unclescott58

Why can you not trust anything an Atom tells you? Because Atoms make up everything. Scott

I built the most recent reissue of the coupe/convertible, seen in Casey's post above with the LaSalle grille. I built mine as close to a "stock" convertible as could be built out of the kit. At the same time I built AMT's '36 as a "stock" 3-window coupe. I liked both kits. I like of AMT one a little better, but had no real complaints about Revell/Monogram kit. It's a good kit, and builds very nicely. And the latest issue comes with some fun options for building different variations. And, so does the AMT kit. Pluses? For an open car, the Revell/monogram kit builds as a true convertible. AMT's a roadster. By 1936, I like the convertible better than the roadster. Minus? AMT's kit can be built "stock." Revell/Monogram's recent reissues. Custom only. Though it can be built to look close to stock. Scale is of course the other issue. Being an old Monogram kit, the Revell/Monogram version is in 1/24th scale. The AMT kit, 1/25th. Scott

Mine was a '53 Chrysler New Yorker Deluxe club coupe. It was about 23 or 24 years old when I bought it. I was was 5 years younger, at 18 or 19. It was in great shape other than the brakes. Leaky master and wheel cylinders. Had to pump the pedal a few times before they'd work. And this was on every stop! But, being young and stupid, I drove it like that for almost a year. Other than the brakes, it was a very nice car. Light blue. Gray cloth interior. Power steering and windows. 331 Hemi. FluidDrive transmission. A wonderful sounding tube radio. A very classy car. Wish I had it today (of course). Scott

I just ruined the value of a near virgin AMT 1967 Ford Falcon model kit in the last month. By building it. Don't get me wrong. It turned out great. In general I buy kits with the idea of building them. Some may never be built in my life time. But, when I buy them, I'm thinking about what they will be like when they are built. Not how much money they'll someday be worth. Scott

I enjoyed the article. But, like others have noted, it was way too short. Would like to see more on the histories of JoHan, AMT, SMP, MPC, and IMC. I have the three wonderful books put out on the histories of Aurora, Monogram, and Revell by Thomas Graham. I'd like to see him, or someone else, in the same format, do the histories on the five other companies mentioned above. Scott

I never thought I'd ever hear anybody claim the Maverick dashboard to be their favorite. It's okay that's it's your favorite Tulio. I'm just surprised by it. Though the console and the tach really help in the photo you provided. And I'm with you Andy on the '72 - '79 mid-size Ford/Mercury full instrumentation dashboards. They were one of the better looking and laid out dashes. Even the "regular" dashboard with less gauges was pretty good on that generation of mid-size FoMoCo products. Scott

Can not read the fender badges. I know it does not have the 427. Beyond that, what engine does it have? Very nice car Mike. Looks pretty solid from the two pictures. Should be a nice ride down the road. Scott

Thanks for the link to the old Life of Riley show. I've always liked William Bendix. This is the first time of ever acutally seen a Life of Riley TV episode. I've heard several of the old Life of Riley Radio shows on cassette tapes. The TV episode was a lot of fun. Cool seeing the old style 50's Hot Rods, and Wally Parks too! This also puts Jr. higher on my list. He and buddies are okay. Last, I do like Riley's line near the end about delinquents with fast being able to outrun the cops. That was funny. And something Riley would say. Scott

Very sorry to hear about your loss. My prayers are with you. Scott

Got the complete collection Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes movies. All 14 films. 12 restored by the UCLA Film & Television Archives. The six I've watched so far (includeing one that not did not need to be restored) all look and sound great. I also have the complete collection of Jeremy Brett's Sherlock Holmes on order. Should be getting that in next few days. Scott

Replaced a power window mechanism in the left rear door of my 2000 LeSabre. Watched a video first on YouTube on how to do it. That helped a lot. The total job maybe took a little more than than 30 minutes start to finish. Cleaning up the residue from the duct tape I used to hold the window closed over the last few months took longer than that to clean off. It was a perfect day to do the job. Not to hot. Not to cool. Got it done, so I can go back to driving with all of the windows down. I love to do that at this time of the year, before the weather gets too hot. Scott

