• Announcements

    • General Usage   05/10/2017

      If someone is acting badly, either in a forum or a private message, please report it. There are conveniently located buttons for sending the post to the moderators. 

1/25 Revell Ford FD-100 Pickup


50 posts in this topic

Posted

I wonder if you use the cab from this kit & bash it with an older kit & build a stock 56?

No. The cab has had a whole lot done to it from stock that's not apparent at first glance.  Look at where the windshield wipers sit on the Foose truck (more or lees flat) vs stock (ramps up to windshield).  There's not a stock piece of sheet metal on the thing. A lot of subtle changes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hmmm... some interesting engineering choices with the bed & running boards, which make more sense when you realize that it was originally supposed to be a pre-painted kit.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Interesting engineering choices alright! Like the metal axle through the engine. I'm not going to make too much noise about it,, but I have to say I thought they stopped doing that years ago. It seems to look fairly clean and concealed in this truck, but then again - it seems wrong somehow.

I'm sure somebody is going to have a cow about it. Bring out the popcorn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Interesting engineering choices alright! Like the metal axle through the engine. I'm not going to make too much noise about it,, but I have to say I thought they stopped doing that years ago. It seems to look fairly clean and concealed in this truck, but then again - it seems wrong somehow.

I'm sure somebody is going to have a cow about it. Bring out the popcorn!

Yeah, the Revell pre-paints have metal axles.  I've got the ZL-1 Camaro and C7 Corvette and they hide it pretty well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I like it; kind of harkens back to the days when the model bodies had a 'presence' and actually looked like the subject matter   ^_^

and vastly expands your choice of wheels, like using the amt f350 metal axle parts under the moeb F100s. Does every kit really need a 27 piece front suspension ?

 

mike

Edited by mk11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What gets me, is all the comments about "why is there no stock option?"" I cannot get over the sheer number of people, who seem fixated on a stock version of this kit. Maybe it is because the kit 'looks' so close to stock. As Brett and others have noted, while this kit looks like a '56 Ford P/U it has had every body panel massaged to be smoother, rounder, or better looking. I fully expect a line by line comparison of the two vehicles in the future showing where Foose made his subtle alterations to the truck. Given the parts shown in the linked instructions, and what we have learned about Model Kit Tooling Economics on the boards in the last few years, it strikes me that Revell may already have plans to use this running gear under another kit. It will be fun to see what they do with it.

I like to think of the '56 as a Ford Flavored Pick up, rather than an exact replica. The same with the other new Foose kit. It is an Eldorado Flavored Car, rather than a stock version.  And, I'm OK with that. I'll wind up with the car rather than the truck. The Engine in the Caddy will be going into a certain Revell Merc Woody, just as soon as I can figure out how to make it fit.  Heck, I may even build the convertible too. :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So much for "not buying any more kits".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

metal axle through the engine

Don't blame me-- I voted for the Impostor. B) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Aand we have a winner!

The winner is first and foremost myself, because I wanted a kit of this truck and I voted for it to be made. - And now I have one! It looks good too!

DSCF1748_zps9lrg66xz.jpg

 

The engine hole is not as bad those from back in the stone age of things, and looks as if it can easily be filled if need be.

DSCF1751_zpsw0pv8opq.jpg

One of the great features of this kit is something I have been wanting for a long time. Different size wheels of the same design and with rubber to match! The different size rollers we have been served in other kits have (almost) always had same diameter wheels. Different width yes, but same diameter, and then those would be fitted with different height tires. This always bugged me  because due to the different aspect ratio of the tires, the rims in the larger tyre would visually appear to be smaller than the one in the smaller tyre. Not anymore though. This kit has them right!

I am excited about this. Please do inform me if I am actually late to the party, and the other Foose kits have been equipped so for a long time now

DSCF1750_zpsumpghgd5.jpg

Edited by lysleder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Looks nice so far.

I hope it sells out quickly. I want to see Revell have a Home Run on their hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hmmm... some interesting engineering choices with the bed & running boards, which make more sense when you realize that it was originally supposed to be a pre-painted kit.  

 

Think that's a good thing, cuz when engineering for "pre-paint", one looks for ways to make it easy to paint the kit, in a production environment, something the casual modeler will appreciate I'm sure.

The metal axle thingy....wonder what the profile was of all who voted on Facebook, think it might explain a lot.

