Sledsel

Beautiful build....

I am in no way telling people not to like and enjoy this kit. For me personally, I would have to fix the obvious issues to me. The kit would look "off" on my shelf next to other 57's. As stated, I will end up with one, and will probably section up a chopped 57 Ranchero body for the correct panels. The dimensions should be close, but we will see. If that is the case, the wagon will get the same treatment (unless it has been addressed) with a Ranchero as a donor. The tough part is removing the flatness of the 1/4 panels if I were to try to "repair" the actual kit.

Okay.... Before anything, I would like to state, the kit photos I am posting here are from Túlio Lazzaroni - Lovefordgalaxie. I am incorporating his photos because his builds and photography are excellent. The lighting and colors on these pics really help point out the areas discussed. I am in no way trying to discredit him or his builds, I have seen many of them and they are all excellent. If he has a problem with me using the cropped pics, I will gladly remove them. I am going to address the body issues only. Yea, there are other problems under the car, but I really do not care, it is the initial displayed kit that means the most (to me) There is a tail light bezel issue, but that would be fixed with a few minutes of sanding, so it will not be shown. Besides, it was shown earlier in this post. Front fender: As discussed, it extends to far down in the front, and the valance should wrap around and be connected to the fender. Behind the tire, the body line extending towards the bottom should be sharp end very evident. Also, this area should be concave towards the tire. The Revell kit has this area actually bulged out. By paying attention to the shadows you can see this. Also, the bumper should reach to the edge of the wheel well. These issues really could easily be fixed, getting that body line sharp would take some time. (the green Ford is my dads, I included this because the bumper is off and shows the valance/fender area clear.) Now the rear quarter, and the more difficult area to correct. If you compare both body lines, you can see the difference. The upper line should extend almost to the bumper. This part of the quarter is rounded, whereas the kit quarter looks pretty flat. The lower body line on the kit looks scribbed into the body. There should be a definite break and then a concave area like the front fender. This body line also needs to extend further back. Note: The 1:1 pic is a Custom 300, and the rear quarters other than the fin is the same on all models (shorter on custom series though) Dash speaker speaks for itself. An scale inch high. Again, not a bid deal, sand off or cut and recess.... but still.... As a final note, these items were not measured and checked with a caliper..... they are visual. Apparent to me as soon as I looked at them. I did not need to compare. This entire mess started because I said I hope they addressed these areas for the wagon. Ironically, the 50 year old AMT and Revell Wagon/Ranchero kits have these areas spot on...... How they do that then and not now?

As for getting Dads car out right now for additional pics, I am unable to do that, but I will point out the problems in pics today since I was asked. I am in no way attempting to "stoke the coals" is this fire I seem to have started.

Sweet looking Ride.... Doing a 60 in the same colors...

Very sharp and I heard it is a tough build, so you get a hats off to ya also. As a real car I believe it would be scary fun to drive And.......Where ever the pics were taken, it is beautiful.

Nice job... Sweet looking color.

forgot one....

A few progress shots....

Very nice. I like the extra details you added. Gotta love a sleeper.

Just your standard metal axle chassis. No front axle though. I epoxied cut down finish nails in place.

Thank you Chuck, but I did start the snowball... I do see where people like the kit, and other kits I do miss the imperfections. I do not get all wired up about it, I decide if I can live with them or not when pointed out to me. It was such a let down for me because I do have a passion for the particular car (and the Merc) I did write to Revell and let them know how I felt. I even sent pics of the kit flaws versus the actual car. I was in now way negative, and was offering constructive criticism. I believe they listened and understood that because we had more than a one correspondence to each other. I mentioned b4, I am not here to piss on any ones Cheerios, but to learn.... if that means learning there is a flaw, fine... thank you for enlightening me. I'll decide what I want then.

Great kit and great build. Good looking chop too! I am chopping on now and it is not an easy one.

Dated kit but just looks right when done. I did an engine swap, Ed Fluck resin hood, different wheels BMF and made traction bars. That's all. I have a stack of these... all being done differently.

Here is a simple build I did of a 66 Mustang Stocker. Rear seat removed, cage,dash, engine, exhaust from 91 Nascar Tbird. AMT kit, love them and have several different builds. Old school kit that looks "right" when done.

Thank you..... FYI, Ed Fluck casted these hoods in resin after I did this build. I have a few if anybody is interested.

Thank you for the compliments..... constructive criticism is okay too..... I do, but they are not completed. I'll post a stocker built in the way this series was tho. Look for Mustang Stocker. The only thing I did not like, the tires were too big, but work great for Pro Street cars. This car has 1/24 Wheels and tires cuz they looked right.

Okay.... I must speak up one more time even though I said I was keeping quiet. This all started cuz of me. I mentioned I was looking forward to this kit, but hoped they corrected the issues because I was very unhappy with the Custom. Then I was asked what the problems with the kit were and I pointed them out. Some others were also pointed out that did not stand out or I did not know about. This opened a can of worms and I definitely caused some problems. Sorry I gave any input at all. I do not get a lot of "build time" and do not want to spend what I do have correcting obvious flaws. Even though my time is limited, I try to build the best kit I can. With the 57 Ford (and 49 Merc) being my all time favorite cars, I was disappointed to say the least. How is it the 30, 40, 50 year old re-issues can look so good and accurate (not without flaws) and todays stuff can have so many issues? Technology is better now and therefore the kit should be even better, or so you would think. It is the "good enough" mentality that gave us these. Their thought was, "it is good enough that they will buy it." Now, these are not the only kits with flaws, there are others and the kit manufacturers have actually listened and corrected, attempted to correct or at least made them more tolerable. Is it wrong for me to not want to spend on a kit I see problems with? No, just like it is not wrong for someone else to accept it. The overall kit is nice, but the main part, the body, has issues. I cannot apologize for that, it is true. On a last note..... Austin T, that gasser looks really nice. The fender was trimmed where is should be, and the radiused wheel wells hide most of the rear quarter problem. If I build one, yours will be the inspiration.

Fantastic Fox. I love the exhaust discoloration.

Pretty cool.

That sure is nice.... That and the 67 Galaxie are my holy grails. I would LOVE to see R2 do that car again.... even with the 57 parts... Heck they just need a body and bumpers.

Another finished kit.... I need a new camera to get pics of more recent builds. This was a fun build. De-radiused the rear wheel wells, filled front fender cut-out for kit exhaust. Added a more detailed front frame clip from the Revell/Monogram 70 Chevelle. Color is Periwinkle from Plastikote

My first post on a build I have done. Mustang Shelby II phantom. Started as an AMT, but ended up using MPC parts for the interior and chassis. Body mods: Extended nose, recessed grill, custom hood, custom rear spoiler, side scoops. Engine is a 351 Cleveland.