unclescott58

Wow! Another thread where I get suckered into hoping for news or a review, and all I get is guys posting how they can't wait for this or that. We all are waiting for these kits. But, I am also waiting for some substantial information in these kits. It is called the "news and reviews" threads after all. Come on guys. Write something, when there is something to write about. Scott

The Foose car I'd like to see done as a kit is not an option in this. And that is his P32. Scott

I don't remember MPC ever offering a '66 Mustang? Nor a '67 or '68. Did they? Scott

Awe..... I thought maybe somebody had a review or some news finally on the kit. Instead I'm suckered into reading more stuff that has little to nothing about the kit. We all want the kit guys. Be patient. Scott

Back from the days when one had a good reason to buy an Oldsmobile. It's still heart breaking to think that Oldmobile is gone. I want my father's Oldsmobile. He had a '51 88 and a '55 Super 88. Then in 1980, my mother bought a brand new Delta 88 with the rarely seen Holiday trim package. My mother liked cars with bucket seats. All 3 were very good cars. Between the '55 and the '80 Olds, my folks switched to driving Mercurys. Another dead brand Scott

I bought one of these early on, in the very early 70's. With that style of box art. And I never got a record with mine. Scott

Saw a Potvin on a old hot rod last summer for the first time. One of the things the owner pointed was the lack of noise compared to belt driven superchargers. Fired the car up. And it was a lot quieter. Nice for use on the street, other than you need to find someplace away from the engine for your radiator. His radiator was mounted in the back of his rod. Just a T shell in front of the supercharger. I though it was pretty cool. Scott

You know, for an old GM fan, I love the Ford GTs. New and old. Naturally I'd love to see a Corvette win at overall LeMans someday. At the same time I know it will not happen. The GTs may not be as practical as my beloved Corvette, but they are very cool looking. And at least have won LeMans. I love the new GT, and can't wait for somebody to bring a kit of it to the market. Scott

What's the point of this thread? I'm not understand what this is all about. Scott

So far I'm still a little confused on this. What does this all mean? Right now? Through Ford, can I order a 2016 Ford GT model I can hold in my hand? Until I can see an actual model in the 3-D flesh, I'm having a hard time understanding what all of fuse is all about. I'm 57 years old, and I'll be honest about this. I'm not understanding it. I can get traditional styrene kits rights now that I can build and hold in my hands quite easily. And I don't need a special, and assume expensive printer, to do it. Can I now get these models from Ford? And at price? Scale? And level of detail? Scott

I've always like the '57 Ford much better than the '57 Chev. Even though I'm mainly a General Motors guy. The '57 Chevy is okay, especially the Nomad. But, the '57 Ford looked stunning in just about every model and body style. It even out sold the Chevrolet in 1957. I can understand why. Scott

Another very cool subject. Never had one of these reconds. And I have not thought about them in years. Cool to finally find out what was on one of them. Somewhere on the web, someone has post a recording of what came on the record that came with AMT's Lief Erikson spaceship model back in the day. that record came mainly with bad futuristic "space" music. This one is much better. Yet, I do like both. Very fun. Scott

The original Futura did look better before Barris got his hands on it. I still love the '66 Barris Batmobile. But, I love the Futura even more. Scott

Cool! I want one. Scott

Yea, I meant TS-51. I'm getting a little confused on what the color of the Gerney/Grant GT-40 Mk II #2 was as raced at Sebring on March 26, 1966. Their car looked like a very dark blue to me. Revell claims in their story about the car at the begining of the instruction sheet, that car was painted Guardsman Blue. Maybe it was not Guardsman Blue like Revell claims, and something else? Tamiya's TS-51, Racing Blue looks close to me. As far as the Gulf cars, I got the impression from one source that any light blue and basic orange will work. I question this. It would be very easy to go with Tamiya TS-23, Light Blue in a that case. That does look kind of close. Now, I wonder about Tamiya's basic acrylic orange paint? Scott

Tamiya's TS-52, racing blue looks correct for Guardsman Blue to me. What do others think. Scott

