tim boyd

Thanks Harvey! TB

None that I know of. A couple of publishers I have worked with previously expressed a bit of interest in a book compilation, but nothing came of it. Concerns included very low potential demand (regrettably, books sell poorly these days due to the internet) and tracking down/securing intellectual property rights.... TB

Dave,,,,in case you missed my earlier post above, I built the original Otaki (?) 1/16 Mustang II Mach 1 fastback kit that I presume came from this same tooling set. AMT commissioned me to assemble and paint the model to show their sales reps at their upcoming annual sales meeting so that they would better understand what AMT's coming lineup of 1/26th scale kits (Bel Air, TB, Mustang, et al) would look like size and feature wise. I recall it being a surprisingly good kit except that the wheels and tires were woefully undersized. Then again, this was nearly 50 years ago so I shouldn't trust my memory to remember things exactly as they were! TB

Bob...yeah I bought the Cars magazine story issue at the time it came out, but if the timing recollection is correct, that story appeared about six months after I ordered the car and about four months after I had taken delivery. My own spec decisions were mostly driven by some of the very early press previews of the new E58 that appeared around 9/73, plus my knowledge from my Dad's Dodge and Chrysler wagons that the big block wedges were heavy and gas users, while the 340 in my Duster (traded in for the RR) had (even with lowered compression) relatively good mileage and very responsive driving attributes. I had always liked pure black cars with tasteful chrome and mag wheels, so that drove the color decision. Interesting you mention the rocker molding....that was not RR factory content but I bought the rockers and a Satellite Sebring Plus bright molding that went above the grille from the dealer parts department (along with the decklid luggage rack, too) and added them to the car over the first couple years of ownership. I too shared your view on those rockers! Cheers...TB

Thx John...never can remember the correct nomenclature for that non-functional (!) feature...best....TB (My Monroney/window sticker below used a spec sheet nomenclature of "Strato Ventilation"...)

Interesting discussion here as my first new cars were a 1973 Duster 340, followed by a factory ordered 1974 Road Runner E58 360 HiPo. I liked the Duster layout with the flip windows as I could reach behind me and flip open the window for ventilation as described above. My '74 RR did not have the flip feature,, so I added the Astro Ventilation to my order, which was supposed to route added air from the floor level vents to the top two center IP outlets otherwise used for A/C (I couldn't afford AC and did not want to deal with the maintenance issued down the road). That turned out to be a total bust as the only air that ever came out of those vents was hot air, even when it was cold outside. Years later, as some of you here pointed out, Mother Mopar eliminated the vent holes toward the rear of the hood for '74 B-bodies....probably explaining why the astro vent option was now worthless. I knew the RR had the fixed rear quarter windows when I ordered it, but after delivery I was surprised to see there was no B0Pillar. The RR was essentially a two door hardtop body style with the rear quarter windows being fixed in place instead of operating. I also learned, years later, that 1974 RRs ordered with Power Windows (again a cost I did not want to incur, plus my father had had ongoing problems with the power windows in his Mopar wagons over the years), all four windows worked and lowered and the car was then a true hardtop. Sure wish I had known that when I ordered the car....TB

Thx Trevor and Jim... BTW for those not familiar with this issue, authoritative sources say that with 2K paints you really need to use a respirator with a separate fresh air supply, typically only found in a 1/1 scale automotive body shop environment, as well as other precautions. Lots of varying points of view on the above and the overall health risks of 2K paints, particularly as it relates to hobby usage, so I won't belabor the points here. My only comment is to make sure you are educated and read about the topic from authoritative outside sources (i.e., don't rely on hobby message board discussions), so that you are fully aware of the issues, and then decide on your own course of action accordingly...TB

I did not know that. My '79 Chia 5.0 TRX notchback was ordered in early August 1978 and delivered (IIRC) early October. It was one of the first ones off the line Do not recall ever having an issue with the trunk lid. Cool info anyway...thx for posting Rob. TB PS - scroll down through this blank space just below to see two photos...

Justin., are they claiming the 2K clear is also non-toxic (as mentioned in the display stand graphics)? Asking because as we all know, the existing 2K is anything but non-toxid....TB

Craig...my thoughts exactly. But then again, this Tuesday they announced a 2025 version inspired by the Bill Strope desert race winner (red, white and blue) winner back in 1971, and it rocks. I saw a 1/1 scale mockup a few months back, and it really looks the part. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a62600699/2025-ford-bronco-stroppe-edition-details/ My former employer has done a great job (IMHO) at keeping the Bronco lineup fresh and current with the various mid cycle updates. Still, I'd have a hard time choosing between this latest intro and the Heritage Edition (in light blue, please). TB

