First detailed look - Revell's '29 Model A Hot Rod Roadster ...updated with photos of completed builds of both kit versions

[Snake45]

Easy answer to all this is the Flathead Ford.

Oh my. Now we'll have to discuss which is the most accurate flathead, and why IT'S not right EITHER.

[DaveM]

I am starting to sand and glue too.  I won't be able to get much painting done this weekend, but I might be able to duck out and shoot a coat of primer to get things started.  So far, so good.   The kit seems pretty nice.  Too  bad the nailhead missed the mark.  Seems like every kit these days has some throw away parts.  I'll have to try my cylinder head chopping idea someday, but for now, I'll just swap out to a better motor.  The chassis looks nice, and the fit is pretty smooth so far.   It's still a pretty big step up for Revell from the last couple of years.  It's quite buildable, and it will look pretty good to the rat rod crowd.  With a new motor and a body swap, it will look pretty decent to the regular street rod folks.  Hopefully Revell gets it all together on the next release and knocks it out of the park.  This is more of a stand up double than a home run, but it's still a pretty decent kit.  It should build up well out of the box, and the only real miss is the motor.  The body matches some of the rat rods that are out there, and that is the market for this kit.  I will get it posted on the Workbench forum within the next day or two.  (As soon as I can get the camera fired up)  

I'll see all of you over on the workbench!  Back to building.

[Spex84]

I'd like to put forward an impassioned request that this thread not be trashed. It looks like a great kit, we're all excited, lets keep the discussion polite if possible. I'm getting the distinct impression that we're all on the same side, and talking past each other. It's like "who's on first", 1/25 scale version.

 

[Guest]

The whole discussion of this stupid port spacing and complaining is crazy. It is a freaking model car, 99% of people will NEVER notice. Maybe some of you should start your own model car company and make a 100% accurate scaled kit.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I'd like to put forward an impassioned request that this thread not be trashed. It looks like a great kit, we're all excited, lets keep the discussion polite if possible. I'm getting the distinct impression that we're all on the same side, and talking past each other. It's like "who's on first", 1/25 scale version.

 

I agree 100%. It looks like a kit every hot-rod builder will need multiples of.

In spite of my criticisms, I'll be buying several. It's great to see Revell get something like this to market, and I certainly appreciate it.

Just a little more careful next time, OK?

[Gary66]

[High octane]

Wow, measuring the port spacing is quite serious. If I took this hobby that seriously, I'd take that kit. place it on the floor and step on it with my foot.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Wow, measuring the port spacing is quite serious. If I took this hobby that seriously, I'd take that kit. place it on the floor and step on it with my foot.

I really don't get it.

The engine looks OFF immediately to anyone who's familiar with the nailhead Buick.

So mentioning it and posting the EASY-TO-GET CORRECT measurements it SHOULD have been in the first place, and that Revell somehow managed to get right 50 years ago but somehow couldn't manage to this time, gets mostly snide comments about "killing the hobby" and other equally relevant remarks about "anal retentiveness", stamping on the kit, etc.

The odd exhaust port-spacing on Revell's Hemi in the '32 Ford isn't any worse, it's just as immediately obvious, and some of you give it failing marks.

I just don't get it.

 I think it's time for me to quit trying to figure out why accuracy matters so little to so many.

In my world, anything worth doing at all is worth doing right. It's getting to be a lonely place, more all the time. And that's OK by me.

 

Edited August 23, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Phildaupho]

Another nailhead to study that was spotted at a car show today.

[mike 51]

I'm curious why revell decided to use a 30-31 style firewall in the 29.....that bothers me far more than the port spacing on the engine.

Anyone know what kits had the stamped valve covers for this engine?

 

[tim boyd]

Sorry guys...I've been involved with family-related responsibilities the last 24 hours.  

First, thanks Martin ("59 Buick") for measuring an actual engine as well as JB for his dimensions measured a different way, and thanks Bill for converting Martin's dimensions to 1/25th.  That's all helpful info.

