1/25 AMT 1971 Mustang Mach 1

[Dave Darby]

On 1/20/2021 at 12:54 AM, charlie8575 said:

with it, or get one of Ken Kitchen's 240/250 I-6s and a C-4 from Kris Morgan, and make it main-streamer with the Pony interior (which it sounds like this "deluxe" interior is more-or-less like)?

The 240 and 250 inch sixes are two totally different animals. The 240 is part of the "big block" 240-300 cu in series and was only used in the full sized Fords, pickups and vans. The 250 is a stroked tall block version of the 144-200 inch 6 that originated in the Falcon and was used in basically everything else that wasn't full sized - including the Mustang. A big difference between the two sixes is the Falcon based six has the intake manifold cast in one piece with the cylinder head.

[Sledsel]

5 hours ago, vamach1 said:

I did the same thing on one.  I used the 69 Shelby engine compartment but it’s a shame two or more other kits are needed just to make one more realistic one.

Nice job on that. I was going to do the same, but decided to scratch it. The upper part of the tower on mine is the wheel well from the chassis. I should have done "in progress" pics

[charlie8575]

8 hours ago, Dave Darby said:

The 240 and 250 inch sixes are two totally different animals. The 240 is part of the "big block" 240-300 cu in series and was only used in the full sized Fords, pickups and vans. The 250 is a stroked tall block version of the 144-200 inch 6 that originated in the Falcon and was used in basically everything else that wasn't full sized - including the Mustang. A big difference between the two sixes is the Falcon based six has the intake manifold cast in one piece with the cylinder head.

Thanks for the correction. Would the C-4 be correct for the automatic?

Charlie Larkin

[the other Mike S.]

Well, Round 2 could modify the chassis and include an "insert" for the engine compartment.  They wouldn't have to touch the body tool if they did it that way.

[Dave Darby]

On 1/22/2021 at 3:21 AM, charlie8575 said:

Thanks for the correction. Would the C-4 be correct for the automatic?

Charlie Larkin

Actually yes. Both the 240 and the 250 (only, not the 144-200s) use the 6 bolt small block V8 bellhousing pattern.

[spike morelli]

On 6/7/2020 at 6:01 PM, vamach1 said:

Simple answer is there's a huge variety for these year Mustangs and I have owned five real 71-73 Mustangs.

So here's a long list but by all means not complete ( not including color variations)

1971: Boss 351, Mach1 (351), 007 Mach1, 429 CJ with ram air, plain sportsroof, Mexican version, Shelby Europa, Drag car (Minuteman)

1972: 351 HO Mach1, Mach1 351, sprint sportsroof,  convertible, GrandAam racer and maybe a Grande

1973: Eleanor, Mach1, sportsroof, convertible, Japanese police car, coupe with a 302, Warren Tope racer

 

Recently, I purchased a Lindberg kit of a '71 Mustang street machine, which I saw at my local hobby shop. I bought it opened, It was previously in someone's collection and being sold as-is. I must say, I really didn't expect much from this Lindberg kit, but, holy sh_t, this kit has to be one of the all-time stinkers ever made. Proportion and detail was thrown right out the window. Literally nothing usefull in the kit, and I have nothing good to say about it. However, it is a freakish curiousity of circus sideshow value, should you possibly be interested in it for your all too cool collection of Mustangs. PM me for any info. I'll take some photos.

[vamach1]

3 hours ago, spike morelli said:

Recently, I purchased a Lindberg kit of a '71 Mustang street machine, which I saw at my local hobby shop. I bought it opened, It was previously in someone's collection and being sold as-is. I must say, I really didn't expect much from this Lindberg kit, but, holy sh_t, this kit has to be one of the all-time stinkers ever made. Proportion and detail was thrown right out the window. Literally nothing usefull in the kit, and I have nothing good to say about it. However, it is a freakish curiousity of circus sideshow value, should you possibly be interested in it for your all too cool collection of Mustangs. PM me for any info. I'll take some photos.

Oh that kit.  I may have the box somewhere but since it an old Palmer mold it is awful as they must have looked at 69-71’s and tried the Foose experiment long before he did.  Appreciate the offer but I built one that you can see is not “stock” and that was enough for me.

Edited January 25, 2021 by vamach1

[spike morelli]

Mad Max!

[vamach1]

8 minutes ago, spike morelli said:

Mad Max!

It seemed a natural and a heck of a lot less expensive for the Japanese kits.  Cobraman sent me the zoomies.

Ford should have refused to allow them to even call this Lindberg kit a Mustang.