I don't think there was a recall, but the original 1970 Duster trunk lid was a uniform surface all the way across (vs. the redesigned lid with a vertical peak stamped into the trunk from the forward to rear edges). The original lid was subject to being bent by customers pushing down on it to close it. Addng the peak put enough extra rigidiity in the lld to avoid any customer--imposed damage. I can't recall for sure if this was a running change late in the 1970 model year (unlikely), at the 1971 Job 1, or sometime during the 1971 model year (most likely if my dim recollection is correct). John or anyone else with more definitive info,, please feel free to update or correct the above...TB

Thanks, guys, for the feedback....!!! TIM

Yep DJ, that's one of them...I remember that these bad boys were ubiquitous on the lower left coast at the time... perhaps not so much elsewhere in the States as Toyota's Distribution system at the time was not as well developed and also included some regional distributors (i.e. Jim Moran/Southeast Toyota) that were not factory owned. I recall the blue stripped version to be particularly popular... TB

Hmmm.... a kitbashed representation of a two-door Raptor and/or Everglades sounds like a pretty cool project to me....thx Jordan! TB

Bingo. And this is exactly why I support a two-door vs. four-door for the Round 2 Bronco project. Modeling is about ambitions, desires, and dreams. 1/1 scale has to defer to practicality for most. Having said that, all the comments on this thread have been very interesting and informative for me. Thank you all for sharing your views....TB

We still need a US-spec kit of the classic 1983 Toyota SR5 4x4 with the three-tone side graphics as found in every high school parking lot in So-Cal/Nor-Cal back then. Some kits have gotten close (a curbside AMT kit comes to mind) but I don't believe I've ever seen the exact spec cited above. Or did it come out and I just missed it? TB

Thanks Justin....that's just the info I was looking for, and mostly, not too much of a surprise. Thanks again for clueing us all in on the "real world" as it exists in your business and locale. Best...TB

Justin...thanks for sharing that info with us. I guess the two surprises for me is how big Aoshima is, and how small Atlantis is (as you commented also, I believe). I would tend to combine AMT and MPC which would total 19.7% for Round 2, making them #2 and much closer to Revell, but on the other hand having them listed individually as you did shows the relative power of the AMT brand vs. MPC. Also appreciate the overall chart showing the leadership of Gundam kits, which certainly reflects what I hear around here. I presume the "paint" category is spread across all the model kits; without looking up the data (if it even exists in that form), from your top of mind does the majority of paint sales go to Gundam, to automotive, or is it pretty much spread across all kit topics? As a career marketer as well as unofficial consultant at times to the model kit industry since the mid 1970s, I find this info fascinating. Great job! TIM

Other than the original Mustang II kit which was a replica of a real car, pretty much all the bodies in this series were intentionally exaggerated and manipulated as part of the design brief, with the Corvette body being the most extreme example. Another words, they appeared as they were intended to, according to my sources within AMT at the time. TB

For those that are interested in further details on this topic, it is also addressed in detail in a Tim K. article/buildup in the spring 2024 issue of MCM (#224 - Icons" theme on the cover). Tim's article includes information directly from Bob Johnson that further explains the rationale and development of the concept and the kit. For those reading this forum that do not already do so, one more reason to buy or subscribe to the magazine that makes this forum possible, IMHO....TB

I've mentioned this to my colleagues at Round 2 multiple times over the last decade or so. I don't have any insider info on this, but I do think it is a fairly safe assumption that this one will come back at some point....and when i does, I highly encourage everyone to grab a copy. It is a really well done snapshot of mid-late 1990 street machine themology, and a great basis for both a box stock build and for a more ambitious kit bashing project of your own choosing....TB pt

I agree that the Nitro Charger would be a great choice for a reissue, but it is an entirely different tool than the one used for the MoPower and its derivatives as mentioned by Mark above. The Nitro Charger (and two other kits - with 1970 Torino and 1972 Nova bodies - that shared used the engine/chassis tool) were never reissued after their 1971-2 initial production run. The final kit using that engine/chassis tooling was the Funny Hugger II, and that alone was reissued around 2005-sh under the Model King label. To what extent the Nitro Charger even exists in the Round 2 tooling bank is not known outside the walls of Round 2 to the best of my knowledge. Here are two pictures that clearly show the differences between the MoPower and Nitro Charger tools...(both models are slightly kitbashed fyi...) TB

Great choice on the Ball Stud Hemi. That engine got a lot closer to production status than most realize; this is the first time I recall seeing one replicated in scale. Very, very cool! TIM

I've always been very impressed with the accuracy of the 1969/70 Mustang body in the Polar Lights Funny Car kit series. (Perhaps that is because the Jims - Jim Kampmann and Jim Johnson were consultants on the project...). Here I built it box stock with paint detailing only during 2011. The paint scheme, of course, was a fictitious spinoff using my paint can paint fade approach, and both Testors Lacquer Ford Sunrise Pink Metallic and Testors One Coat Metalflake Paint colors, over a pearl white base. More pictures below...thanks for looking...Tim \ *****

Kevin...great theme and some really, really good work on display here. Thx for sharing and best wishes as you bring this one home! Cheers....TIM