vamach1

Thanks. The #11 is the IMC kit. I have built both J cars too ut that's another story.

I finally finished TV kit thanks to HRM and the Fujumi kit.

Just absolutely beautiful and period correct. I will get to my full detail HRM Cobra someday. Here are some of my old builds from the 1990's.

Alright Alright Alright on the Boss 302. Kids just remember to paint it metallic blue, yellow, orange or white - the only stock colors for the 69. I'd have a heart attack if they did a T/A version.

I have not looked at the kit in years and now that you mention it there is a lot more than I expected for a snap kit. If I did not have 50 Mustangs to build I might get to it this decade. Maybe my 17 year old son will build it. He loves Ford GTs.

The Ford GT is a snap kit? That's a shame. I suspect it is the same as this kit.

Rare kit or not it is nice to see them built for fun.

Lets see that shotgun motor and where is the rubber on the rear wheel wells? It is too clean.

The FOMOCO hupcaps are resin and were in my stash so I am not sure of the source. However a EBAY seller may have them. I am wait to hear back from her >>> mustang_mom44820 Yes there is no non-vented hood available so you had to fill it with putty. Don't you love how they assumed the hood had vents like a 70 and of course never corrected the mold in 45 years when it was obvious there were no vents.

?pea green? Must be an acquired taste I guess. My point was why would you build a model in a color you do not like. I was simply pointing out all the things that make this diecast less than correct if you care. The real 71-73's seem to get further and further from how they looked when the rolled off the assembly line due to owners down the line changing them. The model companies (if they are doing any research) are basing remakes on whatever Google image comes up.

Well well well. I like the color but See my other Posts for my rants about how inaccurate this kit is. I'll list a few just for fun. The Mach1 decal looks crooked. The 429 never was and will neve be correct for a 71. No 71-73's had vents in the hood and that wing height is okay for a Honda. The rear decal and bumper are right for a 73 but wrong for a 72. I have also seen this diecast kit in silver, red. Black (with incorrect white stripes) . If you wan to build a more accurate 71/72 Mach1 - also see my other posts or comments on any post about 71-73 Mustangs. Yes that is my 72 Mach1 and here is a Danbury Mint diecast next to the Testors one with those gigantic hood hinges, and the AMT kit I built with a few extra.

Most muscle cars (and their non muscle) cousins had many engine options. You can build a 302 powered Mach1 or a plain jane coupe with a 428 or 429. I guess just a someone can build a dozen Mustangs of the same years 71/72 that are not the same (coupe, conv, sportsroof, Mach1, Boss, HO, Sprint, six banger, 302, 351 2v or 4v or 429 - the are all sorts of combinations would be akin to building a fleet of Bascar kits all with different markings with slightly different engines. What makes the car hobby so great is you can build factory stock or not, i.e., you are not limited to making an exact replica of anything. You can chose whatever color or wheels or engine you want and enter a show and not have anyone say this ot that is incorrect. Build what makes you happy which for most of us is not building the same exact thing twice.

Now that you mention it they look pretty ridiculous :-(

I guess in that scale the size difference is more noticeful.

I have hesiated for years from building several of my AMT and MPC 71-73 Mustangs due to the engine compartments being so lame. They are like promos but with incorrect engines, and the only extra being a battery. Brake booster and master cyclinder, windshield washer fluid container, shock tower brace - forget about it. So some of my build will not have an engine for now and some will include parts sourced from other kits and Danbury Mint diecasts to make them respectable. Here is a comparison on the Testors (based on the MPC mold) metal kit compared to the Danbury Mint. Why it may not be a fair comparison based upon the costs, when you see the potential it is hard to accept the far inferior attempt at a realistic engine compartment.

Seen today

Any pictures of the body? Is it the narrow one or full size that is roughly the same size as the street car?

Did you make any more progress on this one? The kit is far from perfect and I hope to build it someday. You have some great improvements already.

Sorry for upside pic.

I wish.

Looks like this one.

Here are pictures of mostly 73's. The front bumper is almost twice as large as a 72. For some reason you see a lot of 73s with 72 stripes.

MotorCity Resin grilles/bumpers and Various decals.

Both the AMT and MPC kits have too many faults to list but are pretty similar. To make a good street version you need an accurate front bumper, grille and of course a real 351C or 429CJ engine would be a bonus but neither kit ever had one. Motorcity Resin sells correct grilles and bumpers on ebay and Keith Marks has decals there are few alternatives (old Fred Cady). I am currently working on a stock MPC 73 Mach1 with an outsourced 351C, grafting a 67/70 Revell engine compartment. No matter what you build (street or race car) be prepared to fix as many shortcomings as you want. My #1 gripe with the MPC kit is the vents in the hood. No 71/73 Mustang had these vents.