Round 2 Aug 2022

[Oldcarfan27]

26 minutes ago, Mr. Metallic said:

Here's the real car that may have inspired the AMT designers, or vice versa.

Not everyone's taste, but it was the style at the time.

Except the photo is dated 1968 - long after the kit was first released. Maybe he was inspired by the kit?

[Rob Hall]

2 minutes ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

Except the photo is dated 1968 - long after the kit was first released. Maybe he was inspired by the kit?

That was at a car show in 1968, but the car may have been built in 1960?  Seems so dated for 1968 (though I wasn’t around then) 

[Oldcarfan27]

5 minutes ago, Rob Hall said:

That was at a car show in 1968, but the car may have been built in 1960?  Seems so dated for 1968 (though I wasn’t around then) 

It does seem dated and in fact customs were out of vogue by 1968, so it seems strange that an old 50s custom - with 60s Torque Thrusts, no less, would be trotted out that late in the decade. Most were dumped by then.

[Richard Bartrop]

29 minutes ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

It does seem dated and in fact customs were out of vogue by 1968, so it seems strange that an old 50s custom - with 60s Torque Thrusts, no less, would be trotted out that late in the decade. Most were dumped by then.

It did happen.  I remember Fred Welsh's custom '40 Ford "Treasure" was a regular fixture at Vancouver car shows right into the late '70s and beyond.  A few updates, but basically the same car.

 

Edited August 5, 2022 by Richard Bartrop

[Mr. Metallic]

2 hours ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

Except the photo is dated 1968 - long after the kit was first released. Maybe he was inspired by the kit?

That's why i said "or vice versa"

But I think Rob is on to the real deal, that it was build much earlier, just shown here in 68. so it could have inspired the AMT designers if that's the case. 

[Can-Con]

That particular '57 Chevy, "Hint of Mint" is a well known car and it's history is well documented. The custom work shown in those pics was done in '65/'66. 

Here's a link to the "Custom Car Chronicles" page on the car.

https://www.customcarchronicle.com/custom-cars/57-chevy-hint-of-mint/

 

[Mark]

A lot of those early customs were updated for the show circuit.  The AMT '50 Ford convertible kit is a good representation of a typical early Sixties custom that got changed later (Carson top cut down into a landau style top, new wheels and tires).  

One of the early Sixties ISCA champions, a '35 Ford coupe, was restyled and won the championship a few years later for another owner.  Like most of those updates, the original version was better.

[Robberbaron]

5 hours ago, Can-Con said:

That particular '57 Chevy, "Hint of Mint" is a well known car and it's history is well documented. The custom work shown in those pics was done in '65/'66. 

Here's a link to the "Custom Car Chronicles" page on the car.

https://www.customcarchronicle.com/custom-cars/57-chevy-hint-of-mint/

 

Steve beat me to it.

If nothing else, check out the link to see how sketchy that old body work was when they were redoing it in the '80s!

[Motor City]

What a great job the Jetter brothers did to properly fix the h-a work of the original and subsequent owners.

[showrods]

On 8/3/2022 at 2:22 PM, Plowboy said:

Here's some photos of the styline parts along with the chopped glass.

Instruction photos.

Now, in all honesty, who would really use those styline parts on a '57 Chevy? 

So if I understand what's being said in this thread - the upcoming Round 2 '57 Chevy release does NOT contain MOST of these customizing parts or does it not contain ANY of these customizing parts?

[Mark]

It will in all likelihood include the mild custom parts that were in the most recent issue, but not the Stylizing parts that were deleted about fifty years ago.

[showrods]

40 minutes ago, Mark said:

It will in all likelihood include the mild custom parts that were in the most recent issue, but not the Stylizing parts that were deleted about fifty years ago.

I thought as much which is a major bummer.  As an example, the box bottom drawings, as shown in the video, would indicate that the "Hint of Mint" back bumper is not included.

[Mark]

Not many builders used the Stylizing parts that were in most of the Sixties issues.  If you are able to attend toy or model kit collectors' shows, or otherwise pound the ground, it is possible to turn up a started or built kit with those parts among the leftovers.  If not, the custom parts still in the kit will make for a nice build.

[showrods]

On 8/3/2022 at 10:26 AM, Dave Darby said:

 

I have trouble understanding:

a). how Round 2 could not know that the Styline parts were in the tool; or

b) not think to ask the question

[showrods]

On 8/4/2022 at 7:48 PM, Mark said:

I cut open the grille area intending to put in a separate piece from behind.

Note the downward slant of the side window opening; I might cheat and recut that to make it more level.  Right now that makes the chop look heavy.  I cut the windshield and rear glass so they can be fitted separately after finish paint.

Please keep posting progress photos - looks great so far.  You could make your own interpretation of "Hint of Mint"...

[pack rat]

45 minutes ago, showrods said:

I have trouble understanding:

a). how Round 2 could not know that the Styline parts were in the tool; or

 

I'm certain that they know exactly what is and what isn't in the tool.