Right now, my focus is on finishing the model so I am going to take a pass at this moment on trying to measure my kit (the engine is already painted and partly built),  Hopefully I can secure another kit in the next few days, and I'll repeat the earlier photo exercise with the dimensions drawn in.  

In the meantime, for all of you reading this thread, I have two salient comments.  

1) I too know a little about Nailhead V8's. While I've never assembled one in 1/1 scale, I've actually built the majority of them ever made in 1/25th scale.  I've also been photographing and looking at Nailhead powered hot rods for nearly 40 years.  This new kit's engine is unmistakably a Nailhead.  Not only that, it may - underline may in totality be the best Nailhead ever put in a kit, whether the cylinder head exhaust port dimensions turn out to be close or not so close.  I'll soon have one finished, and then you can form your own opinion on these these two statements.  

2) In fact, at this point, my view is that this entire kit in totality, may - again, underline may - be the best hot rod kit ever offered in 1/25th scale.  I want to finish it in its final form before I make up my own mind, and then, even more importantly, I want to listen to what other people who have actually built the kit have to say about it vs. the other hot rod kits that have been offered over the years.  

Bottom line - for most of you reading this thread - please don't let your initial opinion of this kit, be swayed by whether the cylinder heads are exactly correct, almost correct, or turn out to be dimensionally inaccurate,

I mean to offend no one, particularly those who have posted here, but there is much, much more to an engine's, and a kit's overall goodness, than just that single series of dimensions.

Instead, buy the kit yourself, build it, and form your own opinion.  And then, if you like it and you had fun building it, buy a few more!  

TIM  

 

   

 

Edited August 23, 2015 by tim boyd

[cdansie]

Thanks Tim

Great review as usual 

I se at least a couple of these in my stash when they finally get to Australia

Chris

[Dennis Lacy]

This new kit's engine is unmistakably a Nailhead. 

TIM  

Which was my exact argument a couple pages back.

[maltsr]

Thanks Tim for all your input on this kit - it looks like a winner to me.

There have been other, lengthy threads about this kit, including images of the sprues and built-up test shots.  I don't recall any adverse comments about the engine in those threads, even after the following picture was shown:

Edited August 23, 2015 by maltsr

[oldscool]

Wow, measuring the port spacing is quite serious. If I took this hobby that seriously, I'd take that kit. place it on the floor and step on it with my foot.

I have actually done that to a couple of kits in the past.

I'm curious why revell decided to use a 30-31 style firewall in the 29.....that bothers me far more than the port spacing on the engine.

Anyone know what kits had the stamped valve covers for this engine?

 

The Tony Nancy double kit has chrome plated ones.

Edited August 23, 2015 by oldscool

[tim boyd]

 

Anyone know what kits had the stamped valve covers for this engine?

 

Mike....did some looking while I was painting the interior parts over the last half hour. 

For plated versions

- As Gerald mentioned, the Revell Tony Nancy Double Dragster kit has the stamped valve covers for the '29 A Altered.  These are my top choice for stamped Nailhead Valve covers.  

- The original (1960 issue) ONLY of the AMT '40 Ford Coupe Trophy Series has plated ones.  All issues thereafter (including the "woodgrained box" version), apparently replaced these with the familiar ribbed valve covers.  These original issue kits are very rare and go for big bucks.  The Revell Nancy kit is a much better choice, not to mention a fraction of the cost.

-  The Monogram Orange Hauler engine has a 1/24th scale Nailhead, and it includes plated, stamped valve covers and also the very cool spark plug covers. Unfortunately, these are all cast together as a single part along with the intake manifold and top of engine, and looks a little toy-like to me in the box (maybe it would look better built up).  

For non-plated versions

- The AMT 1963 Riviera annual kit has non-plated stamped valve covers for the stock version's engine.  I don't have an AMT '64 Riveira kit but I believe that also has the same valve covers for the stock version's engine.   

