Mark

The 1:1 wasn't a funny car, it was a gasser (two seats required for Gas class). The 1:1 had the adjustable wheelbase and the engine could be shifted fore/aft to run as a gasser or an altered. Gas class would probably have the engine in the forward position and the shorter wheelbase, Altered class would have the opposite setup.

There's definitely a learning curve with resin casting. I started messing with it in the early Eighties, long before there was much of anything available in the way of car parts offered. I looked to the railroad and sci-fi/fantasy modelers and their magazine articles for ideas on getting started and where to get supplies. I tried several mold materials, several different types of casting resin, spent a lot of time, and saw a lot of junk parts before getting results. I later sold thousands of parts, but still haven't gotten the hang of casting certain things. Same goes for photoetch parts: did artwork for a couple of those, and spent a couple hundred dollars on each project before seeing the first parts. Those were done without the use of a computer or an artwork program (at least by me); it could be done easier/better/more cheaply/without outside help now. You've got to stick with it, it takes time before you start seeing results. Even if you ultimately decide not to continue, the effort wasn't wasted; you've still got an appreciation of the effort that goes into making something. If I learned something in the process, I don't consider the time to be wasted even if I never use the information again.

Those grooved M/T cheater slicks are currently available, in the '67 Charger and '75 Dart reissues. I've got a pair of those molded in white plastic; never figured out what kit those were in. Someone once told me the early production '67 Charger kits had them. I've had two of that kit over the years (still have one); both have/had the vinyl ones.

It's actually based on the original AMT '67/'68 Mustang annual kit (conversion to the Shelby version was done in '68) so it goes together pretty easily. I built one in the mid-Eighties; the only thing I remember was that the body had a few sink marks in various places. The first couple of issues had separate clear red taillight lenses; later issues have the taillight detail engraved into the chrome surround panel which doesn't look as good. Copies of the original parts are available in resin though. The front inner fender detail (in the engine compartment) isn't correct. The AMT '67 Shelby GT-350 kit has a more accurate chassis, you might want to take a look at one of those to see what the inner fenders should look like.

AMT changed hands at some point in '78 (sold out to Lesney) so the "unfinished" theory might be correct. Checking the '79 Lesney Products catalog, they've got three Penske team car kits, all announced as May '79 releases. For those to have gotten out in/around May of '79, in all likelihood they were started earlier, by the original AMT company.

Revell bought the remaining complete/bagged Corvette GS kits. There's an eBay seller who is selling bagged GS kits minus decals/PE parts for $7 apiece (I bought one the other day). He also had some incomplete McLaren Can-Am kits, and I'm pretty sure he has some of the aircraft kits also. I'm surprised Revell hasn't picked up the tooling for all of the AM kits.

AMT first started doing Indy car kits (again) in '73 or '74. I never compared any of them to one another, but I wonder if the '79 kit is based on the earlier ones. Generally, with racing subjects, the first versions produced will be the most accurate. As the tool is updated to produce later versions that didn't yet exist and couldn't have been planned at the beginning, compromises are made. Usually they focus on the exterior details, the stuff under the skin will be hit or miss. That's true with Indy, NASCAR, drag cars, or any other racing subject. The drag cars were usually further away from the 1:1 right from the start because the kit would often share the body and other main parts with a showroom stock version kit. As for the vague locator points and missing small details, a lot of kits (not just AMT's) were like that in that era. AMT started tooling some of their kits offshore in the Seventies also; not sure if the Indy cars were among them.

Whatever search parameters you use on eBay, you're going to get a bunch of totally unrelated stuff along with it. Gotta pump up those listing numbers...

Around the same time kids' birthdays became "birthday week"...

Linking up with a company that has a professional-quality printer would be the way to go. Do the designing yourself, then use their equipment to create the part. The "home use" equipment will no doubt get better and cheaper, but then again so will the professional-quality stuff. The company doing the printing can afford to upgrade their equipment more frequently than you can. When technology is relatively expensive, don't buy it. Rent it or lease it. Anyone who runs an office knows this.

Limited production...limited to the number they think they can sell. It'll be back in five years or so, tops.

