Mark

They're all great in the first three years. GM in particular often gets good grades for "initial quality". Then the cost-cutting rears its ugly head, the chronic problems rise to the surface, and the resale value gets steered into the ditch like everything else they've been building...

Ah, the substituted parts! Didn't the Buick GN have a 150 series TH? Basically a Chevette transmission. My mom had trouble getting keys made for her Chevette because it was built near the end of the model year, with whatever they swept up off of the assembly plant floor. Funny, isn't it, that they always ran out of Oldsmobile or Buick engines and subbed Chevy engines. They never ran out of Chevy engines and substituted Cadillacs...

GM has been peddling junk for the last forty years. It started with them not taking the subcompact segment seriously, writing it off as unprofitable. (Ford did the same initially too; one of HFII's famous comments was "minicars, miniprofits"). Rusty Vegas followed by perpetual clouds of blue smoke, Chevmobiles, X-cars with dead-last technology (beam rear axles, pushrod engines with carburetors, four-speed manual transmissions), overpriced J-cars that all looked alike, the "sticker shock" that accompanied them into the showrooms, Buick V6 installations that were overmatched by the weight of the cars in which they were installed, diesel engines that didn't last, Pontiac Fieros built out of the parts bin, Cadillacs, Oldsmobiles, and Buicks that were basically Chevrolets with a few added plastic trim parts and stand-up hood ornaments, and so on. Yes, a lot of these were a long time ago. But each major blunder creates a lost generation of customers, as most of those people didn't come back. As parents, most of them probably wouldn't co-sign on their childrens' car loans for GM products either, creating another lost generation. And in general, they probably poor-mouthed GM to anyone who listened. GM is running out of generations of customers to lose.

Notox was marketed by MPC. They had a massive ad campaign to launch the stuff, but it wasn't around long. Even today, I've heard people say that when they disassemble an old builtup that was assembled with Notox, they can detect a lemony smell from the parts...

I'm pretty certain the "original box art" Switchers kit(s) were a DTR deal (not Model King or Stevens International).

That's the corporate line that they like to throw around, but in my commute I see a bunch of basic vehicles like the Nissan Versa, Toyota Yaris, and early Ford Escapes. Ford was selling Rangers up until the end; they realized people were buying them not necessarily wanting a truck, but rather a vehicle without a lot of expensive garbage on it. Say what you will about Chevy Cavaliers, but GM never had any trouble selling them either. The loaded cars sell because most people buy on impulse, want it NOW, and so they have to take what is on the lot. So the dealers put only loaded vehicles on the lot. "It's only ______ more per month anyway", is the rationale for dealers and most buyers. If you don't want power seats (who needs them when you are the only driver?) or a sunroof, you have to place an order and wait. I had to order my truck because I didn't want four-wheel drive or an extended cab, and all they had on the lot were high-end trucks. I've ordered the two trucks and one car that I bought new anyway...if you're spending the money, get exactly what you want, without paying for anything you don't want.

Parts content is pretty much the same. As a nostalgia exercise, they're pretty good, but the Revell Deuces have everything beat. If you are into '32 Fords, though, you'll probably want one of everything that's out there anyway. The '32 Ford kits (there were two, each with two body styles) are easier to assemble than the T-bucket Switchers kits.

I picked up one of those cheapo Dremel type tools when it was on sale, and I could use a coupon on top of the sale price. It's single-speed, so I can plug it into a Dremel speed control and slow it down to a crawl. Even on the lowest speed, the Dremel tools sometimes run faster than I'd like them to.

Around here, the only store that carried Advent kits was Woolworth's. They were already in decline then, and the couple of stores I knew about were sort of out of the way, so I wouldn't have gone there looking for kits. I was more into muscle car promos and kits at the time, so I wouldn't have given the Advent stuff a second glance anyway. I didn't realize how many different kits were sold in Advent packaging until I found the catalog years later. After finding it, I did notice more of the kits, but there are some I still haven't seen. Some may not have been produced.

