tim boyd

JB...AHHH!!!! That's the story - yours is the aluminum smaller Buick V8!. I built one of those myself (from the JoHan kit) many years ago, but it wasn't detailed out like yours. Way cool! Fully agree with you on those spark plug covers - they were on the Nailhead in the AMT Trophy Series Double Kit '32 Ford "Custom"/'40 Willys, and after about two reissues (late 1960's) the tooling for the '32 Ford Custom disappeared, never to return, except for the Tudor body which as released once in the AMT Street Rod Series in 1975 with the Vicky/Phaeton innards. Those spark plug covers would be a terrific aftermarket addition (Norm, are you watching this thread by chance???) With a bit of perspective, now that my box stock builds are done, Bill has hit on what is probably the most significant part of this new kit - its potential for use in literally thousands of kitbashing projects. To add to Bill's info, the Revell '29A frame is slightly longer that stock (probably to accomodate the Nailhead as well as another engine that will surface later in the life of this tool), so it is just a tad too long to fit the AMT '29A Roadster fenders. Shortening the chassis slightly, and removing (or thinning) the frame horns, plus creating space for the kicked rear of the frame by removing the AMT Floorboard beneath the trunk/rumble seat, and it should fit right under the AMT fenders. I haven't been able to confirm that the stock chassis/suspension stance will work exactly, but it not exact, it won't be too far off. Because the '29A frame is longer than stock, it aligns PERFECTLY with the Monogram 124th scale Model A fenders. Again, haven't been able to confirm the suspension/stance but shouldn't be far off. And this info (Bill's and the above) just begins to scratch the surface of what is possible using this kit as the basis. TIM

Horse....yep I agree. I have a '29 Lowboy Channeled Roadster I built a few years ago....and that's exactly what I did. Let's see if I can find a picture of it......welll....looks like this is the best I have right now Maybe I can try to photograph this next to the new Revell Channeled Roadster for a little comparo....but trust me, this one sits WAY lower.....Cheers...TB

JB....that's a really interesting Nailhead alright! My first channeled roadster was this '32, which was inspired by a photo of a channeled '32 in one of the Street Rod Pictorial Annuals of the early 1970's (1974 I believe). It's not an exact duplicate, but close. I built it around 1975 or so. This picture is the third time I've rebuilt it....as of about five years ago. More photos of this, and the second version (rebuilt around 1980) are at this link: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyds-124th--12/boyd-street-rods-ra/boydstreetrodsratro/page7.html Funny enough, I was also in the center of the California street rod scene in the early 1980's. I lived in Foster City (10 miles south of SFO), was good buddies with Roy Brizio, Bill Burnham, and Dave Hill, and was doing some full size street rod work for Street Rodder as well as my model column (that oft-seen action shot of the Prufer CopShop '34 was taken by Street Rodder Editor Geoff Carter from the back seat of my Mustang convertible one Saturday afternoon....) I visited Boyd in his shop when it was in his 2-stall wide, 3 car deep garage behind his house in Stanton. Steve Coonan took me around one evening to see his street rod buddies, including that oft-seen-in-years-since Offy powered, Red '29 Roadster Pickup Highboy. This wasn't really the underground scene you are referring to, but for a boy from Michigan, all those guys were great and I look back on that period with great fondness.....TIM

JB - the highboy in finished form is higher than the Channeled version, albeit not by very much. Compare the top of the rear deck in the side view posted above and you can clearly see that the aqua car is taller in terms of height. Now if you are talking about ground clearance (distance from the ground to the bottom of the frame rails, then I do agree with you - again, the side view comparison makes that point very clear. (Maybe each of us interpret the word "sit" differently - no worries either way). PS - I'd love to see your builtup Nailheads display! **********************. All - Regarding the channeled version, if you go back and look at many 1950's/early 1960's channeled hot rods, the overall stance in many cases was not too different from this model. On the other hand, if your frame of reference is recently (e.g. last ten years) built Channeled Hot Rods and Rat Rods, and you want to mirror that look with your model, you're going to have redo the frame with a Z'ed effect added at the front, and an increase the vertical distance of the Ze'd frame at the back, as some of you have noted above. Cheers...TIM

Joe....I noticed this too and I did not use the shifter decal on the Highboy version a result. I did use the "eyeball" shifter decal, which is the same size, on the Channeled version. It fit fine, once treated with Micro Set applied before the decal, and MicroSol after the decal. Cheers...>TIM

Interesting that no one has commented on the "worn interior" decals? What is your view of that treatment? Cheers....TIM

