STOP THE PRESS! All new 1977 Oldsmobile NASCAR kit

[niteowl7710]

3 hours ago, Casey said:

 

Where was it shown or stated the actual model would have leaf springs?

 

It's clearly shown with leaf springs on the box art illustration of the chassis. The people at JR say they're tooling a set of truck arms and rear end into the Monte Carlo they just announced to serve as replacements. Might not be THE best choice in terms of solving that problem, but it's fix nonetheless.

Edited April 8, 2018 by niteowl7710

[Luc Janssens]

Hmm...from what I read here, this is not a good way to premier in the model kit biz., especially when trying to cater to enthusiast modelers, with a premium prized product.

One can't blame this on a language barrier, or that the engineers don't or didn't have the cultural bagage and imagery, to transform 2D photographic material and carpenter rule measurements, into 3D files.

Now they will have two work at least twice as hard, to undo this bad first impression, consumers will have, checking out this new company's introductory release, cuz I'm sure on social media, the comment's won't be nice!

They got themselves in a little mess...so it seems.

Anyway, If the guys want a good project engineer, please contact me.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Luc Janssens

[MrObsessive]

Interesting comments about the side body creases on the '77 Olds. I couldn't help but notice that's one of the first things I'd have to change if I ever wanted to build an accurate 1976-'77 Olds Cutlass Supreme. I'm not as familiar with the NASCAR version, but I'm VERY familiar with the street car as that was one of our Driver's Ed cars that I had to live with for a semester in High School when they were new.

Yeah, brand new start-up companies have to get all the details pretty much nailed down before their products hit the streets. You know how it goes...................."First Impressions Are The Most Memorable". If they get something wrong out of the gate, the market may not be so kind if there's a second and third impression.

Trumpeter car kits anyone??

[yellowsportwagon]

7 hours ago, Brandon Miller said:

Here are 2 Olds without the bodyline. 

 

 

 

Here’s the picture that irritates me. All you (The kit maker) had to do is take one look at this picture and then look at your bumper. Ifs stinking wrong period. All we have now is all we had for years now. A somewhat Nascarish body with a wrong chassis. We still have to buy another kit to get the right suspension. I’ve done this for years to get a sorta accurate 70s NASCAR chassis. It’s plain silly. Before you make a model PLEASE PLEASE take more than a passing glance at the real thing!

[Irish Murphy]

7 hours ago, Casey said:

 

Where was it shown or stated the actual model would have leaf springs?

 

[Matt T.]

8 hours ago, Casey said:

Where was it shown or stated the actual model would have leaf springs?

They are in the illustration on the box side panel artwork in the other thread. 

With the rebodied Magnum explanation, the chassis tool must be modular since I assume it will also be used for the two other upcoming GM kits (per licensing announcement), ‘77 - ‘80 Monte Carlo and maybe ‘74 - ‘76 Monte?

We’ll see...

[yellowsportwagon]

46 minutes ago, Matt T. said:

They are in the illustration on the box side panel artwork in the other thread. 

With the rebodied Magnum explanation, the chassis tool must be modular since I assume it will also be used for the two other upcoming GM kits (per licensing announcement), ‘77 - ‘80 Monte Carlo and maybe ‘74 - ‘76 Monte?

We’ll see...

The rebodied Magnum explanation is a bunch of BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH. NASCAR still had rules regarding suspension. If a car had coils from the factory it COULD NOT have leaf springs on the track. That is an excuse nothing more.

[Irish Murphy]

To me you can clearly see the break in the door on these pics... others may disagree. 

[Casey]

[1972coronet]

The Richard Petty Magnum was a rebodied 1971-1972 Belvedere / 1972-1973 Charger . At one point , the chassis was reconstituted for the Magnum ; then God knows what happened to it after the Magnum's usefulness ceased . Eventually , that 'Magnum' chassis was employed in the restoration of Petty's 1971 Belvedere .

[Bill J]

According to Dr. Craft's book, the first Petty Monte Carlo began life as a Dodge Miranda. The car was said to perform so poorly that they took it back to the shop and skinned it as a Monte Carlo in a day. The car when raced as a Monte Carlo had coils in the rear, as required. I have no idea what sort of rear suspension a Dodge Miranda had. Best I can tell the last car that ran  leaf springs in NASCAR was the Dodge Magnum. Ford products ran them on Mercury 70-71 Cyclones and used that style car until eligibility expired. They then went to the Mercury Montego which had coils. The Torino began coils in 1972, same as Mercury. Dodge used leafs at least through the Magnum in early 80. GM cars had coils at least since 58. The long trailing arms are from Chevy pickups, began in 1959, ended in 1972. Seems they worked so well that they are the rear suspension of choice today, still.

[iBorg]

Before we hit the panic button over the kit contents, maybe we should wait to see the kit? Test shots are just that, test shots. Errors have been discussed that hopefully will be addressed. As for the chassis illustration errors, are they errors in the illustration or errors in the chassis that the illustrator accurately reproduced?

I'm not going to declare this kit unbuyable. Mercy if the decals are right and other parts are right so it gets kitbashed with another Nascar kit. Last show I went to those were $7 your choice and no one was buying.

