New Revell kits?

[wallyk 50]

I recently read a post on that other forum about 2 new kits from Revell.  A 48 Cadillac convertible and 56 F100.  Fact or fiction?  Would the 56 F100 be an all new tool?

[Danno]

There is no other forum.  

 

But, you probably heard something about the Chip Foose special editions that Revell will bring out later this year.  Both are based on 1:1 cars he built.  Neither will have stock proportions or parts.  No one is sure yet whether the F100 will be a new tool or a rehash of an old tool, but the Caddy has to be an all-new tool since there's never been a plastic kit or promo like it.

[wallyk 50]

Thanks

[Bob Ellis]

There is no other forum.  

 

But, you probably heard something about the Chip Foose special editions that Revell will bring out later this year.  Both are based on 1:1 cars he built.  Neither will have stock proportions or parts.  No one is sure yet whether the F100 will be a new tool or a rehash of an old tool, but the Caddy has to be an all-new tool since there's never been a plastic kit or promo like it.

I would buy a 56 Caddy. GOt A few 56 F100s.

[Casey]

Both will be all-new kits, Wally, and more info can be found here: http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/102156-foose-revell-partnership/?page=1

[niteowl7710]

They 3D scanned the pickup at Foose's shop, so that's obviously going to be a new tool.  The Caddy is self explanatory since nothing like that exists.

I wouldn't get very excited to see BOTH of them in 2016, as the deal with Foose was for 3 years, and it's only a year into the deal at this point. More than likely one late this year, one at the end of 2017.

[CometMan]

A '48 Cadillac convertible that has never been issued in kit form before, but no stock build option? Isn't there some kind of law against cruel and unusual punishment?!

[Rob Hall]

A '48 Cadillac convertible that has never been issued in kit form before, but no stock build option? Isn't there some kind of law against cruel and unusual punishment?!

It would have to be two different kits, since the Foose car this kit represents appears to be completely custom..

[stavanzer]

And I'm OK with Completely Custom. If it sells really well, then Maybe we'll get a stock one. And If not, there is still the custom to try to take back to stock as I expect some enterprising resin caster will do, about a week after the kit hits the shelves.

So far Revell has been on a roll lately with their kit choices, so I'm good with what they bring out. I am going to hold off on getting the 67 Camaro until the inevitable 2'n'1 kit comes out someday. I am betting that there will be one eventually.

[Snake45]

. I am going to hold off on getting the 67 Camaro until the inevitable 2'n'1 kit comes out someday. I am betting that there will be one eventually.

It needs so much corrective work that I consider it a "1/2 in 1" kit.

[Nova-ss]

A '48 Cadillac convertible that has never been issued in kit form before, but no stock build option? Isn't there some kind of law against cruel and unusual punishment?!

LOL..thats a good one Steve

[Nova-ss]

so what does the foose f 100 1956 and Cadillac 1948 look like from foose?..does anyone have pictures....Chris 

[charlie8575]

A '48 Cadillac convertible that has never been issued in kit form before, but no stock build option? Isn't there some kind of law against cruel and unusual punishment?!

Agreed.

That said, let's hope it'll spawn a stock version.

Assuming, of course, there's still enough stock left to make it work.

Charlie Larkin

[Nova-ss]

here is a picture I found on tge net.I don't so what on this car isn't stock.outside wise?

[charlie8575]

Just about...nothing. 

http://www.pbase.com/johnfburns/image/129000497

http://fineartamerica.com/featured/1948-cadillac-convertible-dave-koontz.html

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/cadmanof50s/5854752665/

http://www.carsonline-ads.com/colsite/col?use=UC3_ViewPosting&cmd=showPosting&postingID=49684

This is a radical custom.

Charlie Larkin

[Danno]

 

[Richard Bartrop]

A '48 Cadillac convertible that has never been issued in kit form before, but no stock build option? Isn't there some kind of law against cruel and unusual punishment?!

I feel you pain.  So close, yet so far.

That said, as custom go, it's not that bad looking, anturn it into something more traditional.   It might even be a useful parts source for other custom projects.

[Bill J]

I really don't care for a Foose make over. He and others ruin a lot of nice classic cars to make their two tone trash. I wonder why Revell thinks his work is so awesome??

[Ace-Garageguy]

... let's hope it'll spawn a stock version.

Assuming, of course, there's still enough stock left to make it work.

Gonna take some mighty effort to make it stock. It's sectioned through the belt-line and hood for one thing. But if it has a fairly stock chassis...big IF...tooling a stock body shouldn't be cost-prohibitive. 

Still, I can see it being a great start for something more radical...man...I already see a LOT of source material here...and I'm gonna graft a fastback roof on one...that's for sure. 

The car has nice lines...

...but it be needin' this tail.      Think I woulda preferred machined billet 18" sombreros too.

Kinda like this but different...    

