Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum
hpiguy

Revell '64 Ford Fairlane Thunderbolt Kit Parts Review

Recommended Posts

I have the last re-issue. I'll need to get this one too.

Thanks Again, Chris for posting this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had one of these kits for years, partway through conversion to a lower-class Modified Stocker with a small-block engine. Did a bunch of work removing the teardrop bulge from the hood before Revell brought out the stock(ish) version. 

If anyone has the new version and doesn't need the flat hood...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A kit I have little to no interest in. But, I love Chris' review. Though hearing can be built "stockish" I may need to take a closer look at the instructions over on Revell's web site. A basically "stock" street version of this car could get me to think about buying one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After looking at the instructions over at Revell's web site, sorry to say this kit is nothing I would be interested in building. It's not close enough to a car you might find at most local Ford dealers at the time. Interesting is one of the exhaust system setups shown in the instructions. Just a single small full car length pipe and a muffler coming out of the right side header, near the crossover pipe from the left header. Who would use such a setup like this type? Looking at it, it makes no sense. I'm no expert on these type of drag cars. But, I can't believe a car like the Fairlane Thunderbolt would barely run being choked down by an exhaust of that type. Weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting is one of the exhaust system setups shown in the instructions. Just a single small full car length pipe and a muffler coming out of the right side header, near the crossover pipe from the left header. Who would use such a setup like this type? Looking at it, it makes no sense. I'm no expert on these type of drag cars. But, I can't believe a car like the Fairlane Thunderbolt would barely run being choked down by an exhaust of that type. Weird.

NHRA rules for the class required a stock exhaust system (muffler & tailpipe) be in place - but they didn't specify that it had to be hooked up! So there was small gap between the stock exhaust and the Thunderbolt's big tube headers.

Lots of other modifications went into making a Thunderbolt out of a stock Fairlane - in fact, it's pretty far from anything you'd drive on the street.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHRA rules for the class required a stock exhaust system (muffler & tailpipe) be in place - but they didn't specify that it had to be hooked up! So there was small gap between the stock exhaust and the Thunderbolt's big tube headers.

Lots of other modifications went into making a Thunderbolt out of a stock Fairlane - in fact, it's pretty far from anything you'd drive on the street.

That would explain it. And they indicate that exhaust system with the drag version in the instructions. I thought this was mistake. For they show dual pipes dumping in front the rear wheels for the "street version." I thought the instructions may have had that mixed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure the Revell engineers never intended a "street version" when they tooled this kit. It's a very fine kit and builds into an excellent Thunderbolt, but to make it close to an accurate stock Fairlane, you'd have to change the engine and make extensive modifications to the kit chassis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't looked at one in a long time, but did the 65 Fairlane Mod Stocker reissue have enough of the stock front inner fender wells-shock towers to adapt in? From memory even thought they really changed the exterior sheet metal for 65, underneath there wasn't much of a change.  Here's a 64 Fairlane engine bay.

Ford 1964 Fairlane shock tower lf ft 1.JPG

Ford 1964 Fairlane engine bay.JPG

Ford 1964 Fairlane shock tower rt ft 2.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be! Interestingly enough maybe, the '66 Falcon Modified Stocker probably has the most accurate Falcon/Mustang shock towers available in kit form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't looked at one in a long time, but did the 65 Fairlane Mod Stocker reissue have enough of the stock front inner fender wells-shock towers to adapt in? From memory even thought they really changed the exterior sheet metal for 65, underneath there wasn't much of a change.  Here's a 64 Fairlane engine bay.

Ford 1964 Fairlane shock tower lf ft 1.JPG

Ford 1964 Fairlane engine bay.JPG

Ford 1964 Fairlane shock tower rt ft 2.JPG

The AMT '62 and '63 Fairlane kits have the engine compartment molded as part of the body, but the '64 and '65 had incorrect half-round inner fenders molded as part of the chassis.

Then, for '66, AMT went back to the engine compartment molded as part of the body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Could be! Interestingly enough maybe, the '66 Falcon Modified Stocker probably has the most accurate Falcon/Mustang shock towers available in kit form.

The AMT '62 and '63 Fairlane kits have the engine compartment molded as part of the body, but the '64 and '65 had incorrect half-round inner fenders molded as part of the chassis.

Then, for '66, AMT went back to the engine compartment molded as part of the body.

Think we're sort of getting apples and oranges (or at least different kinds of apples) mixed up. So we can eliminate the 65 Fairlane Modified Stocker as a source since it and the 64 (both the T-bolt and the original) are incorrect. The 66 Fairlane is a different beastie. But the Falcon modified stocker (which I think is actually a 69 IIRC) has accurate Falcon/Mustang shock towers. Are they accurate for a 64 Fairlane? So does that get us all on the same page?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Falcon (or Mustang for that matter) towers aren't correct for the early ('62-'65) intermediate Fairlane.  The Fairlane towers have a huge bulge towards the bottom.  The Revell kit has the DST-modified original towers...easiest way to get from A to B might be to modify those back to stock. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark is right, the 1962-65 Fairlane was not built on the Falcon/Mustang platform, the 1962-63 Mercury Meteor is the only other car with the same chassis.
I had a 1964 Fairlane 500 Sports Coupe for 12 years and sold it last year, so I know that it isn't much from the Falcon/Mustang chassis that fits these Fairlanes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed - sorry for any confusion. I was just remarking that the '66 Falcon had accurate shock towers for a Falcon/Mustang platform - not for a Fairlane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The '62-'65 Fairlane/'62-'64 Meteor have a number of, shall we say, unique front suspension parts.  The front shock absorbers fit absolutely nothing else.  The OEM control arms had the ball joints riveted to them.  Usually those were sold as an assembly, or as "rebuilt" with the replacement ball joints again riveted in place.  Every so often, the ball joints were/are made available as separate items. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent, looks like we've got that all squared away. So looks like best solution for the T-bolt is to use reference (see photos above) and reverse the modifications.

Never worked on them much myself, but do remember our front end guys hated working on the 64-65 Fairlanes.  The irony of that was our Auto Center manager had a 64 Fairlane Sports Coupe for a couple of years.

Thanks Steve for the tip on the Falcon pieces for early Mustang/Falcon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...