[Casey]

16 minutes ago, iBorg said:

Before we hit the panic button

I would usually agree, but the long side box image is clearly a 3D rendering, so this is what the kit is, for the most part, going to look like. If the kit includes a parallel leaf style rear suspension when it should have coils spring and trailing arms, that is a major, major error. If it was simply the die-cat model they modified to give people an idea of what the final model would look like, fine, no harm there...but this is what was designed from scratch on the computer.

I said it before, and I'll say it again-- the stakes for this kit are so very high, that any major gaffe will surely be the beginning of the end. One need only look at Trumpeter's similar foray into automotive kits to see what happens when a kit lacking in details and accuracy enters the market. Nobody can get away with "eh, close enough" or "well, we know it's not totally accurate, but..." in this day and age. Consumers have too many tools at their disposal to verify things, and multiple reference photos a few seconds away via Google. Factor in the whole NASCAR market isn't what it used to be (even separating then-current from vintage, the latter which certainly gets a boost when the former is popular), and the margin for error is extremely thin here.

50 minutes ago, Bill J said:

According to Dr. Craft's book, the first Petty Monte Carlo began life as a Dodge Miranda.

The Dodge Mirada was a J-bodied ('80-83) vehicle, closely related to the F-body ('76-'80) and M-body ('77-'89), so they all used parallel leaf springs in the rear.

Edited April 8, 2018 by Casey

[Rob Hall]

Oh well...sounds like Salvino's JR  are novices to the game--- cutting corners to get to market quickly, and failed to sweat the details...  

[yellowsportwagon]

Don’t get me wrong a mid to late 70s stock car kit is the best thing in the world to me. Just do it right. Don’t be 1973 MPC all over again. A universal chassis to do multiple 70sstock cars with would be a rear steer coil spring frt. with truck arms and coils out back. I can fix the body line issue in twenty minutes. Give me the correct bumper and chassis please! I will buy tons of your kits if they are correct. That’s a promise.

[martinfan5]

Can someone explain the "body line" so many are talking about meow?, is it the lower part of the body that is going inwards ?

[Rob Hall]

10 hours ago, martinfan5 said:

Can someone explain the "body line" so many are talking about meow?, is it the lower part of the body that is going inwards ?

Take a look at the pic of the red car in Irish Murphy's post above...there is a horizontal crease running from the front fender, across the door, into the rear quarter panel.  It's roughly at the bottom of the 51 decal, below the Die Hard decal and splitting the Valvoline decal. It continues behind the rear wheel well ahead of the rear bumper.   Looks at the Sal Jr body pics Casey posted, it's missing...

Edited April 9, 2018 by Rob Hall

[martinfan5]

1 minute ago, Rob Hall said:

Take a look at the pic of the red car in Irish Murphy's post above...there is a horizontal crease running from the front fender, across the door, into the rear quarter panel.  It's roughly at the bottom of the 51 decal, below the Die Hard decal and splitting the Valvoline decal.

Thanks Rob, I see it now.

[Dave Van]

For the price it should be better agreed. 

But I can fix the body line, if I wanted, for about 10 cents worth of brass wire and a small amount of putty. No...I should not have to.....but it does not bother me as the Petty photo shows....REALLY hard to see on SOME cars. 

The rear leaf springs are going to cost me about $5 for a old AMT 'Bird kit and some work at the bench. That is much more an issue to me. 

Still I'll hold judgement until in my hands.

[Rob Hall]

Just now, Dave Van said:

For the price it should be better agreed. 

But I can fix the body line, if I wanted, for about 10 cents worth of brass wire and a small amount of putty. No...I should not have to.....but it does not bother me as the Petty photo shows....REALLY hard to see on SOME cars. 

The rear leaf springs are going to cost me about $5 for a old AMT 'Bird kit and some work at the bench. That is much more an issue to me. 

Still I'll hold judgement until in my hands.

Bottom line, you should not have to fix these issues with a newly tooled kit if they had taken accuracy seriously.    They cut corners to rush something to market. 

[martinfan5]

3 minutes ago, Rob Hall said:

Bottom line, you should not have to fix these issues with a newly tooled kit if they had taken accuracy seriously.    They cut corners to rush something to market. 

This..................right here.

[Dave Van]

20 minutes ago, Rob Hall said:

Bottom line, you should not have to fix these issues with a newly tooled kit if they had taken accuracy seriously.    They cut corners to rush something to market. 

Thanks  for echoing what I said in my post. 

[yellowsportwagon]

4 hours ago, martinfan5 said:

This..................right here.

They were informed months ago about the bumper and springs. They chose to go on doing it wrong. The body is an easy fix. Not the Bumper. 

[martinfan5]

45 minutes ago, yellowsportwagon said:

They were informed months ago about the bumper and springs. They chose to go on doing it wrong. The body is an easy fix. Not the Bumper. 

Sad they chose to ignore the info.

[Casey]

On 4/8/2018 at 3:48 AM, Luc Janssens said:

One can't blame this on a language barrier, or that the engineers don't or didn't have the cultural baggage and imagery, to transform 2D photographic material and carpenter rule measurements, into 3D files.

Yeah, that whole "made in the U.S.A." angle falls even flatter as a selling point when the product contains obvious errors. As always, what's most important is how it's made, not where.