Round 2's new AMT 2016 Camaro SS FULL DETAIL kit: First look/detailed overview (and I'm not kidding about that full detail comment....)

[randyc]

Glad the kit is coming.  Thanks for the review.  Not wild about defroster lines or the molded in headliner that is incomplete.  And the new camaro does not excite me at all.  Drove thru the Chevy place and just did not care for the new design.  Like someone else said - too hot wheels cartoonish - kinda like they wanted to avoid licensing fees to make a camaro.  I know time marches on and they have to change something.  But it just doesn't do anything for me. I do hope they sell a ton of them so others will follow.   And I really didn't mind the simplified, prepainted Challenger. Easy build that didn't take a full machine shop to build... lol.  

At this point, my modeling is more focused on the things I want to build and not every new kit that comes out like in the past.  My income has not increased with the model prices unfortunately.  $100 used to get me a BUNCH of kits, now just 4 or maybe 5.  

Thanks for the write up - I love these previews.

Randyc

 

[charlie8575]

Instead of posable steering,  which costs fidelity,  I wonder if there is not simply a way to offer different parts to have a choice of pre-set poses,  straight or turned.

That's a very cool idea, Mark.

This kit looks superb. I'll be buying one to support the effort. I actually tried one of these on, and the visibility is terrible, I agree. Once settled in, it's reasonably comfortable,.

I just keep thinking to the first Camaro...based on the Nova so you could actually fit in it and have seats for 4-5 people. In the '16, if the front seat is all the way back, it literally stops at the back seat- making leg-room 0.

Charlie Larkin

[horsepower]

Charlie, they're not supposed to have any leg room in the back seat, neither does the Mustang, and I haven't had a chance to get in the Challenger yet. The back seats aren't designed to actually be sat in, remember these cars are supposed to make us remember our formative years when we NEVER used a back seat for sitting in, even the rare occasions when we did WATCH a drive in movie from there we pushed the front seats as far forward as possible and tipped the seat backs forward to rest our feet on, and never ever did we offer to drag anyone along to sit in the back who was taller than 5'2" under the penalty of not looking cool with a car load of dudes, or heaven forbid an actual adult. As to visibility, and some people complain about looking squashed. Just think of it as Chevrolet already chopped the top FOR you, and I didn't have a really bad problem with visibility, because I don't bother to try and look behind me, that's what rear view cameras are for, and at around 5'8" I don't have to scrunch down to look up. But seriously the big problem with almost all new cars is the side impact requirements that the feds have put on the manufacturers, they have to make the body sides so high to get adequate side impact protection that it makes the roof look like it's been chopped about 4 inches, all of the sleeker cars are fighting the slit sized side window problems, but the cars that are still attempting to look like they have separate quarter windows are worse because they can't hide the appearance with body trim around the opening that gives the illusion of the old two door hardtop with the windows down.

Edited August 18, 2016 by horsepower

[martinfan5]

Now that I have built this kit, I have to say that this kit is nowhere near being anything of "Tamiya like quality",  and I firmly believe that anyone that says this kit is on par with a Tamiya kit, has never seen a Tamiya kit or built one for that matter.     For starters, out of the box , the ride height is something close to what you would see on a 4X4, and has tires poking out past the fenders.   Over complicating the rear suspension just for the sake of parts count was not needed, and made lowering it and bringing in the tires a major pain.   Then, the entire kit is basically a snap kit with an engine, almost every mounting hole had to be enlarge , the mounting pin holes on the wheels had to be enlarged if you didnt want to break the pins.   Detail is soft in some area's like the side window trim, paint it with a rattle can probably would of covered it up.   

Molding in the side marker lights and third brake light , this is 2016, that IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !!!!, and then, I like how Round 2 provided extra decals for the bow tie's, the SS emblems, the Camaro emblems, the Camaro lettering for the engine, extra cluster decals , touch screen decals, four different vanity plates, but couldn't bother doing decals for the side maker lights and third stoplight.   And then lets add in molding the mirror faces to the side mirrors, and no hood hinges or anything to keep the hood somewhat attached to the body. 

The only two things that I can say positive about this kit, well, three,  is the windows black area's being done and the taillights came pre colored in the correct way.  The third thing, is that when all said and does, it does look like what is supposed to.