Take the battery out of the calipers if you aren't going to use it for a while. Someone told me to do that when I got mine. At first I didn't take the advice seriously, but after going through the first battery without having used the thing too much, I now take the battery out. Safety goggles (or glasses) should go without saying, but then again we ought to be reminded every so often. The drill bits are okay for plastic, wood, and some metals. I've got a couple of the airbrushes (the cheapest one looks like a Badger knockoff); haven't tried them yet but they should be okay. The miniature files are okay for plastic. Lately I've been using the "diamond grit" ones; I've taken a liking to those. I've found super small ones on eBay. The dental picks and such are okay, but I can get those at automotive swap meets, cheaper and a wider selection. The sanding sponges come in handy once in a while. Not for fine work, but they are alright for knocking down excess filler. Not absolutely everything is offshore stuff. A while back, I saw Maglite flashlights there, and those were still made here (I checked the packaging). Some products will have "Made in USA" with an asterisk, and in fine print you'll find something along the lines of "refers to packaging only". Not the Maglites, at least the ones I've seen lately. I did buy one of those wooden tool chests (one with the lined drawers and the fussy little hardware all over it). I used a coupon, it was pretty cheap. Around here the flea market vendors want stupid money for beat-up old ones. But I did break my own rule about what to buy or not to buy at Snap-On East (Harbor Freight), and bought an air compressor there. Not a hobby type one, but a bigger one. Never again, the thing leaks oil. When I get my garage built, I'll buy a better one. But then again, half of the other stores out there are probably selling the same products, with a different brand name and a higher price.

Racing Champions (maker of diecast NASCAR items in different scales) bought Ertl, and with it AMT and MPC. They eventually moved away from NASCAR items and became RC2. In 2007, RC2 announced that, except for Johnny Lightning diecast cars, they were going to abandon "automotive" items (including shutting down AMT) and get more into educational toys, so they name-changed again to Learning Curve. The name change was made while AMT was still operating. Round 2 (not to be confused with RC2) stepped in and leased the rights to some of the "automotive collectible" brands (including AMT) in 2008. A couple years ago, Tomy bought out Learning Curve and sold to Round 2 the properties they had been leasing. So now Tomy owns Learning Curve (not sure if they still use the name) while Round 2 owns and operates AMT, MPC, and other car-related brands. Everyone has what they want now...

The sellers think the Advent kit is worth more because it's rarer than the Revell equivalent. To be fair, it is rarer, because the Advent version was only manufactured for one year (if that). The 914 kits seem to be tough to find in either package, so it's probably a matter of which one you find first at a price you are willing to pay. Years ago, I bought the Advent Thames and Anglia kits because I couldn't find Revell issues at reasonable prices. Early issue kits had those plastic-eating vinyl tires, later issues had iffy plating. The Advent issues of those two kits had no plating at all. The late Herb Jackson had started doing plating for model kit parts around that time, so I cleaned all the flashing off of the silver trees and had them plated. They came out great! I later sold those kits; the plating made them a lot easier to sell. A couple years after selling them, the Anglia was reissued again. Not long ago, I bought an Advent issue Porsche 911 because it didn't have the plating. Like the Thames and Anglia, I'll clean up the silver parts tree and have it plated.

I didn't mention the chassis...the main point was that this car was not part of the double kit. The Dream Rod frame started out under a less-known British sports car, the Jowett Jupiter. The Dream Rod front suspension is built around some VW Beetle parts, not sure about the rear.

The double kit included the King T (Tognotti's T) and Wild Dream (Wilhelm's Wonder). Two America's Most Beautiful Roadster winners in one box! AMT issued the double kit, MPC later issued the two kits separately. I haven't got the separate kits, but I believe the display bases for each car were plated in those. They weren't plated in the double kit. The King T chassis was used under the Carl Casper Paddy Wagon, and the Chuck Miller Fire Truck (currently available from Round 2). That chassis can be fitted under a stock-appearing fendered T; it hasn't got the kick-up at the rear. The Wild Dream chassis saw service in other MPC kits like the Barris Ice Cream Truck and the one-time only Street Beast '26(issued in the mid-Seventies). MPC tended to recycle a lot of their chassis. Another chassis to take a look at is the one in the MPC Vending Machine (soon to be reissued). It has a Corvette independent rear suspension and tubular front axle. Even if you don't want the 'Vette rear end, it could be switched out for something else without too much effort. The front end setup is more delicate than the ones in the T kits issued earlier, making it worth a look-see. The Car Craft Dream Rod was a stand-alone kit, later altered into the Tiger Shark that was reissued during the RC2 era. I didn't see any mention of this so far...but the frame in the Revell Tweedy Pie is an extremely cut-down '32 Ford unit, accurate to the 1:1 Tweedy but pretty unique in the T-bucket world.