Edited January 25, 2021 by vamach1

[stavanzer]

I have never seen the Lindberg/Palmer Mustang. 

Supposedly it and the Dodge Challenger were some (maybe the only), One piece, Slide molded car bodies Palmer ever did. Both retained Palmer's Whimsical sense of body proportion. The Lindberg Versions were better than the Palmer kits of course, but there was no Silk Purse to be found in these Pigs of kits.

[JS23U]

There were a few others: A 1970 Mustang Boss 302 kit, a 70 Corvette and the mentioned Challenger, which originated as a 1971 model year. These kits were sold under the label "PSM", not Palmer. The Challenger was later changed to the 1972 design we know from the Lindberg model. It seems to me all these kits were (cheap) copies of MPC kits, or at least their bodies. I have the Mustang for its cool box art, but none else. All pics stolen from the net...

Edited January 26, 2021 by JS23U

[vamach1]

2 hours ago, JS23U said:

There were a few others: A 1970 Mustang Boss 302 kit, a 70 Corvette and the mentioned Challenger, which originated as a 1971 model year. These kits were sold under the label "PSM", not Palmer. The Challenger was later changed to the 1972 design we know from the Lindberg model. It seems to me all these kits were (cheap) copies of MPC kits, or at least their bodies. I have the Mustang for its cool box art, but none else. All pics stolen from the net...

 

Here’s what I decided to do with my PSM Boss 302.  The grille is just dreadful.  I cannot even remember what I paid but I know it was not over $20.

Surely the 69 PSM kit is better and worth 100 times the original price.  ?

Edited January 26, 2021 by vamach1

[vamach1]

I mentioned earlier in the thread I thought the MPC 260/289/302 engine was the same as the “real” AMT 260/289/302 engine.  The are close but not exactly the same but they both have that oil filler tube which is what makes them obviously from older molds.  The white V8 is from the AMT 66 Mustang kit and the red one is of course from the 007 kit.  So we know neither of these engines are a 351 Cleveland and we also know the other engine in the 007 kit is a Boss 429 (only available in 69/70).  We also know the original AMT 71-73 Mustangs kits used a 428 engine (available from 68-70) so that’s not a correct option either for a 71 Mustang.  So, in the end neither the AMT or MPC engines can be used unless one wants to make a 302 Windsor powered Mach1 (with the stock blue valve covers and 2 bbl carb) which was actual the base engine but production numbers show most of them were built by Ford with either a 351 Cleveland (2 bbl or 4bbl) and about 5% with the 429CJ or 429SCJ,

Edited January 27, 2021 by vamach1

[1972coronet]

Correct me if I'm wrong ; the oil filler tube was likely eliminated due to emissions controls changes / revisions ( PCV in 1962 ; A.I.R. Pump , et al. , in 1966 ; and Evapourative Emissions in 1970 --- typically the so-called Cleaner Air Package , colloq. , 'California Emissions' ) .

[Dave Darby]

12 hours ago, 1972coronet said:

Correct me if I'm wrong ; the oil filler tube was likely eliminated due to emissions controls changes / revisions ( PCV in 1962 ; A.I.R. Pump , et al. , in 1966 ; and Evapourative Emissions in 1970 --- typically the so-called Cleaner Air Package , colloq. , 'California Emissions' ) .

I'd say you are fairly close. However, I've seen the timing cover mounted filler tube in conjunction with with a PCV valve as late as 1964, with the PCV valve going into the rear of the intake manifold where the road draft tube previously mounted. This may be just the early 1964 engines, as I've also seen plenty of the type where the oil filler and PCV were in the valve covers.  My 64 Falcon Sprint was one of those examples. Obviously, AMT never bothered updating their small block Ford engines.

[Dave Darby]

Looks like this kit shares a pretty good number of parts with the old MPC 69 Mustang kit. And on that note, If anybody has an extra shaker scoop assembly they won't be using from this kit, I have an MPC 69 Mustang I built 30 years ago in desperate need of one.

 

[vamach1]

5 minutes ago, Dave Darby said:

Looks like this kit shares a pretty good number of parts with the old MPC 69 Mustang kit. And on that note, If anybody has an extra shaker scoop assembly they won't be using from this kit, I have an MPC 69 Mustang I built 30 years ago in desperate need of one.

 

Sen me a PM.  I have plenty to spare.  The aircleaner and shaker I presume?

[Bob Ellis]

On 1/24/2021 at 9:00 PM, alexis said:

I have never seen the Lindberg/Palmer Mustang. 

