Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Bob Ellis said:

And Round2 expected the modeler to not notice or care about muffler situation

FIFY ??‍♂️☹️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, keyser said:

FIFY ??‍♂️☹️

Only if you were brain dead and never saw the movie Mustang balancing on 2 wheels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Bob Ellis said:

And Round2 expected the modeler to fix the muffler situation

Yes - that and providing their own 351C or 429CJ engine with an automatic transmission. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the presence of rounded and lack of oval mufflers are the worst thing you see in this group of parts, I have no further words for you:

007m.jpg.3d0e447a9d132445205e6f4499271693.jpg

 

There is not a single separate front suspension piece. NOT ONE. And this is not even a promo style chassis.

? ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Casey said:

If the presence of rounded and lack of oval mufflers are the worst thing you see in this group of parts, I have no further words for you:

At least the exhaust isn't moulded-on , nor is the driveshaft .  

The worst example of mufflers I can recall seeing is the exhaust setup of Monogram's 1971 Hemi'Cuda ( every iteration ) ---- then there's the exhaust-pipes-moulded-to-the-rear-axle-assembly of Monogram's 1970 GTX , SuperBird , Super Bee , Road Runner , and 1971 Satellite (later , GTX) . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1972coronet said:

At least the exhaust isn't moulded-on , nor is the driveshaft .  

The worst example of mufflers I can recall seeing is the exhaust setup of Monogram's 1971 Hemi'Cuda ( every iteration ) ---- then there's the exhaust-pipes-moulded-to-the-rear-axle-assembly of Monogram's 1970 GTX , SuperBird , Super Bee , Road Runner , and 1971 Satellite (later , GTX) . 

Incorrect horn location.  What’s with the side exhaust and wheelie bars and fuel pumps - extra race car parts?.  Half of a nine inch rear end.  No rear shocks.  Radiator cap in wrong location.  GM like inner fender panels.  That leaves the battery which could be better too.

Edited by vamach1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Casey said:

If the presence of rounded and lack of oval mufflers are the worst thing you see in this group of parts, I have no further words for you:

007m.jpg.3d0e447a9d132445205e6f4499271693.jpg

 

There is not a single separate front suspension piece. NOT ONE. And this is not even a promo style chassis.

? ?

But it's not a curbside Mustang kit and we all know that's the real detail sacrilege, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Casey said:

If the presence of rounded and lack of oval mufflers are the worst thing you see in this group of parts, I have no further words for you:

007m.jpg.3d0e447a9d132445205e6f4499271693.jpg

 

There is not a single separate front suspension piece. NOT ONE. And this is not even a promo style chassis.

? ?

 

All this gets painted flat black and make it disappear, or not use it at all! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Daddyfink said:

 

All this gets painted flat black and make it disappear, or not use it at all! 

I think them main complaints are major errors made in this kit from 50 years ago are still there (engine, chassis, etc.) and while the modified grille and front bumper and wheels and decals are appreciated, this kits still takes a LOT of extra work to recreate anything close to a REPLICA stock 71 Mustang Mach1 with a correct engine and exhaust system.  Expecting anyone to pay $30 retail for one may seem like a good deal when the vintage kits sell for $100 but they were really no better.  Having said that once I do purchase this kit @40% discount in the store I will post a follow up of exactly what parts should be tossed aside and what replacements can be used.  In the end someone would have to use parts from three different kits plus some resin parts (so expect to spend a lot more) just to create one replica stock Mach1 with a 429 CJ engine and C-6 automatic that the late Mr. Connery drove in the movie which the box art implies one can build out of what is inside the box.  If I offend anyone that is in love with old promo based kits that are reissued over and over I’m sorry but I’m sure there are others that are used to “newer” kits that are very accurate and do not need major parts swapping just to build a replica of a real car.  I’d gladly pay full retail if there was a kit that had just one correct engine (351C or 429CJ and not a 351W or 428) with a correct dual exhaust system with mufflers and a decent nine inch rear end and an improved interior (seats and door panels) and realistic engine compartment and a hood without incorrect “cowl” vents, etc.

Edited by vamach1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Justin Porter said:

But it's not a curbside Mustang kit and we all know that's the real detail sacrilege, right?

