tim boyd

Mike....your tweaks do so much to increase the appeal of the model, which otherwise is one of AMT's best efforts from that era. Congrats....TIM

Eric....great build and very inventive adds and tweaks. Plus your engine looks so sanitary! A kit that is near and dear to my heart, and you absolutely nailed it! Congrats....TIM

Dennis....what everybody else said, great job. Your work is always so clean, era correct, and reflects great kitbashing ideas and execution. Sigh.....keep it up, Brother! TIM

Richard is exactly right. The three barrel was on the real Baldwin Motion, and you can find the correct 1/1 scale Z-28 carb in the Baldwin Motion kit. These two kits were introduced not long after the RC Champion layoff of the AMT-Ertl model development staff and in my mind this incorrect carb switcharoo was symptomatic of the product errors that followed that decision, which only increased in frequency of occurence and severity until the Round 2 era began. .Good luck with your build. If you have a stash of the other Model Car Magazine, there are how-to/buildup articles on this kit both as a late 1970 1/2 Z-28 (with 1/1 scale late availability paint and front/rear spoiler changes) and later as a 1970 1/2 SS396. I think both magazine issues are still available in their back issue dept. Good luck with your build....lookin' good so far! TIM

X2 Steve.... a terrific choice topic for a build, and love the extra effort you are putting into the interior. And the exterior badging work is, well to my mind at least, simply exceptional. Good luck wrapping this project....TIM

Jason....thanks for asking that question! I never had a clue about on this.... I just looked in my stash where I have two new (old) first issue AMT '36 Fords. One cast in gray, the other in black. And lo and behold....both have the Artillery wheels. I didn't see any overt tool damage on them, but they were not the clean castings we expect today, either. These are both pristine, unused kits and I don't want to part them out....but somewhere I have a box of gluebomb AMT '36 Ford first issue parts......if I can find it, and if one of those parts is the Artillery wheel, and it looks in good condition, maybe I (we) could talk Norm into casting some? TIM

Thanks Alan.....TIM

Thanks Dave for posting the original issue decal sheet. The new Round 2 kit sheet has the same scallops, "buggy" graphic, and Ford Sales and Service decals, plus a few new sponsor decals and 7 new instrument panel gauge decals. The colors are slightly different; the scallops have a more maroon (vs. dark violet) tint to them, and as I mentioned earlier, the Ford Sales/Service decals share the same maroon background color vs.. the original dark blue color as seen in Dave's image. TIM PS - my original issue kit, purchased in early 1964, was molded in medium gray. TB

What Mark said. Not to mention Dave's example! TB

The timeline engine and kit development timeline detailed above means....yes.....in this case the AMT Art Department got a little carried away in their side panel box art for the Surf Van kit. Many on the AMT staff at the time were hardcore car nuts. Accordingly, they were normally pretty good about accuracy of the kit features, but at times got a little carried away...….(probably with some "encouragement" from the Sales department)….this apparently was one of those times, as the kit's engine always was a 289. TIM

When I was shown the '68 Chevelle SS396 test shot buildup, over a year ago, I asked about a '69 derivative. There was no acknowledgement of such a plan at the time. That doesn't mean it wasn't planned, but.... On the other hand, the configuration of the rear fender caps would certainly suggest it was designed with a '69 derivative as a future possibility. As far as scanning, I do not know if the '68 Chevelle tool was the result of a digital scan of a real car, although the results are certainly consistent with that assumption. I do know that that there was at least one, and probably several other recent Revell kits that were scanned in the development process beyond the two Foose models mentioned earlier in this thread. Lastly, there are a number of outside companies that offer scanning services to the automotive industry. Nearly ten years ago I gave a list of three such companies to Revell when I was encouraging them at the time to use one of those scanning services to improve their body proportions for kit topics where factory OEM scan data was not available. Even then the costs were much lower than many would assume, but I was told that the (much smaller) kit development budgets these days precluded even such a modest expenditure. One other point, which I neglected to include in my communications to Revell on this subject, was the additional costs to a kit manufacturer of taking the scan data and adapting/processing it to the creation of 1/25th scale kit tools. Still, my view at the time, and one that remains today, is that the incremental spend for scanning and data processing would be more than returned via incremental lifetime sales of tools developed with the level of body accuracy enabled by scanning, as well as avoiding the incremental time and spend resulting from reworks of kits not developed with scanning as an enabler. Ummm….one more point.....at this time the even more important issue here is the first sentence in Chuck's replay above. That is, will the new owners even make any investment at all in the Revell lineup targeted at their customer base in North America? TIM

This Surf Van uses the AMT Surf Woody kit chassis and engine. At the time the 1/1 scale Surf Woody was engineered and built by the Barris enterprise, which is generally considered to be the year 1964, there was no such thing as a 351 V8. The model kit debuted in 1965. Conversely, the 351 Windsor debuted in the 1969 model year; the 351 Cleveland for the 1970 model year. Therefore, the engine in the Surf Van kit with certainty was a 289, not a 351. Without checking my library, I am still certain that magazine articles about the Surf Woody will verify the 289 engine usage. Just wanna make sure we keep the facts straight.....:) TIM .

