Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Mark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,273

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Mark

  1. Mark
    But these are cast in two halves, all of the halves are the same. They are all going the wrong way on one side of the slick, and one of those wrong-way sides faces out.
  2. Mark
    MPC made snow tires in 1/25 scale. They substituted them for military tires in their Jeep kit. The recent Round 2 Jeep in the Godzilla movie packaging will have four (five?) of them. MPC's AMC Pacer kits included two of them also. I'm not sure about the reissue '78 Pacer though. (The '77 station wagon is an AMT kit, it never had them.)
  3. Mark
    Any of the styrene wrinkled slicks out there should be done correctly, at least the few I have seen are correct (mirror image, correct for both sides). Vinyl tires are more costly to tool, so short cuts like the "wrong on one side" deal seem to be the norm. Though it shouldn't be...all they would have to do is create two masters as with the plastic ones. Cutting the tool wouldn't cost more one way or the other.
  4. Mark
    On eBay already? The Great Unloading has commenced...
  5. Mark
    No, they wrinkle the same way so they are wrong on one side.
  6. Mark
    These auctioneers have a habit of leaving huge gaps, hoping potential bidders will draw their own conclusions. "Said to be" (by who?), "reputed to be", and so on...
  7. Mark
    I have heard/read that Clark did have the car since '65 (maybe '66). Probably not a lot of info on it from back then...how often did he bring it out, and where did he race it? He always was busy as an entertainer, even back then.
  8. Mark
    The AMT kit has the suspension detail molded as part of the chassis. It's based on the '63-'67 annual convertible kits. The Revell fender flares are a near-perfect fit on an AMT Gremlin body, if you switch them side for side (put the left side flare on the right side, and vice versa). A lot of 1:1 builders adapted Corvette flares to other cars because several suppliers made them. Get the cheapest ones (you're going to have to cut them up to some extent anyway) and have at it!
  9. Mark
    The AMT parts pack also has the in/out box you'll need to replace the transmission.
  10. Mark
    Separate rear flares...you sure that's not the Revell kit?
  11. Mark
    Mine arrived today, something I hadn't thought about was that Atlantis had to tinker with the Chevy engine a bit. The parts pack engine originally had street rod headers, they had to stub in the headers from the other small-block Chevy parts pack, most of which is now in the '57 Chevy kit. The original double kit with the Mooneyes dragster must have included both engine packs, with a bit of parts swapping between the two.
  12. Mark
    One part on the roadster chassis tree is needed for the dragster.
  13. Mark
    The Accelerator was issued immediately after the '68, and was largely based on it. The Greenwood GT came later and incorporated some alterations. A new issue would include alterations made for the Greenwood kit.
  14. Mark
    The 'Vette was not a "for 1968" kit. Those (non-stock) "for 1968" kits included the Camaro (essentially a detrimmed '67), Firebird (an alteration of the Camaro), Corvair (basically a '67 minus stock wheels), and "Chevrolet SS 427" ('67 Impala minus stock bumpers and wheels, and with a detrimmed body with no rear window opening). A weird one for sure, but try finding one now...
  15. Mark
    The original annual was not labeled "for 1968"! Though it probably should have been....
  16. Mark
    I never thought about it, but the ACcellerator paint scheme is similar to that of the Fireball 500 Barracuda. Last winter, I finally got the gumption to shoot that body (with spray cans yet!) and it came out great. Still have to clear coat it, it should be thoroughly gassed out by now...
  17. Mark
    Minilite wheels and hood scoop point to the mid-Seventies issue Greenwood GT, which was based on the 1968 only annual kit. AMT tooled an entirely new Corvette kit for 1969.
  18. Mark
    The AMT display drums came in most early Sixties annual kits, but few of the reissues. I found most of mine loose, or as leftovers on parts trees from built kits. There aren't many early Sixties AMT kits that were reissued intact in recent years, I'll see if any of them ('61 Galaxie, '62 Electra) still have (or ever had) that part.
  19. Mark
    The Scenes Unlimited drums look like modified versions of the "display brake drum" that came in a lot of early Sixties AMT annual kits. I picked up a bag of those at a show some time back, between those and the ones I already had I've probably got a dozen or so matched sets (as well as a couple of pairs of disc brakes). I've wanted to try those on something, just need to pick out some backing plates that match up with them. The display drums look a bit wide, but narrowing them a bit on the back side should make them workable. They're about the same diameter as the Revell Model A rod pieces.
  20. Mark
    They do seem to try to mix things up, so as to not send a large quantity of only one item to a particular store.
  21. Mark
    I would fit the floor first, doing whatever is needed to put both the inner rear wheel houses and the firewall in the correct places. After that, stretching the frame behind the transmission crossmember but ahead of any rear suspension attachment points should be simple.
  22. Mark
    Fitting the kit parts into a '70 GP body... -'67 Impala frame is too wide, would require spreading the rocker panels. A minute amount to be sure, but still should not be necessary. Rear of frame hangs out way too far, rear frame rails (between rear wheels) are on the wide side and could make fitting rear wheels problematic. '70 Monte frame is closer, wheelbase is short however. I would make the stretch somewhere in the side rails, but would fit the Monte floor to the body and then fit the frame.
  23. Mark
    You sure that's the Grand Prix frame? One of the measurements is labeled as being different for the convertible, but there was no GP convertible after '68.
  24. Mark
    I wonder where the 2" difference is on the 1:1 cars. Maybe the rear control arms are different, moving the rear axle back? Or is the frame just 2" longer in the middle?
  25. Mark
    I'd still go with the Monte Carlo, and stretch as needed, in an area where the frame is the widest.
×
×
  • Create New...