[[Template core/front/global/utilitiesMenu does not exist. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by whale392

  1. Jason, doing the measurements against the real car shows both kits to have inaccurate roofs. Even the old MPC kits are not correct, but are closer to 1:1 than either Revell offerings. My micrometers and scales just don't lie (and you know what kind of a Fox guy I am, Jason!). Ben, I was just slapping the Pony wheels up under this kit as you were typing. Even though they are 1/24th, they look right under this kit (and could benefit from some lower-profile tires).
  2. Revell 1990 Mustang LX's as slot cars

    As a drag/slot car, the roof doesn't look as bad. I was thinking of doing one up as a Pro-Mod myself.
  3. The point Dennis is trying to make is that you expect one thing and get something far less than what you had initially expected. Is that ok, whether it is a product or service? The answer is no, and it applies universally (whether it be service, manufacturing, production, construction...............). No, you don't have to buy this kit, just an in Dennis' example you don't have to get your house painted. In both though, you really should be able to get the best product quality for the money, and that is where this kit falls short. Are we the loyalists to the Fox Chassis being THAT picky? I don't believe so. I can live with a few errors (look at how many of the Revell, Monogram, Revell-Monogram, AMT, and MPC kits I have (over 100) but for a kit to have this fatal of a flaw is quite a blow. I have more Fox plastic than I really EVER need, and in more scales than I care to thing (1/20th down to 1/87th). Is it too much to ask to have an accurate version? Darin, if you are referring to the old Revell 1/25th series (the Capri, Turbo Mustang, McLaren M81), then you will need to correct the wheel lips, as the Capri didn't have the protruding lips like the Mustang did. It is a fairly easy fix, but must be done correctly as to not look 'wonky'! I have a few of these kits too, and this new LX chassis will go a ways to making them nicer. Just remember, the only year Capri to come with the 8.8" rear would be 1986, but just about every modded Capri (including the Turbo RS) I know of sports an 8.8" anyway!
  4. And I understand that, Darin. Which is why I also stated that it should sell well in this guise and the forthcoming race car version. Now, to take a wider cross-section of Joe Average and we'll see what the vast majority says. Maybe, maybe not (in terms of 'It looks right to me').
  5. 92 ford mustang gt conv

    Saleen wheels? What color are you shooting her in?
  6. I have contemplated the convertible route with one of the dozen I have ordered, and the only real things will be narrowing the rear seat and making the boot/top-down 'doglegs/well' in the interior. This kit also makes a nice donor for the AMT 87-88 Mustang GT kit, as most of it is a few file strokes away from dropping into place (another thing I have been doing with my kit this last week and a half, THANK YOU ED, and REVELL!). The industry has come a long way in the last years, Darin, and a lot of that has to do with the listening to what their customers want/see wrong and from increased pressure from competition. By voicing our concerns with kits, we can hope to see either corrections of kits in the future that are better quality with higher levels of scale fidelity/accuracy. I hope that companies will continue to listen and learn from the people who have an effect on their bottom line (the buyers). There is only so much that the bean-counters can do to keep a company afloat; the revenue stream has to come in before they can do anything new. And having issues with kits is NOT a way to generate revenue (although I do see this kit selling well in its first issue, maybe into the second). Casey, you are correct on personal opinions, and I am guilty of what you mentioned as well. I do have a tendency to let my passion overrun me sometimes, and what I type may come off as a personal attack (for which I apologize). I just can't let fact be buried by personal opinion. And I do vote with my wallet. I put my money where my mouth is. When Ed and I initially talked about this kit (you may remember that, as shortly thereafter I was slapped with the GAG ORDER and cut from the conversations) I told him I would buy the FIRST case of them. Well, I didn't get the first case (or first kit!), bit as soon as it hit the order chain, I put in the order for 12 of them (stop and think, that is $300+). I will honor my request, as both Revell and my hobby supplier will not be stuck because I went back on a promise. I so strongly believed in this kit that I burned up 1/3rd of one of my paychecks just to have these).
  7. Revell 1990 Mustang LX 5.0

