Mark

With all of the body/chassis attachment back there, I wouldn't even try to open the tailgate on that wagon. I'd bet the rear load floor in the interior isn't where it should be (probably too high relative to the lower edge of the tailgate). A headache from the get-go IMO.

Knowledge is being aware that tomatoes are by definition a fruit. Wisdom is knowing you shouldn't put them in a fruit salad...

Too, Chrysler was starting to cut corners here and there (decals instead of pot metal emblems, for example). They were already on the road to the financial troubles that came to a head later in the decade. The fact that they didn't have a domestically built subcompact (instead having to import them) was the first sign of trouble...

Prior to the mid-late Eighties, the bodies were fiberglass. I'd go with simulating raw fiberglass: dull medium gray (which could vary in tone here and there, as they were laid up by hand). Some overspray of the exterior color(s) wouldn't be out of place either, I doubt anyone did any painting or masking on the inside of the body. If they did, they probably just blew some flat black over everything but the interior "tin".

Chrysler had already started with the flip-out quarter glass, on the Roadrunner coupe (and presumably the Belvedere two-door as well). Too, it looks a lot cleaner than a framed quarter window. On some cars the roll-down quarter glass really didn't make much sense. I remember my dad's '59 Chevy Bel Air two-door sedan, the rear windows only went down a couple of inches. My '62 Fairlane is similar in that respect. As for every car having power windows now, it probably just makes it easier to build the door with the guard beam that has to be in there. The power regulator with a cable setup to raise and lower the glass takes up less space than a manual crank setup, and most of it can be located wherever the engineers want to put it. When the doors were a lot wider than they are now, everything was easier to design.

Certified used. Yes, we certify that it is used!

The new-tool '71 Duster also has quarter windows that are massively curved compared to those in the original kit. But then again, they should be. The original side glass is too flat. The 1:1 Duster/Dart Sport side glass is way more curved than that of the sedans and hardtops. Maybe the newer kit has it too curved, but that doesn't take anything away from the originals being overly flat. And, don't leave the quarter window glass out when building one. Those windows didn't roll down in the 1:1 car, they flipped out a couple of inches at the back.

Those do look like the Merc pieces. Another option in some cases is to grab a piece of sheet plastic and a steel ruler, and scribe a set. The trick is to scribe the things consistently without breaking through, so you can bend them without the ribs separating. You'd make them extra long then trim to length after forming them to shape. The tendency is to bear down harder at the center when scribing, so you've got to avoid that. I did a set like that for a (stalled) "easyrod" (one of those early Nineties Thunderbirds with a fiberglass shoebox Ford front clip). The bumpers came out pretty decent, I should throw that thing together even if it's about as ugly as the 1:1 versions turned out. Another way to make a bumper might be to build it up over a wooden form (balsa would even work). Form a piece of really thin sheet plastic over it (no more than .020") then add the ribs with Evergreen half round stock. Again, you'd go extra long, you can glue the ends to the form because those parts will get trimmed off later. The bent Evergreen strip sandwiched with the bent sheet plastic backing piece should hold whatever shape it is formed against. I haven't done a set this way, it's just an idea at this point.

Sometimes the glass isn't half full or half empty...it's too big...

If you are making or improvising a jig for a project, include a center line over the length of the jig. Just my opinion, but working from a center line makes getting everything symmetrical a lot easier. It's even better when you are building offset stuff like oval track chassis (where certain aspects of the design are deliberately off-center).

Those wheels are from some other kit, they're only being used to show the deterioration of the other parts.

Some issues of the AMT '40 Ford coupe and sedan delivery have a set. They're on the thick side. Most of the recent Round 2 reissues do not have them. The Three Stooges issue sedan delivery does have them. If you see an Ertl or RC2 issue kit and it has the "flipper" wheel covers, it will also have the ribbed bumpers. The Monogram '40 Ford pickup had a fantastic set of them, but only the first issue with all of the customizing parts. Later issues don't have them. The '49 Merc pictured has what looks like the Roy Brizio "Briz bumpers": aftermarket extruded aluminum units. They'd cut the extruded units to length and shape the curvature of them for many applications: customs, VW Beetles, and so on. Those were briefly popular but I'm not sure those are being made anymore.

Maybe the air cleaner was planned for that kit but had to be left out for whatever reason. Save them for a build that has that air cleaner.

The revised trunk lid was phased in during 1971.

The two kits were created many years apart by different people, so expect to do some work (maybe a lot of work) to use parts from one with the other.

At the first construction company I worked for (1978-89) the guy who ran the equipment yard had an office full of promo items. When the company hit the skids towards the end of my time there, the main office was actually moved to the equipment yard location. None of that stuff was still there by then...it all probably went home with somebody.

Unlike the Chevy pickup (present version is a combination of AMT and MPC tools, both of which were created by AMT) there isn't any crossover between the Chevelles. MPC's is somewhat simplified (rear seat molded as part of the interior bucket, and I think part of the exhaust system is on the chassis). Both companies' Chevelle kits have been through numerous changes however.

There's a small local show in my area every year devoted mainly to diecast "miniature" construction equipment. Even in smaller scales, some of the stuff if HUGE.

Walk a mile in another man's shoes...by the time he figures out what's going on, you're a mile away and you've got his shoes...

There's probably a 1958 copyright date on the box and/or instruction sheet.

If you are still apprehensive, try gluing together pieces of the kit's parts trees with the adhesive that you would prefer to use.

The only Revell kits I have found to be more brittle than average are some mid-Seventies kits. And even then, it has only involved certain colors, particularly the metallic bronze and green.

The Revell Mercury is either a '55 or (most likely) '56. If it is the 1958 issue, it is a non-stock '56. That said, the 1/32 scale car kits were always molded in styrene, same as modern car kits. Any adhesives you use with other car kits will work just fine with the Mercury kit.

The "Duster" Dart first appeared in the early Eighties, prior to MPC being acquired by Ertl. MPC tooled a new, funny looking hood scoop which was taller but still fit over the same hole as the original one. The original scoop doesn't fit over the dual quad Hemi, only the single four-barrel carb version. The tool was probably marked somewhere as a Duster, as the Dart was converted from the '75 Duster which in turn had evolved from the '71 annual kit.

Driving for Petty Enterprises, in a Superbird as I recall. As has been said already, the Bird was used only on the long tracks. The regular Roadrunner was used on the short tracks, as well as the handful of dirt tracks NASCAR still ran on as late as 1970.