Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum
Casey

1/25 AMT 1963 Chevy II Nova Station Wagon - Craftsman Plus

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Daddyfink said:

This thread has.....

 

I didn't see the shark, Jesse.

??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL! 

But, technically, I think this guy jumped INTO the shark rather than 'jumping the shark.'

 

??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, the other Mike S. said:

Well, you can probably just assemble it "as is" since it's basically a snap kit molded in an off-white color I've been told.   

Minor point...this one isn't a snap kit (pretty close, though).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that I've recovered from the whole jumping-the-shark bit... ??

pretty impressed they went with all-new tooling this time!  That engine bay detail rivals what took four separate parts in the '66 - really begs you to skip the fill plate and drop something in there.

So yeah, I'll just file those A-pillars a little, have this now and the more detailed one later, please.

?️

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GMP440 said:

What the person was trying to say was that the AMT 59 Imperial kit can be found at Hobby Lobby.   The person was referring to the Imperial kit and not the 63 Chevy II wagon kit.  That's all that was.

I think when people read the statement they thought the person was referring to the upcoming 63 Chevy II.  That statement got a few people excited. 

After reading that I bet some people were going Hobby Lobby to get the 63 Chevy II kit.

 

Yeah, I figured that out. I guess people should read what is being quoted, and not just the quote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

If we're to believe some of what we've heard on this and other boards, the AMT Edsel was not exactly a raucous success.

To be fair, the new tool Edsel was misproportioned with some components not in scale. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also it might be hard to tell exactly how good/bad/otherwise the Edsel might have done if the ownership change hadn't just taken place.  The Edsel and '57 Chrysler were Ertl/Mueller era designs, but they weren't released until 1999. By the time Racing Champions was a year into imploding the plastic model division, and the hobby as a whole was about to take a 5 year nap nobody wants to recall in great detail. 

Share this post


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

To be fair, the new tool Edsel was misproportioned with some components not in scale. 

I've always wondered what the complaints were with that kit . Thanks for clarifying , as I always believed it to be the subject matter ( I dig Edsels , by the way... I've just never taken the plunge and bought one of the kits ) .

Is its F-E ( or is it an M-E-L ? ) engine decent ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Chuck Kourouklis said:

Now that I've recovered from the whole jumping-the-shark bit... ??

pretty impressed they went with all-new tooling this time!  That engine bay detail rivals what took four separate parts in the '66 - really begs you to skip the fill plate and drop something in there.

So yeah, I'll just file those A-pillars a little, have this now and the more detailed one later, please.

?️

 

I have a spare Trumpeter 6... think I'll use it with this kit. 

Share this post


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

To be fair, the new tool Edsel was misproportioned with some components not in scale. 

Possibly.

But I don't think that would have been much of a factor in how well the kit sold initially.

The '58 Edsel was requested repeatedly for a number of years before it was finally released by AMT.

The point is that even a kit that seems as if it should do very well doesn't always perform as expected.

 

 

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, pack rat said:

Minor point...this one isn't a snap kit (pretty close, though).

I know, that's why I stated it's "basically" a snap kit.  Not quite, kinda, sorta, but close to one.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chuck Kourouklis said:

Now that I've recovered from the whole jumping-the-shark bit... ??

pretty impressed they went with all-new tooling this time!  That engine bay detail rivals what took four separate parts in the '66 - really begs you to skip the fill plate and drop something in there.

So yeah, I'll just file those A-pillars a little, have this now and the more detailed one later, please.

?️

 

I wish they would include engine plates in more kits.  Not everyone at every time wants to do a full bore engine detail just to get a build on the shelf.  In fact, there are more than few modelers here and on other forums that just glue the hood shut because they want an easy low effort build every once in awhile. 

Including an optional engine plate would be a lot more desirable than just having a big gaping hole underneath the chassis.  Or, having to scratchbuild a fake engine plate using pieces of the lower half of the engine and oil pan to Frankenstein something up.  Providing an engine plate, which would be next to nothing to tool up, would make things so much easier.  They use to do that in many kits of the '60's.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2020 at 9:38 AM, tim boyd said:

What Mark said. 

