Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

highway

Members
  • Posts

    5,380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by highway

  1. On 10/15/2019 at 10:59 PM, Pete L. said:

    I wonder if the Pace Car/Convertible will ever be reissued...

    It had been (and a much better kit in my honest opinion) by Monogram. 

    1818042231_Monogram69CamaroIndyPaceCar.jpg.747195b32cbb0e66ad9554baa17dde0d.jpg

    I'm not sure if later Revell reissues of the same kit still also include the Pace car markings or not, but as I said in my opinion these are far better than any of the early AMT or MPC offerings of a 69 Camaro. I'm sure if nothing else there are aftermarket decals available for the Revell offerings for the Pace Car edition. 

    • Like 1
  2. 15 minutes ago, Daddyfink said:

    So, the engine vs. no engine shall remain an argument for the ages. But, as I learned from a wise, and very talented, model builders years ago is, who is going to see it while it sits on a shelf collecting dust? 

    Also, how much more would this kit be if the extra tooling had to be made for the engine and everything that goes with it? I know, some of you would pay it, but, some of us would hesitate. 

    Like I said before, we as American model builders are spoiled with almost every kit having an engine, even if it is a lump of an engine. But like I also said, I would happily buy a well detailed and proportioned kit if it meant no engine. Current tooled kits have been hit and miss by U.S. kit makers, but Tamiya has been pretty consistent in quality and fidelity. And most of their kits do not have engines. 

    Don't believe me, then go build a Tamiya kit and then decide. 

    EXACTLY!!! You hit the nail on the head and drove it in all in shot Jesse! 

    My only question is how many that complain about Tamiya making this a curbside kit or any other curbsides for that matter and also complain about import kit prices would trip over a Tamiya kit running for the chance to spend twice to three times the cost of an import kit for an old screwbottom kit or promo that is gasp....A CURBSIDE!!! 

  3. 1 hour ago, tim boyd said:

    You guys already know how I feel about this so I will make it short and brief 

    It amazes me that once again Tamiya gets a breather for omitting the engine - arguably the single most important part of a race car - from this kit.   Sorry,  a few pieces depicting what looks like an engine from underneath does not even get close to cutting it in my book.   

    The rest of the kit looks just great - but without the engine it is just becomes a huge fail, and a huge missed opportunity not only for us kit builders, but for the kitmaker as well. 

         TIM

    Yes, it might be one of the most important parts of the race car (last time I checked, a car doesn't get too far without a highly skilled driver) and if you watch racing regularly, you'll also know it is the BIGGEST GUARDED SECRETS IN RACING!!  Sure, it sounds like the car the kit is few years old by now, but there may or may not be secrets under the hood the team doesn't want reviled to the public, because rival teams could buy the kit just as easy as any of us can to try to learn about the car. 

    I tire of seeing these complaints of engine VS curbside, because in my honest opinion it doesn't matter to me because no matter if the kit is Tamiya, Revell, Aoshima, Meng, Italeri, AMT, Monogram, or Fujimi, 99.99% of the time the built model is going to be sitting on my shelf with the hood CLOSED so I really don't care if a kit has a fully detailed engine or is a curbside.  

  4. On 3/15/2020 at 3:58 PM, Can-Con said:

    They were able to because they had paid for the licencing for a few years. It seems to go back and forth between the companys  a lot in those days.

    Even GM had contemplated changing "Trans Am" to just "T/A" for the 3rd generation cars so they  wouldn't have to deal with the SCCA, who have always owned the rights to the name, not GM.

     

     

    On 3/15/2020 at 7:42 PM, 1972coronet said:

    Which is why Dodge employed T/A on their 1970 Challenger --- can't copyright numbers nor acronyms .

    Steve, I am quite aware that the SCCA owns the name to the Trans Am and not Pontiac/GM because I have loved anything associated with the screaming chicken for almost 40 years and have almost every kit made of the car except for a few of the annuals that have eluded me. I also know other than PMD for the real cars, the only model company that ever ponied up the money to SCCA for the Trans AM name was Monogram and like John said for the Challenger though that version of their car ran in the Trans Am series also, it was known just as a "T/A". That is also why most all of my Trans Am kits are older issue Monogram kits, because while I have thought of picking up the newer reissue of the 70 for the expanded decal sheet for interior details and such, I still have an original Monogram decal sheet for the "Trans Am" names that have been left off ever since the Revell/Monogram merger because Revell never would spend the extra to call the Trans Am what it truly was after they bought Monogram who had the licencing from the SCCA. That name on those cars are one rivet I can't skip counting!  

  5. 9 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

    easy fix though, just need a pair of scissors.

