Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

'69 Mustangs....


mk11

Recommended Posts

  • 1 year later...

The AMT '69 annual body was not reworked into the '70.  It was more likely reworked into the "longnose" '69 funny car body, which uses the same trim pieces. 

The AMT '70 was all new at the time.  After the '70 annual, the body was reused in the Mach Won funny car, the chassis and engine recycled into the '71-'73 annuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AMT '69 annual body was not reworked into the '70.  It was more likely reworked into the "longnose" '69 funny car body, which uses the same trim pieces. 

The AMT '70 was all new at the time.  After the '70 annual, the body was reused in the Mach Won funny car, the chassis and engine recycled into the '71-'73 annuals.

Probably true. I have both kits;69 and 70. Doesn't seem like too many common parts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just recently got a mib annual AMT 69 MACH 1 KIT NUMBER Y 905 .....I have always liked this kit better that any other 69 Mustang, even though the chassis pan is poor. built 3 of these, one from xmas 1968, two more from about 20 years back, and will jump into this one at some point too.......the Ace....B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

I know the thread is old, but I always hate starting new thread s on same subject.

I am trying to build a couple of slot cars 1:24 scale.

which kit would best fit my chassis.  Wheel base is adjustable but usuaaly inthe 4.5; range width is bigger factor, I think, it is just under 3" to outside of the wheels.

 

I have a  ,unk manufacture, and it is too narrow, it looks like an open wheel. I want to go 69 and would like most of the wheels under the car.

 

 

D8076CEF-C318-408A-85EC-6BA162034C6B.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Just thought I'd show a couple of interesting parts found in the mpc/amt '69 kit... a rally pac and an a/c bezel.

P1018894

These are obviously left over from earlier incarnations of the mpc mustang as they are definitely not factory issue on the '69, just the '65/'66.

 P1018772

 

mike

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Knee knocker AC was not available on 69-70 Mustangs, actually I think AC  was intergrated into dash either 67 or 68. Even base Mustangs with factory AC used dash vents.

Yeah, Ford started offering proper integrated A/C in the Mustang in '67.  Those are leftover parts from the original MPC '66 annual...I've seen them in every MPC '69 kit I've had...don't recall if the '70 annual had them also.  Pretty sure they were gone from the '71 kit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

A pic comparing the revel '69 Mach 1 body to the revised Boss 302 body...

 

P1019872.JPG

and a comparison of the original amt body to the revell '69 body....

 

P1019864.JPG

The amt body has the reputation of being the best representation of balance and scale fidelity. An opportunity to get some measurements recently from a 1:1 revealed a few points of interest. Revell's body looks vaguely off for a reason; the side 'panels' and door height are each about 1" taller than the prototypes, the rear wheel openings are too big and the quarter windows can stand a slight reshaping. They did, however, capture the correct rocker height below the doors whereas the amt rendition is too skinny. The side window height on both is about an inch short. Having gotten the lower rear quarters and rear wheel openings correct, the real surprise on the amt body is that the rear quarters themselves are at least two inches too short! Revell got them the right length. Other minor weaknesses on the amt '69, like the windshield height, chassis and interior detail and small tail lights, are there as well, but the nicely sculpted front fenders and headlight area bring the whole package together as the most appealing.

P1019871.JPG

The revised front headlight area on revell's just released Boss 302 is a noticeable improvement over the Mach 1's treatment but it is obvious that without some finessing of the fender itself, the ghost of the misshapen 35 year old 1/10 master will continue to lurk.

 

mike 

Edited by mk11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 12:15 AM, mk11 said:

The revised front headlight area on revell's just released Boss 302 is a noticeable improvement over the Mach 1's treatment but it is obvious that without some finessing of the fender itself, the ghost of the misshapen 35 year old 1/10 master will continue to lurk.

 

mike 

My thoughts exactly. They should have fixed the fenders too. But, in light of the rarity of the AMT kit, the much improved Revell offering is and will likely continue to be the only game in town. At least the new design is more tolerable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dave Darby said:

My thoughts exactly. They should have fixed the fenders too. But, in light of the rarity of the AMT kit, the much improved Revell offering is and will likely continue to be the only game in town. At least the new design is more tolerable.

To channel the once-great David Letterman, "Once again, you have crystalized my thoughts perfectly." B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'll bet the story behind the molding process for the AMT '69 and '70 bodies is an interesting one...

A closer look at both bodies is makin' me wonder if they didn't find a way to juggle certain elements of the body mold between the Mach 1, long-nose f/c and the '70 after all. There are similar parting lines, dimensions etc, plus the sharing of the f/c chrome shot and also the recycling of the '69 front valance in the Mach Won f/c kit (because the stock '70 retooled chassis had the front valance built in).

Now, with three kits using the same '70 body - Blue Crescent and two Mach Won f/c issues, red box and blue box, taking the life of the mold into maybe the mid-seventies... is there even a glimmer of hope that the body cavity molds still survive somewhere or were they victims of a scrap drive ? :huh:

 

P1019921.JPG

P1019924.JPG

P1019910.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 2/14/2019 at 6:32 PM, mk11 said:

I'll bet the story behind the molding process for the AMT '69 and '70 bodies is an interesting one...

A closer look at both bodies is makin' me wonder if they didn't find a way to juggle certain elements of the body mold between the Mach 1, long-nose f/c and the '70 after all. There are similar parting lines, dimensions etc, plus the sharing of the f/c chrome shot and also the recycling of the '69 front valance in the Mach Won f/c kit (because the stock '70 retooled chassis had the front valance built in).

Now, with three kits using the same '70 body - Blue Crescent and two Mach Won f/c issues, red box and blue box, taking the life of the mold into maybe the mid-seventies... is there even a glimmer of hope that the body cavity molds still survive somewhere or were they victims of a scrap drive ? :huh:

 

P1019921.JPG

P1019924.JPG

P1019910.JPG

That's a very good question. I just know that looking at that box art makes me want one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...