Edited November 17, 2016 by martinfan5

[tim boyd]

Now that I have built this kit, I have to say that this kit is nowhere near being anything of "Tamiya like quality",  and I firmly believe that anyone that says this kit is on par with a Tamiya kit, has never seen a Tamiya kit or built one for that matter.     For starters, out of the box , the ride height is something close to what you would see on a 4X4, and has tires poking out past the fenders.   Over complicating the rear suspension just for the sake of parts count was not needed, and made lowering it and bringing in the tires a major pain.   Then, the entire kit is basically a snap kit with an engine, almost every mounting hole had to be enlarge , the mounting pin holes on the wheels had to be enlarged if you didnt want to break the pins.   Detail is soft in some area's like the side window trim, paint it with a rattle can probably would of covered it up.   

Molding in the side marker lights and third brake light , this is 2016, that IS NOT ACCEPTABLE !!!!, and then, I like how Round 2 provided extra decals for the bow tie's, the SS emblems, the Camaro emblems, the Camaro lettering for the engine, extra cluster decals , touch screen decals, four different vanity plates, but couldn't bother doing decals for the side maker lights and third stoplight.   And then lets add in molding the mirror faces to the side mirrors, and no hood hinges or anything to keep the hood somewhat attached to the body. 

The only two things that I can say positive about this kit, well, three,  is the windows black area's being done and the taillights came pre colored in the correct way.  The third thing, is that when all said and does, it does look like what is supposed to.

Jonathon, thanks for your comments.  As I've always said, the most legitimate verdict on any kit is after you've built it.  And on that basis, your conclusion above holds a good deal of validity with me. 

On the other hand, as someone who has observed your posts over the years here, it seems to me that you may be among those builders who summarily favor import designed kits over those of the domestic manufacturers.   As someone who worked for 35 years in the domestic auto industry, I observed many times where foreign-designed cars were favored over domestic-designed cars without adequate justification, and I believe the same bias in favor of imports exists among some in the model building community.

As such, I personally reject point blank any statement or inference that Tamiya kits are always superior to domestic-designed kits ( I am not suggesting that you made this statement, but I know some people do feel this way).  There are cases, of course, where Tamiya kits are clearly superior, but not all.  And so I take any critique such as this with a bit of caution.

Still, having not built the kit myself, I find your comments instructional and informative, and in some cases worthy of follow-up should Round 2 pursue additional full detail kits (I will try to make sure they see your observations).  Other comments you make - such as suggesting this is nothing more than a snap kit with an engine added, and that the extra rear suspension detail is not desirable, I personally summarily reject.  

How about others following this thread?  Who else has built the Round 2 Full Detail Camaro kit?  What is your verdict?  Do you agree with Jonathon's conclusion?  Thanks.....TIM  

*************************

PS, personally, I have many Japanese-designed kits, including some from Tamiya, in my own stash.  I was also one of the very first in the States to have received two of the 300SL kits, and I am still hopeful that they will decide to do the Ferrari Berlinetta Lusso at some point in the future.  TB .  

 

 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2016 by tim boyd

[Rob Hall]

Jonathon, thanks for your comments.  As I've always said, the most legitimate verdict on any kit is after you've built it.  And on that basis, your conclusion above holds a good deal of validity with me. 

On the other hand, as someone who has observed your posts over the years here, it seems to me that you may be among those builders who summarily favor import designed kits over those of the domestic manufacturers.   As someone who worked for 35 years in the domestic auto industry, I observed many times where foreign-designed cars were favored over domestic-designed cars without adequate justification, and I believe the same bias in favor of imports exists among some in the model building community.

As such, I personally reject point blank any statement or inference that Tamiya kits are always superior to domestic-designed kits ( I am not suggesting that you made this statement, but I know some people do feel this way).  There are cases, of course, where Tamiya kits are clearly superior, but not all.  And so I take any critique such as this with a bit of caution.

Still, having not built the kit myself, I find your comments instructional and informative, and in some cases worthy of follow-up should Round 2 pursue additional full detail kits (I will try to make sure they see your observations).  

I was also one of the very first in the States to have received two of the 300SL kits.  

 

how is that relevant?  Just sounds like you are bragging...and you reviewed this kit, but haven't built it??  And bringing up that you spent 35 years in the auto industry is also irrelevant.   Just shows you may be biased towards the domestics.     I have the kit, haven't built it yet, but the comments of people that have built it certainly are of more value...

