StevenGuthmiller

This has pretty much become standard for me. One per year.......If I'm lucky! Steve

I see as well that the OP added engine wiring. I would also like to see how any changes done in the engine compartment may interfere with the hood fitment. But in the end, this is a textbook example of why you should ALWAYS, no matter how well, or how poorly you feel that the kit is engineered, test fit and mock-up throughout the entire project. You should never have any surprises such as this unless you allow them to happen. Apparently it's quite possible to get this right. Steve

Regardless, I'm sure that there's a simple explanation and a relatively easy fix for the situation. It's a simple hinge set up. It's not brain surgery, and I'm sure this problem wasn't built into the kit in the 70s. Tape the hood into the position that it needs to be in while closed, flip the model over, and see what needs to be done with the hinges. Worst case scenario, you have to modify or make some new hinge pieces. My personal opinion without seeing what's going on underneath?.........The hinges are installed incorrectly. Steve

That won't change the fact that the rear deck and quarters look like a pallet full of batteries were dropped on the trunk lid! I was a little surprised when this thread came up. I hadn't really looked at this kit until now, but now that I have, it's pretty bad. Surprising considering the fact that people are usually praising Revell's work, and bashing AMT and MPC. One thing I gotta say is, while a lot of the old MPC and AMT molds are pretty well hashed at this point, producing a number of problems, at least for the most part, the bodies were pretty accurate. I'm kind of glad that I'm building pretty much nothing but vintage kits these days. At least I don't have to deal with this stuff. Steve

That's why a person should have all of this stuff worked out and pre-fitted before ever touching a can of paint or a tube of glue. Yeah, I know, everybody would like it if every kit fell together, but they don't, so.........yeah. By the way, that looks like an assembly issue to me. Check your hinge set up. Some times the instructions are unclear, or completely incorrect. I don't see any reason whatsoever that your problem can't be corrected with a little thought. Steve

https://www.libuickclub.org/buick-engines Steve

http://pontiacpower.org/enginecolor.htm Steve

Yes, my '54 Hudson, and at least one of my Ford pickups was like this, but it's such a fine texture that I don't see it being a problem. (unless you're planning on spraying one coat of paint over bare plastic) Steve

No. Steve

Looks to me that if you really want to go down this rabbit hole, you've got a lot of work ahead of you. Along with the drooping rear quarters, just at a quick glance, it appears to me that the front quarter also has a slight droop, not to mention that it appears that both the front and rear wheel openings are shaped wrong. Good luck with that! Edit: The side scoops appear to be too short and dumpy on the kit body as well. Steve

"What's good for General Motors is good for America". We get what we get because that's what they give us. Not like say 1970, when Dodge offered you a choice of 27 different colors for your new Charger, and let the consumer decide. Now, it's more like, "here's what you're gonna get, 'cause we say so". What it al boils down to in my view is that it's so much easier for the manufacturers to offer "packages" instead of allowing the consumer to pick individual options as you could in years past, and likewise, it's much easier for them to offer 6 color choices than it is to offer 27. It all comes down to stream lining the production process and producing as many drab toasters as possible to make as much money as possible. I guess that they're businesses like anyone else, so you can't begrudge them that. Steve

From the photos posted above, I see that the rear of the rear window opening needs to be a little more squared off at the top and vertical, but in my opinion, it's not particularly glaring. The rear wheel openings on the AMT '68/'69 B-bodies on the other hand, appear much more obvious to me, as there's not even a basic match in shape to the front wheel opening as there should be. I suppose that if it was a big enough issue with someone, the rear window of the duster may be able to be corrected, at least to some extent, by removing the drip rail molding and squaring the opening with a very thin wedge shaped shard of plastic at the rear of the opening, slightly larger at the bottom than the top, and then replacing the molding. My opinion? In all honesty, I'm not entirely sure that it's worth the effort. It sometimes occurs to me that occasionally people get too hung up on things that they consider paralyzing issues, like this window shape question, and they'll then spend hours to modify or replace a top, and then in the end, they'll still leave the cheesy door handles, or some other unrealistic or "less than accurate" detail unaddressed. Our quest for accuracy occasionally gets the better of us I presume. Steve

I think sometimes, even noticing some of these inaccuracies can be proportional to ones interest in a particular vehicle. If a particular vehicle is of high interest to someone, they’re much more likely to be aware of inaccuracies that most others might not even realize exists. And then there’s the question of how difficult or time consuming a particular modification might be. Often, it might just not be worth the effort to someone. As an example, on my last project, an AMT 1964 Pontiac Bonneville, the Bonneville script on the rear quarter panel was much larger than it should have been. I was aware of this inconsistency, but then the question became what are the options for changing it, and if possible, is it worth the effort? In the end, I would have preferred to correct it, but after weighing the options, I decided that in this circumstance, I was better off just leaving well enough alone. At the end of the day, I don’t believe that the appearance suffered enough to justify the work that might have been involved to correct it. Sometimes one just has to pick his battles. Steve

And sometimes you have to make decisions about whether it’s worth it or not. Steve

Interior color is always one of our biggest considerations when deciding on a new car color combination, although options are extremely limited. I refuse to buy a car with a gray interior! I can't think of anything more depressing than driving around in something surrounded in gloomy, monotone gray! Our blue Honda S-2000 has a blue interior, and our pearl white Acura MDX, an "Espresso" interior. Steve

Not only that, but “bright” doesn’t necessarily translate into “interesting”. Steve

Nobody will ever take chances like this again! Steve

I guess that most people today want their car’s color to match their car’s soul. Drab and boring! ? Steve

Agreed! Same reason I’m no fan of “resto-mods”. I want my “old cars” to feel like old cars. I can get all the “mod” I can stand with my 2023 Acura. Steve

Which is exactly why they should go in a "different" direction. I think we've already had enough redundancy. Anyway. It's not going to happen, so there's that. Steve

Well, then why not do another’57 Chevy? Or maybe another Mustang or Camaro kit? It’s unlikely to happen anyway, so I shouldn’t have to jump off a bridge. ? Steve

I would hope that if Tamiya were to jump into the classic American car market, they’d go for something a little more unusual. Do we really need “another” ‘32 Ford? ? Steve

https://www.madmodeling.com/ Steve

It scares me a little sometimes! Steve

I agree. Doesn't necessarily need to be an old car to have the same experience either. Steve