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

[bobthehobbyguy]

Tim when you get another kit I'm curious about the differnces between the 32 ford kit and this one. What changes were made?

[Jantrix]

Bob, it's my understanding that this kit has no parts in common with any of the Revell deuces. Entirely new.

[tim boyd]

Bob, it's my understaEacnding that this kit has no parts in common with any of the Revell deuces. Entirely new.

Exactly correct.  Compare the photo of the painted '32 Ford frame from the new Revell '29A kit (see link at my "quickbuild" thread also posted in this "New Car Kit Reviews section)  with the Revell Street Rod Deuce kits and you'll see they are completely different kits.  For one thing, the floorboard on the new kit is completely separate from the frame, vs. the combined frame/floorboard in the Revell '32 Ford Street Rod series.  

Cheers...TIM 

[David]

Attached is a picture of a 425 Nailhead built for the Roadster Shop found on transmissionadapters.com for reference.  http://www.transmissionadapters.com/425 Buick Nailhead engine.htm

David

Edited August 24, 2015 by David
Added link

[Ace-Garageguy]

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 

Sorry to throw a factual wrench in the works, but in reality, the port spacing of ALL the Buick nailheads is the same. The earlier engines had round ports, while the later ones had square ports.

The 364/401/425 all had square ports, and port spacing is identical.

I can easily prove this by referring you all to multiple sites selling header flanges for nailheads. Same part number for 364 engine ('57-'61), 401 engine ('59-'66) and 425 engine ('62-'66).

http://www.hellsgatehotrods.com/flanges/exhaust-header-flanges/buick-nailhead-364-425-exhaust-flange/

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Buick-Nailhead-364-401-425-Exhaust-Lake-Header-kit-lakster-u-weld-hot-rat-rod-/281449723758

http://nailheadbuick.com/exhaust

 

Edited August 24, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[jbwelda]

>I can easily prove this by referring you all to multiple sites selling header flanges for nailheads

that proves something? wow. not in my book it don't. I can't count the number of times I have been sold parts that are said to fit, only for them not to fit. especially in this day of one size must fit all thinking (aka walmart, home depot, autozone, etc)

jb

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

>I can easily prove this by referring you all to multiple sites selling header flanges for nailheads

that proves something? wow. not in my book it don't. I can't count the number of times I have been sold parts that are said to fit, only for them not to fit. especially in this day of one size must fit all thinking (aka walmart, home depot, autozone, etc)

jb

 

Hey JB, if you buy your car parts at HomeDepot, Autozone  and Walmart, no wonder you have fitment issues.

Believe whatever you want. You obviously know everything I say is BS, you're an engineer, draftsman and Buick expert too, so rock on, brother.

Ignorance must truly be bliss. So many seem to strive for it.

[detailstymied]

...know everything I say is BS...

can i get a witness - hallelujah!!!

[Ace-Garageguy]

can i get a witness - hallelujah!!!

You could, of course, always do your own research and cite reputable primary sources to disprove anything I say.

But that would take some applied intelligence and effort. Maybe a little knowledge too, to know where to look for the correct information and how to tell it from internet dweebs rattling on about things they don't know...

Much easier to just take the odd pot-shot, eh?

Nice of you to tell the newbie over on the "modeling questions" page to soak his parts in acetone, by the way. That's the way to spread knowledge and goodwill throughout the hobby, for sure.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Harry P.]

Guys... just a suggestion...

If any of you have a comment regarding the accuracy of the kit, be prepared to back it up with actual facts, not opinion. All of us will be better served if we deal in facts rather than opinions, when we're talking about kit accuracy.

Not calling out anyone specifically, just a friendly suggestion meant to make this thread as helpful as possible to everyone who reads it.

[horsepower]

According to Sanderson Headers, one of the premier manufacturers of headers for the hot rod and performance car industry, even being a winner of manufacturer of the year from the Goodguys Street Rod organization. Something you won't get if your products don't fit right out of the box as advertised. The Buick Nailhead V 8 from 364 cubic inches through the 425 cubic inch engine all use the same exhaust spacing and the headers for one will bolt directly to any of the others in that category. 