Every so often, when I take my truck to the dealer for an oil change, I'll see someone walk out to pull it in to the service area. He'll open the door, then close it and walk back to the service counter. Then someone else walks out, gets in, and pulls it in. The ultimate anti-theft device today would probably be a three-speed with a column shift.

What changed? Carroll Shelby is no longer with us. That car will fetch top dollar. Think of the people whose hands touched it: Shelby, Dean Moon, Dean Jeffries, and others...

LHS in my area still has a couple of them. If you pound the ground, you can turn one up.

Then why have it? I'd rather DO the driving than, essentially, watch the car drive itself. Less driver input and involvement will lead to more distractions. Same goes for those stupid rear view cameras...the manufacturers still tell you to turn around and look while backing up. Get rid of that garbage, and just make the windows big enough to actually see out of. As for the stick vs. automatic discussion, every vehicle I have owned as a daily driver has been a stick (though only three in 37 years). There aren't too many available now, and that number might be down to zero by the next time I buy a vehicle...

Too small a sample out there right now...get enough of them on the road to actually matter, and the numbers will zoom upward...

The Bricklin would probably do really well as a resin kit, if done well. I wouldn't want one, but I'd bet there's enough of a customer base out there to support a decent kit.

Good luck! The T-310 is tougher than the annual, though back in the day it didn't sell. I bought one of those on closeout AFTER the Modified Stocker was issued. Same goes for the '65 Olds, another great kit that got hacked up. I'd suspect that the Modified Stocker series consisted of kits that hadn't sold well in their most recent issue, and the MS was to be the last go-round for those before they hit the scrap pile. Strangely, all of them still exist and have been reissued, except for the GTO which was restored to stock (albeit not too well).

I remember seeing a Delorean at one of those new-car shows way back when...easily the worst build quality of anything there, and there were some other pretty bad ones on the floor that day.

The T-310 (from 1969, I think) is the only 3-in-1 reissue on the '65. AMT reissued a bunch of '65 annual kits in that period. Most were straight reissues but the Fairlane is tweaked a bit. The annual had the puny compact car tires, the T-310 has Firestone Supreme whitewalls. The wheel covers are retooled too (13" replaced by 14"; if you find a set of these you could use them on a more "mainline" '66 build). The custom wheels are different, and a couple of the custom parts are reworked a bit. The reissues of the Modified Stocker has the tool "unblocked", putting in a bunch of parts that weren't in the first Mod Stocker issue. I haven't looked at one in a while, but I think the custom front end parts are in there, as well as the whole 289 engine except for the air cleaner. That said, the Modified Stocker series brought about the butchery of several great 3-in-1 annual kits, this being one of them.

You could make a small fortune with those two kits. Provided you start with a large fortune, that is...

Flat-spotted roofs have been a problem with a couple of other Revell kits ('57 Chevies come to mind). I might pass on this one...same coupe body style as the IMC/Testors kit that I've already got on the shelf, and that one is already paid for...

For a '67, you'll want the Fairlane/Cyclone kit piece. Both kits include two transmissions (C-6 and four-speed). The intake manifold has an oil filler tube; I'm not sure if the '66 would have had that because there's also a filler cap on one valve cover.

I don't have a '78 annual, but do have some of the others including the Skyhawk and the yellow "Pro Street" issue. I didn't do a concentrated search for that one (bought mine almost as an afterthought) but the yellow one (on paper) shouldn't be a big deal. It may have been produced by both MPC (pre-Ertl) as well as Ertl. It has a set of four-lug Centerline wheels which were probably only in that issue. The '78 annual might be tougher because it was the fourth annual and the 1:1 hadn't really changed all that much. I remember picking up one or two of the early annuals on closeout back in the day because the engine in these kits was pretty good compared to other small-blocks. I've been wanting to build a pro stock version using the chassis and parts of the interior from the Twister Vega, so I was looking more for a '75 or '76. I had a '78 kit back in the day, can't remember specifically what was in it except that it was changed around a bit from the earlier annuals.

I don't know that the '78 (Monza Mouse) annual would be so much tougher to find than any of the other annual kits. The later, molded in color Monzas do seem to be more common though. With the MPC kits, I'd put the one-shot Buick Skyhawk at the top of the heap price-wise, then the '75, '76, and '77 annuals, then the '78, with the molded in color variations at the bottom.