sorry-not sorry- I will go there...a "state of the art" kit should have a body that looks like the subject. I have gone there on this microtopic before here, and I will continue to do so...if the approach Round 2 is taking with this will avoid us getting yet another wanted subject with a nasty body, then I'm all in. I'm optimistically "wait and see" on this. At the very worst, I'll get some nice bodies out of these kits.
  22. A LOT of potential with this one, the more I think about it. I would of course love to see this with a Hellcat engine. I see a good number of these cars running around my area with wild colors, stripes, wheels and add-ons. It seems to be a very popular car with enthusiasts these days.
  23. Sounds like a lot of thought went into this project, and some very good choices were made!!!
  24. Not Steve, but based on what the annual kits came with, I’d call it an “annual-style wire axle chassis”. In the case of the annual Coronet kits from ‘68-‘70, they used wire axles front and rear with hole-in-the-engine-block”. The promos used essentially the same chassis, but with an insert representing the lower engine, and larger diameter axles with wheels that did not have separate backs, but instead had the axle receiver cast as part of the wheel. Some old AMT annual kits included the corresponding lower engine insert (‘70–‘71 Thunderbird, maybe others?), but to my knowledge, none of the MPC kits ever did. It would be neat if Round 2 included a lower engine insert for this kit, as I think it was the same piece used in the MPC Charger promos, too. And maybe they will do plastic stubs for the front axles instead of a hole in the block? There are benefits and drawbacks to both the front wire axle (hole in block, for one), as well as plastic axle pins (front wheels sag). I’m coming around to like “wire axle” builds - not everything I build has to have a super detailed chassis anymore.
  25. Aww man…Round 2- take my money!!! I think the retro clone route was the way to go- newer tools just don’t have the cool optional parts (and nostalgia value) that the old annuals have. I saw this with the Olds Cutlasses & Nova wagons and REALLY hoped this would be the route they would take with a ‘68 Coronet!
  • Create New...