Supposedly it and the Dodge Challenger were some (maybe the only), One piece, Slide molded car bodies Palmer ever did. Both retained Palmer's Whimsical sense of body proportion. The Lindberg Versions were better than the Palmer kits of course, but there was no Silk Purse to be found in these Pigs of kits.

The 1971 Palmer Mustang kit is a 1971 er 1970 ugh 1969. In other words it has a 1971 nose with a 1969 rear end. The Lindberg has all the same bad qualities.

[David Miller]

As a Ford guy I had to have it , the box art on Palmer kits is fantastic , the plastic inside not so much 

[vamach1]

I probably posted these before but here’s an alternative to making the 007 version since I the kit has a lot of road course parts to do this build.  Some of the sponsor decals would be a problem replicating and perhaps a Pantera could provide the rear wing as it’s a little larger than stock. 😮

Edited February 1, 2021 by vamach1

[Mark]

On 1/26/2021 at 9:16 AM, JS23U said:

There were a few others: A 1970 Mustang Boss 302 kit, a 70 Corvette and the mentioned Challenger, which originated as a 1971 model year. These kits were sold under the label "PSM", not Palmer. The Challenger was later changed to the 1972 design we know from the Lindberg model. It seems to me all these kits were (cheap) copies of MPC kits, or at least their bodies. I have the Mustang for its cool box art, but none else. All pics stolen from the net...

Ah, yes, the PSM "Boss 302" Mustang...with a 428 engine!  Guess nobody there knew why the 1:1 was called a Boss 302.

A couple of posts mention a 1969 PSM Mustang kit...there wasn't one.  There probably was a Palmer '69 Mustang, but that's a different deal altogether.

[gjorenby]

Building this kit now.  What a disappointment!  Aside from just being a reissue and horribly inaccurate to the screen car (wrong engine, wrong steering wheel, wrong exhaust, etc, etc), the molding detail is poor, the plastic is thin and brittle and there is more flash than a Flash Gordon triple feature!!

They did get the hub caps right, and the front end was retooled, otherwise its just the same kit with new decals.

Anyone have a 1971 two spoke Ford Mustang steering wheel they want to part with?  This kit as the 3 spoke version.

[vamach1]

5 hours ago, gjorenby said:

Building this kit now.  What a disappointment!  Aside from just being a reissue and horribly inaccurate to the screen car (wrong engine, wrong steering wheel, wrong exhaust, etc, etc), the molding detail is poor, the plastic is thin and brittle and there is more flash than a Flash Gordon triple feature!!

They did get the hub caps right, and the front end was retooled, otherwise its just the same kit with new decals.

Anyone have a 1971 two spoke Ford Mustang steering wheel they want to part with?  This kit as the 3 spoke version.

Well, you cannot say I did not warn everyone. 😉

I think Motormax advertises this as a 007 Mach1.  It’s a 1/24th scale diecast and like the Testor’s ones the doors open.  The chassis is very basic, there’s no name on the hubcaps, the motor looks like a 428, but it has the shock tower braces, power steering hose, windshield washer reservoir and a two spoke 😮 steering wheel.  Like the MPC branded as AMT it has no clutch pedal but a 4 speed shifter.  The front bumper looks okay and could made to look not as wide with some black paint under the grille which isn’t bad.  I painted the chrome ares black area around the headlights but otherwise it’s straight out of the box.  There is a silver Mach1 tampo on the sides of the hood NACA openings which should be removed along with the America Graffitti tampo on the drivers side rear quarter panel.  I did not see a single one for sale on Ebay, only a “stock: 1971 with chrome mirrors and the standard grille.  Swap the wheels and add the trunk black stripe and remove the silver lettering and this diecast would be a tad better than the kit and take a lot less time.  The paint is pretty nice for a $20 diecast so I’m glad I bought one when they were available.

I added a few more photos to show the size difference of the Testors and Motormax diecasts compared to the AMT and MPC kits in 1/25 scale.  Unlike the Testors hood the Motormax hood does not have the incorrect cowl vents.

Edited February 26, 2021 by vamach1

[vamach1]

New decal sheet for forthcoming “AMT” kit.  Nothing else is new from the 007 release.

[Oldcarfan27]

On 1/27/2021 at 6:03 PM, David Miller said:

As a Ford guy I had to have it , the box art on Palmer kits is fantastic , the plastic inside not so much 

Was this kit the same as PSMs Boss 302?

I've always hoped that if I could find one, I'd try to correct the nose and taillight area to 70 specs. Looks to me like Palmer actually got the body proportions right, they just got lost on the front details.

I think that Monogram parts could fix it.