I realize people like Rex are into these cars way beyond what most of us are, so I understand his passion. I just don't see the goal in pointing out an incorrect, separately molded exhaust system when the basic chassis/unibody is so horribly designed and outdated. Everyone has their limits, and we all have to decide what's acceptable to each of us, based upon those limits and preferences.

We all knew Round2 was only going to make small changes/improvements, hence my use of both lipstick and pig emojis, so while they end result might be disappointing to some, it wasn't realistic to expect much more IMHO.

Now I'm not going to suggest we all have blind faith that Revell is going to absolutely nail their all-new, forthcoming '71 Mustang kit, but it HAS to be better than ether the existing MPC or AMT offerings. Even if people wait for it, then end up disappointed, you still have the AMT and MPC kits to fall back on.

26 minutes ago, Daddyfink said:

All this gets painted flat black and make it disappear, or not use it at all! 

That's probably the best option, but, for most of us enthusiasts, not an ideal option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2021 at 2:54 PM, Bob Ellis said:

Only if you were brain dead and never saw the movie Mustang balancing on 2 wheels

Or the fact it changed wheels down side in the alley. Brain dead indeed. Though you see the appalling mufflers for less than 3-4 sec. :D 

Ford Mustang Mach 1, Diamonds Are Forever (1971) | James Bond cars | Auto  Expressmust3ng7.3829.jpgdiamondsmustangstunt6ji9.6316.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, keyser said:

Or the fact it changed wheels down side in the alley. Brain dead indeed. Though you see the appalling mufflers for less than 3-4 sec. :D 

Ford Mustang Mach 1, Diamonds Are Forever (1971) | James Bond cars | Auto  Expressmust3ng7.3829.jpgdiamondsmustangstunt6ji9.6316.jpg

Yes - hilarious gaff by filming the Alley stunt in Hollywood vs. solely in Vegas,  That view shows it is a 351C 4v car unless it was the lighter 302 2v with dual exhaust added by the stunt company which would seem like a lot of trouble to go through when they missed such an obvious filming mistake.  It’s very unlikely the 429CJ was used for the stunts due to the heavier front end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this picture of a nice C code 429 in a 71 Mach1.  It’s the non ram-air engine which is usually associated with a Mach1 that does not have the black or silver paint on the hood.

707BB6E5-606F-4496-B542-36A68405BAE2.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So here’s the review some have been waiting for although I see some people have already built this kit so this my be just a reminder of what’s inside and some tips if you want to make a true 1971 Mach1.  On the left are the kit parts I would use (plus other parts not pictured) to make a somewhat accurate Mach1 from the movie.  On the right are the parts you would not need for an accurate 007 build.  Also pictured is the original MPC kit from this iteration is derived which explains a lot.  The original kit was a three in one (stock, road racer and drag car) hence the odd engine choices.  Even by the summer of 1971 it should have been clear to anyone paying attention to the redesigned 1971Mustang that the V8’s choices would be either the 302 Windsor, 351 Boss and 351 Cleveland (2 and 4 bbl) and the 429CJ and SCJ.  So back in 1970 or so MPC was still using the tired old 260 V8 from the ???  kit and the Boss 429 engine from I assume another mold as strangely enough neither AMT or MPC made a “stock” 1969 or 1970 Boss 429 kit.  So, with a correct engine (351 4v or 429CJ) sourced from another kit or kits and a dual exhaust with correct style mufflers and a better 9 inch rear end this kit could be made a whole lot better.  I nor anyone else thought Round2 would tool up a new 351C or 429CJ engine in 1/25 or make any refinements to the body (except for the sportlamp grille and front bumper) or the “vented” hood for this kit so no surprise there.  As other have pointed out the clear headlight lenses and new decals are nice and include the trunk stripe (which is a first) but the hood still has those $%^&* vents that should never have been engraved in the molds - I highlited them with white paint to illustrate this old error.  The wheels do a respectable job of replicating the FOMOCO trim ring and hub caps but otherwise this kit shares a lot in common with previous issues (some under the AMT name like this one) but let’s just say I will not be rushing out to buy more of them especially if I wanted to paint it a different color.  Kits molded in red are not my favorite as I am sure many would agree.  I guess the silver lining is anyone bidding on a vintage kit for over $100 at least has an alternative as long as they do not mind all that red plastic.

