RickyD

Real mystery as to why Round 2 hasn't repopped that one. The last time it was issued was by Model King as part of a combo kit with a Cougar funny car.

The Smokey the Convoy Chaser kit is a derivative of the MPC '76 Dart Sport, which has been reissued something like 3-4 times in recently years, once mistakenly labeled as a Duster. Also, the 1/20 scale Highjacker Ford van was reissued about five years ago and the Bruce Larson USA-1 Vega pro stock is scheduled to be reissued soon.

The guts of the California Street 'Vette were used under several Monogram/Revell C2 Corvettes, most recently the '66 Penske kit. I don't know if the body tooling still exists, but I'd be willing to bet that of the kit could be reissued, it would have been been by by now. Also, Revell and Tom Daniel aren't exactly playing nice these days _ they got into a royalty dispute that scuttled a planned reissued of the Baja Bandito _ so it's doubtful he would sign off a reissue of the Street Vette even if it was doable.

Seems a little odd that anyone would be pining for a reissue of the Mork & Mindy Jeep when that kit is the common-as-dirt CJ-7 that has been pretty much constantly available for more than 40 years in Monogram, Revell-Monogram and Revell packaging. Of course, if you were hoping for it to be reissued in the TV show tie-in packaging, you're probably put of luck, seeing as how that show went off the air in 1982.

The original '64 Cutlass convertible annual kit. AMT modified the body tooling to use in an altered wheelbase drag car kit. Round 2 recently revealed it's tooling a new factory-stock body to enable the annual kit to be reissued.

I'm glad someone is; all they do for me is fill me with disgust that AMT hacked up a bunch of great annual kits to create a bunch of really inaccurate race car kits with cartoonishly large tires. Me, I'd MUCH rather that Round 2 reissue the MPC Stocker Monte Carlo and GTO, but those are among the kits they seem to be ignoring for some reason. We know those kits CAN be reissued because Dave Burkett did so in the early 2000s. Short-track modelers bought them by the case, too, because the adjustable chassis (just about the best-detailed short-track racing unit ever seen in kit form, btw) can be used under virtually any '60s or '70s mid-sized body. The body in the recently-reissued '69 Yenko Camaro kit originated in the Super Stocker Series, so there's one easy kitbash possibility right there.

I'm probably going to get blasted for posting this, but that's life. I've grown really disenchanted and disappointed with Round 2 and its management. Nothing but an endless parade of moldy oldies (like the Ranchero and '63 Ford) and $10 swap meet kits ('57 Chrysler, '58 Edsel) while a host of great kits that they could bring back _ and we know they CAN be brought back because they were reissued by Model King and/ or Learning Curve _ are passed over. The upcoming '64 Olds with the newly tooled body is interesting, but not $35 worth of interesting, imo. You can get the new Tamiya Mustang kit for less than that if you know where to look.

Absolutely, which is why I'll take Revell's '57 Chevy SnapTite kit over any other Bel Air hardtop kit that has ever been produced in 1/24-25 scale. It's my observation that the odds of a kit having a correctly proportioned body increase when the body is essentially all the manufacturer has to worry about. Or, at least that seems to be the case where Revell is concerned.

Whenever I hear someone puling about the lack of an engine in a model car kit, the first place my mind inevitably goes is "Wow, not once in my life have I ever heard an armor or aircraft modeler complain about one of their kits not having an engine. Never. Not one time." And we all know what a demanding bunch military builders are. Yes, some armor and aircraft kits do have engines, but it's not like there's some unwritten law that they have to have engines to be considered worthy of builders' time and attention. Reason No. 9,534 why society at large tends to view military modelers as serious miniaturists and historical recreationosts and car modelers as arrested adolescents playing with toy cars.

You're absolutely correct. And if not including engine lowers the price point on a kit like the Mustang to make it more affordable for folks to buy more kits and build multiple versions of it, that's a win-win for Tamiya and for the hobby, imo. That lack of an engine certainly doesn't seem.to have hurt the sales of Tamiya's AMG GT3 kits, either.

I seriously doubt sales would be as good if the kit had an engine because it would likely be priced in the $70-$80 range.

And, as others have correctly noted, not one mumbling word from Tim, publicly, ay least, about Revell's only representations of the current-generation Mustang being a pair of unassembled toys that, oh, by the way, also do not have opening hoods and engines. Hell, those "kits" do not even have acceptable headlight detail! Sorry, but there's more than a tinge of hypocrisy in that stance. Which is a greater disservice to the hobby, Revell's pathetic "efforts" or Tamiya producing a beautifully detailed, state-of-the-art kit that happens to not have an engine?

Yep, the upcoming AMT '64 Olds reissue with the retooled body has an MSRP of $34. The recent Moebius '65-'66 Ford pickups and '65 Plymouth AWB kits are also priced in the mid-$30 range. So anyone thinking Tamiya kits MUST be full detail because they're premium-priced compared to the rest of the market is obviously out of touch with said market.

The ex-Monogram '78 El Camino is coming as well.