tim boyd

There are many factors involved here, several of which are touched on above. What most people do not know is that a great deal of the design and content of all automobiles these days is driven by governmental regulation, as well as the lobbying efforts of the many insurance, safety, and environmental lobbies. And for many vehicles, these laws vary from country to country, making all of us pay for compliance with all the laws even though many (such as the European/now Asian Pedestrian Impact Laws) are not required in some markets where the vehicles are sold. The laws and restrictions they advocate have varied levels of effectiveness, but what they all do is add immensely to the cost of new vehicles sold today. Personally, I suspect that the true cost to consumers of these regulations is far higher than has been quoted in the media or claimed by those who lobby in favor of them. Some of these laws - such as those about vehicle stability controls and braking/collision avoidance are highly useful, others much less so. One of the very worst laws has been the CAFE/Corporate Average Fuel Economy laws in the US, which have over 40 years greatly distorted the automotive marketplace in numerous ways and continue to do so today. Ironically, the result of government and NGO-driven automotive legislation is to increase the cost of new vehicles to the point that some people stay out of the new car market, which ironically drives down the overall safety/environmental/etc. effectiveness of the entire automotive fleet as people who would prefer to buy new instead hold on to older, less safe, less efficient vehicles. I don't have a solution other than to suggest that everyone investigate very carefully the voting records of those you vote for in national and state elections...... TIM

As I alluded to earlier in this thread (I think it was here), Round 2 was investigating this version as the primary plan for this kit, if the test shots played out as hoped. Looks like that might very well be what happened....TIM

Joseph....thanks a bunch. I never even thought to look at Dave's website.....should have been an obvious thing to do. Best regards.....TIM

I have generally kept my thoughts on NASCAR in check because of my career with one of the major auto manufacturers. Now retired, I can be a little more open. Historically, NASCAR has multiple lines of consumer appeal, of which the top two were manufacturer preferences, and driver/race team preferences. When the manufacturers more or less dropped out of NASCAR in the early 1970's, NASCAR moved to focus on just the drivers/race teams. This was certainly understandable and a smart move at the time. But like many things in our world, over time the pendulum swung too far in the other direction. The brands that the drivers race are now treated as second or third hand news; for example media coverage does not even mention the makes of the winning cars, even in the last sentence of the last paragraph. Concurrently, the cars have evolved so far away from their production counterparts that any connection between the race and the showroom is not evident for most fans. To get NASCAR back on track, they need to (1) refocus with a dual emphasis on the race teams AND the Brands being raced, thus providing two distinct avenues of consumer appeal. And (2) they need to change the cars back to something that is MUCH closer to their production equivalents (I'm thinking the last time they had this racecar/production quotient right was with the 1983-1986 Thunderbirds). And for those of you who do not read the www.autoextremist.com website, the author Peter DeLorenzo is highly outspoken on the subject of NASCAR and what is needed to right the ship. Not saying I agree with all his thoughts, but it is an interesting read to get a well-rounded view of the subject. TIM

Steven....the 365hp 426-S Wedge was the top powertrain option in the 1965 Fury lineup. If I were doing this project, I'd use the box stock engine in the Moebius 1965 Satellite kit, which replicates the same engine in 1/1 scale. (As you may be aware, the one downside of this well detailed engine is the non-stock, finned TorqueFlite transmission pan).....TIM

Mark...that is come very cool work so far. That method for drilling out carb intakes and exhaust is brilliant - thanks for sharing. Not clear if you are using the 289 Paxton Supercharged or the Ardun, but either one is a very inspired choice. Your linkage work on the 289 is superb Many years ago I build a chopped '31A Tudor myself, starting it around 1978 and finishing it in 1994-ish. Mine was more of a race-themed execution (inspired in part by the Pete Eastwood rust primer '32 Tudor on the cover of Hot Rod back then), combined with a 429 Boss mill, a Logghe-style tube chassis, and Pro-Street style rear end). Still one of my favorite builds. Best of luck with your continued work on this one....it is shaping up to be very, very cool. TIM

Thanks again guys. I'm most interested in what would be available now or in the near future for those that would be building the new Moebius A990 kits. This subject was never really on my radar screen in the past as to build a really accurate A!990 would have been a very involved and expensive project prior to the Moebius kit breaking cover. BTW, if you haven't seen it yet, his kit is really, really well done. Best regards TIM PS - I checked with Jack Smith at Top End Decals, who had done some very wicked good decal sheets for 1960's drag racing topics, including some pretty obscure (but cool) cars. Jack said that he's been really busy lately and unable to find the time to develop new offerings, but I look forward to the possibility of future developments here.....TB

I agree Greg. I referenced this book (and pictured it too IIRC) in my article in MCM #203 on building a 1929 HIghboy Roadster on Model A (not '32) rails...similar in several ways (other than powertrain and lack of hub covers) to the cover art on the above Vern Tardel title. TIM

Thanks Wayne.....TIM

Is anyone producing aftermarket decals for some of the A990 Belvederes that ran in NHRA SuperStock from 1965 through 1969? Thanks in advance....TIM

The 1972 Montego GT was by far one of the coolest cars on offer that year. Yours is a great looking example, and that model is also a very impressive effort! TIM

Yep..this is the old AMT headquarters building on Maple Road just west of I-75 and Stephenson Highway in Troy, just north of Detroit. Building is still there today, although it looks much different now..... As for the Blueprinter, it was a whole series of articles over a number of issues, on the history of all the brands owned by AMT-Ertl from the late 1980's onward. As for an AMT book or history, at least one name most of you would recognize has thought about a project like this from time to time. No firm plans yet (at least that I know of). In the meantime I have a book coming out later this year from CarTech Publishing with the working title "Collecting Muscle Car Model Kits". It will show many AMT kits from the "Golden Years" along with some tidbits about the company itself, but it is not in any way a comprehensive history of AMT alone. TIM