- The AMT 1964 Buick Wildcat annual kit has the non-plated stamped valve covers for the stock version's engine.  I checked the follow-up 1965 Buick Wildcat engine, and it has the ribbed valve covers only.  I presume the '66 annual kit also has the ribbed covers only.  

I built a '29 A channeled roadster (heavily kitbashed) a few years ago using the Revell Tony Nancy valve covers, but I don't have any pictures posted in my Fotki album.  It was a buildup, I believe, in SA a few years ago.    

Hope that helps...TIM  

Edited August 24, 2015 by tim boyd

[Muncie]

Add my thanks to Tim for the excellent review and photos.

There are some unique features engineered into this kit that I haven't seen before.  Revell added some material to the parts on the chrome trees so the sprue attaching points won't be visible when the model is built - It will take a bit of clever trimming, but there won't be any white spots showing or silver touch-ups required - way cool.  An example is the air cleaners which have the sprue attached on the bottom, not the edge

There are a lot of extra little disposable tabs molded on many of the parts with tiny details - overall, the detail is a lot finer and the tabs allow plastic to fill the molds so the detail is not lost.  Revell has engineered carburetors that look like a real carb and not just a plastic blob.  Revell has really upped the quality of the detail on this kit.  I didn't find any sink marks to fill.

Not an expert on injection molding but it looks like all of the ejection pins (or at least the ones I found) are on the sprue - not on the parts.

The parts trees are set up in logical groups - it looks like modular packaging which is looking forward to future kits - looks like more are on the way

Good fit on all of the parts that I've done test fits.

 

[mike 51]

Thanks Tim.

[jbwelda]

it just occurred to me the possible similarities of this new kit to this seemingly similar release from not too long ago:

 

anyone (Tim?) know what the parts swapping possibilities are between the two kits or have any other comments on similarities or differences? I have a number of these kits and always thought they were great sources for parts if nothing else, but now I am thinking about using one of the truck cabs on the spare chassis from the roadster. or would that just be redundant?

jb

 

[DaveM]

I have that kit, and the '31 sedan which shares many parts.  It will take me a couple of days, as I am dealing with a mini crisis here.  I will try to at least hold the parts together and see how they line up.  I may also do this with the AMT '29 roadster.  I am hoping that one of the hoods can be easily adapted to the new Revell kit.  I also have the AMT woody/pickup, and the Revell Woodstock (I think)  to check parts out with.  

 

Hopefully, I will be able to post which parts will fit together nicely, and which will take more extensive surgery.  Imagine the sheer number of combinations we can come up with!

 

[dodgefever]

 

-  The Monogram Orange Crate engine has a 1/24th scale Nailhead, and it includes plated, stamped valve covers and also the very cool spark plug covers. Unfortunately, these are all cast together as a single part along with the intake manifold and top of engine, and looks a little toy-like to me in the box (maybe it would look better built up).  

Orange Hauler.   Orange Crate has a an Olds.

 

 

 

 

 

[dodgefever]

I really don't get it.

The engine looks OFF immediately to anyone who's familiar with the nailhead Buick.

So mentioning it and posting the EASY-TO-GET CORRECT measurements it SHOULD have been in the first place, and that Revell somehow managed to get right 50 years ago but somehow couldn't manage to this time, gets mostly snide comments about "killing the hobby" and other equally relevant remarks about "anal retentiveness", stamping on the kit, etc.

The odd exhaust port-spacing on Revell's Hemi in the '32 Ford isn't any worse, it's just as immediately obvious, and some of you give it failing marks.

I just don't get it.

 I think it's time for me to quit trying to figure out why accuracy matters so little to so many.

In my world, anything worth doing at all is worth doing right. It's getting to be a lonely place, more all the time. And that's OK by me.

 

There will always be those with an eye for proportion who are driven up the wall by inaccuracies, as there will be those who are happy to stick SBC headers on a Hemi...  and never the twain shall meet.

Niggles aside, I'll be buying several of these.   It's about time we had a proper I beam and split wishbones.

