I think this is a great mid winter slump buster kit. If you are a "box stock" builder it does have some pitfalls as noted already. If you are more of a "parts box" builder and swap out pieces here and there this a is a nice kit. I swapped the wheels and used a modern R-M 440 in one build and just wheels on another. A couple issues I remember not already noted is I had a little issue with the hood fit (easily fixed) and the position of the front wheels being a bit far back in the wheel well (also easily fixed and a good time to lower the nose just a bit). Since yours is a red one paint the interior dark metallic red.
3D printing will change parts of the hobby just like resin parts did. How---I don't know but it will. I am working on a design for a 3D printed canned ham camper. My66S55 is right, all the work is in the cad design. 3D printers like large flat things (with some ribbing or they can warp) - like the sides of a camper. Thick or tall things take more time and cost more.
On a tech note the new SLA style "printers" have some really good results. My company had one of the old SLA printers that cost 250K in the late 90's. We now have a high end FDM style printer but we are thinking of supplementing it with one of the new SLA's due to the quality and lower cost. What cad program did you use?
This is a great build! I like the way you are making the clear sections. Back in the late 80's/early 90's I parted out scores of 64-68 full size Pontiacs. Since you are going to this much work I wanted to share that the clear sections of the wheel should be tinted slightly in a shade similar to the color of the metallic plastic the rest of the wheel is molded in. The tint gets a little darker on the 67-68 wheels. Although many of the re-cast wheels on restored cars are clear I was able to find one good picture showing an original blue tinted wheel (a 65). Carmak
First a big thanks to Casey for glass!! Jim, My 69 bird body does NOT have the insignia on the C-pillar (it is on the box art). I am not in a hurry on the tail lights. Let me know either way when you decide. Thanks Craig
I am an engineer at a medical company that has used multiple methods to make short run (less than 1000 and sometimes less than 50) parts. My company does not do it as a service but I know two former co-workers that are now on their own that may. Nice looking masters. Are those printed or SLA? Carmak
I have been working with low volume injection tooling for 15+ years in the medical device field. Is you plan: * print the master and pour the injection mold components. * print the mold * print the master to confirm the geometry and CNC machine the tool.
I will share with you that our low volume presses would not be able to fill and pack a body tool or any origin. The clamping pressure required by the surface area is way to high. You could easily be into the 50 ton+ range. You may need to shoot multi-piece bodies. I would rather have an ABS multi-piece body than a resin body. I am glad to hear someone talking about low volume tooling to aftermarket parts. My vote is for the 71 Polara 2drHT or 4drHT! Carmak
Reminds me a bit of my wife's car. We have had it for 18 years. I can see how you would miss that 58. We had a 58 Coupe before we got the 57. There is a 58 Coupe with a similar color combo in a junk yard in Burlington, IA. Craig
My spin on this would be the most of the same kit I ever bought at once. Back in the 90's I bought a 12 kit case of the MPC 69 442 kit. I was at the old Ertl outlet store and a worker came out with the case which was ripped open at one end. I asked if they would sell the whole case. Yep, $6 for the case as is. As I wanted them for the chassis I was not concerned about the case being ripped open (turned out none of the plastic was damaged). I sure do miss the Ertl outlet store.
Useless trivia: I had a 58 Fleetwood parts car years ago. There is no sheet metal behind those massive qtr panels. They are screwed on along the top and have a couple angled supports.at the bottom. Also the skirts are nearly as heavy as a cylinder head.
I would rather have a curbside with a spot on body (like an AMT craftsman) than a detailed kit with a proportion issue (Revell 69 Mustang) and other people would rather have the opposite. None of us are right or wrong. As an engineer that designs injection molded plastic parts that are tooled by some of the same tool builders that made AMT tooling in the 90's I can tell you that a new multi piece chassis tool is a way more costly than you think. A "simple" change like removing the exhaust from a chassis could easily cost tens of thousands. My vote would be to use that limited cash to restore "long lost" tools with missing parts of subjects we have not had in decades (like the 68 Coronet ).