the other Mike S.

They’re not just coupes, they’re called Gran Coupes. At least according to BMW.

I’m betting they will be made of the same plastic eating rubber material. This time, however, they’ll probably be sealed in a clear protective bag like the rest of the parts.

They came in a real 2dr coupe….

Relax…it’s probably on one of those freighters coming in from China. They’re all stacked up right now in the ocean off Long Beach.

Nice build Tim! However, those front windows still look really really looooong contributing to the chop top roofline appearance. Also, I still don’t like having to “glue” the lower body-sides to the chassis to retain the slight tuck under. Perhaps your 2022 build will address those problems. Thanks.

Strawman ploy. Those particular examples do not negate the entirety of what I stated. Go back and read about the Revell ‘68 Charger that had to modified because Dodge corporate didn’t like the rooftop. Or, read about the ‘61 Impala that had to be modified by Lindberg because it too had major problems with the body. There are many examples of this, if you do a search. If the other models were corrected due to their inaccuracies, why won't they correct the Chevy II chop top before it goes into production? Or, will they? This “it is what it is” sounds weak. If people on here have that attitude about it, then they probably won’t fix it. Mediocrity at best around here, I guess. In a way, you sort of contradict yourself. If 3D scanning is the “be all end all” for complete accuracy, then why didn't they use that? Too expensive? Tolerance stacking? Nope, I’m still not buying it.

Monogram only and it was 1/24th scale. The Chevette would be nice to see again as a reissue.

No offense, but this is a far cry from the sentiments you espoused during the Revell “chop top” Mustang LX days. Have they finally beaten you down? Or, do you have a vested interest in seeing the ‘65 Chevy II gasser do well in the marketplace? As a modeler and hobby consumer, I know why these things happen. It is primarily due to the location of production and the relationships between the home office and the designers/tooling engineers that work in these foreign countries. You don’t have to be genius to figure that one out. I do know that having factory support is highly advantages for a new kit release. If you don’t have that, you will be in a constant uphill battle to get the details right. So, developing and maintaining good relationships with the auto manufacturers is probably the best thing you can do as a model company to ensure accurate looking models.

Someone in the thread made a reference to how the upper window drip rail on the driver’s-side was not accurate. Then, people chimed in to complain about the custom BFG’s that are in the kit making one to assume that it’s a POS reissue or something. The BFG’s are included to give an alternative tire option for the custom/lowrider crowd. I agree, it’s a terrible choice. However, at least we have the Firestone whitewalls, of which, most people will probably use instead. I think most people who build this kit will probably build it stock or as a period custom with parts box/aftermarket wheels and tires. I don’t think anyone is going to make a “gasser” out of it.

So, does that make the whole kit useless, then? And, why are you speaking for somebody else? I don’t care for the BFG’s either. However, I think most people who buy this kit are going to be using the stock tires, not a late model custom tire. I’m just grateful they also include the Firestones, in a whitewall no less. In some years of past kits like this, you couldn't even get that.

I agree. Tim Boyd is a very talented experienced builder so I’m sure he can work his magic on what they gave him.

It’s says right on the box pic that was posted above….”pad printed Firestone ‘whitewall’ tires” included. If you don’t like the BFG’s, you don’t have to use them.

At least it’s only on one side in a particular spot, not the whole dang roof being about 3 scale inches lower. However, we certainly don’t want to say anything if a model company makes a major, really noticeable, goof on a new tool. 🤭

You’re comparing two different things. Not all Supras are the same. The MKII Supra by MPC was/is a much better kit than the F&F derived MKIV. Also, I don’t think the MKIV could be built stock. The MPC Supra, if reissued, doesn’t exist in a vacuum. However, for mostly 1/25th fans, the MKII Supra would be a much desired addition unless they can find sources for the original annual. Also, if you like to make custom builds or build several that are in different color/trim combinations, having a new reissue to build from would be much better than trying to search and scrounge the original annuals. In the sea of Camaros/Firebirds/Mustangs/ect that we always seem to have, the MPC MKII Supra would be a welcome addition. Also, it would full a much absent model in 1/25th scale. Some people don’t mix and match different scales so freely as you have implied. Since I build mostly in 1/25th scale, those Tamiya kits that you so highly speak of would not be a consideration for me. As I said before, having it just sitting in the warehouse collecting dust is not making them any money. It’s a pretty good kit and they should reissue it.

Man, I’ll tell,ya. Round 2 is going to put me into the poor house with all these great reissues we’re seeing from them, lately. Not a “chop top” in the bunch! lol!

Nice! I can’t wait until this kit is on the shelves. 😃

Jack, No. It did not. As for the people who are saying that this chop top is “acceptable” for a gasser. Can you show me one pic of a real ‘65 Chevy II 100 2dr sedan “gasser” (of this particular car) that has a chopped roofline? I did a search on Google and couldn’t find any. As for the comment made by Dave M. of Moebius stating that they knew the body was not 100% accurate anyway. Well, that sounds like significant back-pedaling to me. They SCREWED UP and are now trying to PASS IT OFF like it was their intention from the start. Jeez, give me a break! The critical design and development probably took place in another country (hint: China) and that’s probably what contributed to the goofed up roofline. Even Round 2 had a problem over there with one of their recently modified tooling reissues, (full bumper ‘70 Camaro) I believe. So, you really don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure out why it happened.