Rex

3C098904-1526-4C72-80BF-377FA6BAF9AE.jpeg

04040296-BB81-485C-BA25-242A9896BEE1.jpeg

Edited by vamach1
Not a 260 from the Cobra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vamach1 said:

The hood still has those $%^&* vents [...]

Is it just me , or are the scoops' leading ends off-centre ? Driver's-side looks longer than the passenger-side .

The non-updated Windsor engine is disappointing ; similar to the undersized Chrysler LA Engine in the Dart Sport and Duster kits .

An interesting aspect to the MPC 428 engine : it includes the Therm-Actor lines and tubing --- something that's sorely-lacking on the newer crop of Revell's 396 / 427 engines ( i.e. , the A.I.R. Pump plumbing ) . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 1972coronet said:

Is it just me , or are the scoops' leading ends off-centre ? Driver's-side looks longer than the passenger-side .

The non-updated Windsor engine is disappointing ; similar to the undersized Chrysler LA Engine in the Dart Sport and Duster kits .

An interesting aspect to the MPC 428 engine : it includes the Therm-Actor lines and tubing --- something that's sorely-lacking on the newer crop of Revell's 396 / 427 engines ( i.e. , the A.I.R. Pump plumbing ) . 

I see what you mean about the scoops.  I have not measured the distance but since they are not “opened” if it’s off one could fix that while they are at it.  The thing about the scoops is for all the non-ram air cars there was a honeycomb “block off” plate in the opened glass to stop water from entering while going the “speed of sound.”  For the ram-air cars, there was a vacuum driven “flap” that opened up when the driver revved the engine or was at full acceleration.  It is presumed the Bond Mach1’s did not have ram-at as that option was past of the package that included the twist locks and black paint on the hood and of course the ram-aim plenum and special air cleaner.

You are right about the smog canister - it was also required for the 429 SCJ engine so those parts could be repurposed.  I notice the “small block” valve covers look like the ones in the Cougar Eliminator kit but of course those would not be correct if they are supposed to resemble the standard Cleveland steel valve covers and not a Boss 302 style,

 

062365E7-FE12-4BB4-A935-1D3E7B79ED65.jpeg

Edited by vamach1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1972coronet said:

Is it just me , or are the scoops' leading ends off-centre ? Driver's-side looks longer than the passenger-side .

The non-updated Windsor engine is disappointing ; similar to the undersized Chrysler LA Engine in the Dart Sport and Duster kits .

An interesting aspect to the MPC 428 engine : it includes the Therm-Actor lines and tubing --- something that's sorely-lacking on the newer crop of Revell's 396 / 427 engines ( i.e. , the A.I.R. Pump plumbing ) . 

I think the scoops looking off is just a lighting illusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MPC didn't do Cobra, AMT did. I'd guess it's MPC 66 Mustang 289?

Thanks for winnowing chaff from wheat,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, keyser said:

MPC didn't do Cobra, AMT did. I'd guess it's MPC 66 Mustang 289?

Thanks for winnowing chaff from wheat,

You are correct so I will blame my confusion on the AMT packaging or old age.  ?  Now that makes me wonder why in the world MPC did the same early Ford small block engine that looks just like the AMT one.  I have very few early MPC kits ( a few glue bombs) so your guess is probably right.  How odd they both based their SB Fords on the early version of the 260 V8 with the filler tube.  I will have to compare the AMT vs. the MPC ones to see if there are any differences.  At any rate I think we can agree a 260V8 engine does NOT belong in a 71 Mustang. ?even if the base Mach1 engine was a 302 2v which you do not see too often but some were made.

I found pictures of the 67 MPC Mustang fastback small block engine.  It looks very similar to the AMT one but that answers the question that it’s been around for decades and made it’s way into later kits.

 

53762988-CB5B-4FF0-A2D4-61301EC74BB0.jpeg

2CED9729-15B2-4100-93CA-CC98F5777AD3.jpeg

Edited by vamach1
MPC engine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2020 at 9:38 PM, vamach1 said:

I always thought they were a good value (cost wise ) and still are compared to the 65-70 Mustangs.   Although they of course are a little larger than a 69/70 I have like them since the first one I bought in about 1977.  I have done all sorts of road trips and open track events and drag racing and autocrossing in my current Mach1.  Although it will not keep up with my 2003 Cobra, it still get looks anywhere I go and my kids love the sound even if it drives like an old car and squeaks and does not have air conditioning.