[showrods]

On 8/6/2022 at 7:50 PM, pack rat said:

I'm certain that they know exactly what is and what isn't in the tool.

According to Dave Darby's post on page 1 they didn't.

Edited August 9, 2022 by showrods

[Dave Darby]

On 8/6/2022 at 7:50 PM, pack rat said:

I'm certain that they know exactly what is and what isn't in the tool.

From what I was told, they thought those cavities were gone. I then sent them photos of a short shot of the rear Styline extension from a 1990s issue.

[keyser]

Only way to tell is blow plastic thru mold. Clear welded off runners, and wait. 
The tool is not easy to discern what it makes. Hence test shots. How they found 64 Cutlass. Mark, Dave, those guys know more as always. 

[Mark]

What they have/don't have is known to some extent by the "hanger shots" that Ertl ran on some of the tooling.  It seems that, when time and budget permitted, they'd dust off dormant tools, unblock whatever they could, and shoot plastic through them.  Whatever came out would be evaluated, then sandwiched between a couple of sheets of clear vinyl with a coat hanger at the top.  That was done with tools in current production too, those were used for QC purposes.  I have a couple of those that I bought at the old Toledo Toy Fair shows around 1990.  We were once set up next to the Ertl display, one guy gave those a look and went looking for the guy who was selling them.  Even Ertl, long as they owned all of the AMT stuff (1982 purchase), never got around to evaluating everything.

[Oldcarfan27]

13 hours ago, Mark said:

What they have/don't have is known to some extent by the "hanger shots" that Ertl ran on some of the tooling.  It seems that, when time and budget permitted, they'd dust off dormant tools, unblock whatever they could, and shoot plastic through them.  Whatever came out would be evaluated, then sandwiched between a couple of sheets of clear vinyl with a coat hanger at the top.

Even Ertl, long as they owned all of the AMT stuff (1982 purchase), never got around to evaluating everything.

So I take it that there is a lot more tooling that they haven't ran plastic through.

As far as identifying what cavities are still in each one, is it because they can't easily open the tooling to see what is inside them? I know each assembly is large and very heavy. As from what I have seen on other threads, they are basically a large block of steel with all of the business end inside. 

I wish we knew what an opened tool looks like, so as to understand the limitations of evaluating what it is.

If it was so easy, I think they would take a few days to open all of them and have a complete inventory made, but obviously it's not, as decades can go by and they still find more surprises. So then, tooling must be a catacomb of hidden treasures not easily mined.

[showrods]

If a company A is thinking of buying out company B, would they not want a COMPLETE inventory of molds and an assessment of their conditions in order to be able to come up with a proper offer price?

Granted, it may be impractical to run plastic through every mold before acquisition but at minimum you'd think that a visual inspection of everything would be in order...

Seems as if it's mostly the purchase of a bunch of "surprise packages" in some cases.

Edited August 9, 2022 by showrods

[stavanzer]

7 hours ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

So I take it that there is a lot more tooling that they haven't ran plastic through.

As far as identifying what cavities are still in each one, is it because they can't easily open the tooling to see what is inside them? I know each assembly is large and very heavy. As from what I have seen on other threads, they are basically a large block of steel with all of the business end inside. 

I wish we knew what an opened tool looks like, so as to understand the limitations of evaluating what it is.

If it was so easy, I think they would take a few days to open all of them and have a complete inventory made, but obviously it's not, as decades can go by and they still find more surprises. So then, tooling must be a catacomb of hidden treasures not easily mined.

The Atlantis Facebook Page sometimes show the insides of tool cavities, I think.

This is a tool for smaller parts, that are all the same, but you can get an idea of how hard it is to guess what is really in there.

Further, just by looking at this can you tell if the tool is worn, or whether the parts will have excess flash or even if the tool is simply still useable? Just imagine splitting a bunch of these..... To look inside and guess.

A big job, and one not done often.

[Stef]

I constantly marvel at how technical model tooling and manufacturing has always been.

In the early days, much of this stuff was considered temporary, and ultimately disposable.

OK, this is probably super-naive, but gotta ask anyway. Just curious, what if the model companies, in an effort to identify old things they rediscover, were to simply push playdoh or something into the halves, take pictures, post them online, and get us, the community, to identify them?

There are so many smart dudes here, we're a literal encyclopedia of model car history.

Just imagine: "Hey, that one is MPC's old Chevy Monza. Boom. This one is MPC's 74 Super Charger. Boom."

Me personally, I'm super happy to be getting so many old kits back into our hands. And I'd be even happier to help them bring back even more.

I'll buy myself a flight to any warehouse, comb through the archives, catalogue it, and post it here.

You guys will work your magic.

[Justin Porter]

All these posts about whether or not Round 2's going to run the old Styline parts along with the old-tool '57 and I'm just over here upset that they STILL haven't brought back the new-tool Street Machine kit.