When the USA Oldies kits came out, Dennis Doty was quick to point out some of the 'errors" in interiors in his published works. While not mentioned in this thread, the engines in these kits were for the most part pretty primitive as well. At the time, Dennis was close to Joe Haenle and well aware of some of the challenges he faced in running his company. At the same time, we as modelers in the mid 1970's were overjoyed to get a chance to buy these models of some long-favored automotive subjects and be able to build them once again. Because back then, there was almost no way to acquire old, out of production kits, unless you were lucky enough to live in a metro area with enlightened merchants like Models Hobby in Ferndale, and two other store that Dennis and Chuck Helppie showed me - one on East Eight Mile Road in Detroit, the other in Wyandotte. Mail order of old kits was not yet to arrive, and 'toy fairs" at the time were just getting started, and tended to focus on 1/43rd and toys, rather than 1/25th scale kits. In short, the JoHan kits were timely, incredibly well received by adult modelers, and while subject to some "errors" as noted in this and other threads (which resulted from an effort to get these kits back into production, with a minimum of fresh investment and additional time to market), were a real boon to the adult modeling hobby when introduced in the mid 1970's/ TIM .
Issue #197, August/September 2015. F-J, the following comment is not targeted at you, but to all MCM forum members: If you guys are not subscribing or otherwise reading BOTH of the major model car magazines, you are missing tons of relevant and entertaining info that will significantly increase your enjoyment of the model car hobby. There...I've said it. Please stop and consider for a moment or two.... Thanks....commercial break is now over. TIM
Cameron...I have a '16 Mustang GT Premium with the six speed manual...it's the convertible version. It's quite a leap beyond the S197-based Mustangs...both in terms of technology/content but also in terms of the feel and drive of the car. I look at it as the Mustang GT having finally made the leap all the way into sports car territory. I think you'd be very pleased with your choice. I also think you are exactly right to pay down the remaining CC balances before making your move...Good Luck with your plan! Cheers....TIM (full disclosure...I'm a retired Ford lifer so I may not be the most independent thinker on this subject(!)
Dave....same here on considering you a friend...for sure!!! Great reference pictures, too. As far as molding the windshield unit to the body on the AMT kit....guys this is why I am always ragging on about the need to actually build model kits before critiquing them. The AMT windshield/IP unit does not match up to the AMT main body cowl at all. Not even close. If you are painting your AMT '29 a dark color, it will hide the gaps fairly well, but if you are painting a light color (white, yellow, orange) you are going to cringe at the result - a ditch all along the joint, with even larger gaps at the outside edges of the joint. I sure cringed did the first time I built one. That is why I consider it to be absolutely essential to, yes, cut the windshield frame apart from IP/cowl continuation and...yes....mold the IP/cowl configuration to the cowl of the body. The result won't be 100% accurate - as proven by Dave's 1/1 pix above...but it will look one heckuva lot better than doing nothing at all. Cheers..TIM
Yikes....the body is highly altered....cut off at the forward edge of the front fenders....retooled at the rear with an "integral spoiler"...hood entirely different....That would be a major investment to return the tool to stock condition....for comparison here is a stock MPC 1966 Dodge Monaco 500 Hardtop built by yours truly back in ... yes... 1966. (This MPC tool also included the 1966 Polara 500 Convertible version which was the basis of the Magnum kit) .
Compare it to the parts breakdown shot in Mike's post of the eBay listing above and you can see how much has been changed. Uuggghhh!
The tool was significantly modified to create the "Magnum" (IIRC) concept/showcar kit- the one with the single and dual bubble tops and a jutting front end design. I don't have that kit so I can't comment on how heavily the tool was modified. If the tool still exists, I suspect it is pretty much irretrievably altered in terms of being able to return it to a showroom stock '66 .... TIM
Dave...hear ya on this. That was certainly my initial impression as well. But having painted and built several of these now....I no longer have the feeling that the Revell body lacks finesse. Maybe it's the paint thickness on top of the body moldings, which appear a bit overwrought to me when looking at just the unpainted styrene. Clearly i would have done the stock rear wheel wells/Quarter panels if I had led the kit development, but in almost every other consideration I now prefer the new body. Plus as one of our esteemed/respected hot rod builders have pointed out here (sorry guys, I can't remember exactly which one of you highlighted this), the drop off of the rear deck area (when viewed from the side) is more accurate in the Revell body. And you don't have to mess with the cowl/windshield area (the AMT kit really should have the lower part of the windshield/IP part cut away and molded to the front cowl, and then again you have to deal with plating the windshield on the AMT kit. All this is done correctly, right from the box, in the Revell kit. Cheers...TIM
James...looks promising. You've probably already taken care of this, but I don't see it in your pix, so just wanted to make sure you paint the rear fenderwells (which are stamped into the two interior sidewalls) body color while you've got that paint out. I've tried it by masking off the interior color and adding the body color on the fenderwell area, and also by simply cutting away the fenderwells from the interior stamping and painting them along with the other body parts. Both approaches work pretty well. Will be watching as you bring this one to completion....TIM