Yea, and as a kid I may have still built it with the fuel injection unit. After all, that was cool looking, and the age of 8 I may not have know that had Chevrolet replaced it with the big block. As long as it looked correct on the outside, including the things like wheel covers. Looking like the Corvette on the Chevy's show floors and in the brochures (I'd look at the brochure, but still not have understood the engine change). If I remember correctly, AMT's '66 Vette came with the plain, small block hood. I'm sure I would have preferred the the big block style of hood no matter what engine rested under it. Today, I'd want the big block hood, with a big block under it. At 8 I doubt that I cared. Plus let's not forget MPC's 1/20th scale 1970 AMX, which was just recently reissued. The whole interior of that kit is 1968, with exception of the dashboard. The seats (with required headrests) and the door panels were not even updated for 1969. Why they gave the '70 a correct dashboard and nothing else I really have a hard time understanding. Why not tool up correct high back bucket seats and the correct two-spoke steering wheel at the same time? Could probably still gotten away with the interior bucket, for I doubt many people would have noticed or cared about the incorrect door panels. But, the seats in particular really stand out. But again, by this time even though I was 10, I still may not have noticed, or cared. So this gives you some idea why these old kit were the way they were. I'm sorry to tell you guys this, but models back then were looked at as mainly toys for kids. Scott

Are you sure your Dad had a '65? A different style of interior trim can be accounted for by the level of Wildcat one bought. A standard, Deluxe, or Custom Wildcat. But, all '65 Wildcats regardless of trim had the same dash. As did all the full-size Buicks. And that is the dash that comes in the '65 and '66 AMT Wildcat models. The '66 full-size Buicks got a dash simular to what you describe. But, the 5 had the round pods low on the dashboard and looked simular, having a simular styling theme to, but not same as the Rivieras at the time (1963 - 1965) and the '63 and '64 full-size Buick dash. The interior in the '66 AMT Wildcat model depicts the '65 Wildcat Custom with bucket seats. The upholstery, door panels, and dash all match the '65 Wildcat Customs other members in our local Buick club have owned. I got to spend a little time driving a beautiful black '65 Custom 2-door hardtop, with a red interior. Other member had a very nice '65 convertible. So I've been around these cars a bit. Why did AMT not update the interior on their '66 Wildcat model in the day? I don't think anybody really cared. As long as the outside of the car looked right. Models, even promos, were mostly aimed at kids. What do they know? Or care? That would have been the thinking of the day. I recently built a virgin, in the box, AMT 1967 Ford Falcon. I can tell you several changes, like the exhaust system, were not brought up to date on the model. Look at MPC's full-size Pontiac models of the time. The '67 - '70 Bonneville kits came with the tri-cab set up. Something that was not available on the full-size, or any Pontiac for that matter, from the factory after 1966. Why tool up a new four-barrel carb and manifold when most kids wouldn't know difference? And you know what? When I built my '69 Bonneville convertible back in the day, I didn't know it was wrong. Nor did I care. The tri-carb set up was cool to me. This brings up one more point on AMT's '66 Wildcat. The dual four-barrel set up was seen on very few '66 Wildcats. And most of the ones you do see were sold over counter through your Buick dealer. I think a few early 66's may have come from the factory with dual-four barrel set up. But, I'd have to do a little digging to make sure of that. This was the same with the '66 Rivieras. Scott

I like Revell's new 57's a lot. But, I still like this old AMT classic too. It builds into a nice looking model. Scott

Jay Leno's Garage this last looked at the car Nissan is running at LeMans this here. Very cool! Plus they talked and rode with a very cool young driver they hired to drive the car. The guy came up from the video community. Nice kid. Great story. Cool car. Guess who I'll be rooting for to win this one? Scott

After looking at the selection I'm voting for none of them. Foose's stuff is not old school enough for me. Scott

Or make them easy to catch as they stop and laugh. They say bats are blind. It took a blind one to design that thing. Not the worst Batmobile I've ever seen. But, it ranks in my top ten. In fact there have been few good looking Batmobiles, in comics or other media, since the late 1960's. Scott

I'm sorry, but I have no interest in any of the four, other than the Barracuda. And I have one of those in my stash waiting to be built someday. Scott

As Greg shows above its the GT Mk IV. My next question is what year Shell put these films out? And are they available on DVD? They're great. Other than they end with 1951. Scott

Nah. What is the function of all of those weird shapes all over the car? Now, I don't expect that the design to functional in use of every shape. After all, I like my Batmobiles with fins. But all of these jagged shapes? Half open fenders? Etc? What is it all for? Scott