tim boyd

Dave....looking forward to seeing yours...particularly since you are building the other version. Cheers...TIM

Ron....you bet it is. As part of my 35 1/2 year career at Ford, I was SVT Team leader from early 1995-early 1998. Best Regards...TIM

For those that can never get enough (err...that would be me), I've just posted nine new photos of the completed model, as well as my final verdict on the kit. at this link (start at photo #30): http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/page2.html Thanks everyone for following along, sharing your thoughts and studied comments, and so forth. I hope that those of you who buy and build this kit enjoy it as much as I have. Best Regards...TIM

Adam...that's a great build of the EXP. You really did the MPC kit proud, and I agree with you that most MPC kits from this era were actually really well detailed and could make gretr models with the hand of an experienced builder applied. I was a zone rep for Ford calling on Ford dealers when the EXP came out. Oh, the stories I could tell....actually....the car was a modest success from what I recall....except for the ones I convinced my biggest dealer to order in the new"hot" color, what my dealer later derisively called "Frog" Green Metallic. Ooopps. There was a mid-cycle freshening planned including the hidden headlamps (which made a world of difference) and a slightly more aggressive powertrain, IIRC, but these changes were set aside as there were other, much hotter products to invest the freshening money in at the time. TIM

I think I misunderstood Frank's original question to center on why the headers were chrome vs. the non-chrome on the remaining exhaust pipes and mufflers. Several of you saw past that and got to Frank's real question, with Bill's response above being the most in-depth. Thanks all..TB

Thanks Don...hope all is well on your end. TB

Dennis...they are the kit's whitewall decals. I so wish the rear whitewalls were a tad smaller (leaving more blackwall exposed, and less likely to overlap the rear wheels), but with some effort, I think they came out fairly well. And they definitely add to the appearance of the kit. TIM

Dennis...thanks for your feedback. I had to do some really thinking on that color scheme; I really wanted to use real auto lacquer on this build, but the abbreviated build schedule just wouldn't allow that. I agree with you on the rake/stance of the model. The finished model actually shows just the slightest forward rake. I think I may slightly raise the rear end on my next build....maybe by using a larger OD rear tire so no suspension changes would be needed. Best regards.... TIM

Frank...there is no such thing as a simpleton question....in this case, I'm not sure I have an answer that makes sense. Other than this is how many 1/1 scale traditional hot rod owners build their cars. The headers could be easily stripped and painted (I'm thinking a matte black) .... TIM

OK Team...here's a link to the final assembly photos and several shots of the finished model. (Start with Photo #25 to pickup where we left off with the prior updates posted above.) http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/page2.html Also included is a photo of the leftover parts that could form the basis of a second model project (albeit with much assistance from your unbuilt kit stash/and-or your parts box.... . Thanks for looking, for your comments and feedback, and your interest. And if based on what you've seen here, you like the kit, please don't forget to mention it to your friends and acquaintances at Revell. And if appropriate, get your order in for own kit soon. Best Regards./..TIM

Bob...I'm just about done with the kit. In my opinion, it actually goes together better than Revell's '32 kits. Positive tabs and locaters about - fit is nearly perfect...pretty much a breeze to assemble once parts are prepped and painted. Best part? Can't wait to build another one, something else it shares with the '32 kits. Everyone - Thanks for the comments! ....TIM

Bill. my info comes from the 1971 Dodge Car and Truck Showroom Color and Upholstery Selector Book, Charger tab, page 22. My book appears to include all the mid-year updates. It states "Charger R/T and Charger Super Bee Accent Stripes, Flat Black Only Code V6X (available all exterior colors)." However, as we all know, what Mother Mopar said vs. what they did was not always in agreement. Best Regards...TIM

Chassis is finished..... ..and includes probably the best dropped I-Beam front axle yet found in a 1/25th scale kit.... Please note that I have yet to do paint touchups. And yes, those holes through the shock mounts are just the way they come in the kit! Ten new pictures (as of Tuesday evening) at this link http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/ Start at picture #14 for latest updates.... TIM

Mike...that's great news. I had requested this correction a number of months ago in my correspondence with Round 2. Perhaps others did as well (including you?). As far as colors go, for '71 the Charger R/T side stripes, door "gill" inserts, and hood blackout were only available in code V6X Flat Black only. Cheers...>TIM

Chassis assembly is just about complete. Photos hopefully later this evening. TIM