 

[tim boyd]

how is that relevant?  Just sounds like you are bragging...and you reviewed this kit, but haven't built it??  And bringing up that you spent 35 years in the auto industry is also irrelevant.   Just shows you may be biased towards the domestics.     I have the kit, haven't built it yet, but the comments of people that have built it certainly are of more value...

 

With all due respect, it is highly relevant.  

 

And my review was of the kit itself, not of the assembled model. Go back and re-read my review, here's the link.  Also note that I said in the intro "as usual, I caution against making any definitive determinations until you've bought the kit and built it for yourself. I also can't comment on fit and assembly, although this is typically not an issue with current CAD-based model kit development."

That's one of the reasons I am so interested in Jonathon's comments, as well as those of others who have actually built the kit.    TIM   

TIM 

Edited November 17, 2016 by tim boyd

[Zoom Zoom]

Jonathan, thanks for your honest review of the kit. 

Let's hope AMT listens to the critiques and refines the kit, and others that may be coming behind it. The more full-detail kits they make like this, the better they should get.

[tim boyd]

 

Let's hope AMT listens to the critiques and refines the kit, and others that may be coming behind it. The more full-detail kits they make like this, the better they should get.

Jonathon and Bob - as I promised, Jon's comments have been forwarded to Round 2.  While they obviously do not agree with some of your conclusions, they will take a serious look at adding the side marker lights and CHMSL decals, as you suggest, to future versions of this tool.  And I bet they'll follow through with that, too    

And as Bob says, I think you will see some of the other suggestions migrate to future full detail kits (if they decide to go in this direction, which obviously, I hope they do).

TIM   

 

 

[Luc Janssens]

"Over complicating the rear suspension just for the sake of parts count was not needed, and made lowering it and bringing in the tires a major pain"

"almost every mounting hole had to be enlarge , the mounting pin holes on the wheels had to be enlarged if you didnt want to break the pins" 

A few comments

Form follows function and sometimes less is more, is my motto. a full detail and snapper from the same tooling, but in another configuration, is always a compromise, remember the 4th gen F-cars from Monogram?

In the past whenever you saw first shots being built, it was in raw plastic, maybe manufactures before assembling should paint the parts, if don't do it already, (Tim might know) could it be they don't build in enough tolerance in the 3D files, also with the final polishing of the tool part get slightly bigger except for the mounting holes....food for thought..

Like Tim I come from automotive, built a lot of prototype and pilot cars, and remember when receiving painted bodies we all of a sudden had fit and alignment problems, not only due to the paint but also due to baking the paint, that latter now is very unlikely with building a plastic model kit, even when you put it in the food dehydrator....

 

Edited November 17, 2016 by Luc Janssens

[martinfan5]

A few comments

Form follows function and sometimes less is more, is my motto. a full detail and snapper from the same tooling, but in another configuration, is always a compromise, remember the 4th gen F-cars from Monogram?

In the past whenever you saw first shots being built, it was in raw plastic, maybe manufactures before assembling should paint the parts, if don't do it already, (Tim might know) could it be they don't build in enough tolerance in the 3D files, also with the final polishing of the tool part get slightly bigger except for the mounting holes....food for thought..

Like Tim I come from automotive, built a lot of prototype and pilot cars, and remember when receiving painted bodies we all of a sudden had fit and alignment problems, not only due to the paint but also due to baking the paint, that latter now is very unlikely with building a plastic model kit, even when you put it in the food dehydrator....

 

All the issues with fitment that I encountered were before any paint was applied, so I was dealing with bare plastic.

 

 

[Ron Hamilton]

Jonathon, thanks for your comments.  As I've always said, the most legitimate verdict on any kit is after you've built it.  And on that basis, your conclusion above holds a good deal of validity with me. 

On the other hand, as someone who has observed your posts over the years here, it seems to me that you may be among those builders who summarily favor import designed kits over those of the domestic manufacturers.   As someone who worked for 35 years in the domestic auto industry, I observed many times where foreign-designed cars were favored over domestic-designed cars without adequate justification, and I believe the same bias in favor of imports exists among some in the model building community.

As such, I personally reject point blank any statement or inference that Tamiya kits are always superior to domestic-designed kits ( I am not suggesting that you made this statement, but I know some people do feel this way).  There are cases, of course, where Tamiya kits are clearly superior, but not all.  And so I take any critique such as this with a bit of caution.

Still, having not built the kit myself, I find your comments instructional and informative, and in some cases worthy of follow-up should Round 2 pursue additional full detail kits (I will try to make sure they see your observations).  Other comments you make - such as suggesting this is nothing more than a snap kit with an engine added, and that the extra rear suspension detail is not desirable, I personally summarily reject.  