Appreciate the comments, Bill. Best Regards....TIM

Scott....a primer gray or possibly a light blue/gray (like the color of the Channeled version on the box art) might work better with the "fauxtina" decals. In my case, I used them as a way to save a paint job that did not go down as planned due to a leaky paint can that I should have discarded rather than try to use. I also wanted to achieve the biggest visual contrast vs. the Highboy model, which as you know was very :"shiny". That is, I wanted to show just how greatly differentiated a model you could build from two of the same kits. At the very least, I think this Channeled version build may suggest to people the possibility that the fauxtina decals might be worth exploring. Whereas, nearly everyone had serious doubts that they could be used at all, based at just looking at them on the decal sheet. That exploration process is part of what a "quickbuild" like this hopes to achieve. Would I do it again this way? Probably not, and I think that the majority of honest/candid feedback here reflects similar views to that conclusion. But at least now I (and indeed, most everyone reading this thread), knows. Appreciate the question and the feedback. Cheers....TIm

Dennis that is a gorgeous and righteous hot rod model, my friend! Great job! TIM

Mike...following up on your idea, I pieced this together this morning. Only a slight modification to the bottom of the Highboy version inner fender wells (to create clearance for the Model A frame at the back, which is slightly wider than the narrowed '32 frame) is required to make your suggestion of a Highboy version using the '29A Z'ed chassis a go! Best Regards...TIM

I've posted a few photos of the two completed versions, place side by side, here: http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/105015-first-detailed-look-revells-29-model-a-hot-rod-roadster-updated-with-photos-of-completed-builds-of-both-kit-versions/?page=7 Best Regards...TIM

Posted 3 minutes ago (edited) · Report post Wanted to post some comparo photos of the two completed builds...and thought this thread might be the appropriate place. So here goes: A ground-level profile shot: And finally, an overhead birdseye front 3/4 view As many people have complained over the last few years about Revell making people buy two different kits of the same topic (e.g. the '72 Olds kits, and the '62 Corvette kits) to get the complete range of building alternatives; Revell deserves huge chops in my mind this time, for packaging all the parts to create two such highly differentiated builds within the same box. These are far more complete and better executed than any of the AMT Trophy Series 3 in 1 kits that so many of us view as a gold standard for this type of kit configuration. Yet one more sign that we are truly in the "Third Golden Age" of the Model Car Hobby right now! Best Regards....TIM

See comparo photos of the completed Highboy and Channeled versions here:::http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/105015-first-detailed-look-revells-29-model-a-hot-rod-roadster/?page=7 Best Regards...TIM:

Mike....I think a highboy using the Model A frame is indeed a possibility. Maybe you could use the Highboy interior and the Z'ed Model A Frame to get the Highboy/A frame configuration. (Hmmm....maybe I should give that a try?) These are the middle of the three headlamp sizes. I used the smallest ones on the Highboy build. Best, TIM

Bernard...just like Dennis' critique above, I think we can learn a great deal from your observations. I won't repeat my observations/suggestions relative to the grille shell position and headlamps that I''ve just posted in response to Dennis' observations, but they apply equally well here. I too am interested in exploring the AMT '29A shell which for me would make the most sense for the highboy version (where the original factory rear wheel well position would look best). But as one of you voiced earlier, I am really reluctant to give up the much better accuracy of the Revell body in the cowl area (the more accurate treatment of the separation between the side panels and the top cowl/gas tank cover here, as well as the correct body stamping below the windshield frame). What I would ideally like would be the AMT body, with the Revell front cowl/side area and rear wheel well area, and the Revell rear inner fender (with its more accurate side stamping) adapted to fit the AMT fender openings. As to whether this could be accomplished without huge amounts of work, I do not know. Bernard, as I've mentioned before, I highly value your perspective because of how many "reet on" 1/25th scale hot rod builds you've posted before. And personally, I can't wait to see your interpretation(s) of this new Revell kit. Best...TIM

