tim boyd

FWIW, I agree with Dave on this subject...TB

John is spot-on here. The E58 '74 360 was by far the best engine choice for any '74 Mopar, and easily among the best choices for any car that year (the Pontiac SD-455 and hi-po Camaro Z-28/Corvette 350 being the others). Mother Mopar did a great job bringing this performance-oriented engine to market for 1974 in spite of government and insurance industry plots (err...let's make that "actions" instead) to undermine any performance-oriented auto offerings those years. What Chrysler - and most of the enthusiast rags - horribly failed at was getting the message out to performance car buyers on this engine. At the time most media scoffed and called it nothing more than the C-body 360 wagon motor with a four barrel carb added, listing net hp ratings of somewhere between 180 and 200 hp, and thoroughly dissiing the effort. This was happening even as recently as 20 years ago in some very respected publications. I've got a whole file on this subject (and had written a detailed sidebar on it for my "Collecting Muscle Car Model Kits" book a few years ago which I had to drop because I was way over the contractual word count for the mag). Short story is the E58 was rated at 245 net hp (equivalent to 305-315hp under the 1971 and prior gross hp rating system), had nearly all the 340 gubbins inside except the cylinder head and forged crank (some sources even state it had the same cam and specs as the original 1968 340 automatic), and possessed low-mid-range torque a 340 could only dream about. (The NHRA soon refactored the recognized HP for racing classes at 270-280net hp). After I took delivery of my '74 E58 road runner, the son of the local Shell Station owner ordered his like mine, except he wanted to "upgrade" to the 400 4-barrel. I gave him all the reasons not to do so but he did so anyway. Big disappointment. All of the above applies only to the 1/1 engine discussion. As much as I'd love to see newly tooled '71-'74 B Body model kits, my business side suggests there are considerably more promising venues for Round 2's limited kit design budget at this point in time, even though I wish that wasn't the case. Best...TB

Jens....that is one beautiful piece of work...big congrats! TB

I built my first model kit in the summer of 1962 at age 8 and it was a Revell 1/25th scale Dodge Lancer GT. TB ______.

Interesting thread. Car engineers are faced with many competing priorities much the same as those characterized by Craig above. But on top of those they must contain many competing priorities from governmental legislation, and not just single governments but political entities across the world. Then add on NGOs like the insurance, safety and anti-petroleum lobbies and their agendas. Some of the resulting requirements are exceedingly poorly envisioned and driven by political considerations rather than what is truly best for the customer and the world. They often overlap and compete against each other and require sub-optimal results. So much of what people complain about automobiles today is the result of factors the automakers have little or no control over. Automotive engineering in particular is a series of tradeoffs. Ease of repair is almost always a consideration in design of autos but when placed up against the many other issues auto design must contain these days, it does not always end up at the top of the decision matrix. Just a comment from the sidelines from someone who worked in the regional (US) and later global automobile industry in sales and marketing and later on in design, with about half of my 35-year career in executive level assignments....TB

x2!!! Nice job too on the canopy vinyl roof converssion....TB

Thanks John....I have a pretty extensive library of Mopar Action back issues but do not recall reading the above....really helpful and really appreciate the update. And yes, the color was B9. I have been slowly collecting info on the car from my late Dad's files....I did find the window sticker not too long ago and it did show 999 on the color position. Only a few days ago I found a packet of color negs and it appears to have a front 3/4 and rear 3/4 image of the car...need to find a place to print photos for me and my brothers.

UPDATE - that "Might Have Been Musclecars" article referenced above, for those of you with Scale Auto back issue collections, appeared in the June 2016 issue. The '71 Charger annual kit prototype spoiler is shown on page 26; the '72 Charger and Challenger R/T promo decal sheet is shown on page 27.... TB

Smile....kinda sad though too, isn't it? TB

Not sure what specific cars are involved in the Edit statement, but for 1971-74 the Charger and Road Runner/Sebring 2-doors used the same wheelbase dimension, 115". The '71 to '74 Coronet 4-door sedan and wagon and Belvedere 4-soor sedan/wagon shared a longer wheelbase chassis, listed as 117" or 118" in a quick google search, although 117" seems more familiar without doing a deep dive into my reference archives...TB