How about others following this thread?  Who else has built the Round 2 Full Detail Camaro kit?  What is your verdict?  Do you agree with Jonathon's conclusion?  Thanks.....TIM  

*************************

PS, personally, I have many Japanese-designed kits, including some from Tamiya, in my own stash.  I was also one of the very first in the States to have received two of the 300SL kits, and I am still hopeful that they will decide to do the Ferrari Berlinetta Lusso at some point in the future.  TB .  

 

 

 

 

I built one of these when the kit first came out, and I liked the kit. Until it was painted and glued, it sat kind of funky, but one I did my final assembly, I an quite happy with the kit. The only problem I had, was that I felt that the side window gaskets were not very well defined, and hard to paint.

Other than having to finesse a few parts to my satisfaction, which I normally do with my builds anyway, I am pleased with the kit. I did not encounter the problems that Jonathon mentioned once everything was painted.

[Luc Janssens]

All the issues with fitment that I encountered were before any paint was applied, so I was dealing with bare plastic.

So normally when building the kit from test shots, this should've been picked up, yet Ron didn't encounter the problems you had, hmm....very strange, maybe it the Chinese plastic

Think we need more builder info...

 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Luc Janssens

[tim boyd]

I built one of these when the kit first came out, and I liked the kit. Until it was painted and glued, it sat kind of funky, but one I did my final assembly, I an quite happy with the kit. The only problem I had, was that I felt that the side window gaskets were not very well defined, and hard to paint.

Other than having to finesse a few parts to my satisfaction, which I normally do with my builds anyway, I am pleased with the kit. I did not encounter the problems that Jonathon mentioned once everything was painted.

Ron....looks very sharp indeed.  And thanks for sharing your experience......

[tim boyd]

So normally when building the kit from test shots, this should've been picked up, yet Ron didn't encounter the problems you had, hmm....very strange, maybe it the Chinese plastic

Think we need more builder info...

 

Luc....Round 2 tells me that they specifically worked with the supplier during the test shot phase to finesse the fit of part locating tabs/holes, and the like.  I believe Jonathon when he said he encountered fit problems, yet Ron didn't have seem to have a major issue either.  

Strange.....as you suggest, we could benefit from more feedback from those that have built the kit.  

It reminds me of my experiences with a certain tool from a Round 2 competitor....I've built probably 12 models so far from the two kit variants, and I've been surprised at the variations in ejector pin marks, sink marks, parting lines, and the like in every kit that I open and build.  Some samples approach near perfection, others end up needing work.  There seems to be no specific pattern.  I wonder something if similar could be at work that would explain the variation between the kits that Jonathon and Ron built?  (Just so we are clear, to my understanding the kits I am referring to and built, came from a different manufacturing source than the one that Round 2 uses for molding their kits).....TIM 

Edited November 18, 2016 by tim boyd

[martinfan5]

Luc....Round 2 tells me that they specifically worked with the supplier during the test shot phase to finesse the fit of part locating tabs/holes, and the like.  I believe Jonathon when he said he encountered fit problems, yet Ron didn't have seem to have a major issue either.  

Strange.....as you suggest, we could benefit from more feedback from those that have built the kit.  

It reminds me of my experiences with a certain tool from a Round 2 competitor....I've built probably 12 models so far from the two kit variants, and I've been surprised at the variations in ejector pin marks, sink marks, parting lines, and the like in every kit that I open and build.  Some samples approach near perfection, others end up needing work.  There seems to be no specific pattern.  I wonder something if similar could be at work that would explain the variation between the kits that Jonathon and Ron built?  (Just so we are clear, to my understanding the kits I am referring to and built, came from a different manufacturing source than the one that Round 2 uses for molding their kits).....TIM 

Tim, let me be perfectly clear here so there isnt any misinformation said,  the only "fit" issues I encountered was the with the tires not fitting well on to the hub pieces, which for me caused them to stick out some past the fenders.     One of two things could of cause that issue for me,  one, the hub pieces more so for the rear where molded just a tad bit too long, or the female end that half shaft goes into was not molded deep enough,  or, I just wanst pressing the wheels all the way into the hubs.   I know that I pushed the wheels on as far as they would go, so this leads me to believe that is was on the hub end.  