    It's kind like with MPC not having the Trans Am licensing back in the day ;)

    Oh yes, the wonder broken up TRA NS AM on the decal sheets! :lol: The only thing I still don't understand is how MPC without that licencing was able to use the Trans Am names on the box art, because quite a few of those old late 70s and early 80s Trans Am kits have "Firebird Trans Am" on the box even into the AMT days.

    One thing that I'm disappointed in with the Rubicon is I think Revell completely messed up more than just the spelling on LIFEGUARD with this kit. It's just my opinion so you can agree with it or not, but now that I have watched the unboxing video this has went from a "can't wait to see what's inside" to a "meh, I don't really care if I pick one up or not and probably won't" because I think Revell could have sold to many more by keeping the previous issue's off road parts in the kit as well as the new factory stock parts and day two add ons such as the snorkel and more aggressive tires than what you'd probably roll off the dealer lot with. I for one was planning on buying a few if the Baja Claw tires from the previous issue would have been included as options in this issue just for tires for the parts box without leaving me with a kit without tires and wheels I could have still built as a factory stock or a slightly modified in progress rig with a mix of the parts from both the new parts and the previous issue parts. As I said, this is just my opinion so I don't really care if anyone agrees with the way I feel or not, but I just see it as one more thing in a long line of things Revell messes up, and just not a misspelling on the decal sheet! Good job Revell, because I know for sure you lost at least a solid few kits you would have sold to me just because you couldn't make this kit be built optional ways. 

  6. 38 minutes ago, espo said:

    I like the red color and the paint finish. So often seen in white with blue stripe or blue with the white stripe, this really stands out. 

    It does stand out in red and I do think in 71 as Eric is representing this one as the color lineup did expand, the reason that this kit is so often seen in the white with the blue stripe or the reverse is that were the only two color choices for the Trans Am model in 1970. You could have the Firebird in any of the colors Pontiac offered for it, but for the true Trans Am, they were only offered in white or blue, expanded for just white with blue stripes in 1969. 

  7. 29 minutes ago, Plowboy said:

    Personally, I don't keep track of what I spend on the hobby or any one build. If I have the money and want something, I get it. If I don't, I don't. I will spend whatever it takes to make my vision become a tangible object. It may cost $40. It may go well over $100. Doesn't matter to me. 

     

    15 minutes ago, SfanGoch said:

    That's the ticket.

    Yes, exactly! Also, in the case of this build mostly because of my build speed being slower than molasses in winter and this being in progress for 10 years now:

    HPIM4781.JPG.febaeb19637d6a92475f4092013e12f8.JPG

    between kits, kits bought for parts for an engine donor, resin and aftermarket pieces, and paint including colorshifting paint on both truck and trailer and different colorshifting paint for the frames of both and also shades of Alclad including Prismatic Chrome for the roof and floor of the trailer, I would say a rough estimate I have probably close to $300 or $400 into this model at this time. I'd say $150 of that is for kits alone, including the parts kit that donated the engine, and since the project still isn't finished there is no telling what else I my find that I might want to dress it up with. If someone thinks about $80 (which is what I figured out the $120 CD would be in USD) is too expensive for someone to be in the hobby for the car portion, which I've got that in or probably more in a few of my car projects with donor kits, resin bodies, and accessories, then definitely stay away from the big rig kits because you'll have just that much in just most of the base tractor kits out of the box! 

  8. 7 hours ago, vincen47 said:

     

    However, they are 10 lug/hole aluminum wheels, and 16” wheels are usually 8 lug/hole wheels, even the fancy covers that go over the typical plain 16” one ton 5 hole steel wheels. 

     

    If I remember correctly, since most of the one tons we have available are older (HINT HINT WHOEVER FROM THE MODEL COMPANIES ARE READING THIS!!) trucks from the 90s, I think the Super Duty Ford from that era that equates to the F450s and F550s of today may have been available with 10 lug axles. I'm almost certain a 1990 FSuperDuty rollback I drove about 20 years ago had 10 lug axles on it, but I'm not 100% sure, but sitting at a stop light a few weeks ago noticed a new Ram 5500 rollback did have 10 lugs on it. 

    As for customs, which it seems most most people want to use semi wheels on duallys, even 1/25th scale wheels on the pickups for the big wheel and rubber band tire and ground scrapping looks, the aftermarket in the 1:1 world have conversions to convert 8 lug to 10 lug, so no matter the plan the lug pattern wouldn't be much of an issue.

  9. 1 hour ago, Snake45 said:

    Well, I don't know anything about trucks. 

    Of the two cars shown, I think the Impala was always Revell, never Monogram, and the Camaro is 1/24, not 1/25. 