Still more on this...in the spring of 1973 my Dad bought a new Coronet Crestwood wagon (the one with the wood decals) from Pointe Dodge on Mack Avenue in Detroit/Gross Pointe Michigan. It was a dealer demo and was loaded with some pretty unique stuff....400 Magnum with duals, Tuff steering wheel, dealer-applied red upper body pinstripes, and most surprisingly, the not-for B-Body dark blue midnight metallic that was a C-body color only that year. When he picked up the car, there was also a 1973 Charger SE on the lot painted the same color, with the optional white halo vinyl roof, which was a little-known '73 SE option for those like me who thought the standard three-window "louver" SE roof was beyond goofy, red pinstripes, 15x7 Rallyes and RWL Polyglas rubber, and a white with black console interior. It was back then, and ever since, the coolest 1973 Charger I have ever seen. Over the years (decades) I've been collecting parts to recreate that one in scale. If they ever rebooted the SuperCharger with the wheel wheels corrected, that might be the ticket to get underway. As for that non-production color. I never learned the real story, other than that the dealer principle, Ken Meade, was very closely connected to Chrysler leadership at Mother Mopar and probably could get strings pulled, as by 1971 non-production coloros were pretty much a thing of the past for most OEMs. However, in the last few years, Mopar Collectors Guide ran an article on at least one more '71 B-Body that was factory painted in the same C-Body midnight blue metallic, so this may have been some type of factory sales staff spring promotion to get more dealer orders, although I have never seen any factory documentation to support that. TB l

Thanks Bill...I did not know it repeated in the '72 and Hawaiian kits....cool! Also did not know Few Sprues did the '72 market lights. His stuff is really sharp IMHO. TB ****** BTW for the rest of you, I recall that the never-released '71 Charger R/T and Super Bee graphics treatments and spoiler were shown in a late summer/early fall 1970 issue of Car Craft. The same images also appeared on one of the East Coast" "new for '71" one-off newsstand specials about the same time...TB

Mike....thanks for weighing in on this. Always, always look forward to your insights on AMT/Ertl/MPC/Round 2 kit development! TIM

OK if you guys really want to get in the weeds on this.... 1) The MPC '72 Charger Promo included a sheet with decals for both the Charger and Challenger Promos. And what did the decals show? How about 1972 "R/T" decals, not the actual "Rallye" graphics that came out on the real car. Thus presumably proving my long-held belief that the change from R/T to generic ho-hum "Rallye" series nomenclature for '72 was not only misguided (my view since the day they came out) but also a very last minute one. 2) The original 1/1 scale plan for the '71 Charger included several additional side graphics treatments that never made final production. These were shown in several of the car magazines in their "intro" articles for the 1971 automotive model year. One of those options also included a never-released stand-alone rear spoiler that was very reminiscent of the GTO Judge approach for 1969. Guess what, guys.....find an original, unmolested 1971 Charger annual kit and you will find that exact spoiler in the kit parts! (I did an article on "might have been muscle cars" showing model kits that featured last minute cancellations of 1/1 scale muscle cars, including both of the above IIRC, and others such as the never-released Boss 429s in the 1970 AMT Torino and MPC Cyclone kits, the cancelled 1975 GTO in the MPC 1975 Ventura kit, and several others. I wrote it for Hemmings Muscle Machines but they showed no interest, so it finally appeared (in slightly revised form) in an issue of Scale Auto back in the day.) Makes me want to revisit a kitbashing idea i've had for many years...a 1/25th scale 1972 Charger using the original 1972 "R/T" promo decals and a recreation of the planned but never released semi-hemi 400/440 engine block/heads program that was planned to replace both the B/RB and Hemi engines and was thought to be on track for the 1972 model year. What a cool model that would be???? TB

Bill....thanks for doing the deep dive on this. Fascinating to see the images side by side. And yes, the MPC Dodge C-Body chassis is by way far the best rendition of a Mopar C-Body in any 1/25th kit I know of. Best...TB

