Mark

The retro-Thunderbird was killed before it had a chance, by dealers looking at a big fat markup. It was probably worth sticker price, but the ten grand beyond that, that some dealers were asking, brought a lot of negative press. The PT Cruiser ran its course. Daimler didn't develop a second-generation model, they only cheapened it and squeezed every nickel out of it. A co-worker of mine had a very early one; a few years later she looked at another new one but was appalled by how much the thing had been "de-contented". A two-door wagon would have sold better as a second model than the convertible, and would have lent itself to a sedan delivery version. The HHR was okay, but overpriced at first. I considered pulling the trigger on one in 2007. My nephew, who sells new cars, told me recently "be glad you didn't buy one...we've had a lot of problems with them". Then there's the panel version: pay $300 more for no rear seat, no windows in the rear doors, and no quarter windows? What kind of logic is that? I'm surprised Ford didn't come up with a similar vehicle, to grab a piece of that market. The Fiero: typical GM thinking, build it out of the parts bin but charge the long dollar. I looked at one in 1984. Base model, $8,400...sticker price, dealer won't budge. Where's the OHC, where's the aluminum engine...where's the five-speed transaxle? Throttle-body fuel injection...not much more than half a Quadrajet with a bunch of wires attached, dead-end technology. After looking at that, I never gave a GM vehicle more than a passing glance until I saw the HHR.

I don't see any. I bought this kit because my original issue kit is missing some parts, including the carburetors. So, I haven't got originals to compare to, but the new ones look good. The ejector pin marks are on little tabs that have to be trimmed off, two on each carb. One tab is attached to the intake horn (near the bottom, on the back) and the other tab is attached to the lower front part of the carburetor. The intake horns are partially hollowed out in the style of recent Revell exhaust pipe ends. I'd bet these are better than the original parts.

The Premier kits are molded in styrene. I've got an unbuilt '55 Chevy convertible. It's molded in two colors (white and blue). The body is split in such a way as, when assembled, the car is a factory style two-tone color scheme. The side trim is molded as separate pieces, plated, which cover the seams. The plating is as good as anything made today. The colored plastic is opaque and extremely shiny. Years ago, I showed this kit to a couple of friends. When the new-tool Monogram '55 Chevy convertible was issued, one of them built one right away. Remembering the split body in the Premier kit, he cut the Monogram body apart in the trim recess area when painting the two-tone color scheme...he said it saved time, he didn't have to mask the body or wait for one color to dry before applying the second color!

If that's like the other Premier kits, the windshield is a sheet of clear acetate, die-cut with tabs that fit into the slots on the body. I've got a Premier '55 Chevy convertible and a two-seater Thunderbird, and that's how they are. No windshield frame was included. One of the manufacturers of wood model kits (Berkeley?) did a kit of that show car also. The body would have been a rough-shaped balsa block, with cast metal trim parts and rubber tires with stamped metal hubcaps.

A fair amount of the Little Deuce remains, but a lot of changes have been made. The engine is different, as are the wheels and tires. The headlights and taillights have been changed also. If you want to replicate the Little Deuce, try to find one of the Early Iron Series roadster kits (the one molded in black). It's a lot closer to the Little Deuce than the recent issues. I've found a couple of those for way less than the retail price of the current version.

The tires are the ones tooled for the Rat Rod Model A releases. They're nicely done, but look like radials with their rounded shoulder areas. The old Revell Goodyear bias-ply tires had sharp delineation between the tread area and sidewall. That said, the newly tooled parts are done quite well. I bought the reissue because the original kit I have is missing the gas tank, carburetor/intake horn units, and another part or two that weren't in any of the later issues. Revell is paying extra attention to exhaust pipe and intake parts, and trying to mold these parts with hollowed-out ends. I don't have the original parts to check against, but I'm betting the new carb/intake parts are better than the originals. The new generator looks better to me, and the Chevrolet script on the valve covers also looks like it's improved. The decal sheet is also larger than the original, with instrument faces and body side striping the original sheet lacked. The license plate decals on the original sheet edge out the newer ones, but otherwise the new sheet is decent. The optional parts (fenders, lanterns, and raised top) will probably be saved for use on one of the recent issues, as will the new wheels and tires. Revell also included two newly tooled mag wheels that look a lot like the American Torque-Thrust IIs on my Fairlane. I'll have to either pull a mold off of one of these, or scrounge a second pair, for whenever I get around to building another Fairlane.

That's Jack Abramoff (sp?), a famous lobbyist. The media made the Boris Badenov comparison at the time he was in the news.

The whitewall tires appear to be the Rat Rod units; not exactly like the originals. The parts trees to the right side in the next two pictures (fenders/gas tank, plated wheels and other parts) are new tooling. Apparently the original parts were discarded and/or altered when the kit was first revised away from the original Tweedy Pie configuration in the early Seventies. My original issue kit is missing the gas tank and carburetors with curved intake horns, so I've been waiting for the reissue since first hearing about it. It would have been nice to see wheels and tires that match the originals more closely, but these can be put to use on something else. Wonder if we'll see the Tweedy Pie/Boss Fink again at some point?

