Are the AMT '32 Ford 5W Still a Valid Model to Build?

[GasPunkAlley]

Digging thru my old stash of kits, I am horrified by the amount of started models I never finished in my younger days. Now I want to make good use of the time spent and finish some stuff. I found my second top chop project I ever did, an AMT '32 Five Window coupe. Now with the new Revell kit out and seeing how the body is actually sectioned, is it worth finishing or should I just start with a Revell kit and chop away? I am into nostalgia rods and having a sectioned car wouoldn't be bad and I could make an East cast styled rod and use the Revell chassis. Any Thoughts?

I think it is about a 3" chop. I used a soldering iron to fuse the plastic at the joins. It has held up well for over 20 years!

[unclescott58]

Why would question if this is a valid model to build? AMT's old '32 is this great kit for what it is. I just paint the flathead for that exact same kit yesterday. The Revell '32 5W is a much better kit in many ways. But comparing AMT's old '32 to Revell's newer '32, is like comparing vanilla ice cream to chocolate. I like them both. But sometimes I want one over the other. And at other times I like twist cones. If you get my message there. Just build the kit the way you like and have fun doing it.

Scott

[GasPunkAlley]

Thanks Scott,

I have been building some historical models lately and in that group, if the tooling is old, then it is not good enough... It was odd, but then I looked at how much effort and detail has been put into an armor or airplane kit recently, looking at kits from the 1960's look a but crude by comparison. Once again I think finishing something I start is a good use of time.

[unclescott58]

Yes it's crude compared to today's kits. But, one can still have some fun with it. The old AMT kits still go together quite well, and turn pretty good when they are done. Unlike other kits tooled up in the 60's. You want to see crude? Look at old Pamler, Premier, and some of the Pyro kits from the same time. The old AMTs are light years ahead of those. Take another look at your '32. You might be surprised what you can do with it. Some very nice models have been built over the years, using that kit.

Scott

[1930fordpickup]

I find it crazy how people will complain about how far off the body on these are then they turn around and chop and section the Revell body. If you were trying to make a stock 32 Ford you should start with the newer kit.

[blunc]

just as valid as building a 32 Ford "No Window"

[Foxer]

It's all been said and I love th eold AMT bescuae it's the first '32 I built .. when it was new. And I'm still building them, as good as the Revell is ... this IS in progress

Edited June 5, 2014 by Foxer

[Bernard Kron]

The early 60's AMT Deuce kits all "suffer" from a fundamental inaccuracy which is that they have an upward curvature along the bottom of the body ending at the firewall. Like the 1:1's, the Revell kits are straight in this area. As full-fendered cars the Revell looks far more accurate but as a channeled rod the AMT models have their own "drama" that makes them quite unique and which many of us has think has a lot of "soul". On the other hand all the Revell kits are built strictly as fairly contemporary hot rods with tubular front axles, air bags (!!????), enormous trailing rods to locate modern 8" rear axle, etc., etc. Indeed, even as "contemporary" hot rods they are becoming quite dated. The tires, in particular, are becoming a real 90's throwback as the modern "traditional" rod movement has taken over popular tastes. Revell's failure to change this when they introduced the 5-window with it's steelies was particularly galling! We had to wait for the otherwise absurdly indiosyncratic Stacey David Rat Roaster for a decent set of tires and wheels from this line.

So the AMT kits are a fine historical document of an important era in both car modeling and hot rodding. They are certainly far more crude with their metal axles and "soft" molded-in detailing but taken on their own terms they can result in some fine builds. The Revell kits are crisp, well detailed, and, with work, make superb replicas of hot rods of any number of eras. On the other hand making a showroom stock '32 Ford from a Revell kit can be quite a challenge!

This is a chopped and channeled AMT 5-window coupe in a somewhat "rat rod" style I did a few years back. The actual body is a resin casting by ThePartsBox.com but other than the chop the AMT aspects are completely intact. It was built as a tribute to that Australian company's fine line of aftermarket parts, hence the right hand drive. I don't think a Revell 5-window would have quite the same funky vibe that this does, even with a severe chop.

[Ace-Garageguy]

"Valid" ?? Why not?? A mild sectioning job could be done, still, in the real-world for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that a body a builder started with was rotten off at the bottom. Valid? I think so. This is one of mine. Build thread here. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=63112

[GasPunkAlley]

As for Stock, I am not concerned about that. I get to the nutz and boltz about replica stock Mustangs, but not in my Rods. I have been looking at my stash and considered offering some castings of some of my conversions and would people still be interested in a conversion from an AMT kit? Th body seems to fit the Revell chassis just fine.

[Ace-Garageguy]

As for Stock, I am not concerned about that. I get to the nutz and boltz about replica stock Mustangs, but not in my Rods. I have been looking at my stash and considered offering some castings of some of my conversions and would people still be interested in a conversion from an AMT kit? Th body seems to fit the Revell chassis just fine.

1) Nobody with a brain is going to build a stock '32 from an old AMT kit, unless as an exercise in either nostalgia or fabrication / heavy modification...but I didn't understand that as being the question.

2) The AMT body seems to fit the Revell chassis?? Well...yeah. They're both '32 Fords, in 1/25 scale, so if the guys who did the tooling for the kits were doing their jobs, like measuring and stuff, they SHOULD fit each other.

3) To get some feedback as to whether folks would be interested in resin models based on the AMT kits, maybe you should post on the car-resin thread, and ask over there. You might also look around at what's already on the market. Reinventing the wheel is rarely business-smart, unless you have a MUCH better wheel.

4) The '32 Ford is THE HOT-ROD ICON. There will always be '32 Fords being built in 1:1...we're building two REAL-STEEL survivor cars in our shop right now...and repop-steel and f'glass cars abound in reality. IF you make WELL-DONE resin conversion bodies for '32 Fords, I'm CERTAIN people will buy them. Whether it makes business sense, as in "will it ever make a profit?" is anybody's guess.

[Dave Darby]

Well how bout a bump for this thread. Yeah Revell's Deuces are more accurate. But like the other guys here say, the AMT 32s have that soul. Here is a box art replica I'm plugging away on. I've extended the frame rails, added a spreader bar, and sectioned the grille shell. Front End is sitting on the best dropped axle and juice brakes setup ever. The Monogram Deuce. 

[Greg Myers]

Box art builds, such a great trip down memory lane. 

[Sledsel]

Build it! As for accuracy, it is an old kit and has some issues, (although many old AMT's are pretty accurate) but less than many "new" kits.