That is the only reason that would describe your extreme reluctance to having the MPC Toyota Supra reissued again. By the same token. If they reissue it again and sales proved to be very good, it would encourage other manufacturers (like Hasagawa) to develop a new kit of their own based on the same subject. To make matters worse, you’re comparing an existing kit that was made (back in the day) to a (as of yet confirmed) fantasy kit from Hasagawa. How can you compare a kit that was actually made to a future fantasy kit from Hasagawa? That doesn’t make any sense IMHO. We haven’t seen this kit since the mid ‘80’s. I believe that is enough time ago that it would garner a lot of interest if reissued again. As it stands right now, sales and profits for this kit are a big fat zero as it sits in Round 2’s tooling archive. I say…let’s get the tooling out of mothballs and get it producing plastic again. Things can’t make money/profit if they’re not being utilized.

It happens this way because people are willing to accept these major problems in body proportions because it has a few extra little detail parts, like header gaskets, or something. Again, I will ask. Why do we have to accept these rather noticeable flub ups when the technology exists that can give us almost 99.9% accuracy? Think about it for a moment. If people buy this kit anyway, even though there are major body proportion problems, why would they want to try to correct these problems on future kits? They won’t because they know, we as consumers, will accept mediocrity and less than accurate model body shapes. I think some are forgetting the forest for the trees here. All the detail in the world is NOT going to eliminate a major body proportion problem like the chop top greenhouse. That is, unless you are building a chop top custom in the first place. Those who are willing to forgive that and build the kit anyway, good for them. However, you will never be able to build a realistic model of this car if you don’t also correct the chop top roofline. If they don’t correct the greenhouse, all I will see is a model that does NOT look like the real car, or a version of the real car, no matter how much detail or great your skill as a builder is. I always thought this hobby was called “scale model car” building because we strive to make these miniature cars we build to look the closest to the real thing as we can? If that is not the case, or has never been the case, then all we are doing is building toy model cars that do not look like the real thing.

I’d have to say 1/25th scale makes sense today, as well. The biggest white elephant in the room is this. They HAVE the tooling in their archive. It’s just sitting there collecting spider webs. Why should we have to wait for Hasegawa to design and develop a new MKII Supra kit when one already EXISTS in Round 2’s storage archive? It’s almost as if this is a thinly veiled attempt by some on here to keep the original annual MPC Supra from ever being reissued again. Just like the modelers who never want to see anyone use 3D printing technology to copy the bodies from the old Johan kits so they could possibly be reissued again. Now we have “collector pressure” which is resisting us when we think about what kind of kits we would like to see reissued again. Ugh! I don’t where you guys are buying your Hasagawa 1/24-1/25 kits for cheaper than Round 2, especially the ‘63 Nova wagon, which retails for $27 (with free shipping) if you look around. Most of the new Hasagawa kits I see for sale are at a price point much higher than that. Even the simple easy click kits (basically a snap kit) from Revell are MSRP’ing for $24.95, the last time I checked. I’ve haven’t seen a new Hasagawa kit cheaper than that.

Why should we have to accept mediocrity, in this day and age, when they could get it totally accurate? It’s obvious when I look at the pics of the built test shot that Tim showed, the top looks a little chopped. What’s with these model car companies and their chop top rooflines? Revell did the same thing when they released their ‘90’s Mustang LX notchback. I was going to buy a case of them until I found out about the chopped roofline. I didn’t buy a single one. The recent Jaguar XKE is another. There’s no excuse to be having these types of major fub ups with the technology that is available to them. For some reason, this smells like a “translation problem” in mathematical measurements with the engineers in China. Think about it for a moment. What has been the common thing in all of these cases? The country these kits are designed and manufactured in. So, Mobieus wants us accept this major body flub up and just buy it anyway? These kits cost a lot of money. They’re not free. They’re approaching almost $40+, especially for a Mobieus kit, which are usually more expensive than a similar 1/25th scale kit from Round 2 or Revell. They simply goofed up. They didn’t realize that the Chevy II 100 sedan has a ever so slightly taller greenhouse than the hardtop. However, the Chinese CAD programmer who transferred the data files into the 3D printing machine wouldn’t know that. So, the printer just made what was programmed into it, one slightly chopped top ‘65 Chevy II 100 sedan. As for who cares? Well, I do. You got people throwing fits on the modeling forums about having realistic looking header flanges when the body looks chopped. Come on, lets get real! I really don’t care how well detailed a kit may be if the body doesn’t look right. It’s called scale model building for a reason. I want to build and collect realistic looking model cars, not models that look like inaccurate toys.

Yeah, the letters were raised instead of being stamped into the sidewall like the real tire. Ugh! At least the BFG’s could pass for the earlier style Eagle GT’s because they had a similar raised lettered design which could be painted white to hide the inaccuracy even more. However, they were not raised outline lettered tires but at this scale it’s not that noticeable.

I’ve seen pics of the chassis/suspension of that kit online and I will have to respectfully disagree. It’s based on the regular C4 kit by MPC with just a few little bits changed here and there.

If Hasegawa does it, it’ll be 2.5 times the price and in a scale that would probably not be as lucrative as 1/25th, at least in this country. However, why wait for a new tool when one already exists that’s just collecting dust in the tooling archive? It’s costing them money having it sitting there collecting dust when it could be making them money in the marketplace. The MPC Supra is a pretty good kit. The wheels/tires are not 100% accurate, but they look a lot closer to the BGF’s in the Supra pics (in this thread) compared to the Goodyear Eagle GT/Goodyear Gatorback tires that came on the Camaros and Firebirds of that era.