The can will lose pressure over time, but in many cases the paint inside may still be usable if decanted and applied with an airbrush. I have had paint settle and separate, namely AMT lacquer in solid colors.

Most people who are seriously into these cars will have at least one of each version issued. For two identical seats, build every other version with the second seat from another Willys kit. The ones you took the seat from could then be built with different seats, either aftermarket castings or from some other kit. Revell had to make the kit "generic" so that it could be issued as several similar cars. But the little details (wheels, valve covers, seats, roll bars, headers) differ to some extent on each car. You'll want to switch a few things around to make each one in your collection look more like the 1:1 car it represents.

Check out the decal sheet in the Jimmy..."Mustang Ranch, Silver Springs, Nevada"...

I've got two AMT '67 annual kits (Barracuda and Mustang), and three '68 kits (Riviera, Torino fastback, and Galaxie), that are still shrinkwrapped. Two of the '68 kits have period store price tags. I've had the Barracuda since 1973, and I know where it has been since 1967. Neither of the people who had it before me would have had the capability to wrap it. I bought two of the Mustangs from a trustworthy collector/seller (now deceased) in the mid-Eighties. He knew where they were since 1972 (info is lightly penciled in on the box bottom; corner of shrinkwrap was cut and pulled away in that area). Opened the other Mustang upon receiving it, it's exactly what it's supposed to be. Same goes for a '67 Galaxie hardtop kit that I bought from the same guy, that I cracked open and built in the late Eighties. Two of the '68 kits were purchased at Toledo about twenty years ago, for (at the time) little more than what vendors were asking for current kits. I can't see the doll vendor who sold them to me going to the trouble of wrapping those. A couple of these do exhibit minor pulling-in of the box lids, but I've got a few others from the 1969 period that do not have any issues. That has more to do with storage conditions than anything else. Looking at several other AMT '67 annual kits (and one empty box) that are unsealed, not a single one of them has the tape marks or residue on the side panels and box bottom that the pre-'67 boxes will always have. Bagging of the unplated parts inside the box started later ('69 or '70) but I'll stick to my earlier statement: shrinkwrapping boxes at AMT started with the '67 annuals. That said, I wouldn't spend that kind of money on a shrinkwrapped kit, especially in an online auction...I'd have to see it.

Looks legit to me...I've got several sealed AMT kits from that era, the wrap on each of them looks similar to that one. I've had a couple of them since the early Seventies, and a couple others bought from a reliable collector/seller (bought two of the same kit, both wrapped; opened one and it was "right"). Others were found for less than the price of a (then) current production kit, so I'm pretty sure nobody would go to any great length to do anything to those. One or two of mine are split along the seam on one side of the box, but they were that way prior to my getting them. AMT started shrinkwrapping their kits in late '66 with the 1967 annuals. Trophy Series kits were "phased in"; they generally stayed with the little pieces of tape on each side of the box, and were changed to shrinkwrap next time the kit was issued with different box art. Yellowing, excessive shrinking that pulls the top of the box into a "concave" shape, and drying/splitting of shrinkwrap are caused by storage conditions. If the box was sitting in an attic or other place with temp/humidity extremes, it would develop any or all of these conditions. The Chevelle kit was probably stored under optimal conditions over the years. That said, I've never spent that much on a kit, and if I were to do so, I'd have to see it "in person" beforehand. I've seen too many shrinkwrapped kits with stickers, writing, paint spots, and other issues under the shrinkwrap, as well as shrinkwrapped pre-'67 AMT kits, to trust anything but a hands-on inspection. A period store price tag would be a plus, though sometimes you don't want to see that on the top face of the box lid.

Maybe GSA required mirrors on both sides, but my mom bought a 1995 Dodge Neon, brand new...with no passenger side mirror. She wanted one without any options other than an automatic transmission...not even a radio (which was still optional). Dealer found her one with the automatic, rear window defroster (required in NY, except on hatchbacks), side moldings, and a radio. Mom agreed to take the side moldings but insisted on no radio. The dealer left it in because they couldn't get the block-off plate for the instrument panel. And what would they do with an AM radio? My brother got the car after my mom quit driving; first thing he did was go to the junkyard and get a passenger-side mirror...

They are (solid) now...they weren't back then...

The engines are still water-cooled, only all of the coolant is in the block and cylinder heads. There is no water pump to circulate the coolant, it just sits there and absorbs heat. No radiator is needed because they are only running for a minute or so at a stretch. They are shut off at the far end of the strip, then towed or pushed back to the pits. If the water gets too hot, it can be drained and replaced with cooler water before the next round, but the "down time" between rounds was usually sufficient to get the engine into the right temperature range. Often, you don't want ice-cold coolant when you are ready to race. The recent Bill Jenkins book mentions a late-Sixties aluminum engine block, and his desire to keep the engine temp at around 140 degrees. Jenkins and his crew rigged up a system to circulate heated liquid through the engine overnight so it would remain at the desired temperature. On his earlier cars, for between-rounds cool-downs, Jenkins wired the car's generator to act as a motor, then ran a shorter fan belt connecting the generator (now electric motor) and water pump pulleys.

