Casey Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 9 hours ago, boss 302 mustang said: Who would buy these except the lunatic fringe? I don;t think they have the drawing power for sales to have Revell replace the missing tools. I am 99% sure the molds are in Atlantis' possession, and their target market is the lunatic fringe, so much more likely than if (old) Revell possessed them. Granted, they probably have many more kits which require far less upfront investment to chose from, so it's still a slim chance to ever see them again. New tires wouldn't be a huge deal on their own, but no clear parts is possibly a deal breaker...for Atlantis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul alflen Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 Dave Burkett of Model King fame put up the money to retool the glass for the 1959 Imperial pre-Round 2. I'm sure Atlantis wouldn't mind him fronting the money to retool the glass and/or tires for the 62 Revell kit molds ( that Atlantis has). It would be a win-win situation for both companies!!!!! What do you say Model King, how about it??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathgoblin Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 I love to have the 62 Newport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sledsel Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 I'd buy all of them.... Luckily for me, I just got the Imperial in good shape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 On 10/28/2019 at 3:29 PM, boss 302 mustang said: Who would buy these except the lunatic fringe? I don;t think they have the drawing power for sales to have Revell replace the missing tools. BTW I would definitely buy the Lancer to build the Dragmaster "Golden Lancer" A/FX car , the Plymouth to build as an S/SA car and the Valiant as I had that kit at one time. I'm sure Tom Geiger would be in for at least a case of Valiants too!! I am a proud card carrying member of the 'fringe! And funny thing, I did have a case of the Valiant! Back maybe 30 years ago Dave Burket / Model King came into an old hobby distributor's warehouse on the west coast. I was able to buy a sealed case of Valiants for $25 a kit! I still have the empty case. When eBay came about and I discovered I could get $50 a car, I sold more than half of them! Argh! Back when Dave did the '59 Imperials, Tomy owned AMT and I believe it was missing the chrome tree. My foggy memory says it cost him $10,000 to have that reverse engineered from an original tree he provided. I also remember him having to have new wheels tooled to match tires AMT had available at that time. He did two runs of the kit. I cannot remember if those were 2,500 or 5,000 kit runs. There were issues with those in the market. People who were used to having full detail kits, who didn't understand the history of the tooling, were aghast when they opened the box to see the clunky heavy tooling and low parts count. I remember one guy screaming bloody murder on a board that this was his first Model King kit and they were garbage! The Valiant and Lancer are a bit better technology wise, still had a one piece chassis with molded in rear end, but they had open hoods and came with slant six engines! Still if they are missing the glass shots, tooling that often got separated from projects since they were not part of the main tool, there would be that cost. And they'd have to retool the wheels to accept modern tires that they may have the mold for. I wouldn't attempt to create that 1962 tire mold as those tires were very clunky! Also both cars had too much plastic above the windshield giving them a toy-like appearance. I would want to modify the tools to correct this before issuing new kits. The existing glass shot does cover this fine. I see this issue on both the Valiant and Lancer. I haven't looked at the rest of the series. (I had photos in this post but kept getting that 404 error!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chepp Posted October 29, 2019 Share Posted October 29, 2019 (edited) If it wasn't a more-door, I could get interested in the '62 Dodge Dart but not the Lancer. Edited October 29, 2019 by chepp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Bartrop Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 And for all the griping about the Imperial, people still bought them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenGuthmiller Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 39 minutes ago, chepp said: If it wasn't a more-door, I could get interested in the '62 Dodge Dart I'm of the same frame of mind. The '62 Dart, Fury and Imperial were all available from other manufacturers in 2 door configurations. I most likely would not be interested in any of those. The Newport and the Lancer were unique to Revell and also 2 doors. Those I would absolutely buy. Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pack rat Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 A big plus re the Lancer; it came equipped with the "Hyperpack" slant six. Note...the intake manifold was missing on this one. I carved a facsimile out of scrap plastic. The wheels/tires and taillights aren't original kit pieces either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 302 mustang Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Boy, I really spurred this conversation on!!! BTW, I bought Dave's Imperial,;71 T-bird, "71 Buick and a bunch more of his other kits. I also buy every Jo-Han kit I see that I don't have (if I can afford it!). I like wire axle kits. I'd love to see the roadster chassis accessory parts pack reissued, So I'm not against reissuing these Mopars..... Like I said originally, I would buy several of them myself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Bartrop Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 As far as two vs. four doors go, I'm good either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Nemanic Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Wasn't the Dart body modified and used on the Tony Nancy 22jr chassis in the Dodge Revellion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Handley Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 1 hour ago, Richard Bartrop said: As far as two vs. four doors go, I'm good either way. Ditto, in fact when it comes to real vehicles, I've owned 1 coupe (Dodge Shadow, which was technically a 3 door, but coupe shaped), 2 sedans (my 4dr 200 and 5 dr Lebaron GTS), and 2 5dr Jeeps (both of which have been unibody and basically station wagons too), I'll take a 4dr if it's an interesting to me subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddyfink Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 12 hours ago, Vince Nemanic said: Wasn't the Dart body modified and used on the Tony Nancy 22jr chassis in the Dodge Revellion? Yes, and they had to weld back together the Tony Nancy molds to bring that kit back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGTRUCK Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 I got this right from Dean Milano to post here, he couldn’t sign in to post himself. For some reason, it won't let me sign in to the page. You can post this if you like, and tell them if came from me: The only test shot I remember us running at Revell was the '62 Chrysler