Dennis...thanks for posting your detaliled critique. It matches my own thoughts in a number of areas.... I fully agree on the grille shell being too far forward. I remember noticing this on the test shots I built 18 months ago, but it is very obvious on the finished, painted model here. It appears, however, that it may be a super-easy fix. The radiator is what mounts to the frame, and the grille shell then mounts to the radiator. It appears that you could section the radiator by about 1/2 its width and that would move the grille shell rearward by the same amount. If that is indeed the case, this is a two-minute mod that will do much for the appearance. As for the headlamps, I had already used the smallest ones (there are three choices of headlamps in the kit) on my highboy build, so I wanted to try a different size on this build. I ended up using the mid-sized ones. More than the size, the biggest issue is that they are too high for a modern-era interpretation of a 1950's hot rod (they are more technically correct for a true 1950's rod where lighting laws were strictly enforced). This is driven by the shock mounts, which are configured to support the Highboy version, and adapted for the Channeled version as a result. Using the smallest size headlamps will help, as you pointed out, but lowering the position of the lamps is going to involve some work and adaptation. To the best of my knowledge, I believe that parts from this kit and an additional future version from this basic tool, are designed to allow swapping between the kits. If this is true, the '32 shell seen on the pictures that surfaced over the summer of a purported future kit variation, would swap right onto this kit version. As to whether you'd have to tweak the radiator to get the height correct (top of shell to align with top of roadster cowl), I couldn't say. Sectioning the windshield (where the top bar meets the side post) should be a very easy mod. Overall, it's pretty amazing to me that Revell was able to get too such different versions out of one kit - it was a masterful work of art from the kit design and tooling team. However, it appears to me that the kit was designed around the '29A/'32 rails highboy configuration, then adapted for the second channeled version. The result is that the channeled version is a BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH fine effort, but would benefit from some minor tweaking. Your list above is a great place to start. Best...TIM

Starting at photo #16 at this link: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-mo-1/ you'll see the chassis completed, interior completed, steps to final assembly, and a number of views of the completed model. I finished one side of the model with the wheels and trim rings only... ...while the other side includes trim rings and hubcaps, accented with the same flat red used on the finned engine accessories, as suggested by Dennis) earlier in the thread.... A total of 17 fresh images and captions at the link above for your perusal and comments, such as this shot of the completed chassis, which has immense kitbashing potential for Model A and Model T-based hot rod model projects... Thanks for following along....I'll be posting some comparo photos of the Channeled and Highboy versions of the kit, photographed together, later this evening or early tomorrow. Cheers...TIM

Very, very sharp paint work, Gregg! And the car looks good, too! Cheers...>TIM

Bill...great project and progress! TIM

Eric...this came out terrific! Anyone driving a 1/1 version of that in the 1970's would have truly been the king of the street. If anyone remembers the Hank Borger "Boulevard Marauder/Ghost Dancer/Firebox" article series....this one could be poised to give the best of those a real run for 1/25th street supremacy! TIM .

JB - I know that multiple assemblies of the test shots were done, because I did one set myself. At the stage I did mine (1st round test shots), I was working from an exploded parts view. Instruction sheets are often the last thing completed (along with decals, just before the kit starts down the line). Revell would have to address how this error occured. But overall I think the instructions are extremely well done, providing clear and easy to follow assemblies of some of the more complicated parts of the kit based on my prior experience. Just my 2 cents...TIM

Second update photos are now posted at this link. http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-mo-1/ Updates start at photo #8. Here's a look at the finished Hilborn injected version of the Nailhead V8. Several additional views of the engine, also, updates on the interior, and a clear look at the Z'ed Model A frame are part of the updates. Thanks for your continued interest and comments. TIM (Please note I still have some cleanup todo - paint touchups...removing extranious glue strings, etc....TB )

Martin...I do plan to build a future Nailhead V8 using the '29A engine except for the dual quad carbs/intake and exhaust manifolds from the AMT/Ertl '66 Riv kit. I expect that everything will match up fine. I'll post pictures when the time comes. Clearly we have established that the dimensions of the Revell header/exhaust ports do not match the 1/1 scale counterparts, but I just don't see the discrepancy as being one that is obvious in 1/25th scale. I acknowledge that some of you do see the discrepancy. For those that are bothered, I think your idea of sectioning through the middle of the header is the way to go, although due to the geometry you'll then need to slightly shorten the #3 and #4 header tubes as well (UPDATE - I see JC (AFX) also mentioned the need to do this extra step). Personally, I'm way to busy planning future kit bashing projects with this kit to attempt the header conversion, but hopefully someone here will do so. Best Regards...TIM PS - will be posting photos of the completed engine shortly. TB

Chris...you are exactly right on why I tried the fauxtina decals....most everyone who saw them on the decal sheet dismissed them. I wanted to try them (especially since it avoided having to do the paint job over, as explained in one of the photo captions). I think the results are somewhat mixed. They would probably look better over some real 3D rust (like Dr. Cranky does). Using them on this version is 180 degrees opposed to the "shiny" finish of my Highboy version of the kit, which also make for an interesting "comparo" picture later on.... Cheers... TIM

Dennis....the parts fit so well that I decided I could cut them apart and paint the rear wheel wells with the body, and not have to mask off the interior pieces for painting later. Then later I painted the interior pieces the black color at the same time I painted the body the red color. It turned out to be a time saver and I will do it that way with all future builds of this kit. Then everything reassembled as original later on. Thanks for asking....TIM