    I still can't think of any Monogram, 1/25, car snapper kits. :unsure:

    I'm sorry you don't know about trucks because they are vital for everything you have, maybe you should broaden your modeling horizons beyond 4 wheels. :)

    As for the scale on the Camaro, I corrected myself in the second post with the pictures so I could have be confusing it with the truck kits and the fact that the others are all 1/25th scale that I thought the Camaro was also. The main point of my original comment wasn't really for scales, but kit histories and how some really either seem to care or just think because a kit came out in the past couple years or is coming in 2020 it should be "new" or just because a kit is a Skill Level 2 and has the little glue drop symbol on the box there is no way it could be the same kit that came in a Snap Tite box years ago. 

    1 hour ago, Luc Janssens said:

    Hmmm, somehow the topic changed from Round2 to Monogram

    The same way the Revell thread spiraled into talk about AMT 69 Chevelles and El Caminos and other AMT kits! :lol:

  10. 1 minute ago, Snake45 said:

    I'm trying without success to think of what kits you're talking about here. Can you enlighten me/us? :unsure:

    Sure. A couple of truck kits, and those are the ones that seem to be the ones most don't believe the snap tite roots, and a couple of car kits

    _Monogram-1505-Kenworth-W900-Aerodyne-1-25-1991parts.jpg.6f2fbea70c7752e69b922c5f4d451e71.jpg

    918mAA-mj1L._SL1500_.jpg.481593456690552bd80606490c2f17e6.jpg

    472233210_MonogramPeteerbilt359SNAP.jpg.f6a2670e3780e5f7bb23c6bb5ddeb2b0.jpg67556128_RevellPeterbilt359SNAP.png.33904f8fe2957cdc9774947ed40069cd.png

    Even though these are both Revell, it was around the merger time but still fits the ex snap that has no mention of being snap kits anymore. 

    revell-1994-chevy-impala-ss.jpg.0722582e212f448d06e08e2528ea35b9.jpgrevell-1994-chevy-impala-ss-snaptite-27.jpg.20fc44dea2a087a294a58d52c6893746.jpg

    Another Revell only, but years before the merger. 

    Rev7220web.jpg.776d407eaab688c187a340e264345057.jpgrevell-captain-hook-1977-gmc-wrecker-tow-truck-snap-together-1.jpg.c6732cd535a659d8141639b70d944bd5.jpg

    And finally for now one that was 1/24th, but is still an ex Monogram Snap Tite that I had as a wee lad and I have the reissue kit now and plan on painting it as the Simon and Simon car. 

    221842372_!B-ldclQ!2k(KGrHqUOKisEz(CCWkrDBM9EW81Qm!_3.jpg.3f454c3b1ece90dc88de6446f1b61000.jpgrevell-1985-camaro-z28.jpg.c27e6bce0c818fdcc58a9280c102115f.jpg

     

  11. 19 minutes ago, Ron Hamilton said:

    Remember. In 1964, part of the 442 package was a 4 speed manual transmission. The 64 Olds Cutlass tool has a automatic transmission console. I have a hardtop and a convertible that needs a windshield header. I had planned to combine a 64 body with the superior 66 chassis and drivetrain for a future project.

    Yes Ron, back in the day the true definition of the 442 package was 4 barrel carb, 4 speed trans, and dual exhaust, correct? That was at least what I had always heard was what it stood for. 

     

  12. 41 minutes ago, Rob Hall said:

    There will be the inevitable posts from clueless people on Facebook that buy the kit thinking it's a new tool and then whine about the molded-in-one-piece chassis and wire axles....people need to learn the history and inform themselves....

    That's the problem Rob, most people don't or won't or would just rather argue about it than inform themselves of kit histories and thinking it will be an all new kit just because a new body is being retooled. The same goes for a few old ex Monogram tools that were nicely done 1/25th scale snap kits that have been reissued without any mention to the snap on the box and I've seen people swear they are not snap kits but glue kits, even after presented with evidence that the kit started life as a snap kit just to say something like those aren't the same kit. I don't know if some I've seen are acting clueless to have fun behind a keyboard or are really that clueless, but no matter the case the clueless of the hobby will never understand and never take the time to learn that there are histories to these kits they like to call "toys".  

  13. Peter, as Brian said, the middle is a custom sleeper unit and the dome is for TV and it has the roof mounted A/C unit. The truck itself is commonly know as an expediter and usually team driven for LTL (less than truckload) expedited freight, and since there is also a reefer unit on the box on this in the pic, this particular one is set up for temperature controlled freight as well.  Other than what has already been mentioned, the only other thing I'm seeing by enlarging the pic in the way of antennas on the sleeper is a chromed older style Qualcomm antenna dome, which is used primarily for communication with dispatch, but also with newer Qualcomm units in the cab serve as the driver's logs and GPS.  

