Buddy Baker's 1980 Oldsmobile 442 in 1/25th scale.

[Tom Geiger]

12 hours ago, 1320wayne said:

I'm not saying that the arguements here are not valid in any way but from what I've seen so far this is the only forum that has taken a hardline stance from certain members at negative reviews of this new product.

Yup.  This board will pick apart anything.

[MrObsessive]

While I'm not a big fan of NASCAR, I'm just glad this bodystyle is AVAILABLE! The more 1973-'77 Colonnade cars in any version the better! I sure wish I could get just the BODY for this one! It would make my eventual '76-'77 Olds Cutlass Supreme project that much easier.

Heck, I might get fancy and get the model just for that purpose!

[Bill J]

Now that I have seen all of the parts, seems there are some more glaring errors. The chassis is a 2 part thing like the 70's MPC NASCAR kits, the front suspension is torsion bar instead of coil springs, the rear leafs we already knew about. The headers are a Ford or big block Chevy type with all four equally separated. The tires are horrible, not even usable they are molded so badly. As I keep saying the body sides are smooth and rounded and not flatter with the crease for the undercut above the rocker area. The rear bumper is all wrong, the front bumper has nearly no detail to it. Pretty much looks like the old MPC kits done in the early '70's but with more errors.

You all can buy this kit if you want, don't let me stop you. Keep in mind that they will put the same level of quality into all their future kits if this one is accepted. I am not buying any, even though I really like the car this kit is a really poor representation.

[lordairgtar]

I bought one  today. That interior floor pan has me scratching my head. Looks like it came from a toy.

 

[Rob Hall]

Mine came today.  Here's pics of the body.  Note the two piece chassis and two sets of wheels--one plated, one unplated.  Molded in a non-shiny white plastic.

 

 

 

Chrome:

 

 

 

Decals:

Tires.  Have divots.

Edited July 12, 2018 by Rob Hall

[Mark]

That transmission tunnel looks huge, as do those ejector pin marks on the chassis halves.

[Rob Hall]

The decals look nice and the instructions are clear and shiny.

[Casey]

On 7/6/2018 at 10:06 PM, 1320wayne said:

I'm not saying that the arguements here are not valid in any way but from what I've seen so far this is the only forum that has taken a hardline stance from certain members at negative reviews of this new product. Everywhere else that I'm listening in I seem to hear a lot of enthusiastic folks excited about this kit. And now that it is released I'm seeing loads of facebook posts of people happy to have their new kit(s) in hand. 

If they have valid points of criticism, isn't that valuable? We've all seen and read (even here in this very topic) people cheerleading for both this kit and company, and while I hope they become a successful model maker, there is no value in praising something which most people can see isn't accurate, nor well designed. Plus, since this kit was touted as being designed in the U.S., the Chinese are ineligible for use as a scapegoat this time around.

If a kit is a masterpiece and knocks 99.5% of the model buying public's socks off, heap it with praise. If it's a turd and doesn't look the part of the real car, in all areas, bring on the criticism. If the manufacturer is smart, they'll heed all the criticism and sort through those comments which will make their next effort better, or end up like Trumpeter's automotive lineup in short order. 

[Casey]

20 minutes ago, Mark said:

That transmission tunnel looks huge, as do those ejector pin marks on the chassis halves.

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm shocked they are that bad.

16 hours ago, lordairgtar said:

That interior floor pan has me scratching my head. Looks like it came from a toy.

This kit is awful in the details. That engine/trans looks like it was cribbed from a cheap diecast model. 

[MrObsessive]

OK, having just seen Rob's pic of his kit and having seen some of the issues that had been talked about earlier------I have some serious doubts that I'll be getting this kit, even for a donor body. Yes, I know this is a NASCAR and that there were some differences naturally from that to a street version, but I'm seeing through my laptop screen some HUGE errors that are sticking out to me like a smashed thumb.