Thanks, Bill, for digging deep on this one. Your photos clearly show the issue I raised regarding the lack of 1/1 style body engraving around the wheel lip moldings, and lack of wheel lip moldings themselves, on the SuperCharger reissue. That was back in the day, and still is today, a "no go" for me, but perhaps of much lesser concern to most of the kit buying public. The news on the vents on the hoods is new to me. A similar evolution of hood vents on the '71-'74 Plymouth RoadRunner/Sebring resulted in the eventual complete elimination of the hood vents on the '74 RR, which I suppose was the primary reason the "Astro/Strato (or whatever it was called) Upper Ventilation" option on my 1/1 factory ordered'74 RR only ever blew hot (i.e.underhood) air and was essentially worthless. Which then leads me to wonder if by '74 the 1/1 Charger hoods also completely eliminated the vents as well. (MPC did not update their '73 RR tool for the '74 model year). Anyway, big thanks for all your research on this...TIM

Interesting conversations.... The original 1968 Coronet annual kit chassis did not come from the MPC 1965/66 Dodge C-body (Monaco/Monaco 500/Custom 880/Polara 500/Magnum II) tool, but it has been widely accepted that it was reused from the 1966/67 Charger annual kit tool, which itself was sourced from the "AMT" (but really designed and tooled by MPC) 1965 Coronet 500 annual kit. Maybe I (or someone else) need to dig out the above kits and do an updated comparison? I was also under the impression (but not clear understanding) that the MPC 1971 Charger annual kit had a fresh underbody tooling. More detective work needed? Finally, I am in the camp that says I doubt Round 2 will try another project adapting or cloning original annual kit body tooling to 1990s/early 2000s AMT/Ertl underbody content. Just like the 1/1 scale automotive world, sounds plausible on the surface but so many unknown/unexpected issues to actually deliver. Cool and creative idea, though, I must admit. TB

I have expressed to Round 2 my support for a reissue of both the Don Nicholson and (especially) the Gapp and Roush Pinto Pro Stock kits for at least 10 years now. especially since those two kits are by far (in my judgement) the most accurate of all the MPC pro-stock kits. Round 2 is very aware of the interest in reissuing their Pro Stock kits, and has been so for quite some time, but in this particular case doing so would apparently be far more difficult than it sounds on the surface and is probably not a viable option. As for the factory stock versions of the '73 and '74 Charger, I'd love to see that, however IIRC the 1980s modified reissue did not have an accurate rendition of the 1/1 surface/trim around the wheel openings (perhaps a remnant of the prior Petty Nascar kit?) and would not in my opinion satisfy the expectations of today's modeling community. I don't know the status of that tooling, nor if it would be possible to modify that tooling back to the original factory configuration, but I am guessing (no insider info here. mind you) that there are probably higher priority/much more viable projects on Round 2's current possibilities iist....TB

Just a heads-up that a full, in-depth kit review and buildup has just been posted at the online forum of the magazine that covers all types of scale models. It includes issues to watch out for when building the kit. If you are thinking of buying the kit, or you have bought it and have it in your personal build cue, recommend you take a minute and check it out... Best....TIM

Personally, I find it way cool when we find out that some of today's best and most notable builders (err...Wes that would include you...) actually have a prior history of notable success in our hobby. This whole story is neat in every sense of the word...TB

Turns out the issue, at least for me, may have been that my own images in my Fotki album were not loading properly, including when accessed from a site like MCM. So at least for me, on Sunday morning, Fotki was the issue, not the MCM Forum... TB

To all who have read this post, whether you posted comments or not, thanks for taking a look! Very much appreciated....TIM

Thanks Alan. Sometimes in spite of our best (not) intentions, things actually come out right after all. All part of the fun of modeling, yes? best...tB

Thanks Jeff - I always like to use real wood in my models if there is a credible application possibility. Best...TIM

Steve....I saw your post a few days ago and thought that it is a really cool and creative way to use that kit. The very things that make the kit undesirable on its own - primarily the undersized scale and proportions of the body - are instead used to accentuate the treatment and theme of your model. I thought "what a cool idea!". And even if you have what you call a wandering mind, I think the overall treatment of your model lends itself to a very coherent theme and delivery. "Well done" in my book. One question i had looking at your project, the side panel flame graphics, which look very cool here - did you paint those ore was it a very skillful use of kit decals, and if it was kit based, which kit? Thx for your comments! Cheers...TIM