If anyone doubts the accuracy of what Mark says, check out my full kit contents review which discusses the completely all new tooling (zero carryover parts from the original Craftsman kit) and shows pix of the points Mark describes above.  It also includes the parts of the new kit that point to future kit variations coming from this tooling investment.  For those that did not see it earlier in the thread, here's the link...  (make sure to read the captions that are below each individual picture for all the details.....)  TIM 

I just clicked into your link above Tim. And I've even more excited by this kit than I was before. In my opinion, Round 2 has done this one right. I hope this kit is a big success, so we can see more like it in the future. If this was just a minor revamp on the old kit, I would be happy with just the one I have on order. But, after seeing the detail in the new kit, two things come to mind. It's going to be a shame building the kit as curbside. Hiding all of that great new under hood detail. Second, I'll be buying the more detailed version of the kit, when it too comes out. Normally I'm happy with just a curbside kit. But looking at what seeing of this curbside kit, I'm looking forward to seeing and building the more detailed version too. 

I love the UFO decals and New Mexico plates. I will be using those on my curbside build. I also like the squirrel. I have no idea of how I would use it in any of my builds. I've never found a use for any of the past animals from early 60's AMT kits. Yet I like little trinkets like that where almost always in those old kits. So I'm glad Round 2 is giving us a squirrel with this kit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/20/2020 at 2:06 PM, StevenGuthmiller said:

I guess I never really doubted anyone's assertions that this was an all new, freshly tooled kit.

It just seemed odd to me that their first attempt at resurrecting this "annual-ish" type of subject matter would start with something like a '63 Nova wagon.

Of all of the cars that they could have re-engineered in this manner, this first offering seems to me as if it would be the most likely to fail.

 

Personally, I'm still not sure that I will buy one.

Just not something that's awfully high on my "want to build" list.

 

I would have thought that a re-engineered '66 Skylark, '71 Mercury Cyclone or Dodge Demon, '68 Coronet R/T, or any number of other subjects, would have been much more likely to succeed, creating excitement for others to come.

The '63 Nova wagon doesn't stir a lot of excitement for me, and if there is a more detailed version coming in the future, I absolutely will not be spending the money on a curbside offering.

 

 

 

 

Steve

It obviously stirs excitement for me. I love the common cars. The type regular people bought more of in real life. The kits you listed above Steve, are on my "want" list too. But, so was the early, 1st gen Chevy II wagon. I'm delighted to see a new version of this car in kit form. I've already ordered a curbside. And when the more detailed comes out, I'll be ordering one of those too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There sure is some negativity being thrown around for curbside kits on here, but yet some will spend  $300+ for a "curbside" '72 Chevy Impala promo with a warped roof.  I don't know about you, but I'd like to see more curbside kits reissued/released.  Most of them, even in "full detail" form , are basically curbside with their simpllfied '60's era engine compartments and basic bare bones engine details.  Unless you're talking about a modern tool which of course may have more detail.  However, Round 2 hasn't made a moden tool since the 6th gen Camaro, I believe.

Edited by the other Mike S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2020 at 9:11 PM, Motor City said:

Not to get off topic, but if this newly tooled Cutlass body is successful, the '66 Skylark GS could go the same way and eventually get a new variation with the '67 GS.  The '65 Olds Dynamic 88 could be done as '65 and '66 Starfires or even a '65 Jetstar 1.  If some of you aren't familiar with these big bucket seat Olds' models, look them up.  But the most potential would be to convert the '68-'69 Torino into a '68-'69 Cyclone with all of those variations (Cyclone Spoiler, etc.).  This Nova could spawn a '67 wagon or hardtop.  The possibilities are great.

With the re-constructed tools, 3-D design and scanning, and rapid prototyping/manufacturing processes (look up ProtoMold in Maple Plain, Mn. for an example of a company that does this well), all of these can happen very easily. Which is why I'm saying this is exciting.

Charlie Larkin

Share this post


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

I've always wondered what the complaints were with that kit . Thanks for clarifying , as I always believed it to be the subject matter ( I dig Edsels , by the way... I've just never taken the plunge and bought one of the kits ) .

Is its F-E ( or is it an M-E-L ? ) engine decent ? 

The engine is beautiful. Well worth the price of admission. About the only thing they didn't get was the E-400 decals for the valve covers. No issue has had that, and my graphic arts skills (or manual painting skills) are good enough to make them.

As far as proportioning, I'm not sure where it's off. A real '58 lives not too far me, and by doing an eyeball comparison, it looks decent. Perhaps a smidge narrow, but once the car is together, I think it looks pretty good. The worst part of it, and one of the things slowing me down is figuring out how to do the outer ring of the center grille. Unfortunately, they moulded it, and the grille itself, integral with the body, and  I've spent the last several months puzzling with it on how to detail it without ruining the paint.

