Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Force

  • Rank
    MCM Ohana

Previous Fields

  • Scale I Build

Profile Information

  • Location
    Umea, Sweden
  • Full Name
    Håkan Persson

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. To add to that, due to length regulations and demand they almost exclusively do cabovers here in Europe, I don't know of any conventionals made now. Like the US manufacturers, they only do conventionals as there is no demand for COE's anymore.
  2. Rodders Journal is still around, but it comes out only four times a year so every three months you get a new issue. They have recently relocated tho'. Rodders Journal is one of the good magazines left since The Enthusiast Network (TEN) folded most of their paper magazine lineup including the Hot Rod DeLuxe.
  3. Brutalform wrote: Thanks for clearing that up. I’m glad the body is good to go. If I can ask you another question? Would the R Code with the XL trim level either have a bench seat or buckets with a console? The XL trim level wich came for the 1962 model year includes a more blingy interior with bucket seats and center console, the lower level 500 has bench. XL was top of the line until the LTD came.
  4. Ford engines were black from 1959 up to late 1965 when the 1966 model year started, so from 1966 model year the were blue. R-code engines were available in most of the full size Custom and Galaxie body styles and as the XL (wich is a trim package and top of the line) was available with the R-code 427's the quarter panel badge would be right, for the poverty caps, it doesn't really matter if they were on the option list for the XL trim package, they could easily have been changed afterwards...I use 7 X 15 and 8 X 15 steel wheels and poverty caps on my 1963½ 500XL and it looks great. The wheels for the 65 R-code cars could have been 15 inch instead of the standard 14 inch, I know they were on many 63 and 64 Q and R-code cars.
  5. Here is a very good site for truck kit instructions, box art and a lot more useful stuff. https://public.fotki.com/modeltrucks25thscale/truckkit_instructions/ https://public.fotki.com/modeltrucks25thscale/ This could maybe be pinned on top of the first page so it's easy to find.
  6. Instruction pages from the AMT Kenworth Challenge Mixer kit from the Modeltrucks25 Fotki albums, a great source for truck kit instructions and other great stuff.
  7. Both the Rubber Duck and Pig Pen Mack's were mentioned in text earlier in this thread. The Rubber Duck truck was a Western RS700L and there is no kit made of one of those, but AITM has one in resin, the Pig Pen can be done from the AMT Cruiseliner. and Modeltruckin' has decals for both. Yes it was a Kenworth W900 in the first movie, a GMC General in the second and a Peterbilt 359 in the third. The KW W900 in your picture is a clone and not really correct for the movie truck. Here is the real truck. And a much better, more correct clone.
  8. It's most likely meant to be a N14 but the engine is still the same NTC as they used in several other truck kits starting with the Freightliner FLC kit but without the aftercooler. The NTC and N14 looks very different in the cylinder head area, especially the valve covers, but that didn't Italeri bother to do anything about, they just modified the intake area and instead of a water to air aftercooler on the engine they did an air to air intercooler in front of the radiator and it's the only upgrade they did...so it's not a correct N14 by any means. If you want a more correct N14 Auslowe has one.
  9. Most of the Cummins N14 I have seen are also black, some with red valve covers. As far as I know there is no Cummins with NTD designation, I think AMT had it wrong when they did the White Western Star, it should be NTC 350 not NTD 350.
  10. Same here, your builds are a huge inspiration.
  11. As mentioned a few posts above AMT did the Suzanne Somers 1956 T-bird back in 2003. The Pharao's Custom Mercury is a 1951 and that year has never been done as a model kit, but the movie car can be done from the 1949's from either AMT or Revell as it's all we got for the "shoebox" Mercury. But a 1951 Merc is quite different from the 49-50, the rear window opening is larger and has a different shape with sharp pointed lower corners, they are rounded on the 49-50, and the rear quarter panels are longer and extends beyond the trunk wich they doesn't do on the 49-50, the 51 also have different "church window" style tail lights and they kept them on the movie car. The dash panel and gauges are also very different from the 49, they upgraded it for the 1950 model year and continued with the same panel for 51. The grille is also different on the 1951 but it was custom with just a single bar in the middle on the movie car so it doesn't matter. So to do a correct one it involves some work. Star Models has a chopped 51 Coupe in resin but it's not exactly correct as it's most likely based on the AMT 49 and has the 49-50 rear window shape for the opening with rounded lower corners and it has to be modified further to more resemble the movie car. In my personal opinion the 1951 is my least favoured "shoebox" Mercury of the three followed by the 1949, and I like the 1950 the best, it would have been nice if Revell had done a 50 instead of a 49 as AMT allready had one.
  12. The rear end of the chassis on the Revell Germany T600 is the same as in their K100 kits, the Revell Germany W900 is from a different tool, it has a KW Air Glide 100 suspension as the K100 has but the W900 shares nothing with the K100's. It looks like you have some progress and it looks good...the yellow Cummins engine stands out a bit and should originally have been beige.
  13. The springs are separate but the front of the frame is different from the 359 and the bumper mounts are molded to the frame Here are the instructions for the 352 https://public.fotki.com/modeltrucks25thscale/truckkit_instructions/amt/t502_peterbilt_352/ Wich 359 frame are you using?
  • Create New...