It's not entirely clear how to me how prevalent some of these issues are (relative to the entire production run of each kit), but I recall making the exact same argument as Bill notes here to the AMT staff when I was doing work for them in the mid 1970's. Some of their kits back then were truly bad in these very areas. And as AMT then declined in the late 1970's, I personally wondered how much of it was attributable to the quality problems in their kits at the time and the dissatisfaction and resulting lack of repeat purchases that Bill cites above. TIM

Further to Bill's comments above, here's proof that the AMT '36 can be built in a fenderless form with relatively few modifications - as shown in this cover story of the February, 2016 issue of the other model car magazine (apologies in advance for linking to "the competition" on this this website, although I personally believe the two mags as far more complimentary to each other than being competitors). http://www.scaleautomag.com/issues/2016/february-2016 While this one was built as a coupe, same steps would apply using the Roadster parts in the same kit....TIM

Mike....I can't speak for others who have reviewed test shots, but in my experience with one project in particular, Dave and I spent considerable time going over, initially the CAD drawings, and much later on the first round test shots. Extensive refinements were made based on our discussions, and (presumably) input from others. My experience is a bit unique in that I spent the last 13 years of my career working alongside some of the top automotive design executives in the industry. I thought I knew a lot about design before this time (I did), but there was even more I didn't know that I learned subsequently from this experience. Bottom line, calipers and photos from measuring sessions are a help, but the actual observation of 3D properties from a learned perspective also becomes a crucial step in the development process, particularly with the intricacies of automotive designs. It is from that perspective that I provided my own input. To be clear, in my input to Moebius, I was not asked to assemble test shots, and therefore I was not personally aware of fit issues like the issues that some have reported on the 1961 Pontiac Ventura kit. While there are areas to legitimately criticize on individual kit projects, I have personally been really, really impressed by some of the 'extra effort' the Moebius team has put into their model kit projects. Right now I am building an A-990 Super Stock from their 1965 Belvedere series, and so far I find it a very impressive effort, and have been a little surprised about how easy and simple the assembly process has gone - so far. Thanks for your comments and observations....TIM

From time to time all the domestic kit manufacturers contact me on various subjects, and I've found that of them all, Dave is the most likely to ask for feedback, including sometimes providing very early test shots to subject matter experts for a given kit topic. Much of this input is provided with no public knowledge, and it does result in better kits on the market, at least in my very limited experience with Moebius. No kits are perfect, and Moebius has had its share of quality/fit/finish issues, but given the realities of today's market (very low sales volume, pricing pressure [as mentioned in various posts above], product development and manufacturing sources located half way around the world and 12 hours ahead of us that speak an entirely different language, not to mention a comparatively tiny product development staffing model when compared to past decades), I think they do a very admirable job there. But I just want to clarify that Dave and Moebius do a comparatively large degree of seeking of outside subject matter expert feedback, at least based on my personal experience. Thanks....TIM

Recommend you check out the cover story in the current issue of the other model car magazine; it addresses your question.....TIM

The optional two-part headers and cowl induction air cleaner in the AMT '66 Impala kit BBC are dead ringers for published pictures of the original "Mark II" 427 engine that was in the 1963 Chevy NASCAR racers until 'the plug was pulled'. Those parts are the same ones pictured in Gerry's post above. TIM

That's the one.....thanks Gerry, and thanks Mark for clarifying that this setup was not in the annual kit version. TIM

Factory correct or no, I'd build mine with the matching front wheel flares. FWIW, my understanding is that Revell worked with a recognized first gen Bronco expert in producing both versions of the tool. TIM

Thanks for clarifying, Bill. Now I can put that Manx buggy back on the shelf with pride....well not really pride, but a sense of restored authenticity. And thanks Scott for asking the question...I wondered about that myself. TIM

Guys....what I am recalling was a totally different setup than the one in the MPC '70 Impala. Just checked...it was in the 1983 reissue of the MPC 1972 Chevelle kit. I don't have the original annual kit issue, but I recall being told by someone whom I trust in these matters that it was also in that kit. (It was not in the "SS Slasher" reissue of the kit.) The layout has two turbos, each mounted on the top side outlet of the left and right exhaust manifolds. The fresh air output of each turbo is routed directly to one side (front or back, respectively) of the mid-rise manifold used also used in the "dual quads" street machine version (no carbs in between the turbo and the intake manifold). The fresh air is routed to the turbos by some ducting running from inlets at the front of the engine to the turbos, with some very basic plumbing possibly hinting at some form of fuel injection. I suspect that the layout is lacking at least some accuracy/authenticity. TIM

Interesting....the Ford C-Series is one of those near-timeless Industrial Designs that remained successful for decades beyond its intended design life. Same thing could be said for Ford's "Louisville Line" medium and heavy trucks first introduced in 1969 and produced (in updated form) through the 1990's.... TIM

Round 2 is aware of the "50 years" vs. "60 years" being the correct number for the Edsel kit...and apparently will correct the next run of the kit. I'm not gonna defend them for bloopers like this, but like most hobby organizations, they run very, very fast with a very lean staffing approach. That's what the hobby business supports these days. I've certainly made "head slapper" mistakes like this; I suspect we all have at some point, particularly when we are moving really quickly under a very long "to do" list. TIM

Trusting my memory here (always a risky bet without checking to make sure, but assuming it is correct (this time)), the MPC 1972 Chevelle SS annual kit and a number of reissues had a BB dual turbocharger option in the kit. I don't recall whether it was factually correct in its plumbing but it was a real eye catcher.... TIM