One biggie for me is the "crease" in the beltline that should be there on all Cutlass two door models for 1976-'77. This should be just below the "B" pillar and IIRC, even the NASCAR versions have it. Another oddity is the shape of the side window profile (door glass). 1973-'77 GM Colonnade bodies had a distinctive sweep to that window arc, and this body, it just appears misshapen to me. I can remember this car from new, and it was my Driver's Ed car from that very year, so I'm more than a bit familiar with how it should look. I initially thought about using this as a donor kit at least for the body, but it would be just as much work to use this one, as it would be to convert a Johan '75 Cutlass body (I've got five of those) which to me is MUCH more accurate representation than what I'm seeing here.

There are some other foibles that are screaming out to me as I type this------sad to say I'm gonna have to pass on this one.

 

[Matt T.]

Oh, man. I have one on the way. Regretting it, after seeing Rob’s pictures. Wow. 

[Rob Hall]

I'm not too upset about it, since it was sort of a gift and cost me nothing.    I have no shortage of kits in my stash, so another one to add to the shelves... I'll put it together eventually.

Will be interesting to see how their next effort turns out ('74 or '77 Monte Carlo, I've heard?)

[wilson]

I never did plan to buy this kit because the year and the body style did not really appeal to me    But I was hoping that this first kit would knock everyone out of the park with it's details so the company would be successful and have no problems producing more kits for the future.  I saw many comments that I questioned but now seeing the pictures of that chassis and I and not crazy about that two part deal.  I remember dealing with that nightmare as a kid putting MPC kits together as kid.  I can only hope that the future kits can be updated because I would like to see some new Mopar kits back on the market.  

Oh well I more than enough kits to keep me busy and a wife who says I don't need any more anyway.   

[tachyonbb]

I think everyone was excited for a new company putting together a Grey Ghost kit.  A new company with a lot of readily available information to put together a kit that even the rivet counters could love.  What a disappointment.  Front suspension is a  torsion bar suspension which was only used by Chrysler products. What a disappointment. Even a cursory look at what a Buick suspension/NASCAR  GM suspension looked like at that time would have indicated what should have been used.  Rear suspension was a set of leaf springs.  Ummmm the Buick did not use a leaf spring suspension.  The body was not even close.   The ejector pin marks remind me of an early 60's kit. 

Like Wilson I hoped the new company would knock it out of the park.  More like a pop up for an easy out. If their Monte Carlo kit has a torsion bar suspension the company is toast. 

[niteowl7710]

In regards to that ridiculous amount of huge depressed ejector pins on the chassis - which considering the amount of kick outs on the runner proper, and the fact it was a side loader injection machine is ridiculous - I can only assume they chose the lesser of two evils route. If those parts HAD to have all of those marks they went with the bottom since that's the side you won't see sitting on your shelf, as opposed to having those all over the business side of the interior and visible through the windows.

Ehhhhh I'm less impressed than I already was...

Edited July 12, 2018 by niteowl7710

[Allen Wrench]

It looks like they basically copied the old MPC two-piece adjustable-wheelbase NASCAR chassis, and I'd be willing to bet that's why it has leaf springs and torsion bar front suspension. 

The engine block/transmission looks terrible _ the block, heads and valve covers are too short and the transmission is too long. 

What a hot mess this kit turned out to be, and, the sad thing is, it didn't have to be that way. It's not like it would have been difficult for the Salvinos to do some homework and get it right. As it stands, the kit pretty much screams "poorly researched and rushed into production."

Nice decals, though.

[1972coronet]

I , too , am quite disappointed in the contents of the kit that I'm seeing ---- tooling that looks like a cross between 70's - early 80's Monogram , 70's AMT , and c.1976 MPC : oversimplified , vague details , huge ejector pin marques , and weirdo proportions ( dare I say , "Palmer" ? ) .

I'm not alone in hoping that this kit would've been solid gold ; instead , it's pure aluminium ...

Edited July 12, 2018 by 1972coronet

[Rob Hall]

Build it, glue the hood shut, paint it, and decal it and it will make a good 20-ft shelf model. 

[Rat Roaster]

25 minutes ago, 1972coronet said:

  ( dare I say , "Palmer" ? ) .

 

Sadly, 'Palmer' is the best analysis. That bellhousing and inspection cover is science fiction material. The transmission not far behind.