IMG_7639.JPG

Nice car, but those houses! Is that Williamsburg, or just someplace with really good architecture?

Charlie Larkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, charlie8575 said:

Nice car, but those houses! Is that Williamsburg, or just someplace with really good architecture?

Charlie Larkin

They are near where I live and the builder surely had Williamsburg in mind when they were built.  I’ve taken pictures of several cars there before someone tells me I cannot park there but I stay just long enough to snap a few pictures..  It is much more picturesque than my asphalt driveway. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, vamach1 said:

They are near where I live and the builder surely had Williamsburg in mind when they were built.  I’ve taken pictures of several cars there before someone tells me I cannot park there but I stay just long enough to snap a few pictures..  It is much more picturesque than my asphalt driveway. ?

So that's newer construction? Impressive. Vienna is nearer to D.C., correct? Seems a house such as that would sell nicely around there.

So, after reading this review...this is what I'm reading:

1. Correct the exhaust.

2. Fill in the scoops on the hood, and make it a flat hood.

3. Present the car as a 302/351-W car, and be done 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)?

Am I on the right track?

Might be best to see if Revell does in fact do a new kit if you really want a Mach 1, or turn this into something a little closer to what it might actually be.

Charlie Larkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, charlie8575 said:

So that's newer construction? Impressive. Vienna is nearer to D.C., correct? Seems a house such as that would sell nicely around there.

So, after reading this review...this is what I'm reading:

1. Correct the exhaust.

2. Fill in the scoops on the hood, and make it a flat hood.

3. Present the car as a 302/351-W car, and be done 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)?

Am I on the right track?

Might be best to see if Revell does in fact do a new kit if you really want a Mach 1, or turn this into something a little closer to what it might actually be.

Charlie Larkin

The twin NACA scoops are okay for a Mach1.  It’s the “cowl vents” that should not be there and were never on ANY 71-73 Mustang.  Pretty sure the Bond cars were an automatic too.  The door panels sort of look like the deluxe ones but are too flat (see photo).  Bottom line is if one wants to build a 71 Mach1 as it appeared in the Bond movie there are a lot of issues that I simply cannot overlook.  As a starting point you could build many different version of a 71 or 72 sportsroof Mustang with the right parts from a drag car or road racer to a Olympic sprint to even a Boss 351 if you want to spend two or three times the cost of the original kit searching and or making correct parts and decals etc.  I have gone down that road and made a few of the AMT and MPC ones and let’s just say every time I am reminded of all the shortcomings of them.  In the picture the Testors metal body kit is the one on the left.  It started as a prepainted yellow 73 “Mach1.”  By all means IF there’s a new tool made of a 71-73 Mustang I would hope a lot of these problems are not repeated.

I just saw these road tests posted today for the Boss 351, 429CJ and 302 2v from Road and Track.

As for those houses - they were built about 20 years ago and like any real estate in this area I’m sure they sell for big money.  I just looked it up and they are valued from at a tad under $1M up to $1.4M ?

141D115C-DE07-484A-AD75-A8AC73A9C3F2.jpeg

D36A20DE-336E-45DB-A33C-31FABBCE954D.jpeg

7D857F61-73B9-4377-AA5B-E01C3A554FD6.jpeg

03FFCBBC-C1C6-41BB-A6A1-470085EFAB58.jpeg

Edited by vamach1
Door panel & performance info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an FYI, this modification did not take that long. Not 100% correct, but looks acceptable IMO

 

MVC-046F.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sledsel said:

As an FYI, this modification did not take that long. Not 100% correct, but looks acceptable IMO

 

MVC-046F.JPG

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.

D038BC8F-11AB-4650-8BB4-3E9B11502F1E.jpeg

D682F518-EEB6-4195-9CC5-F8C409068B97.jpeg

C8BB1980-DC23-4D50-9D04-AFA790B04690.jpeg

233753E1-C072-45A1-B883-AADC6F18ACDC.jpeg

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...