Newport, which looked good- except for the problems with the tires and the missing clear tree. We came close to reissuing it as an SSP and I'm not sure why we didn't. Probably a matter of having to invest in new parts for a kit that might not be a big seller. But from what I remember, that was the only tool that was considered. I don't know what shape the others were in or if they still existed. And the '62 Dart of course became the Revellion, which was already mentioned here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 (edited) I tried posting these photos earlier and got the dreaded 404 error. Dave said to try it again so here it goes! Top photo: see how low that molding hangs into the windshield, creating too narrow a glass area? Bottom photo: My fix, I carved out the plastic up to the the lip to open up the glass area. The existing glass shot does cover this fine. I see this issue on both the Valiant and Lancer. I haven't looked at the rest of the series. Edited October 30, 2019 by Tom Geiger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 4 hours ago, BIGTRUCK said: Probably a matter of having to invest in new parts for a kit that might not be a big seller. Which still applies today. Honestly, Atlantis probably has no shortage of kits they can reissue with far less up front investment, and which project to be better sellers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim boyd Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 20 hours ago, pack rat said: A big plus re the Lancer; it came equipped with the "Hyperpack" slant six. Note...the intake manifold was missing on this one. I carved a facsimile out of scrap plastic. The wheels/tires and taillights aren't original kit pieces either. Wow Mike....great job on putting together the Lancer GT. Looks terrific! **** Mike is also spot on regarding the Mopar Hyper-Pak engine option for the Lancer GT kit. I built up this engine and showed it in an article I did around 2005 or so for the other magazine on "straight six" cylinder engines in kits...it's an excellent replica. The Valiant Signet kit also had optional engine parts, but they were different than the Hyper-Pak parts in the Lancer kit. TIM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robberbaron Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 On 10/28/2019 at 3:29 PM, Dave Van said: I was always told clear and tires molds. The tires were unique to the 62 Mopars. On 10/28/2019 at 11:44 PM, Casey said: New tires wouldn't be a huge deal on their own, but no clear parts is possibly a deal breaker...for Atlantis. On 10/29/2019 at 6:26 PM, Tom Geiger said: Still if they are missing the glass shots, tooling that often got separated from projects since they were not part of the main tool, there would be that cost. And they'd have to retool the wheels to accept modern tires that they may have the mold for. I wouldn't attempt to create that 1962 tire mold as those tires were very clunky! On 10/30/2019 at 9:16 AM, BIGTRUCK said: I got this right from Dean Milano to post here, he couldn’t sign in to post himself. The only test shot I remember us running at Revell was the '62 Chrysler Newport, which looked good- except for the problems with the tires and the missing clear tree. We came close to reissuing it as an SSP and I'm not sure why we didn't. Probably a matter of having to invest in new parts for a kit that might not be a big seller. But from what I remember, that was the only tool that was considered. I don't know what shape the others were in or if they still existed. And the '62 Dart of course became the Revellion, which was already mentioned here. Agreed that the tires don't seem like a deal breaker. Gotta wonder, would vacuforming be an option for the window glass? Not sure if they could do that in volume, but seems like creating a buck to vacuform would be cheaper than machining new tooling for the glass. Then again, the whole thing might seem too crude to the average customer. Is there some kind of precedent in the model airplane or military world? (are there injected molded kits with vacuformed glass?). Or is vacuforming really just something you only see in the aftermarket/cottage industry, like in resin kits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Handley Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 Don't see how large quantity vacuum formed parts would be an issue with the right buck, durability wouldn't be an issue since this is used for packaging and r/c car bodies and airplane canopies. There might be some detail related issues, but you should be able to mold a headliner into it to if you wanted to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Janssens Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 4 hours ago, Joe Handley said: Don't see how large quantity vacuum formed parts would be an issue with the right buck, durability wouldn't be an issue since this is used for packaging and r/c car bodies and airplane canopies. There might be some detail related issues, but you should be able to mold a headliner into it to if you wanted to. It might even fit better, and look more in scale, but the downside could be that huge gaps will show, between the bodies the dashboard and package-shelf area . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike999 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 (edited) 11 hours ago, Robberbaron said: Is there some kind of precedent in the model airplane or military world? (are there injected molded kits with vacuformed glass?). Or is vacuforming really just something you only see in the aftermarket/cottage industry, like in resin kits? Definitely a precedent. Many injection-molded, short-run aircraft kits have used vacuformed glass for years. These are mostly from smaller European companies like Azur, Special Hobby, etc. Though as soon as they can afford it, these companies seem to switch to injection-molded clear parts. Here's the really obscure Vultee V-11, a 1/72 scale kit from Azur. It had a huge glass cockpit area, a "flying greenhouse." It also had some flat side and bottom windows, which Azur covered by including clear plastic sheet. Notice it has 4 vacformed canopies. That covers 2 different cockpit configurations, for Brazilian and Turkish aircraft, with a spare for each. The spares are a nice touch, and pretty common for these companies. Edited November 2, 2019 by Mike999 error2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Handley Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 6 hours ago, Luc Janssens said: It might even fit better, and look more in scale, but the downside could be that huge gaps will show, between the bodies the dashboard and package-shelf area . That is true, forgot about that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Van Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 Vac would still cost more...bur could work. The tires were made to only fit the 62 Chrysler kits.....none on hand would fit. New wheels or tires were needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stavanzer Posted November 3, 2019 Share Posted November 3, 2019 It just hit me. You could use either a two piece polystyrene tire, or the stacked multi-piece tires used by some Eastern European kits. 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.