Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted

The 91 trans am gta. A few things not correct on it. Biggest thing is the rear suspension is set up for a b body car not an f body. Amt does some funky stuff. Overall pretty happy with the kit so far. I really just wanted to do a model with pose-able steering. And even that they dropped the ball on with this kit... It's pretty screwy...

Posted

So far so good. I like the color. Do those have the TPI engine?

I didn't jazz up the motor in this one. I did plug wires on it and some fuel lines. I've been just piecing it together here and there. Tinkering with it ever so often. I'm excited to do the revell formula. I do like the color of this as well. I feel like they should've called it shamrock metallic

Posted

Every now and then you get one of those models that just loves to disagree with you. For those that are familiar with the '70 boss 429, that car gave me hell all the time. The paint came out horrible. Sanded in my kitchen sink, resprayed, missed a spot.... redo number 2. Paint comes out beautiful.... spray some clear on it and bam.... wrinkles..... fml..... sand it in the sink again... redo number 3. No clear coat... hood is all jacked up and doesn't sit right.... ECT ECT .... well here we go again.... kinda. Now that I keep finding things about this car the more I hate it. But.... I love the color. And I really want pose-able steering. And with some finessing it might be an ok kit. There's just little nuances about it.... like the fact the dashboard has legible numbering and lettering but it's molded pre 85. Or the fact the center console is an automatic and the trans and floor are set up for a 5 speed. I'm pretty sure it's the same kit as the knight rider kit with a few different parts. I had to put felt pieces in the wheels to keep them from being sloppy. 

Posted

The 91 trans am gta. A few things not correct on it. Biggest thing is the rear suspension is set up for a b body car not an f body.

Hum,, aside from the lack of the torque arm attached to the transmission and a panhard rod, looks pretty close to me.

Posted

Hum,, aside from the lack of the torque arm attached to the transmission and a panhard rod, looks pretty close to me.

it is close. But There's a few things that are just odd about the whole kit. Like the fact it has clutch brake and gas pedals but they're molded upside down in the interior tub. The car has a standard trans in it but an automatic shift handle. The wheel backs are kinda hokey. Had to file the wing down quite a bit... just some odds and ends. As I stated before the steering is a little iffy also. It's not horrible but certainly not great. And the chassis while I understand why they did it. It's not set up real great Either. The struts should mount into the wheel wells which should be part of the engine bay. Instead they mount in the wheel wells which are part of the chassis. Again I understand the concept of why they did it that way. But it's not really right. Also the dash is a conundrum. On the one hand you can almost read the gauges but the dash is molded for a pre 85 car. Which I know they used this body and interior for the knight rider kit and the 80's trans am kit. So if the updated the nose and rear bumper, made a ground effects package, and gave it t tops.... why not correct the other issues. It's probably me being nit picky but I'd say I'm pretty mild as far as some hobbiests could go on it. 

Posted

it is close. But There's a few things that are just odd about the whole kit. Like the fact it has clutch brake and gas pedals but they're molded upside down in the interior tub. The car has a standard trans in it but an automatic shift handle. The wheel backs are kinda hokey. Had to file the wing down quite a bit... just some odds and ends. As I stated before the steering is a little iffy also. It's not horrible but certainly not great. And the chassis while I understand why they did it. It's not set up real great Either. The struts should mount into the wheel wells which should be part of the engine bay. Instead they mount in the wheel wells which are part of the chassis. Again I understand the concept of why they did it that way. But it's not really right. Also the dash is a conundrum. On the one hand you can almost read the gauges but the dash is molded for a pre 85 car. Which I know they used this body and interior for the knight rider kit and the 80's trans am kit. So if the updated the nose and rear bumper, made a ground effects package, and gave it t tops.... why not correct the other issues. It's probably me being nit picky but I'd say I'm pretty mild as far as some hobbiests could go on it. 

Hey, I hear ya. But I'd be more concerned with the hood missing the large crease right up the center and the vents not being positioned evenly.

The kit actually started off as the '82 annual and came out in '81. Then updated every year the 3rd gen was made. The Knight Rider kit was done along side the annual for most of the kit's life. That's why only the first '82 annual kits had the solid top. The T top was added for the KR kit in mid '82 and both kits had them ever since. They made some shortcuts. The hood was the original smooth hood that was in the '82 to '84 kit then given the vents [poorly] for the '85. The wheels are not actually the lace spoke GTA wheels, those wheels were in all the previous 3rd gen Firebird annuals, the '79 and '80 Monte Carlo annuals and a few of the Elcamino annuals around that time as the optional wheels. 

So, yea, the kit has lots of "issues" but from spending lots of time under my 1/1 '85, I can tell you the rear suspension , aside from the missing parts I mentioned above is pretty accurate to the real cars.

BTW, here's mine right after the new paint a couple weeks ago. ;)

IMG 2224

Posted

Hey, I hear ya. But I'd be more concerned with the hood missing the large crease right up the center and the vents not being positioned evenly.

The kit actually started off as the '82 annual and came out in '81. Then updated every year the 3rd gen was made. The Knight Rider kit was done along side the annual for most of the kit's life. That's why only the first '82 annual kits had the solid top. The T top was added for the KR kit in mid '82 and both kits had them ever since. They made some shortcuts. The hood was the original smooth hood that was in the '82 to '84 kit then given the vents [poorly] for the '85. The wheels are not actually the lace spoke GTA wheels, those wheels were in all the previous 3rd gen Firebird annuals, the '79 and '80 Monte Carlo annuals and a few of the Elcamino annuals around that time as the optional wheels. 

So, yea, the kit has lots of "issues" but from spending lots of time under my 1/1 '85, I can tell you the rear suspension , aside from the missing parts I mentioned above is pretty accurate to the real cars.

BTW, here's mine right after the new paint a couple weeks ago. ;)

IMG 2224

that is a nice t/a . I like your color choices. And yes. You've nailed this kit for what it is. Like I said all in all its an okay kit. In retrospect it's kind of impressive they were able to keep it pretty relevant. I've had a fair share of 1:1 3rd gens in my day. I had an 84 berlinetta, an 84 t/a, an 85 firebird base model that had a 305 and a 5 sp, an 85 iroc, an 88 rs, and an 87 formula that was loaded. The only thing my 87 didn't have was the 350. It did have tuned port but it was a 305. I loved my formula. Spent a lot of time with that car. My formula had the "turbo bulge" hood. This model also came with the formula hood but I chose to use the gta hood as I'll be building the revell 92 bird at some point. That kit comes with the bulge hood. I've already cut the "block off plate" out of that hood as I took it out of my 1:1 bird. There's been a few times I've thought about throwing all these parts in the idea bin for later use. But I'll keep plugging away at it. For now.

Posted

looks pretty nice,are you going to give the wheels any detailing?

well I decided I'd do the gold spoke since I'm doing the badges in gold. I had brass originally but felt it was a little dark. Still have to do the center caps black. 

20171014_234318.jpg

20171014_234309.jpg

Posted

Nice, gold always goes well with green.

right?!? I feel like if I left the black, whIle is an option, is kind of a cop out on bringing out the details. And I see what you're saying now about them not being actual gta wheels. They're close but not quite. And also the hood. Which is funny because the nose cone has it. Which is why I think it threw me off that the hood didnt.

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
×
×
  • Create New...