Mark

AMT and MPC both had '74-'77 kits. MPC only for '78. MPC had the promo model deal, they did promos for '74 and '75. Besides the hood and grille, '74 has the gas cap below the styling crease on the quarter panel. It was moved up for '75.

Revell '64 Impala engine probably has more correct accessories like exhaust manifolds and air cleaner. The later Nova engine is a 350 with later external parts.

If the original builder used cheap off-brand glue, early/ineffective "non-toxic" cement, or something not intended for plastic, it may peel off. Otherwise, you are cutting and grinding. If the clear parts have whitened in the areas where cement was applied, you're out of luck and will have to replace the parts. The van looks like an early one with separate hood and side panel inserts. With that one, I would make saving the body top priority. You can pick up a more recent reissue to get new windows, chassis parts, and chrome. With the Chevelle, again save the body and chrome parts if you must prioritize. A later issue '70 or '72 kit uses the same chassis, engine, glass, and interior.

Roger Waters' father was killed in battle in 1944, never having seen his son. From what I have read, he was never found.

HL does not stock every currently available car kit from any manufacturer. Like any other store, someone there makes decisions regarding which items to carry and which will not be stocked...model kits are no exception.

The pickup version of the Willys wasn't available until 1969; by then the Deuce coupe kit was out of production. The bed might be from a kit or could be scratchbuilt. Sheet plastic wasn't common back then, so it could be balsa or even cardboard. If you haven't got the article to follow, just scratch one, nobody will know the difference.

Someone ought to be horsewhipped for this...

The pickup version appears to use mostly parts from the '32 coupe kit. The engine is a small-block Chevy with six carbs and curved intake stacks. The Moon discs and chromed rear wheels are in early (pre-1976) issues of the coupe kit. The '34 pickup was first issued in 1962, but that bed does not look like even a modified version of what came in the pickup. I'm not sure if this build was covered in an early issue of CAR MODEL. I'd scratch the bed, it would be easy enough to do.

Auto World included building instructions for the Shamrock with every Styline Corvair kit they sold. They did that with several other cars featured in CAR MODEL magazine early on.

Nope, no bucket seats in the Impala, other than the SS. The Caprice had something called a "strato-bench" which appears to have a fold-down center arm rest. Impalas were limited to a bench seat. Since the rear seat has to be altered anyway, may as well rework both seats at once and make them match. The Caprice conversion is a no-go, no Caprice unique wheel covers and no photoetch emblems either.

Yeah, I dug out the brochure...looks like no bucket seats in non-SS Impalas. That's a switch from '66...one of my brothers parted out a '66 Caprice four-door hardtop, and I'm certain he got a pair of buckets, a console, even the gauge package out of that car along with a four-barrel 327 and Turbohydramatic. Anyway, the MCG photoetch set has non-SS Impala scripts included.

The store that is on my way home from work had one (repeat: had one, had none after I was there). That was the only new kit they got in since reopening a couple of weeks ago. Now to drag out the brochures...was the four-door hardtop available with bucket seats and console? Wheel covers...fake mags from the Lindberg '66 Chevelle, or wire spoke from the Polar Lights '64 GTO? Next, check my MCG photoetch stash to see if I have the '67 Impala set, then think about adding a vinyl roof to really load this thing up...

Are you looking for a specific brand tire, or just wide whitewalls? A number of Revell kits include tires with separate whitewall inserts, a number of Round 2 AMT kits include tires with printed wide whitewalls. The Round 2 tires are available in a separate pack of eight tires.

