StevenGuthmiller

Yes,the kit came with a pair of chrome "rings", (bezels) that slipped over the pins at the base of the lenses. Steve

This is part of the reason why I really dislike working with resin. Some years ago, I stripped some paint off of an older Modelhaus resin ‘56 Cadillac with Easy Off oven cleaner. No apparent immediate damage, but some years later when I pulled it out again, it was full of cracks. In all fairness, I don’t know if this was due to the oven cleaner, or just age, but I’ve heard enough horror stories about resin and some of the strange things that it will do over time, to give me real pause about investing too much time or money into resin kits. Steve

I don’t know if that confirms or contradicts what is commonly seen in the vintage kit world. Very often, hard tops are much more difficult to find than convertibles. Just as examples, the AMT 1958 Ford, 1960 Mercury and 1960 Buick convertibles are much easier to come by than the hard tops. Don’t really know the dynamics of why that’s the case, but it has been the case. Steve

I understand Peter, but to me, it’s still a floor care product, and I’m just not comfortable with the prospects of it’s long term durability. I am confident however, that automotive clear lacquer is going to last at least for the remainder of my lifetime. I don’t see any advantage with using Future, other than possibly a time advantage, but I’ve never been the type to look for short cuts anyway. I can understand some of the uses like what you’ve described above, but you’re not likely to ever see me putting it over any of my paint jobs. Steve

I always try to look at any materials that I use in the construction of my models from a basic common sense point of view. That’s not to say that there aren’t plenty of materials that were not designed to be used on a model that may work fine, but there are a lot of things used by modelers today that I just don’t trust, and if there are viable alternatives that work as well that don’t appear to cause issues down the road, it just makes sense to me to use them instead. Baking soda, or powder would worry me a bit. Just for the fact that it’s a “food stuff” would cause me pause, and being as there is a good alternative for carpets, (embossing powder) which is essentially a plastic, it only makes sense that from a longevity standpoint, it seems much less risky than using something that is used in baking. I have these same sort of worries about a lot of other materials used by today’s hobbyists. Masking tape for vinyl tops is one. Masking tape was never designed to be permanent, so in my view, it’s a much better, (and more realistic looking) alternative to use paint, which I know isn’t going anywhere. Floor polish versus clear lacquer or other form of clear paint is another that I have little confidence in. The most recent material that I stay away from is Molotow ink for chrome trim. Another material that was invented for graffiti art, and never really meant to be permanent, I’m much more comfortable using foil, which is metal and will theoretically last darn near forever, versus a very fragile ink which I have no reason to believe will hold up for the long haul. I believe in letting others be my guinea pigs for me, and in the mean time, I’ll stick with my tried and true “old school” approaches that I know will work without giving me any headaches down the road. Steve

Fireball Modelworks still carries them. Steve

Aaah, but with an up top, it won't matter! Steve

I didn't know that there was never a '65 Wildcat convertible in kit form. Ya learn something new every day. Steve

The door should be completely smooth in the area of the door handle. Steve

Okay, now here come the complaints on the '68! Being as they were re-engineering the body, it would have been great if they would have eliminated the incorrect upper body crease on the doors. But, I suppose that they're not that difficult to remove. I'm sure most will just leave them as is. Second, I really wish that they would have eliminated the molded in seat belts! Took me a considerable amount of time to get rid of them on my project. I would prefer not to have to do that again! But again, an item that most will probably be fine with. For the record, if I were to build one of these, it's still gettin' a chassis swap. PS. Who's 3-D printing, or resin casting the up-top for this one? Steve

I agree. I have no interest in ever building another Monogram '69, but I would love to have another crack at the MPC '69 R/T.......especially with an upgraded grille and interior! Steve

Speaking of early Barracudas, I wonder how difficult it would be to take the Hemi Under Glass cuda back to stock......or even if there would be enough of a market for it. I expect maybe so? Seem to get pretty good prices for the original annuals. Steve

I get the point Roger! ? Steve

Well, I guess you caught me. ? I may not have been entirely clear in that post, but all that I meant by that statement is that as I scroll through any given thread, I will personally rarely open links contained therein. If I am asking a direct question of members myself, in my own thread, I absolutely will open them. After all I asked for the information. Anywhere else, I’m not necessarily interested in fishing through the possible dead ends and misdirections that can come with links, unless it’s something that expressly interests me. Sorry if I was unclear with that declaration. Steve

I have a solution. How about a 1969 Dodge Coronet 500? ? Steve

I could see the ‘69 R/T, but I have the suspicion that the availability of the old Monogram ‘69 Super Bee might have a bit of a cooling affect on that one. But hey, I’ve been wrong before. ? The ‘69 would absolutely need a new grille though. Steve

I’m in! ? Steve

That’s my general feeling as well. But, I’m reserving judgement until I know for sure. The red interior pictured above is a convertible, but that doesn’t mean that it’s correct. This is my problem. I don’t know what’s correct. Steve

Steve

Yes. It was transformed into this incarnation of ugliness. Depending on the availability of the original kit parts, I would think that this might be a very viable future Round-2 project. Maybe with the addition of the Lindbeg '66 Chevelle chassis and a Buick engine from the AMT '66 Riv kit? Are you listening Round-2? Steve

I appreciate that Bob. I agree 100%. The real fun in this hobby began for me when I lost the fear of modifying a vintage kit extensively. The fun for me is not in assembling a kit out of the box with maybe a few wheel and tire, engine intake, or other accessory additions, it's in completely revisiting all aspects of an old kit to bring it up to equal to, or better than, modern kit standards. The world is my oyster! Steve

But that's a little like apples to oranges. Same basic body styles, but different years might be part of the equation. Plus the fact that the AMT '61-'63 kits were "unibody" trucks could hold part of the appeal. If you read my post to David, you'll understand my theory.......as demented as it may be. The sustained value on those AMT Fords could be in jeopardy if Round-2 re-introduced the originals. Let me put it this way. I'm not even mildly entertaining the possibility of buying an original AMT 1964 Olds Cutlass convertible on ebay for $350.00 when I can pick one up any day of the week at my LHS for less than 10% of that. Steve

Not quite the same thing as the Revell Cuda is an all new tool. The vintage kit still has some allure to builders as well as collectors. It would kind of be like if the introduction of the new AMT '69 GTX would have some affect on the value of the original Johan GTX. Not likely. But in the same vein, if the original Johan GTX were to be reintroduced, I would expect that it would undoubtedly have an affect on the vintage GTX's value. At least for a sizeable fraction of the modeling population. Steve

I suspect as much. Steve

Thanks for the link Les! The very detailed pics will come in very handy......if this proves to be correct for a Fireflite convertible. I'm having difficulties with that question at the moment, but I'm sure that I'll find some resolution. Steve