 

[Luc Janssens]

Tim, let me be perfectly clear here so there isnt any misinformation said,  the only "fit" issues I encountered was the with the tires not fitting well on to the hub pieces, which for me caused them to stick out some past the fenders.     One of two things could of cause that issue for me,  one, the hub pieces more so for the rear where molded just a tad bit too long, or the female end that half shaft goes into was not molded deep enough,  or, I just wanst pressing the wheels all the way into the hubs.   I know that I pushed the wheels on as far as they would go, so this leads me to believe that is was on the hub end.  

 

"almost every mounting hole had to be enlarged" is what you said in your post, was it posted in the heat of the moment then?

Sorry but this is misinformation, and doesn't help anyone.

[martinfan5]

"almost every mounting hole had to be enlarged" is what you said in your post, was it posted in the heat of the moment then?

Sorry but this is misinformation, and doesn't help anyone

I wouldnt say heat of the moment, but I still standby what I said,  I probably did fail a bit in putting my thoughts into words, so let me try this again,  it was my finding that a lot of the mounting holes were not say big enough to allow easy insertion without having to apply a lot pressure and then risking breaking said part and or pin.   The mounting holes for the spoiler ,  the amount of pressure needed to push it down into the holes could of very easily snapped the spoiler if not being really careful.   And there we some mounting holes, that did not need any attention. 

Is there anything else you would like to discredit me on?  do me favor, if you are going to imply that I am wildly incompetent, then be a man and come out and say it,  if you are trying to say I am just biased against domestic kits , then , be a man and just come out and say it,  but I have grown tired of your back handed remarks in this thread because you dont like what I have to say.

I am doing what the very point of the a review section is for, to share opinions on kits, that is something that us guys that are building the kits have the ability to do.

 

Edited November 19, 2016 by martinfan5

[martinfan5]

Jonathon, thanks for your comments.  As I've always said, the most legitimate verdict on any kit is after you've built it.  And on that basis, your conclusion above holds a good deal of validity with me. 

On the other hand, as someone who has observed your posts over the years here, it seems to me that you may be among those builders who summarily favor import designed kits over those of the domestic manufacturers.   As someone who worked for 35 years in the domestic auto industry, I observed many times where foreign-designed cars were favored over domestic-designed cars without adequate justification, and I believe the same bias in favor of imports exists among some in the model building community.

As such, I personally reject point blank any statement or inference that Tamiya kits are always superior to domestic-designed kits ( I am not suggesting that you made this statement, but I know some people do feel this way).  There are cases, of course, where Tamiya kits are clearly superior, but not all.  And so I take any critique such as this with a bit of caution.

Still, having not built the kit myself, I find your comments instructional and informative, and in some cases worthy of follow-up should Round 2 pursue additional full detail kits (I will try to make sure they see your observations).  Other comments you make - such as suggesting this is nothing more than a snap kit with an engine added, and that the extra rear suspension detail is not desirable, I personally summarily reject.  

How about others following this thread?  Who else has built the Round 2 Full Detail Camaro kit?  What is your verdict?  Do you agree with Jonathon's conclusion?  Thanks.....TIM  

*************************

PS, personally, I have many Japanese-designed kits, including some from Tamiya, in my own stash.  I was also one of the very first in the States to have received two of the 300SL kits, and I am still hopeful that they will decide to do the Ferrari Berlinetta Lusso at some point in the future.  TB .  

 

 

 

 

Tim

I have some questions for you before I go any further

1. Did you really send my comments to Round 2 and get a response directly about them?
2. Exactly who at Round 2 did send my comments to?
3. Exactly what was the response to your comments?

Now,  I understand you have a little bit invested in this kit, so I can understand why you might be I guess offended by what I have/had to say about this kit,  but that doesnt mean you have a right try and discredit me as well.   Ive been building models since sometime in the 80's ,  Ive been around long enough to know what a good kit is , and what a subpar kit is.  

Second, I dont understand why you brought up that that I favor building Japanese kits vs domestic kits, please, tell how that has any bearing on me being able to give a opinion of a domestic kit.   They are both model kits , the only difference is the country of origin ,  nothing more, nothing less, so that was just a failed attempt at trying to discredit me.

I will let you on a little secret as to why that is,  I like building cars from era, which from 1980-today,  and I know you dont need me telling you this, but we dont get a lot of current American subjects that are not build and play kits, so, my only choice is to build mostly Japanese kits,  if Round 2 and Revell kit current subjects that I have an interest in, I will buy them and build them, case in point, I bought the 2016 Camaro kit, and here is something, I HATE Camaro's in real life.  So, I was doing my part in supporting Round 2 for the efforts and showing them that current subjects are wanted. 