The ejector pins issue isn't a hard fix for a mold maker. It's just startling that nobody thought it worthwhile to deal with it. I learned from the Trumpeter 1960 Bonneville debacle - i'll shower my money on companies with a proven track record.

 

[Bill J]

It would have been great to get an accurate 77-78 Olds kit, or even something close to accurate. The really unfortunate side to this whole deal, is that this company has plans to use this whole chassis, floor pan and engines in all of their proposed kits. A lot of people pointed out the error of leaf springs and they are supposed to be doing a correction piece that is optional. I am sure it will be way off based on how it will likely have to be made. This kit is as bad as a poorly detailed diecast. The decals are first class Powerslide art and Cartograph printed, a waste on this turkey of a kit.  You can buy decals only from Powerslide that also include options for other years and body styles.

The days of the generic MPC kits were acceptable at the price they were sold for. The bodies were at least close to accurate. To charge a premium price for a kit today and to have the level of buffoonery that this kit includes is just plain nonsense.  I seriously doubt that anything they do in the future will be any better. The one size fits all just doesn't work.

[echoxrayniner]

Man... I know we're all kind of uptight for accuracy and honest I only ever would buy this kit to form some '77-'78 decal sheets based on it(for the regular Olds even, not the NASCAR) but... woof, this is a spectacular train-wreck. This is truly disappointing though, a new player out on the field, big hype and enthusiasm(even if it came from the company itself), high end quality decals and all that for it to trip over its own feet on the way in. Hell, if anyone wants to off-load the body, lemme know hah.

[Mark]

15 hours ago, MrObsessive said:

OK, having just seen Rob's pic of his kit and having seen some of the issues that had been talked about earlier------I have some serious doubts that I'll be getting this kit, even for a donor body. Yes, I know this is a NASCAR and that there were some differences naturally from that to a street version, but I'm seeing through my laptop screen some HUGE errors that are sticking out to me like a smashed thumb.

One biggie for me is the "crease" in the beltline that should be there on all Cutlass two door models for 1976-'77. This should be just below the "B" pillar and IIRC, even the NASCAR versions have it. Another oddity is the shape of the side window profile (door glass). 1973-'77 GM Colonnade bodies had a distinctive sweep to that window arc, and this body, it just appears misshapen to me. I can remember this car from new, and it was my Driver's Ed car from that very year, so I'm more than a bit familiar with how it should look. I initially thought about using this as a donor kit at least for the body, but it would be just as much work to use this one, as it would be to convert a Johan '75 Cutlass body (I've got five of those) which to me is MUCH more accurate representation than what I'm seeing here.

There are some other foibles that are screaming out to me as I type this------sad to say I'm gonna have to pass on this one.

 

I'm pretty certain NASCAR teams were "massaging" the roofs on these cars.  I don't recall hearing or seeing any complaints about the AMT or MPC NASCAR Malibu kit bodies that use the same style roof...could be that those bodies are accurate for a racing version but not so much as a stock body.  For a stock roof, what's wrong with the Jo-Han '75 Cutlass?

[boss 302 mustang]

Very disappointing kit. I don't understand how there could be so many errors in the chassis setup of this thing, along with as someone mentioned earlier, the odd looking sizes of the too small appearing engine and too long transmission.   Doesn't even appear that useful as a parts kit.

[niteowl7710]

A quick spin around FB will once again prove this place is the 1% HQ, because outside of here it's being "nominated" for Kit of the Year and called the best thing since antibiotics.  So long as they can sell enough to that crowd - well hey that marketing has worked for Revell & Moebius for over a half a decade at least.

[Casey]

7 minutes ago, niteowl7710 said:

A quick spin around FB will once again prove this place is the 1% HQ, because outside of here it's being "nominated" for Kit of the Year and called the best thing since antibiotics.  So long as they can sell enough to that crowd - well hey that marketing has worked for Revell & Moebius for over a half a decade at least.

Sadly, I think that's entirely accurate. Worse still is that the "meh, good enough for me" crowd may have been their target audience from the get-go. 

Edited July 12, 2018 by Casey