I'm with Dave Van on this one. Seeing the photos above now have me thinking about adding this kit to my collect. Unlike Mr. Van, I'll be building mine stock. By the way Mr. Metzner, I like that green. What paint is that? Scott

Dave, you'll be getting more of my money soon, looking at those pictures. A great looking Pontiac. Scott

One of my all time favorite kits. I do wish Round 2 would reissue this kit in way that it could be built as "showroom" stock '63 Vette. Scott

Wow! Looks good. And left hand drive, I see. Scott

'89 was the big change for Thunderbird to IRS and other things. The '87 and '88 was basically a restyled body on the '83 - '86 chassis (actually the chassis goes back to 1980 on T-bird). The interior and dashboards were still very simular, if not identical, to the year before. In fact I've got a friend who gets quite perturbed when the conversation comes up about Motor Trend awarding their Car of the Year Award to the '87 Thunderbird. He drove an '83 for years and loved it. But, thought the restyled Bird of '87 too minor of a change to be considered a new car for Motor Trend's award. I'm not sure I disagree. Even though I really like the '87 and '88 T-birds. Scott

The building part is just fine. The only real problem with the kit, and this goes back to the origin issue back in 1966, is the interior. The kit has the the 1965 interior and dash, rather than the correct '66 style. AMT did not see a need to tool up a new or correct interior for the kit back in the day. Other than that, it's like any other kit tooled from that time period. It builds well, but is very low on detail on things like the chassis. Typical of other AMT annual kits of the time. Scott

For me the 919 dash shown above is too much and not very pretty. It takes more than a lot of stuff to give me entertainment and enjoyment in what I'm looking at. Part of what I love about the late 50's cars are the dashboard and fins. In either case neither may serve much function, but they are interesting to look at. Bob Spedding mentioned Chevy's high beam indicator shaped like their bow tie logo. I also like the Pontiac ones that are shaped like the profile of Chief Pontiac used in Pontiac's logos into the late 50's. I would who else did high beam, or other dash warning lights shaped like their logos? Scott

So when are you inviting me over for a nice trout dinner? Scott

I'd like to see a non Hurst version of this kit with a correct 4-4-2 grille. Lovely kit, other than the grille. Make mine a regular 4-4-2 convertible. Until then, I wait on picking one up. Scott

Like anything put out by humans, I'm sure it's not 100% accurate. But, it's as good or better than anything else I've seen out there. Scott

Another great review Tim. I don't need another '68 Roadrunner, but I'm tempted to pick one up just for the box art. Looking at the rest of your review, I don't see enough issues with AMT's kit that would make me pass on it, if I was looking to build a '68 Roadrunner. All the "flaws" are so minor, I never noticed them until they were pointed out. And no one at my local model car club ever pointed them out, or complained about them. It looks like a pretty good kit of '68 Roadrunner to me. Scott

I think your correct on it being Budd. Budd built a few different bodies for Ford, including the '55, '56, '57 Thunderbirds. Despite it being built by Budd, I'd be willing to bet the C-series, like the 2-seat birds, were designed by Ford in house. Scott

The Directory of Model Car Kits by Bill Coulter and Bob Shelton is a pretty good source. They published several of these guides. I two different editions of The Directory of Model Car Kits, American Manufacturers Only, with Price Guide, 1/24-1/25 Scale. They measure about 8 1/2 by 11 inches. An inch or so in thickness. Soft cover, spiral bound. I don't know if they're still be published or not. I would check Amazon or eBay for. Scott

I have a book put out by Toyota talking about the cars in their museum. One of the cars there is a reproduction of Toyota AA. They could not find an original, so they decided built a new one using the original blueprints. They do have an original AB in their colletion. But back to the AA. Toyota openly admits the chassis and engine are copies of the contemporary Chevrolet of the time. And the body design was copied from the Chrysler Airflow. Scott