Just picked up my copy earlier today. The 1998 issue kit I'm working on now was pretty decent compared to the half dozen or so issues prior to it, but this one seems a little better. The drivers' side FI script still looks a little weak like the '98 issue, but the body parts in the new issue have less flashing, and minimal sink marks. My '98 kit body had one prominent one, on the drivers' side quarter panel above the "washboard" trim. The new issue has no sink marks on the bumpers, and the wheel covers look a bit better than at any time in the last forty years or so. I haven't tried any of the separate panels for fit. My '98 kit doors seem to be pretty good except for a sink mark or two, the trunk lid needed material added along one side to tighten up the gap. Unfortunately, the plated tree in my new kit is contaminated with a lot of junk, so off goes an e-mail to customer service...

The '57 still looks buildable, at least from what I've seen so far into the project. The '55 hardtop might be the best of the bunch (in relative terms), with the '57 hardtop right behind. Far behind are the '56 sedan and '57 Nomad. I built one of the '56 kits around 1969, and got it into one piece. The HOT ROD issue '56 I had was unbuildable; windows fell through the openings, warpage, things like that. The wide tires in the Skip's Drive In issue '55 don't fit the back of the car (at least on one side; one inner fender is narrower than the other).

I think Revell will get to the '57 Nomad at some point. The ex-Monogram kit is a mess, and the Revell kit was never really buildable. Every one of those that I have ever had, has the cowl area on the drivers' side drooping badly. I've got a started original that I want to tackle...it will get a section spliced in from a spare hardtop body. They might get around to a '56 hardtop or even a '55 Nomad at some point; the kits they have done so far seem to have sold very well.

The three kits pictured ('29 Ford pickup, two Buttera T kits) should have plated parts. I have the pickup and phaeton; mine have plating. I did have the Anglia and Thames kits; neither had plating (that tree was molded in silver plastic) or decals. My Porsche 911 also has one tree molded in silver. Advent was supposedly a sideline operation that allowed some Revell employees to increase their earnings. It operated only one year (1979 or 1980; I've got the lone catalog but can't remember the year). Quite a few Revell kits were offered, not just cars. Advent didn't get the best sellers ('53-'57 Chevies) or the newest tooling that was out under the Revell name at that time. I'm surprised the Buttera kits were offered by Advent; they were fairly new and were pretty decent sellers for Revell.

The Nomad and hardtop are similar, but I doubt they share any actual tooling. Revell had the hardtop in continuous production from 1963 through about 1998, and the Nomad was available, with a couple of short breaks, from 1968 into the early Nineties. Neither share any actual tooling with the '55 hardtop or '56 sedan, though some of the parts look very similar. Revell probably kept each kit as a stand-alone item to ensure that damage to one tool wouldn't keep any of the others out of the catalog for any length of time. They sold a bunch of the tri-five Chevy kits over the years. Around 1968, the '57 hardtop was reworked. The engine was replaced with the C-1107 parts pack unit, the straight axle was added, hood and trunk hinges were changed, and other numerous little things were done. The Nomad was created around the same time. Some of the parts removed from the hardtop (the original stock engine) may have been used in the Nomad. I'm down to one started original-issue Nomad, I sold off three or four other issues, so I can't compare the parts trees of the two kits. I should dig out the instruction sheets and compare part numbers between the two kits. I do know that some parts like the front bumpers (which do interchange, and do look the same) have different part numbers and have visual differences that are apparent only under close examination. Issuing the hardtop as the Roth car makes sense. It fits in with the existing Roth kits (including the '56 Ford pickup) in terms of parts breakdown. It was first issued shortly after he started his tenure with Revell. After seeing the Roth/Thacker book, I always thought that Revell should issue both the pickup and '57 hardtop in Roth garb. There are two other Roth cars that would be within reach for Revell; I hope they do those at some point too. I haven't seen the new issue yet, but am currently tackling the last issue (1998 street machine) as a club project. It actually seems like it won't be as tough as it looks. I've got a couple other issues, including the low rider and an original issue, that I want to build also. Of course, I might not feel like doing one of these again after getting the first one done, but that's another story. For this build, I'm trying to get parts in from as many different '57 kits as possible. The AMT Pro Shop PE grille looks like it will fit, the old-tool AMT grille bar and maybe the valve covers will be used, wheel covers and intake setup will come from the new-tool Revell two-door sedan, and so on. I'm going to hopefully have some fun with this one.