Charlie Larkin

Edited by charlie8575

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, the other Mike S. said:

There sure is some negativity being thrown around for curbside kits on here, but yet some will spend  $300+ for a "curbside" '72 Chevy Impala promo with a warped roof.

That's because there are few options if you want a '72 Impala.

With this kit, there is already prior information that there will be a detailed kit to follow, so I see no point in purchasing a curbside version, unless that's your thing.

 

 

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, the other Mike S. said:

There sure is some negativity being thrown around for curbside kits on here

I'm not really reading much, but here's a good topic for further debate:

 

If we're honest, there should be very little to complain about regarding the AMT '63 Chevy II 400 Wagon Craftsman style kit, and it's forthcoming full-detail sibling. Round2 is bloody close to repeating the glory days so many of the Boomers pine for with these two kits. I think people realize this may never happen again (or at least not for another 50+ years), and the anticipation and excitement here seems to reflect that sentiment.

Share this post


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

I'm not really reading much, but here's a good topic for further debate:

 

If we're honest, there should be very little to complain about regarding the AMT '63 Chevy II 400 Wagon Craftsman style kit, and it's forthcoming full-detail sibling. Round2 is bloody close to repeating the glory days so many of the Boomers pine for with these two kits. I think people realize this may never happen again (or at least not for another 50+ years), and the anticipation and excitement here seems to reflect that sentiment.

  Casey,  I was reading the phrase in your last sentence;   "people realize this may never happen again" .  Is it possible that Round maybe doing one final run of the old annuals that were produced from the 60's through the 70's?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GMP440 said:

  Casey,  I was reading the phrase in your last sentence;   "people realize this may never happen again" .  Is it possible that Round maybe doing one final run of the old annuals that were produced from the 60's through the 70's?  

I guess I see this '63 Chevy II Wagon kit as a tribute to the original Craftsman-then-full detail style kits-- not the same as the originals, but still a lower parts count, easier to build version is released first, followed soon after by a full detail kit. I don't really foresee Round2 repeating that pattern for a different subject, which is why I feel these two '63 Chevy II Wagon sibling kits are going to be unique.

I think one version would probably satisfy the majority of customers, be it Craftsman style or full detail, as long as the essence and feel of the original is present, even if some of the minor details are in fact totally different. Purists might cry foul, collectors will rejoice, and builders will be delighted to have a shot at easily obtaining one for less than $30. (Almost) everybody wins in this scenario. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2020 at 9:07 PM, 1972coronet said:

I've always wondered what the complaints were with that kit . Thanks for clarifying , as I always believed it to be the subject matter ( I dig Edsels , by the way... I've just never taken the plunge and bought one of the kits ) .

Is its F-E ( or is it an M-E-L ? ) engine decent ? 

The FE engine (Ford/Edsel 332-428) in this kit is underscale, as is the rear axle. The body isn't deep enough, and the front bumpers are too fat. The MEL engine (not in this kit) is the Mercury Edsel Lincoln 383, 430, 462.

Edited by Dave Darby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2020 at 5:40 AM, charlie8575 said:

The engine is beautiful. Well worth the price of admission. About the only thing they didn't get was the E-400 decals for the valve covers. No issue has had that, and my graphic arts skills (or manual painting skills) are good enough to make them.

As far as proportioning, I'm not sure where it's off. A real '58 lives not too far me, and by doing an eyeball comparison, it looks decent. Perhaps a smidge narrow, but once the car is together, I think it looks pretty good. The worst part of it, and one of the things slowing me down is figuring out how to do the outer ring of the center grille. Unfortunately, they moulded it, and the grille itself, integral with the body, and  I've spent the last several months puzzling with it on how to detail it without ruining the paint.

Charlie Larkin

The engine appearance is great, with nice detail. Unfortunately, it's too small. Sit it next to the even nicer one in the 1960 Starliner, or the 66 Fairlane (or any other 1/25th scale FE engine) and it becomes immediately apparent. The front bumpers are fat, and hang down to a level even with the rocker panels, which don't come down low enough. They end about where the door bottoms should be. Other than that, it's a nice kit. I built one for my brother. But I prefer the old tool. The body is much closer. 

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...