;)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This kit is worth it for me for the wheels alone.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I keep checking my local Hobby Lobby to see if they have filled the slot with these. This kit looks like a winner to me and I will have to buy a couple and like Darin mentions, the wheels are worth the price of the kit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess I'll be the one who has the cow about the metal axle through the engine. I cannot believe that in a day and age where we are now paying almost $35 for a kit that Revell's thinks it's appropriate to go back to sixties and run a metal axle through the engine. How hard would it have been to use the metal pins for mounting the front wheels like they've been doing for the past few years? Revell is trying to appeal to what market with this kit? Not the adult model builder. Obviously they are designing toys to be played with. No, I don't need a 27 pieces front suspension but I do feel 60's technology in a brand new 2017 kit is inappropriate. If that makes me a hater, I apologize but the pin type mounting system cannot be that much more expensive to produce and would have made a more acceptable product. I appreciate Revell bringing new product to market such as this truck and the upcoming Cadillac. The kit, I believe is no cheaper to buy due to Revell cheaping out on the wheel mounting system. I cannot see other genre model builders (planes,  armor, etc) tolerating the model companies going back to sixties technology for their planes or tanks but we seem to think it's all right? I don't get it. O.K. frustrated rant over. Flame away and again I apologize for those that may be upset by this opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess I'll be the one who has the cow about the metal axle through the engine. I cannot believe that in a day and age where we are now paying almost $35 for a kit that Revell's thinks it's appropriate to go back to sixties and run a metal axle through the engine. How hard would it have been to use the metal pins for mounting the front wheels like they've been doing for the past few years? Revell is trying to appeal to what market with this kit? Not the adult model builder. Obviously they are designing toys to be played with. No, I don't need a 27 pieces front suspension but I do feel 60's technology in a brand new 2017 kit is inappropriate. If that makes me a hater, I apologize but the pin type mounting system cannot be that much more expensive to produce and would have made a more acceptable product. I appreciate Revell bringing new product to market such as this truck and the upcoming Cadillac. The kit, I believe is no cheaper to buy due to Revell cheaping out on the wheel mounting system. I cannot see other genre model builders (planes,  armor, etc) tolerating the model companies going back to sixties technology for their planes or tanks but we seem to think it's all right? I don't get it. O.K. frustrated rant over. Flame away and again I apologize for those that may be upset by this opinion.

It was mentioned above that this was intended to be a pre-painted kit and thus the simplistic approach to the kit- metal axles, one piece bed- and that is how we have this kit. I agree that we shouldn't have to accept metal axles in this modern day of model kits but if it helps Revell sell more kits to a broader audience and thus develop more kits, then that is the end result. Given that there are fewer new kits and only a couple of companies bringing out new kits, it is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Almost $35? It's $24.95 MSRP. Personally I'll take metal axles if they get the body proportions right. A return to the days of promos and annuals if you will. The C7 Vette is bang on and all indications are this one is too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I saw pictures that the truck was 3d scanned. Hopefully that will help with getting it right. Considering this kit is targeted at kids the metal the metal axle makes sense. Hope they sell bunches. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

100_3564_zpsbkudkn8i.jpg

 

100_3565_zpspcy102gq.jpg

Comparison between the old Revell '56 and the new Foose FD100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Almost $35? It's $24.95 MSRP. Personally I'll take metal axles if they get the body proportions right. A return to the days of promos and annuals if you will. The C7 Vette is bang on and all indications are this one is too. 

Sorry, Brett, in Canada current kits are now going for around $35 CDN. Low dollar sucks.  I guess it's just me but metal axle screams $10 toy to me not a 2017 scale kit. And why go to all the trouble of going to all the trouble of scanning every thing to get body proportions right and then throw it all away with a clunky metal axle through the engine when there are far better ways of doing it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One it is a toy. That is the main market its designed for. 

Second it shouldn't be that difficult to fix.  Where the hole is won't really show if you get rid of the metal axle. Besides it nothing like the kits from the 60s that half the oil pan and block were gone for the hole. Looking forward to grabbing one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think you guys are overthinking all of these, just a weeeeeeee bit.

The licensing agreement for these Foose kits was for 6 models total. Two SnapTite, Two pre-paints, and 2 all new tool glue kits.  To assume this was going to be a pre-paint would imply that Revell was going to make this truck regardless as to how the voting was going to come out, and gee-golly-shucks look it "magically" won.  The entire voting process being a fraud a P.R. disaster Revell doesn't need, especially since it would completely overshadow what seems to be a nice model.

The reason the kit has two metal axles, and a grand total of 9 suspension pieces is because it's a "one shot" kit.  This can never be made into something else down the road.  There's no 2nd and 3rd versions to make up for poor sales.  The price we pay for kits is a carefully tabulated guesstimate based on tooling costs and expected sales.  Because there can't be a stock '56 Ford based on this tooling, or anything else for that matter, cost savings had to be implemented in order for these kits to be feasible.  Putting metal axles in it might harken back to a simpler time to a certain extent, but that doesn't make it a toy, or marketed at kids.  It's the realities that Revell faced in making this kit, do you want it or not?  The little axles nails wouldn't work in this application because of the way the disc brake and wheel assembly interface (which if we want to be honest is very diecasty) is designed.  Plug the hole, cut the axles down and voila problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

f100_zpsh11k6miy.jpg

f1001_zpsrnypr0nr.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I wondering if Foose's design is so good that it could fool people in to thinking it was a stock truck if one just made it a little higher and put steelwheels and full profile tires on it. If one also tweeked the tailgate so that is says FORD, how long would it be on a showtable before people noticed that it is not stock...I think I want to try and find that out:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The Revell 1956 F-100 dates back to 1962 . I have an original-issue of this kit (found at a thrift store about 10 years ago) ; even it cannot be built 100% stock , but it comes close ( the headliner is a custom job ; and the Thunderbird Y-Block isn't stock ... close , but no cigar .)

I am impressed with the Foose FD-100 so far (judging it only by the photos shared here , and by the online "instructions" pdf ) . It looks like a nice , clean customised F-100 , with quite subtle "massaging" of its panels . 

That would be a neat 'test' to add some stock changes to it ( essentially , add the wind wings ; change its suspension to straight front axle / solid "floater" rear with leaf springs ; stock tyres & wheels ; and , interior 'retrogrades' ) . These days , it would be like the proverbial "stock" Model A or 1932 Ford or 1934 Ford : few among us -- my-self included -- know what the body proportions are on those cars in dead-stock form ( though , Tim Boyd Tulio , and others would know right-off ... ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now