Thanks everyone for your updated info and comments. Rob and Rex....there are indeed many instances where model kits reflect "planned but not delivered" elements of 1/1 vehicle designs, and I too suspect that was exactly the case with the hood vents. In fact, I did a whole story on this phenomenon (with details and images) on the other model car magazine about 3-4 years ago. Tommy, I'm pretty sure the Publisher would kill me if I divulged the print run info...but let's just say that all books these days have initial print runs that are a fraction of what was typical 15-20 years ago. The internet has largely replaced much of the book trade. Of course, as many authors and publishers point out, the quality/reliability of info provided on the internet is, shall we say, of "variable" quality....:) It is kind of at the point now where writing a book is no longer a viable source of income....which is why some of the car book trade's best authors have pretty much left the business..... David....thanks for the info...I try to keep up to a degree with the book inventory/sales situation, but was not aware of the info you provided.... Best Regards all....TIM

Dennis....just confirming Casey's reply below, only one set of "clear glass" this time.....Best Regards....TIM

Dave…..yes, those are the exact same ones. They include one tree just as you show above, and then one wheel cut from another tree after plating, to equal five per kit. AKA, they're running five of the "597" wheel tools for every four of the '34 Ford reissues to be sold.....TIM

Dave...don't know. I'll try to check and get back to you.....Best Regards.....TIM

Thanks Richard....I will check that out.....Best Regards.....TIM

As noted earlier, the new kit still has the old Lindberg "billet" wheels as the option, and new, simplified chromed reverse wheels as the choice for the top box art version. Those old custom wheelcovers are nowhere to be found......TIM

Rob...after reading your website critique, last night I checked the bodies of my in-progress '71 and '72 Mach 1 projects. The MPC '72 kit as the vents in the hood as shown in your website images.....but the AMT '71 kit has the smooth hood (no vents). Both of these bodies are original issue annual kits. I might have misread your web pages.....I thought you said that both the AMT and MPC kits had the vents.....anyway, thanks for a highly comprehensive and excellent /informative review of both the AMT and MPC tools..... TIM

Rex...thanks for the comment and also the link. One point in the link I noted was incorrect myself. The AMT 1971 Mustang Mach 1 kit has the lower molding along the bodyline because the standard Mach 1 version in 1/1 scale had a flat black lower rocker panel treatment, and the horizontal molding served to cover the factory paint break between the body color and the flat black lower rocker. Still,,,really interesting info and comparison of the AMT and MPC '71 kits. I've painted both bodies (the AMT in '71 Grabber Lime and the MPC in '72 factory Bright Lime) and I have finished the interior on the AMT kit as well....someday hopefully both will be finished! TIM

Everyone....I was just notified by the Publisher that they are planning to reprint the book. As part of the reprint, they will be accommodating my ongoing list of minor corrections and clarifications. I have already noted the suggestions/feedback previously voiced in this Forum thread and will add those as appropriate. If anyone else has noticed any errors or areas that would benefit from a minor tweak to improve understanding or accuracy, please let me know by replying to this thread or by PM to me by Tuesday, January 15th. And a very big THANKS to all who have already bought a copy of my book.....much appreciated! .....TIM

The Ford Ranger (the contemporary one sold in all world markets except the US) is now the best selling pickup in Europe....I realize that's not a full size pickup but it is very popular in most worldwide markets (outsells Toyota in many) and it would seem that as a kit subject might have more international appeal than the full size pickups??? Just wondering....TIM .

Keith,,,,this is a project near and dear to my heart as I owned a real one, a factory ordered '74 RR with the E58 360 hi-po. I still hope to build a 1/25th scale replica someday. My advice is to try and find the most recent reissues of the '74 RR kit, because as Mark points out the issue above uses an incorrect post-1974 B-Body chassis (with incorrect single exhaust) and interior instrument panel. (To the best of my knowledge It also does not have the correct '73/'74 RR body graphics (even though they are illustrated on the box art)). The last two releases of the MPC '74 $$ added back the correct 1974 chassis and interior parts and a more correct set of bodyside graphics. Between the two (the Dukes of Hazzard Daisy Duke kit and the metal box version with the Lucerne Blue Metallic/White Stripe illustration), the latter has the most complete and correct decal sheet. I do think the AMT-Ertl '71 chassis and driveline are the way to go. If the 400 or 440 Wedge is not the engine you want to use, you can get a reasonable facsimile of the '74 RR E58 360 small block in the AMT-Ertl '71 Duster 340 kit, which has just been reissued. I showed the conversion in my Mopar "Muscle V8's" story in the other mag a few years back. Be aware that most '74 E58s had an orange air cleaner (along the Mopar Blue engine paint), but a few (my 1/1 included) had gloss black air cleaners instead. As for the interior, the '74 RR kit is a must to get the correct front and rear seat upholstery sew style. Might be easiest to use these seats in the '71 Charger interior setup, and kitbash the doors to a more accurate facsimile of the real 1974 RR. Good luck with the project! TIM

There is an interesting point of view on a subject tangential to this thread (specifically, new kits that would actually interest and involve the Millennial generation), written by the associate editor of the other model car magazine, in the new February issue (page next to the back cover). While I don't fully agree with some of his points, there is plenty of food for thought in his essay.....TIM

I just painted an NHRA style "competition coupe" body with the new Testors color shift paint. I was very pleased with the outcome - almost no orange peel, excellent gloss, went on perfectly with two light coats. What I was much less satisfied with was the current formula of Testors Gloss Black enamel which you are to use as a basecoat for the Color Shift paint. Sags, uneven coverage, slow to dry, et al. This is a shame as the original 1960's/1970's Testors Gloss Black spray was fabulous - nearly foolproof, no orange peel, quick to dry, and terrific glossiness. I noticed the differences in the Gloss Black enamel spray paint starting around the early-mid 1990's, and it has gotten worse from there. I suspect that the EPA regulations among other factors, have caused the decline. Very sad Fortunately today we have both Testors and Tamiya spray paints that work far better than the current formulations of spray enamels. And at least for me, ring my trial, the enamel based Color Shift paint also largely shared the favorable lacquer-like characteristics. Hmmm...... TIM PS - the talented model builder who goes by the name "Bone" (based in NW near Seattle I think), recently did a bunch of test bodies using the Testors Color Shift paint over other color basecoats, including bright red IIRC. The result looked, well, terrific to my eye. TB