Roadrunner

It's odd how a person gets something in their head, as I was dead sure I'd seen a Revell Phaeton kit somewhere. In retrospect, I may have been thinking of the Revell 1:16 scale kit.

I may actually be able to make this one, possibly both, or at least I hope so.

I will most certainly pop off a PM, Steve, and thanks very much for responding.

Looks like the Malibu had it, but not the SS.

Bingo! Until now I hadn't realized how similar they really were. Thanks.

For now I use the Tamiya stand. Later this year, when I've finished my new hobby benches, I'll grab a Rubbermaid turntable.

Yep, one of those seedless (supposedly), bowling ball shaped ones.

I use some el cheapo cutters I found years ago at Radio Shack; exact same thing as the "Hobby nippers" I also had, but for a third of the price. I have about five pair now, and use them all the time.

Yes, that is indeed a nice touch, and should enhance the front end somewhat.

Another small detail, but now that I'm aware of it, bugs me, is the absence of the buttons (bolt heads) that hold the rear and front bumpers on. I should be able to cobble together a decent fix for this though.

And here we go. All of this funky trim will need to be removed, as I've just not generally seen this trim on the overwhelming majority of the 396's that I've seen so far (perhaps it was an option, I really have no idea). I also noticed that the front marker lights are shorter than the rear ones, when they should be the same, but that should be an easy enough fix. While we're at it, the key entry on the doors are really bad, so I'll be replacing those with punched plastic discs. I may also buy some new door handles and replace them as well, even if they're not specific to this car. I doubt most folks would know the difference.

Fair question. An exposed engine and engine compartment just begs to be detailed, and I just don't have the patience or time for it, not until I do an exposed engine roadster or something anyway, at which time I will detail it all to heck.

It certainly does have what appears to be some sort of trim molded in near the bottom that shouldn't be there. I have no idea what AMT was thinking. I'll snatch a photo here in a few minutes.

This can be rather frustrating. To use the Monogram '70 Challenger T/A as an example, the body trim is actually satin black, but if it's given a gloss coat along with the rest of the body, that trim will be shiny, when it's not supposed to be. I think I'll stick with applying decals over a very smooth surface and leave it go at that, but that's just me. I seem to recall that Steve G clears over his BMF trim though, and you certainly can't argue with his utterly amazing results.

I'll probably stick with what's in the box, chassis wise (no need to spend more on something no one will ever see), but yes, consider the chrome gone. The less chrome, the better, at least as far as I'm concerned.

So far it looks to be really quite nice. I downloaded a lot of brochure images and photos of real Chevelles, and the kit looks to have captured the exterior particularly well. Thanks a bunch. My first shot at a convertible, so we'll just see how it goes.

At this point I just have to ask; do you ever do any mild commission work, or would you even consider it? I have a '59 El Camino that naturally enough has a lot of chrome, and I'm lousy with BMF, whereas you seem to have completely mastered that particular art.

I had just mentioned the Testors blue metalflake somewhere else here. I'm real surprised (and pleased) to see that it's still available after all these years. I was also wondering what the drywall screen was for, but now I know.

Great info here. Thanks a lot, fellas. I have the old Switchers kit, and want to build the Phaeton from it as a tribute to what was my favorite model car model that I ever built, so will be using the provided components, just as I did when I was a kid. I even recall that I'd painted it with Testors metalflake blue, which rather surprisingly, is still available after all these years. I'd still like to build another one as well though, as I really have a "thing" for the Phaeton,, so was trying to determine which kit, of the MPC, AMT and Revell Phaetons, would be the best all around, specifically to build as a street rod.

While I certainly didn't get these today (my father made regular trips to the dealers to collect brochures during the 50's and 60's and I now have all of them that I could find), I found it an odd coincidence to re-discover the '60 Thunderbird brochure in particular, as I just received the AMT 1:32 kit a few days ago. Pretty cool, really.

And yet another one knocked out of the park. You, sir, are amazing.

OK, thanks. I thought it might be a way to check for kit flaws or something.

What's the gold stuff on the body for?

Between MPC, AMT and Revell, who makes the best (most accurate) '32 Ford Phaeton kit? Thanks a bunch,

Thanks a bunch. I'll be ordering more paint, as what I'd planned for this car looked terrible.