[tim boyd]

Orange Hauler.   Orange Crate has a an Olds.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Dodge...I'll fix that.  Cheers...TIM

[tim boyd]

Yesterday I received a photo of one of the actual engines that Revell's researchers scaled.  

From the photo, the exhaust port spacing is 3.5" first and second port, 8.5" second and third port, and 3.5" third to fourth port.  This spacing places the first and second port, and the third and fourth port, 1" closer together in each instance than the engine Martin ("59 Buick") measured (he reported the same measurement dimensions being 4.5" apart) .  Even more interesting, the exhaust ports in the engine Revell measured were exactly circular, vs. the rectangular ports in the one Martin measured.  So these are clearly two very different cylinder head designs. 

What does this mean?  The Revell Parts Pack engine, which apparently matches the engine Martin measured, was tooled in 1962-ish, meaning it represented the Buick Nailhead cylinder head design at that time.    The parts pack engine represented, then, either a 364 or 401 cubic inch engine design (even though versions of the parts pack packaging referred to it as a "467" (IIRC) engine).  (It probably was scaled off the 1/1 scale Tony Nancy '29 Altered.)  Stated another way, the 425 Nailhead did not exist at the time that Revell tooled the Parts Pack engine.  

The 425 cubic inch Nailhead was introduced in 1963 and ran through 1966, and it is the engine reportedly replicated by both the the Revell '29A, AND the AMT-Ertl 1966 Riviera kits.  As mentioned above, the cylinder head exhaust port configuration and port spacing are clearly different than the engine Martin measured (which has to be the engine replicated in the Revell Parts Pack).  This might explain why the outer two exhaust ports, and headers, would appear closer together on those model kit engines than on the Revell Parts Pack engine.  

Bottom line, it would appear that both camps here are correct - earlier 364/401 Nailheads had the outer two ports spaced farther apart than the late 425 Nailhead.  Thus the Revell Parts Pack engine is correct for the 401, while the Revell '29A kit and AMT-Ertl '66 Riviera are correct (or very close to correct) for a 425 Nailhead.  Imagine that.   

I have not taken these new 425 dimensions and compared them to the actual Revell kit piece - as I said earlier, I've got to get a second kit to make that comparison.  

I also checked my definitive source on early OHV engines, the Peter C. Sessler book "Ultimate V8 Engine Data Book 1949-1974", and while it contains a detailed chapter on all the Nailhead V8s, and the cylinder head casting numbers for the '59-'63 401, it curiously omits any mention about differences in the 425 cylinder heads vs. the 401, and it does not give the cylinder head listings and casting numbers for the '63-'66 425.  So while the cylinder head exhaust port shape and spacing is clearly much different between the engine Martin measure and the engine Revell measured, there is still some conjecture on my part in the info posted above.  

TIM 

Edited August 24, 2015 by tim boyd

[tim boyd]

it just occurred to me the possible similarities of this new kit to this seemingly similar release from not too long ago:

 

anyone (Tim?) know what the parts swapping possibilities are between the two kits or have any other comments on similarities or differences? I have a number of these kits and always thought they were great sources for parts if nothing else, but now I am thinking about using one of the truck cabs on the spare chassis from the roadster. or would that just be redundant?

jb

 

JB...theoretically the kit you picture, plus all '28-'31 1/25th scale Model A bodies, should adapt to this kit with relatively minor changes.  This includes the AMT '28A Tudor, the Revell '29A Pickups above, the MPC '29 Pickup/Woody, and the Revell '31A Tudor/Woody/faux Sedan Delivery kits.  Given time, I'll also try the 1/24th scale Monogram Model A bodies, as sometimes Monogram's 1/24th scale bodies can appear almost identical to 1/15th scale bodies in size.  

Bottom line, the kitbashing possibilities here are endless....TB  

PS -  I need to stop typing and get back to building.  I'll check the AMT '29A roadster hood fit when I get the Revell kit done.