I too looked at converting the AMT Malibu body to stock (including the roof) some years ago. First time around, I was looking at using a second pair of rear wheel openongs...this time, if I ever get to it, I'll probably use sheet plastic and epoxy putty. I've been working through this whole "shutdown", but I have put the spare time to use doing repairs on bodies and parts that take a lot of patience. The approach I would take with the Malibu is the same as I did with a '67 Fairlane, restoring cut rear wheel openings back to stock. I work in one plane first, restoring the lost material to the panel and smoothing it up. The Fairlane has one styling crease (should have two; AMT eliminated the lower one, why I don't know). After getting new material into the panel to fill the cut wheel opening and clean up the styling crease, I then cut the wheel opening and added the flare, then puttied that in. After getting the "fillet" from the quarter panel to the flare, I then thinned the flare to match the other side (which had the complete panel replaced; I had two left side panels but no right side). Cleaning up the inside of the flare by trimming it level with the inside of the fender completes the job.

Maybe use a chunk of the Monza rear wheel flare to stretch the front one?

Diecasts are generally all over the place. There are a lot of "1/24 scale" cars that measure out smaller, some measure out larger. The Ertl Bantam is one (about 1/20, but I'll admit to never having checked one), the Johnny Lightning bullet nose Studebaker is another (if I remember right that one is about 1/22). And the "1/25 scale" car kits don't escape criticism either. ALL Jo-Han AMC products from 1961 on are 1/24 scale. Their '62 Studebaker Larks are about 1/23. My best guess would be that Jo-Han used the larger scales to make the models look right with existing tires. A while back, I measured an IMC (Lindberg) Dodge A-100, and found the major dimensions to be about 1/25.7 scale. The only way to know for certain is to measure the item in question and compare with the specs of the 1/1 vehicle.

The fiberglass one was a low-dollar project, the guy couldn't afford a steel one or a manufactured 'glass body so he made his own. He'd built several of the AMT kits (like a lot of kids did back then; they often bought more than one) so he used that one as the pattern. One thing on the Pro Shop kit: as I recall the box art car used stock wheels and tires from the '34 Ford sedan or 5W coupe kits.

I don't know if the guy ever finished it, but I remember seeing a piece in a magazine some time ago about a 1:1 fiberglass '32 roadster that was scaled up from an AMT kit body, sectioning and all...

Stock engine is the base four cylinder, optional engine is an early Chrysler Hemi. Everything is simplified (rear axle molded as part of the chassis, oil pan is part of engine block halves, interior has side panels and seat as a single part) but the kit does have nostalgia value. Some aspects are off a bit (slightly "sectioned" body sides, stock wheels are undersize) but assembled, it does look like a '32 Ford roadster.

This is the old pro stock kit (last issued as the Twister Vega, but the body was the '78 Monza S). The body and a few other parts are new. The old body got changed every year, so they did a whole new one. Later on there will be a 1974 version, with another new body.

The rear bumper is definitely from the Modified Stocker. The front bumper shown is most likely from the "tiger stripe box" issue. The Modified Stocker front bumper had blanked out headlights.

I've got a front bumper from an Elegance Series kit, it is molded in yellow and much of the plating is gone. The plate may be blank. I do know the "tiger stripe box" kit had "AMT" plates, and the Show & Go kit had blank plates.

I only just noticed this: check the angle of the GTO on the Elegance Series box, then compare with the Modified Stocker box...

This version of the kit will be way better than the original. The original issue from 1973 has a STOCK chassis, molded-in exhaust detail and all. The rear wheel openings on the original were radiused, round, no flare, like an old gasser. I don't think the Jenkins Competition decal for the quarter panel even fit where it was supposed to go, in the area over the wheel opening. I'm getting to the point where the chassis won't really matter, as long as the stance is correct. I have the parts to do a more correct Toy IX (which had stock front suspension when first built), maybe I'll get to that at some point. For now though, I'd like to have one just sitting in the display case, and nobody will ever see underneath (maybe not even under the hood).

The chassis is similar to stock except for the lack of molded-in exhaust detail and the narrow rear axle. The MPC pro stock kits really didn't pay much attention to chassis detail (some had molded-in exhaust detail). Chassis is best described as "it holds the rest of the car up". To be fair though, reference material is tough to find, as those guys really didn't want anyone looking under the car back then.