  14. OH NO, THE SKY IS FALLING!! ROUND 2 IS DISCONTINUING KITS ISSUED IN 2018!!!

    I have both the Scout and the NYPD van on the list "in stock" in my stash that both have 2018 issue dates on them, and as quite a few of the others I remember on that list that have been out for a while and been out long enough a few I had actually forgot had been out,  time to move them out and make room for new stock. 

  15. 16 hours ago, Mark said:

    How do you get two cars with one body?  

     

    15 hours ago, SfanGoch said:

    According to the instruction sheet for AMT 626, there are roadster and chopped coupe bodies along with two separate frames.

     

    14 hours ago, Plowboy said:

    The one issued in the '60's and 2010 did have two bodies and you could build two complete models with them.

    The one issued in '01 only had one body. No coupe body. It could be built two different ways. But, you couldn't build two complete models from it.

    After seeing the bottom of the box in the pic in the link Joe had posted and I obviously had missed when I compared the two, I did not realize the stock and roadster versions used the same roadster body, that was my mistake. I normally don't even build hot rods like this, but since it has the multiple options of not only the hot rod but the stock T as well and the stock version does interest me, that is the only reason these kits inhabit my stash. 

  16. 22 hours ago, Mark said:

    That's just it...it hadn't been a double kit since the late Sixties.  The stock height coupe was issued in the mid-Seventies, the roadster a few times, but none had all of the parts for two cars.

    Yes it did have parts for two cars in it, because as I said in my previous post the ONLY difference between the 25 Roadster kit issued 2001 and the Double T kit issued in 2010 was the 2001 issue did not have the chopped T body. Other than that I have both kits and I have compared them and parts are there to build TWO COMPLETE CARS IN BOTH KITS!

  17. 3 hours ago, Jantrix said:

    One that pops to mind was the AMT Double T kit. Before the R2 issue, the last release was in 1961 and the molds were MIA according to AMT. This is particularly personal is because I'd just spent quite a bit for an incomplete kit to build one for a family member, and then a year later .......... ?

    If you are speaking of this 2010 reissue of the Double T Rob

    549847849_AMTDoubleT.jpg.169c5c7228e5ff451b70b1cb832e3976.jpg

    there was a reissue prior to it in 2001. 

    911804913_AMT1925FordRoadster.jpg.dc1d8aea2fb2aeef43d47001b38db9ce.jpg

    The only difference and possibly the missing mold you were referring to is the 2001 issue does not have the chopped T body in it, but I have both kits and have compared them and with the exception of the chopped body, they are the same. 

  18. I'm happy to see this coming out because it has been one I've wanted but not wanted to pay the crazy prices to buy to build, and even happier that I didn't sell a resin Outlaw style hood I got in a resin parts lot for this kit! It was going to hit the chopping block because I thought I'd never have this kit but thanks to the reissue it will find it's way to the shelf. 

  19. It would be just under 13'6" Hermann, almost as tall as the trailer would be. I'm not sure what that would convert to in meters for you across the pond, but here in the states our trailers are 13"6" and most of the condo style trucks like that are a couple inches shorter, so as long as your total height would be around 13'2" or 13'4" at the back of the cab you should be fine for close enough. As for the dimensions you asked for, the best I could give you is a guess of maybe 8 1/2 feet to 9 feet from the bottom of the cab to the top of the roof, but since those are more or less found just like in your pic rotting away in a field or just already junked and recycled, I would say the best way to make it would be mock the cab up on the frame and measure from the ground to where the total height measurement I gave you would be and mark that on a piece of cardboard and start your scratchbuilding from there.

     

  20. On 2/7/2020 at 8:41 AM, Oldmopars said:

    I used BNL resin's and they are really nice and fair priced. I hate to buy a full kit t rob a couple of major parts out of it. I got 2 axles and T-Case for less than half of a new kit. 

    That was why I mentioned the 70 Coronet Pro Street kit Scott, you get the full length Dana from the Roadrunner kit in it as spare parts. 

  21. On 2/15/2020 at 11:02 AM, Luc Janssens said:

    Reissues have been part of the game since day two, I wonder how many kits of tools thought to be scrapped or incomplete were brought back by R2?

    This, because it was always said the cab molds were destroyed in the 80s to be modified into the T600A truck kit.

    AMT1021-2.jpg.b3d0a6669291a7d89d32345c5476161d.jpg

×
×
  • Create New...