I hope this helps take some of the cloudiness of the header spacing and clear it up.

[Muncie]

just finished getting exhuast port centerline dimensions from the Sanderson headers on the nailhead in Joe's 1928 model A sport coupe - real Henry steel and GM iron.  He pulled the 401 out of a  stock 1965 Buick. Headers were on the work bench so real easy to measure port spacing with a Stanley tape. 

Ports one to two - 4-1/2",  ports two to three - 8-1/4", ports one to four 17-1/4"

Plastic Nailheads - with dial caliper and calibrated eyeball - please allow some tolerance in these measurements - measuring points aren't precise on the plastic parts.

Revell Parts Pack/Ivo Showboat - one to two - 0.155 (3-7/8"),  two to three - 0.3303 (8-1/4"), one to four 0.670" (16-3/4")

Revell 1929 Model A headers-  one to two - 0.165 (4-1/8"), two to three - 0.380 (9-1/2"), one to four - 0.710 (17-3/4")

Revell 1929 Model A Buick cylinder heads -  same as the headers

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2015 by Muncie

[Gary66]

One day, a 100 percent perfectly scaled kit will hit the market, and humanity will be saved.

[bobthehobbyguy]

Hey instead of endless pages focusing on whether the engine is right or wrong, how about some of the things that are right with this model. It would be really balanced view of this kit.

[mike 51]

Hey instead of endless pages focusing on whether the engine is right or wrong, how about some of the things that are right with this model. It would be really balanced view of this kit.

It appears that's about the only thing "wrong" with this kit...

while I would have liked a more traditional hot rod overall (flathead with an early V8 drivetrain), I'm very pleased with mine overall.

[LDO]

I can imagine lots of posts in the Trade section based on this kit. I know I'll be offering up the Nailheads. I would be happy to give up some flatheads as well.

 

Hmmm. I may not find a lot of DOHC V-8s and V-12s from people who want Nailheads and Flatheads.

[bobthehobbyguy]

And if that is the case then the engine shouldn't dominate this topic.

[High octane]

One day, a 100 percent perfectly scaled kit will hit the market, and humanity will be saved.

Don't bet on it, as the odds are lousy.

[Ace-Garageguy]

One of the many things about this kit that DO appear to be very well done is the separate and fully detailed floor.

This will be terrific for anyone who wants to do a realistically channeled '28-'29 Ford that looks as good from the bottom as it does from the top.

The rear tires that appear in this kit are perfect for some vintage and period rod applications too. I've been looking for something like these for years.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[tim boyd]

just finished getting exhuast port centerline dimensions from the Sanderson headers on the nailhead in Joe's 1928 model A sport coupe - real Henry steel and GM iron.  He pulled the 401 out of a  stock 1965 Buick. Headers were on the work bench so real easy to measure port spacing with a Stanley tape. 

Ports one to two - 4-1/2",  ports two to three - 8-1/4", ports one to four 17-1/4"

Plastic Nailheads - with dial caliper and calibrated eyeball - please allow some tolerance in these measurements - measuring points aren't precise on the plastic parts.

Revell Parts Pack/Ivo Showboat - one to two - 0.155 (3-7/8"),  two to three - 0.3303 (8-1/4"), one to four 0.670" (16-3/4")

Revell 1929 Model A headers-  one to two - 0.165 (4-1/8"), two to three - 0.380 (9-1/2"), one to four - 0.710 (17-3/4")

Revell 1929 Model A Buick cylinder heads -  same as the headers

 

 

 

Thanks Steve (Muncie) for the info.  My source of the info on the engines Revell measured confirmed last night that the cylinder head with the circular ports that I measured was indeed one from a 1954 Buick 264/322 engine, not the 425 as I had previously understood.   This source also measured his photos of yet another head that was photographed (a '61-'66 364/401/425, according to his info based on the casting number in photo), and his measurements from the photograph/ruler were 4.5" ports one to two, 8.0" two to three, and 4.5" ports three to four.  Essentially identical to Steve's measurements above, except for a difference of 1/4" between ports two and three.  

