Longbox55 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 I had an AMT Chevy Nova (1976?) that was releases in 2004 or something like that. Showed a stock looking car on the box but was a streetlegal drag car in the box. EDIT: I belive it was this one: Sold it not very long after I bought it because I was dissapointed that I could not build a stock version. That's the one! Just finished building that kit a few weeks ago. I was aware of what was in the box when I got it, though. Had an original issue of it when I was a kid, so I knew what I was in for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Kourouklis Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Anybody remember the MPC/AMT '69 Charger with dog dish caps on the cover? With this, the stock '76 Nova gaffe, and any number of AMT boxcover cars from that period also showing wiring and plumbing in the engine bay, I halfway wondered if some of the boxtop-building regulars phoned in a few already-built cars when AMT needed something for the latest reissue. Turnaround time and compensation on those were usually so miserable, you could hardly blame 'em... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howard Cohen Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Then there was the 1983 Corvette kit that was scheduled for production only to find out Chevy wasn't building a 1983 Corvette Oops... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr mopar Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Anybody remember the MPC/AMT '69 Charger with dog dish caps on the cover? With this, the stock '76 Nova gaffe, and any number of AMT boxcover cars from that period also showing wiring and plumbing in the engine bay, I halfway wondered if some of the boxtop-building regulars phoned in a few already-built cars when AMT needed something for the latest reissue. Turnaround time and compensation on those were usually so miserable, you could hardly blame 'em... This one made me mad,i even wrote to rc2 about this kit not having the dog dish hub caps and red line tires in the kit all got was Sorry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atmobil Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 But is there a stock 76 Nova kit out there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longbox55 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 YEs, AMT actually did make a stock '76. Much of the kit is actually the same as the pro street version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Kourouklis Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Fwiw, if you're gonna check out Novas of that vintage, I'd go digging for some of the MPC counterparts too - those look a bit closer, at least to my eye. Edited July 15, 2015 by Chuck Kourouklis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldcars Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 I have a AMT 1973 mustang kit with a great picture of the louvered back window. No louvers!! Found out the 1971 kit (which doesn't show the louvers), has it in that kit. Was not about to buy a second kit just to get this piece. Was pre-round2(a few years ago). Still need the louvers. Richard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbwelda Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 typos were not just limited to box art, some were even apparent in point of purchase displays: there are errors on a couple of other stands I have and while these are reproductions, I understand the originals contain the same errors. and it doesn't have to be vintage either... oh the first problem is "Interier" and the second "Comptetion". jb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan barton Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 No pictures but the AMT 39/40 Ford Tudor had one reissue where it was proudly called a 39/40 Coupe. I believe there was a Reveloogram Top Fuel rail that announced that it was the season champion when the season wasn't over yet - can't remeber the details - Amato maybe? The one I have never seen mentioned anywhere, however, is the green and white box art for the MPC Fire Tuck show rod. No matter how hard I look there is no evidence of a frame rail in the engine bay - radius rods are there, engine is there, but nothing to hold the front of the car to the back of the car! Cheers Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddyfink Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 This one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Anderson Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 The problem with that Monogram "Yellow Jacket" was that Monogram's marketing people called it a "roadster" which it is not, never has been (NOBODY has yet done a 1/24-1/25 scale '30-'31 Model A roadster!), but a modified reissue of their 1930 Model A Cabriolet. Art Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike 51 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) This one? yep...it was Joe Amato. the 2nd of 3 straight!!! Edited July 16, 2015 by mike 51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The70judgeman Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Monogram '71 HEMI 'Cuda with the first run that says it's a '70 HEMI 'Cuda on the box(In Violet car on the cover). Edited July 17, 2015 by The70judgeman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbwelda Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) to me a "roadster" has always been a car without an integrated windscreen and with no roll up windows. certainly qualifies under that definition. jb Edited July 18, 2015 by jbwelda what the heck? i am typing this into a box called "Reason for edit" that appears to be a required field. meanwhile i do not see anywhere to actually edit my post. is this a new "feature"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsxse240 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Ok, this is a bit of a stretch, but it's still a box art/grammar mistake that made it into production. Its a re-released Mustang kit that says it's fuel injected the end of the box shows that it's fuel INJECTD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake45 Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Didn't notice that!Also, technically, it's not a Mustang GT, it's a Mustang 2+2. GT was an equipment package that could be had on any body style of Mustang, and this model doesn't have ANY of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iBorg Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 The Ormsby car always saddens me. Gary wont the championship in 1989 in a classic battle with Garlits. Gary died of cancer just prior to the Nationals in 1991. He was one of the last innovators in drag racing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lysleder Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Then there is this one.. Exiting 4wd Track.. ..Datsun Track.. Then again, I don't really want to be too hard on these people - english as a second language and everything, back in the eighties to boot. That said, although I don't have a picture of it (you have to believe me on this), the recent Revell offering of this same truck, the Datsun off road pickup has a honest typo on the side panel of the box. There the truck is called a "Datstun". Can somebody please verify? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan barton Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 (edited) Hi William, In regards to the roadster v cabriolet issue, Art is correct but I can see where you are coming from.The Yellow Jacket is built from a cabriolet body but gives the impression of being a roadster by virtue of leaving off the cabriolet body parts north of the waistline.I have a Yellow Jacket and it definitely looks like a roadster but if there ever was a model of a 1930 Model A roadster you would see that the doors are longer and the cockpit is longer. As a result the back of the body drops down quicker than a roadster body and the beaver panel is shorter as the trunk lid is slid down to match.I drive a real Model A roadster and have some coupe quarter panels (same as cabriolet) in my garage and the differences are not obvious from a distance but very evident when side by side. Hope that helpsAlan Edited July 17, 2015 by alan barton Correct spelling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sledsel Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabrux Posted July 17, 2015 Share Posted July 17, 2015 That said, although I don't have a picture of it (you have to believe me on this), the recent Revell offering of this same truck, the Datsun off road pickup has a honest typo on the side panel of the box. There the truck is called a "Datstun". Can somebody please verify?I can verify, but I don't have a picture at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGTRUCK Posted July 17, 2015 Author Share Posted July 17, 2015 Some of these I heard of but never saw before, and some I never knew existed like the ''interier'' spelling or the 39/40 coupe box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.