    Eric, this kit chassis and drivetrain really are nice! I can see using the 5.0/T5 in a lot of other projects. As I have to wait to get my order, I will be watching what you do with this one.
  8. Nice try Randy, and a waste of animation, Brett. Now, if you would like me to flood this thread with pictures of the 1:1 cars measurements and the conversion math to PROVE 100% that this roof is FUBAR, I can do THAT too. And just so you know, the MPC roof is NOT correct either, but it is closer to 1:1 than this body. Edit note: I stated I have over 100 pictures of this body with the real thing (both an LX Coupe and a GT, since the doors are the same and the greenhouse has the exact same height between the two). This is not a joke to me, or others. While the rest of the kit (especially the drivetrain) is rather nice, the body is NOT.
  9. Being in the Midwest, we are still waiting for them to hit our distributors and then head to the individual hobby shops. Mine said sometime late next week is when they are expected to hit shelves. I have a case (12) of them on pre-order (did when I first got involved, and when they were released into Revells catalog). I will honor the pre-order, as I am one to put my money where my mouth is and keep a promise. Will I purchase any more..........that remains to be seen. Maybe from several bodies and lots of cutting/shaping/filling/sanding I can get a body to look close to correct. The chassis and drivetrain are nice, and can be used under other projects. Again, owning the real cars, working on the real cars, and racing the real cars, I can assure you the body is less than what it could have been and a long way from right. There are some good areas of the body, and the headlight buckets (while real deep) are well worth the extra time to detail out right (same with the tail light buckets, although they are missing the bulb separation between the back-up light bay and the turn signal bay.
  10. To answer your question, Danno, the kit fits with room in the box. So, I don't believe that would be a reason.
  11. To be fair to Ed, Scott; I was cut out of the development early when I leaked info that they were in development of this kit (In my defense, I didn't know that the conversations Ed and I had were private and confidential). The next time Ed contacted me was as the kit was already coming back from its' last test shots and for some info on the SSP package and car-specific (not agency specific) options for what years of build (such as when 10-holes went away for the stock version, when map pockets were installed, things of this nature). By the time I got to see the final results, it was too late (Toledo, and then again in Indy) for any real changes. They did go back and shrink the 5.0L emblem by 50% as Ed and I discussed that it was too large, but when addressing the other issues with the body it was too late. I feel somewhat personally responsible for this kit, as I did have knowledge of its coming and development. Being an owner of these cars (5 total and still own 3 as of this moment), I feel as though I have let down the Fox loyal (including myself and even Ed). Hopefully we can get a corrected body, as correcting this one (to the 'rivet counter' standards) will require a LOT of work.
  12. Yes, I do have the 1/32nd scale coupes, and they have a roofline/greenhouse that is closer to scale than this. I have been in the garage the last week with my kit body, measuring it up against my 1:1 Fox. It is flat-out WRONG from the window strip up. No matter the glass in or not, you can't deny the 1.75" chop this kit has. Anybody who owns these cars can SEE it, they don't need to measure it (but I did just to be 100% sure). To all of those who want to get on those who wanted a styrene LX, finally have it, and are now complaining: There is a reason we are (so get over yourselves). Accuracy is paramount, and this is not it. The chassis plate, interior (for the most part), and driveline are quite nice, but the body just fails to hit the mark. Believe me, nobody wanted this body correct more than me, and I even went so far as to get Ed and his development team in contact with a Mustang shop to get pictures and measurements (it will be represented in the upcoming drag car release of this kit). I have had multiple email and phone conversations with Ed while this kit was in its infancy and later at the tail end of development. I have been with this kit almost since concept, and for me to say what I do about it HURTS me. I love the Fox chassis, and will do whatever it takes to see one in any scale/representation; so to say this one missed the mark proportionally is a personal blow to me. All of you 'it is accurate' guys get the point yet? It sure ISN'T accurate.
  13. ^^^That pizza looks sooooooooooo good (dang this high-protein diet I have right now. Starting back into lifting weights and dropping pounds from my midsection) What is the picture limit per post?
  14. Project Honda 1:1