With all due respect, I really don't care how long you say you were in the auto industry, that has no bearing on building model kits,  and doesnt mean your opinion mean's more than mine does.   If we were talking about 1:1 cars, sure, you might have me there.  

I might of made it a bit personal with my Tamiya remark,  I probably should of kept that out, but it was said, and I still stand by it, but it is becoming very common for people to compare every model kit to Tamiya kits, why, I dont know, and I think it gets a bit silly at times, and Tamiya is not perfect either in their own right.    Now of course, this is just my opinion, but anyone that has built a Tamiya like quality kit would know the difference between a Tamiya kit and a Revell or AMT kit, and would know that it would be very silly to say that are the same. 

Ok, awesome, you got the first two SL kits in the US, I can play that game too, from my understanding, I have the only Aoshima tee shirt in the USA,  and it looks like I might of been the first to get the Meng Hummer H1 in the US, but that has no bearing on this topic.   But that goes back to, have you actually built a Tamiya kit?   I know you have an axe to grind with Tamiya over the Aston Martin DBS ,  it is time to get over that, lets move on, life is too short for that. 

I am not ragging or bashing on AMT like I suspect you think I am doing, I have no axe to grind with them, I have ZERO reason to bad mouth this kit, I really dont,  you gotta trust me on that one.

If you are really curious or care about my dealings with this kit , I mean really truly care about the issues I had, than drop the crude, show me some respect,and I will do the same in return,  and talk to me with out the back handed remarks trying to get everyone to think that I am 2 bit hack. 

Now that we got all the personal BS out of the way,lets move on and focus on the kit.

 

Edited November 19, 2016 by martinfan5

[tim boyd]

Tim

In response to Jonathan's questions: 

I have some questions for you before I go any further

1. Did you really send my comments to Round 2 and get a response directly about them?
2. Exactly who at Round 2 did send my comments to?
3. Exactly what was the response to your comments?

To Jonathon and others following this thread:  

1.  Yes, I sent your comments to Round 2, and yes they responded to me with their reaction.  

2  Who I sent the comments to is confidential. 

3. I will not quote the response word for word as that is also confidential.  But to summarize, your comments were forwarded by the recipient to several other people in the company who do product development for their information, along with a request to see if your suggestion on the decals could be incorporated in future kit releases. It also said that they disagree with your assessment of some of the parts locating tabs, and that they assembled several test shots and worked with the supplier to finesse those areas (this is pretty typical of all kit manufacturers, from my experience) prior to the kit's release.  

In my post I raised the issue about unjustified pro-Japanese product bias as I experienced it firsthand in my automotive career, and to my consternation I still see it surface from time to time on this and other model car related forums.  No one manufacturer or country of origin has a lock on product development expertise, be it 1/1 automotive or 1/24th-25th scale model car kits.  And just because one kit manufacturer has ultra-precise fit and finish does not automatically make them superior to another kit manufacturer who sweats the effort to include additional parts, and underbody realism that may not be seen in the final assembled model.    

It was not, and is not, my intent to discredit or undermine your experience as a model kit builder, and I apologize if that is the impression I gave you with my comments. But I will continue to challenge posts on this board and elsewhere that, in my judgement, continue to contribute to a perception that Japanese-designed model kits are always superior per se to those from domestic manufacturers.   I understand that this is not a popular position to take on this board, but it is my belief and I stand by it   

As to the kit itself, I do not have any personal vested interest in it, other than to publicize the extent of the "full detail" component of the kit, and to encourage Round 2, if sales warrant it, to expand the approach to other 1/1 scale products such as the current and future generations of Mustangs.  If that happens, it would address what both you and I (and many others) would like to see - more post 1980's kit subjects done with the detail that we as serious modeling hobbyists want to see.   

Meanwhile, I applaud and encourage the comments from all who have built the kit, including you and Ron, as it helps to bring a well-rounded view of the kit to the modeling community.  This is not to suggest that one person's conclusions are more valid than another's.  To the contrary, as Luc suggests above, it would be even better if others who have built the kit could share their experiences with us.   