As I stated in italics in my post yesterday, "there is still some conjecture on my part on the info posted above", this due to the lack of cylinder head info for the 425 version in the Peter Sessler book, and my own understanding (I'm not an engineer but reasonably well informed about engine design considerations) that all other factors being equal, a circular cylinder head exhaust port will flow better than a rectangular exhaust port.  Clearly that conjecture proved wrong.  Thanks Bill and Steve for finally setting the record straight with hard info sources that remove any need for further conjecture.      

Now, having said all that, I finished the Nailhead engine last night.  I dare ANYONE to look at these pictures and claim that this is not a Nailhead Buick, and a very nicely done one at that.

And here are the parts before assembly

For those that are still bothered by the exhaust port spacing, I have an idea for a simple operation to align the headers more closely to the specs in Steve's post.  I'll give that a try when I can get a second or third copy of the kit at hand.  In the meantime, the rest of us will celebrate that we now have a new, really well done 1/25th scale replica of one of the coolest Hot Rod V8's out there.  Cheers...TIM 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2015 by tim boyd

[tim boyd]

Several of you have asked about whether the hood from the AMT '29A would fit the Revell '29A Roadster kit.  

I did some mockups yesterday, and here's the answer.

1) the fit of the AMT hood to the cowl of the Revell kit is pretty good, as seen here. .  

2. The fit of the front of the hood to the Revell radiator shell is good, not quite perfect but passable  (no photo) 

3. The one issue is that with the longer wheelbase of the '32 Highboy frame, the distance between the radiator shell and the cowl/rest of the body is increased.  This means that, just as in a 1/1 scale '29 on '32 rails, a stock '29 hood is too short in length to fit the new, longer engine compartment space.  And the AMT hood reflects that fact in scale.  It was a little difficult to measure the exact length of the shortfall in my mockup, but it was probably about 3/32" too short.  

Best Regards...TIM     

 

[slusher]

Thank you Tm for the preview. I have some ideas on how i want to build one but great parts for other models in this kit..

[DaveM]

That's great to see Tim.  Really, the cowl fit is the most important.  If the front was a touch off, we could just swap radiator shells between the kits.   I figured the '32 frame was going to throw everything off.  That's they way they work in real life too!  If I want a hood on a '32 frame, I'll have to scratchbuild or modify one.  I would also be thinking about a '32 Grille shell at that point too.  I'll plan on a hooded version of a lowboy.  Now, I've got to see if I can modify or scratch out a chopped uptop!  

The kit looks pretty nice.  The more I work with it, the better I am liking most of it.  I am building the "A" framed version, which should look  the best with the raised wheel arches.  I think I will take the '32 frame and work it under an AMT kit.  I can adapt the suspensions from the AMT kit, and the stock wheel arches should shine here, even with some fairly tall Modelhaus tires.  If I am really picky, I can put the Revell suspension under the '32 for the more modern car, and the AMT transverse leaf under the "A" frame.One of our local slot car racers, who also builds, is working on this kit.  He thinks it's a hot rodder's dream.  His best statement on the kit was, "If you build this kit out of the box, there's somethin' wrong with your head!"  I think he's right.  This kit just screams out to be twisted to the imaginations of the builder.  That said...  I am sort of going out of the box a bit with mine, but I will be swapping out the motor and wheels.  The nailhead is getting tweaked a bit and will be shoehorned into a '25 "T"  (For now.  all of my plans for this build are transient.)

[Phildaupho]

Tim - you nailed the engine - hit it right on the head!! Great to see the AMT hood fits at the cowl as it can help form a scratch-built hood if required. Also really like the finned oil pan, valley cover etc.

[wayne swayze]

Seems to me, this kit is a hit! Can't wait for mine to arrive here in London Ont. BTW Tim, your engine is looking top notch!