The only stuff that irritates me these days is basic things that are missed: removal of ejector pin marks or trademark info, sink marks and jagged parting lines not fixed, things like that. Sometimes, on an assembled model, you can see into the front of the interior around the firewall (Revell '53-'54 Chevies) or can look at the car from the side and can see clear through to the other side because there aren't any inner rear fenders (AMT '37 Chevies). Engine wiring isn't a big deal to me anymore (especially on older kits, where there's a gaping hole in the lower engine block with a metal axle passing through). Poorly done wiring looks worse than none at all (like when the wires are "parted" down the center, with four going to each cylinder bank). Leaving out the coil wire doesn't make sense either. Even if there isn't an ignition coil in the kit, scratching one from a piece of sprue or plastic rod isn't tough. When you are looking at a 1:1 car or truck, when was the last time the valve stems caught your eye? They are just "there", like balancing weights. One last thought...why are lift-off hoods okay when the 1:1 car has a hinged hood, but lift-off trunk lids or doors aren't?

Not every '62 kit had parts for either the kart or the cycle; in fact, more didn't have them than did have them. You didn't even have to buy all of the ones that did have the parts, as some parts were in more than one kit. For example, one kit had plated wheels for the kart while another had an unplated set. Same with the exhaust pipes for the engines, and possibly the gas tank. The '61 kits didn't include parts for an extra item like this. Some of them had miniature billboard frames, and a printed sheet that you had to cut from the instruction sheet which had a space for the builder to write details about their model.

In addition to the Joe Henning article in Rod & Custom, keep an eye open for issue #23 of Motor Racing Replica News; it contains an article on the Marmon Wasp. 1/25 scale dimensional line drawings are included. This article leaves parts sources "open" but mentions a couple of model airplane items as starting points for the tires. Like the R&C article, engine detail is ignored. The MRRN article breaks some of the parts down into shapes. A passable 1/25 scale shelf model could be constructed from the articles alone. Anything larger would demand a greater level of detail (including access to the engine), which would require a first-hand look at the 1:1 car.

Wheels were the same, tires were not. The front tires were plastic, probably tooled up because the originals couldn't be located. I don't think any of the MPC kits had all four Cragar mags the same width. So if you want all four to be the same, you must either track down two sets of wheels, or get one wheel and do some resin casting.

The LA Dart wheelie car body is indeed a rework of the Ramchargers Dart funny car body. The Ramchargers Dart has the front wheel openings too far forward for stock, but the LA Dart body has them too far back. That kit was cobbled together with the MPC Hurst Hemi Under Glass Barracuda interior and underbody, and the Dart body's wheel openings were shifted to match up with the front wheel locations on the Barracuda underbody. Besides that, the LA Dart body doesn't have a trunk lid, and the front bumper was left out of the kit (the 1:1 didn't have one). For this subject, if you can get your hands on a properly done, correct version in resin, that would be the way to go rather than tracking down all the necessary pieces and doing the conversion yourself.

There are more of the "429" misprint box kits than there were corrected "427" kits in that same box. The misprint boxes were used for the initial run. The highest number of any given kit will be made in the first run. Subsequent production runs are usually way smaller (fewer kits) because not all distributors or stores restock at the same time.

Decide what types of parts you want to build (suspension members, exhaust pipes, crossmembers, whatever), get accurate measurements of the 1:1 pieces, then convert the measurements to the scale you are going to work in. If the dimensions of the 1:1 item scaled down should fall between two available material sizes, take the smaller of the two (to allow for paint thickness). If you are making tubular/round cross-section parts that are straight, use plastic tubing with wire inside as opposed to plastic rod when feasible. If you are scratching a rectangular tube frame rail with a kick-up, or a crossmember with a drop center, you might want to cut it from a sheet as opposed to building it up from multiple pieces. After a couple of instances where you build something with one method and then decide another way is better, you will quickly figure out the best method the first time.

Placed an order 2/5 (Sunday evening), it was waiting for me today (2/16, Tuesday). That's not terribly long. It was short one item (I had ordered two of a particular sheet but only one was included). I checked all of the sets without header cards stapled on to make sure the second one was not in with something else, then sent Becky an e-mail. I got a prompt reply, and was told the missing sheet was still in stock and would be sent out ASAP. Great service, great product...their closing will certainly leave a void (or an opening for someone...)

Where the spokes meet the rim? Unfortunately, those are sink marks. Unfortunate, because those wheels are otherwise excellent. The fix isn't easy...strip the plating from one of each size wheel, fill sink marks, make molds, and cast them.