Best Regards....TIM

Edited November 19, 2016 by tim boyd

[The Junkman]

I, for one appreciate a first person build report.  In fact I prefer multiple build reports as I live in a town without a hobby shop and no local source of kits/paints except a Michaels and have no one to bounce impressions off.  Camaros aren't a thing with me (check signature) but solutions are.  As long as everyone acknowledges that everyone's opinion is equally valid and everyone's experience is theirs alone, I'm happy. 

(Psssst, Tim.  Next time you talk with R2, mention two little words-289 Cobra.  Maybe add FIA/USRRC to the conversation.  I don't even want to know whom you talked to.   Let's keep this between us, OK?)

Edited November 19, 2016 by The Junkman

[mikemodeler]

I sought out this kit based on initial positive reviews. I appreciate the honest feedback given by people who actually have built the kit as I hope to avoid the problems they encountered.

All the other drama is unnecessary, I can go to Facebook and get drama, personal attacks and name calling; I come here to enjoy the hobby.

 

[Luc Janssens]

 

Is there anything else you would like to discredit me on?  do me favor, if you are going to imply that I am wildly incompetent, then be a man and come out and say it,  if you are trying to say I am just biased against domestic kits , then , be a man and just come out and say it,  but I have grown tired of your back handed remarks in this thread because you dont like what I have to say.

 

Hmm...

I'm following you in your 1st hand build report, I wonder what could've caused the difficulties you ran into, then a post later you tone down your comments....I notice, and now I am the bad guy?

A clear cut example of "the best defense is a good offense?!

Anyway enough of this silliness, lets keep us focused on what this board is about, providing accurate info to build the best possible model, by using info dispensed by a collective of knowledgeable people all in their own field.

 

 

 

[Ron Hamilton]

I thought that reviews of a kit were of a subjective nature. When did it become a ... contest? I understand Jonathon's comments concerning this kit, and I saw the same thing concerning one of the wheels on the one I built. I stand by my opinion of the AMT 2016 Camaro kit. To me, it is a quality kit. Period.

While the Imported kits are usually of very high quality, I have personally worked on a couple that need a little "finessing", but I expect that from ALL model kits. I have several models under construction at the present time, a couple that one who normally sees my work on this board would not expect from me. Both of them are BMWs. One is a Tamiya BMW 850i, and one is a BMW 325 I sedan from one of the premier Japanese companies. They are both mocked up, "Finessed", and ready for paint, and final assembly, once I decide on the colors of the exterior and interior.

I admit that I am far from the best modeler on this board, but I can say I know my way around a model car, over 50 years, building a few hundred kits over that period.

I've seen Jonathon's work, and I can say from the photos I saw, it's excellent. Disparaging his abilities and skills on this board is ridiculous. He is entitled to his opinion, as are everyone else who posts them on this and any other board.

I admit that I am very much into American Iron from the early '60's through today, and the only Imported Cars I have built are the Fujimi Porsche 356 and 911 Cabriolets, and Ferrari 250 GTO and 365 GTB Coupes, Fujimi BMW 650i and a Revell of Germany BMW 750il, even though I have several Fujimi, Aoshima, Revell of Germany, and Tamiya kits of various subjects.

None of these kits are absolutely perfect, and while I can actually agree with most of Jonathan's findings and observations, I contend that AMT has definitely stepped up their game, and I welcome more kits at this level, no matter what country the kit is marketed from. I want to see contemporary cars and trucks, especially the domestics. If AMT, Revell, Mobieus, or any of the European and Japanese can do this, it will be a better day for the modeling community.

 

Edited November 20, 2016 by Ron Hamilton

[niteowl7710]

While the Imported kits are usually of very high quality, I have personally worked on a couple that need a little "finessing", but I expect that from ALL model kits. I have several models under construction at the present time, a couple that one who normally sees my work on this board would not expect from me. Both of them are BMWs. One is a Tamiya BMW 850i, and one is a BMW 325 I sedan from one of the premier Japanese companies. They are both mocked up, "Finessed", and ready for paint, and final assembly, once I decide on the colors of the exterior and interior.

 

You have to finesse the 850i because it's a Revell of Germany kit in a Tamiya box.  When it comes to 325is there are two of them.  The Tamiya kit is ALSO a reboxed Revell of Germany kit.  If you're talking about the E30 generation on by Fujimi that thing is a disaster on all fronts and I don't care how much you finesse it, it's never going to look right due to the one-size-fits-all motorized chassis it rides on from it's 1980s origins that cause the body to be misproportioned in pretty much every dimension.