 

Edited April 1, 2016 by Ace-Garageguy

[stavanzer]

Bill Jay. I agree about Foose and others Ruining Stock cars. Read a Column in Car Culture Deluxe a couple years ago, advising guys to look for Museums selling off excess vehicles, to get fresh Sheet metal to chop & hot rod. At the Current rate, I fully expect to see two Billionaire Rodders, spending millions to buy the last "un-Chopped" 32 Deuce Coupe, so they can chop it. Because after all, Just because every Deuce Coupe built has been chopped, THEIR vision requires virgin factory sheet metal to cut, rather than re-doing some other already altered car, or using reproduction sheet metal. "It's NOT the same!" they'll cry. Only the REAL thing will work for MY idea! Even if the last Genuine Car has to be ruined, to do something that has been done to death in the last 50 years......

Lets face it. Even guys as "Talented" as Foose can only do so much before the laws of physics, and the need to sit in, and operate the car, take over. The AMBR winners get more expensive, and more derivative every year. The AMBR & Riddler awards have long been ceded to "Check Book Rodders" and professional Rod Shops and so-called Designers. The ordinary car guy does not need to anything but pay admission fees, and posters. How dare he try to build one himself? After only the "Pros" can compete at this level now.

 

As for the WHY Revell is doing this, it comes down to sales and money. Revell believes (I think, correctly) that these new Foose kits will reach a new market and sell well. Given how little the Modern high level reveres 'stock bodied' cars, I'm not hold my breath for stock versions of either kit, although I'd happily purchase multiple copies of the Caddy..

YMMV

Alan

[Mike Chernecki]

Looking at the Cadillac, I would love to see a kit of Billy Gibbons Cadzilla.

[Dave Ambrose]

I think the Foose kits will open a new market for Revell. I also think that's a good thing. We need new people in this hobby, and I don't think it will hurt any of us to be more ecumenical regarding style. Personally, I have mixed feelings about his builds. But, they're mostly good/OK. Don't get me started on "checkbook hot-rodding" either. :-)

[mrm]

I can't even build a MODEL chopped and screwed, let alone want to see a full-size car ruined.  It's like they think they are CREATING something, when all they are really doing is ruining classic beauty by slightly tweaking a line or two.  Or removing chrome (capital crime in my book).  I only buy Foosh kits if I need STOCK parts from them, and only when they are on the clearance rack.  I don't want to encourage this stuff.  Just my 2 cents!

What was that saying about opinions and buttholes?……….

I think it is great what some of these guys are doing. Both the real builders and Revell. My kids do to. And let's face it. People like me (younger) are going to be building kits after people like you (older) are gone. And my kid's generation will be building models after I am gone. In other words the future of the hobby does not quite care that much about stock Caddies and loves the new-era customs. 

What bugs me, is the tendency since Boyd Coddington died, for Chip Foose to freshen up cars built by Boyd while he was working for him and then introduce them under his own brand. This was the case with the 0032, which was originally The Boydster II. Foose repainted it in black (yellow originally) changed the wheels and campaigned it under his own name. The story with this Caddy is pretty much the same. And no matter how involved Foose was in the design of that car, it came out of Boyd's shop.

[horsepower]

Alan, before painting the car show community with a wide brush,or a roller I'd suggest a little better research, in the recent past there have been several AMBR finalists that came from individual garage builders, and even one from a High School shop program, and the past couple of years the winners have appeared to be very close to out of the box garage builds, but the biggest difference is the detail work, and attention to the little subtle changes that take a really close look to find.

And it's kinda ironic that you made the remark about reproduction sheet metal not being close enough for the purists to use, because again let me give you a little known background bit of trivia on reproduction parts, when thereproduction industry first started one of its initial offerings was parts for a 1932 Chevrolet roadster, to say these were the usual offerings that only a hot rod builder might use in a pinch is a little off. In fact to showcase their offerings, the company built a totally stock roadster using body parts that was done using the manufacturers firewall tag as the only production line part from Chevrolet, it won it's class and this was at one of the countries top concourse type shows. They did forfeit their award and disclose that the car was officially built using reproduction tin, but as far as building a real car it would still be considered a 1932 Chevrolet by the DMV.  Many street rod builders really prefer the reproduction steel to original junk, because of the better quality control than the factory did back then, and because they don't have to correct or repair decades of neglect and abuse, or improperly done work before being able to start on a project. So I think that last stock deuce coupe is safe now, thanks to the hot rod industry who want a project that is miles ahead in quality of what Henry had to offer.

[CometMan]

I feel you pain.  So close, yet so far.

That said, as custom go, it's not that bad looking, anturn it into something more traditional.   It might even be a useful parts source for other custom projects.

Yeah, you're right, it is nice looking for a custom, and may actually yield some useful parts, but you still can't beat a Cadillac from the days when the name actually meant something!