[[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 This theme may be out of date.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.]]

highway

Members
  • Content count

    5,183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About highway

  • Rank
    MCM Ohana
  • Birthday 02/04/1976

Previous Fields

  • Scale I Build
    1/25

Profile Information

  • Location
    Talentless Hack University at Wheelman's Warehouse
  • Full Name
    Matthew Brownlee, card carrying member of the Donnie Boger fan club

Recent Profile Visitors

17,686 profile views
  1. I've tried about a half a dozen times to reply to a topic in the truck section and every time I hit reply, I get an error message "404 Page Not Found". Is anyone else having problems or am I just special!?!?
  2. 7 Muscle Cars I Hope Will Be Kitted Soon

    Other than the spelling errors, this has been one of the best replies to this thread! One addition to add to older tooling being only designed to support one version of a kit especially when it comes to the AMT/MPC kits mentioned in the opening post, most if not all of those kits mentioned were annual kits so that tooling was modified for every year. That is why many of the reissues are of whatever year the last of that body was because those are the only molds to still exist. Also in reply to the opening post, sorry that those kits don't meet the high standards of more modern kits but that means more of them available for those of us that do like the older kits. I would almost bet the farm too that if something like a 70 Trans Am (which the old Monogram fits the bill for me just fine) or a kit of the 74-76 would be remolded, Round 2 would be using the underpinnings from the long in the tooth 79 Trans Am since all the GM F bodies were built on the same platform from 1970 to 1981.
  3. D-100 Reissued -- C-10 Next ?

    This would be that custom dually that resides in my stash. There is also one that was not mentioned, the 1981 issue of the "Ground Shaker" that has the (in my opinion much better looking) 4 eyed Chevy grille. Also, if you look hard enough or get lucky enough to just happen across them as I did, there is 8 foot bed options in the aftermarket and along with that also found this.
  4. I don't know if this was mentioned or not, I will admit I wasn't reading comments and just looking at your outstanding work while listening to my wallet whimper for mercy, but I noticed on this sheet you also have 455 markings for the shaker hood. The 455 was not offered in 1977.
  5. 90-96 Bronco in scale?

    As Rob said, combining the AMT 92 to 95 F150s and the MPC 80 to 86 Bronco would work for the mid and late 90s Broncos, but also be sure to use the tail lights from the pickup truck for the correct smooth style tail lights used on the later model trucks and Broncos rather than the earlier grooved style. 80 to 86 tail lights 87-96 tail lights Also, and I'm not sure what years other than they are also the 87-96 style tail lights, and I think maybe the change happened on the 92-96 trucks as my 1990 F350 has the above style, but some of the smooth tail lights also have a wraparound reverse lens. Also, for the 87 to 91 style Broncos you could use the Monogram/Revell F250 or F350 pickup and on of the Monogram/Revell 1/24th scale Bronco kits for those years.
  6. I'm really hoping the flat bed will be soon, and maybe with an option to have the front axle posed in both up and down positions. As for the Fords, they don't do anything for me because I don't care for those year Ford pickups, but I do hope Moebius does as they did with the big rig tire sets and offer the utility bed as a standalone product in addition to being in the Ford kit. I have quite a few ideas for that utility bed, but I don't want to waste money on the Ford kits just for the utility bed and junk the rest of the kit.
  7. Are these both AMT Rigs? Help!

    Oh, I can understand the eyes not being what they used to be! Over the past couple years mine have went from where I needed a set of magnifying reading glasses just for fine detail work to needing them just to work on a model now. The worst was the past month though after finding out I have diabetes and while my body was adjusting to taking insulin, my eyes went from clear vision to a blur where I needed those reading glasses just to see. Thankfully everything cleared back up to what it was before I started insulin.
  8. Are these both AMT Rigs? Help!

    If you look at the second pic, both of these have the Hendrickson suspension on them, and the W925 also had an early version with the torsion bar suspension. I just recently won one in a Facebook auction group I'm in of the original issue Watkins W925 with the torsion bar suspension for a price so low I feel like I stole it!
  9. Bill Elliott transporter questions

    I'm sorry, but you would be wrong in this information because the AMT Elliott transporter is correct for the time period. Sam, to answer your question, here is a pic of the real transporter that matches or is at least the closest match to the AMT kit and to replicate the Ford LTL9000 as it is in the pic you would need the cab assembly from Italeri's US Wrecker Truck kit #3825 and the sleeper from the Italeri or Revell US rebox of the Ford Aeromax 120. As for how many cars it hauled, that I'm not sure of, but I'm converting mine to be a two car hauler.
  10. 2019 Revell (Germany)

    You thunk correctly Rob, the Challenger T/A also had the side dump exhaust.
  11. Terrible Box Art

    Yes, the "checkerboard" boxes were Walmart exclusive, as were "Motorworks" boxes from Revell.
  12. Terrible Box Art

    The incorrectness of this (other than just like the "box of chocolates" Nova I posted earlier you never knew exactly what you were getting in the box) is that while the kit description may or may not be correct if stock 67 Impala is what is actually inside, the box art photos come from the early 90s issues of this kit. That was in the time where AMT was offering the stock kit as one kit and the custom or "street" versions in a separate kit.
  13. Terrible Box Art

    Though I think reading through this thread, a few of these were already mentioned, but my vote for the all time worst box art is AMT's RC2 days in the late 2000s like this one. I like to call these the "box of chocolate" kits, because you never know what is actually going to be inside! No kit descriptions, and specifically with this kit, it doesn't even represent the kit that is actually in the box. I bought this kit specifically because I wanted to build a stock run of the mill "grocery getter" Nova like it shows on the box, and to my dismay open it up to find out that what is inside is only parts to build a pro street style car, no stock option parts are included. I ended up picking up a reissue of the "Squad Rod" just so I could have my stock Nova to get my scale groceries in!
  14. Terrible Box Art

    It isn't that the Japanese companies are still trying to use the gimmick of motorization, it's due to the fact that when these kits were originally molded in the late 70s or 80s for a Japanese kit to be imported to the US, it had to be sold as a "toy". That is why the older ARII, Tamiya, and Fujimi kits all have provisions for motorization and some are not done as good as others. As with most things though until importing foreign kits as we enjoy today got easier, there are some notable exceptions to the rules back then, and mostly an American manufacturer reboxing an import kit. Many of the old Testors yellow box kits are either Tamiya, Italeri, or the best of them all Fujimi Enthusiast kits. The early to mid 80s Revell GT40 is actually a Fujimi kit reboxed, as is the AMT "Back to the Future" DeLorean which was actually molded by Aoshima.
  15. New Forum Rules

    So, wouldn't your own comment fall under this rule?? 2) Personal attacks will not be tolerated. We believe that encouraging and/or constructive criticism can help, but putting a person down does not accomplish anything for the community. Also, flaming, name calling, and off-color cartoons, images, or content are NOT permitted. Personal attacks are grounds for immediate banning. Or at least this subsection of Rule #7: • Belittling someone because their beliefs are different than your own I'm guessing I'm not going to be posting here much anymore, if even at all. If I have an opinion or have facts to either back up or disprove someone else's, I'm going to voice it, and both of those seem to be frowned upon here now.