I like the paint, and the tinlets. When I get the lid pried off, I'll keep a piece of aluminum foil handy, and wipe as much of the paint from the lid as possible onto it. That then goes back into the tinlet, and gets mixed (I don't usually shake them). The paint left on the inside of the lid then gets wiped off; first with a Q-tip (with the "fuzz" removed) and then a rag. If you clean the lid and the top of the tinlet prior to putting the lid on, there's seldom a problem getting the lid off again. I still like to paint a lot of parts with a brush. My dad taught me how to apply paint with a brush years ago; he also showed me how to keep the brushes in great shape but, unfortunately, I don't always have the patience to do that so I'm hard on brushes. Humbrol is the best enamel I've tried for brushing; usually it covers with a single coat. I've never had much luck airbrushing it, though. If I try again, I'll probably start with a brand new tinlet, and decant straight to the airbrush bottle. A LHS that opened about two years ago here sells Humbrol; the owner tells me the nearest dealer is over a hundred miles away. I'm glad I can get it again. I just hope they don't have to mess with it to meet some unknown/upcoming regulation...

Aurora issued coupe and roadster kits in the early Sixties. Only the coupe has ever been reissued, whether by Aurora (with WWII military style decals) or by Monogram (and later, Revell). Revell's 1/25 scale kit was never issued as a coupe, only a roadster with a separate top. It was reissued in the early Seventies, again in 1979 (Advent; possibly with no chrome plating), and sporadically in the ensuing years. It was in a three-car set (Car & Driver, or Road & Track, can't remember which). It was issued once in SSP in the original style packaging, and again as the Austin Powers car. There are probably other issues too. But with Revell having two XK-E tools, we will probably never see the ex-Aurora kit offered as a roadster again.

It's way more accurate. Besides the Revell parts pack, their Thunderbolt kit's 427, and several AMT engines, are better than the Aurora piece. The Aurora pistons have "connecting rods" that are just round stalks sticking out from the bottom. The cylinder bores look way small. Parts like the water pump, oil filter, and starter look like whoever sculpted them never looked at a Ford engine, or even a good picture of one. The rocker arm detail just attaches to the upper part of the cylinder heads, not surrounded by any valve cover mounting surface. The valve covers are way too wide. And it isn't even a 427; I can't recall seeing a 427 with a three-twos setup. Yes, the parts should fit, but who ran one? The Revell engine, with larger carburetors and some tweaks to accept the piston/connecting rod parts from the Revell display parts pack, would be a way better engine. Aurora didn't do any other engine packs; that should say something.

The Aurora engine has separate pistons, but I'd take the Revell engine over the Aurora every day, and twice on Sunday.

There were no photoetch or cast resin parts (though somewhere here I do have a 1963 Model Car Science issue with an article on resin casting). But there were some aftermarket items. Ulrich, a company that made model railroad items, got into cars with their Mini-Men figures in both 1/25 and 1/32 scale. Those were aimed at slot car guys, but they later did surfer figures with surfboards for the static model crowd. Ulrich also did some cast metal car club plaques in 1/25 scale, as well as pre-packaged upholstery kits. Flocking in usual and unusual colors ("Funny Fur") was available. Another designer, Monte (credited by some with some of Ed Roth's creations) offered upholstery items, decals, injection molded custom tops, and a show car display. The display is interesting; it incorporated the box in which it was sold, as a platform. Lengths of dowel are included for stanchions, along with fabric covering, and a "potted plant", the "pot" being an inverted cap from a toothpaste (or something similar) tube. Engine wiring kits weren't prevalent because a lot of builders were still using waxed thread back then. Chassis detail items weren't really available because most kits still had everything molded as a unit with the chassis. If you look at the old magazines, there was a lot of customizing with detailing being secondary. Even the AMT Trophy Series kits had exhaust detail molded as part of the chassis. You didn't see a lot of separate chassis details until the classic Revell kits ('56 Ford pickup, '55-'57 Chevies) appeared.

Finding a 1:1 brochure for the truck in question isn't a bad idea. Usually, those include dimensions of the short and long bed versions, including bed length, overall length, and wheelbase. Prior to the last couple of generations, most full size pickups were available with 6-1/2' or 8' bed lengths. Mini pickups were usually 5-1/2' or 7', but not always. The difference in overall length (8' to 6-1/2' = 18" in the instances I checked) is how much the bed is shortened overall; the difference in wheelbase (usually 12") is how much of that must be ahead of the rear wheels. That's for full size pickups; the minis seem to vary by manufacturer. The newest pickups all seem to be different, but most of those aren't available as kits anyway.