    funny you say that, Tom. The Buckeye Scale Auto Classic did away with the TUNER class as the first year only had 1 entry. But, I have seen quite a few more show up this year at the show. They get grouped in with LowRiders or curbside. Now, most Tuners just can't compete with a well done lowrider, but I personally prefer the tuner aspect to lowriders (depends on the style and quality of either build).
  15. Pizza sauce? Thanks Brett, now I am hungry. I am not so much worried about pics for myself (I have had mine for over a week now, a gift from Ed) as I am pics for everybody else. (I was told not to say anything until they started hitting shelves). If I tried to post all the pics I have (well over 100), it would overload the site. (and in case you believe me to be kidding, there are a few who still post here who HAVE seen the pics).
  16. So, with those weighing in on having theirs already, where are the pics? JasonC, the SSI intake was NOT one of BBKs better intakes. It only performed marginally at best, and the only real things it had going for it were that it was better than a stocker (even the Ford GT40 outperformed the SSI) and it sure looked cool as all heck. It suffers from too small of a feed opening and too little plenum volume. now, get in there and open it up, then couple it to your ProCharger and you might just have something (Yes, I do play with FOX cars for a second living/fun).
  17. Project Honda 1:1

    That B18 would be an almost direct swap. Grab the intermediate shaft from a DC2 and the mounts from a Del-Sol and you are in. Is it a B18B or a disguised B18C?
  18. Mini truck build....update Started

    I agree, smoothside beds are so much nicer. I just picked up an old Datsun smoothside pick-up and was deciding it's fate. May have to go with a clean mini-truck build for it!
  19. Fox Chassis (Ford) community build anyone?

    Heck yeah, finish her up! Love seeing the Foxes built, and the older MPC/AMT kits can look good when done right!
  20. Mini truck build....update Started

    Chuck, do you have the hood from that FC you took the engine from? If so, take the scoop too! Or go real crazy and use a Scooby STI Tidal Wave hood scoop!
  21. With the thin-skinned and tight-underwear-sporting majority in this hobby, better to keep it to yourself (or approach the matter via PM). Otherwise, you have a bunch of crybabies and a large clean-up on isle 6 to deal with.
  22. They are MOLDED in red, not painted. I can 100% gaurantee that. So that can be put to bed, and I have word from VERY GOOD authority that Revell will replace the red MOLDED lenses with clear lenses if you file a parts request via the normal channels. This is a current running change-over on their production lines right now.
  23. Fox mustang rarities

    The 5.0 badge first appeared on the Fox in its first year (1979), but as Rick states it really didn't come into the spotlight until the return of the GT in 1982. 1986 saw the SEFI 5.0L hit production, along with the 8.8" and true dual exhaust. Also, thanks to the NTHSB, the chmsl was implemented across the board. Most people consider the 'Meca' of 5.0L to be 1989, when it went 50-state MAF. This ushered in the age of tunable EFI as we know it today.
  24. Fox mustang rarities

    Jason, that is why I said the TurboGT was unveiled as a test for the EEC4/SEFI set-up. Yes, you could get the Turbo4 from 1979-82, but it was a draw-through carb set-up that was marginal at best. And I was referring to the TurboGT in particular for its' significance to the coming EFI generation. Being that I own a TurboGT, I have done quite a bit of research on the car and its rarity. Mine is an early-84, which means it still has the TRX/Slapper Bar suspension, non-Fog light nose, and 3-piece rear decklid spoiler. Mid-84 (hence the 1984&1/2 moniker), they switched to the Fog-light nose, the single-piece decklid spoiler, and the Quad-Shock Sport suspension. Engines were really unchanged from 1983 to 1984, with both years carrying the small VAM, 30#ph injectors, non-intercooled, and Garrett T3 .60/.63 non-water-cooled turbos. The XR4Tis got the same set-up, but with a water-cooled center section Garrett. The SVO received the intercooler, large VAM, 35#ph injectors, and the PE computer. 83-86 Thunderbird TurboCoupes were the same as the TurboGT, but in some cases getting the front-mount intercooler via Ford Motorsports. 87-88 saw the TurboCoupe get the top-mount intercooler, large VAM, 35# injectors, anf the IHI-Warner .60/.48 turbo. And you are correct, Jason, in the fact that the GT350 (Anny) pictured is actually a V8 car. There were only 147 Turbo4 Annys built.
  25. Are all imports curbside?

    Aoshima is a mixed bag, some are curbside while others have engine detail. Their boxes will denote whether it has an engine or not.