Several of you have asked about whether the hood from the AMT '29A would fit the Revell '29A Roadster kit. I did some mockups yesterday, and here's the answer. 1) the fit of the AMT hood to the cowl of the Revell kit is pretty good, as seen here. . 2. The fit of the front of the hood to the Revell radiator shell is good, not quite perfect but passable (no photo) 3. The one issue is that with the longer wheelbase of the '32 Highboy frame, the distance between the radiator shell and the cowl/rest of the body is increased. This means that, just as in a 1/1 scale '29 on '32 rails, a stock '29 hood is too short in length to fit the new, longer engine compartment space. And the AMT hood reflects that fact in scale. It was a little difficult to measure the exact length of the shortfall in my mockup, but it was probably about 3/32" too short. Best Regards...TIM

Thanks Steve (Muncie) for the info. My source of the info on the engines Revell measured confirmed last night that the cylinder head with the circular ports that I measured was indeed one from a 1954 Buick 264/322 engine, not the 425 as I had previously understood. This source also measured his photos of yet another head that was photographed (a '61-'66 364/401/425, according to his info based on the casting number in photo), and his measurements from the photograph/ruler were 4.5" ports one to two, 8.0" two to three, and 4.5" ports three to four. Essentially identical to Steve's measurements above, except for a difference of 1/4" between ports two and three. As I stated in italics in my post yesterday, "there is still some conjecture on my part on the info posted above", this due to the lack of cylinder head info for the 425 version in the Peter Sessler book, and my own understanding (I'm not an engineer but reasonably well informed about engine design considerations) that all other factors being equal, a circular cylinder head exhaust port will flow better than a rectangular exhaust port. Clearly that conjecture proved wrong. Thanks Bill and Steve for finally setting the record straight with hard info sources that remove any need for further conjecture. Now, having said all that, I finished the Nailhead engine last night. I dare ANYONE to look at these pictures and claim that this is not a Nailhead Buick, and a very nicely done one at that. And here are the parts before assembly For those that are still bothered by the exhaust port spacing, I have an idea for a simple operation to align the headers more closely to the specs in Steve's post. I'll give that a try when I can get a second or third copy of the kit at hand. In the meantime, the rest of us will celebrate that we now have a new, really well done 1/25th scale replica of one of the coolest Hot Rod V8's out there. Cheers...TIM

Engine is finished....seven updated photos at the link....TIM http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/

Exactly correct. Compare the photo of the painted '32 Ford frame from the new Revell '29A kit (see link at my "quickbuild" thread also posted in this "New Car Kit Reviews section) with the Revell Street Rod Deuce kits and you'll see they are completely different kits. For one thing, the floorboard on the new kit is completely separate from the frame, vs. the combined frame/floorboard in the Revell '32 Ford Street Rod series. Cheers...TIM

I'm going to post some photos as I build the Revell '29A Roadster kit. This is not really a "On the Bench" build, rather a quick build to see how the kit comes together when assembled straight out of the box, without modifications. I've posted the first six photos here http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/ Included are photos of the painted engine block and front cover, all the engine components just before assembly, a gorgeous set of painted Buick-style finned brake drums. interior components, and a view of the two frames included in the kit. Check back often for updates! Thanks...TIM

Greg that is a gorgeous, super-sharp looking build. Congrats! TIM

JB...theoretically the kit you picture, plus all '28-'31 1/25th scale Model A bodies, should adapt to this kit with relatively minor changes. This includes the AMT '28A Tudor, the Revell '29A Pickups above, the MPC '29 Pickup/Woody, and the Revell '31A Tudor/Woody/faux Sedan Delivery kits. Given time, I'll also try the 1/24th scale Monogram Model A bodies, as sometimes Monogram's 1/24th scale bodies can appear almost identical to 1/15th scale bodies in size. Bottom line, the kitbashing possibilities here are endless....TB PS - I need to stop typing and get back to building. I'll check the AMT '29A roadster hood fit when I get the Revell kit done.

Yesterday I received a photo of one of the actual engines that Revell's researchers scaled. From the photo, the exhaust port spacing is 3.5" first and second port, 8.5" second and third port, and 3.5" third to fourth port. This spacing places the first and second port, and the third and fourth port, 1" closer together in each instance than the engine Martin ("59 Buick") measured (he reported the same measurement dimensions being 4.5" apart) . Even more interesting, the exhaust ports in the engine Revell measured were exactly circular, vs. the rectangular ports in the one Martin measured. So these are clearly two very different cylinder head designs. What does this mean? The Revell Parts Pack engine, which apparently matches the engine Martin measured, was tooled in 1962-ish, meaning it represented the Buick Nailhead cylinder head design at that time. The parts pack engine represented, then, either a 364 or 401 cubic inch engine design (even though versions of the parts pack packaging referred to it as a "467" (IIRC) engine). (It probably was scaled off the 1/1 scale Tony Nancy '29 Altered.) Stated another way, the 425 Nailhead did not exist at the time that Revell tooled the Parts Pack engine. The 425 cubic inch Nailhead was introduced in 1963 and ran through 1966, and it is the engine reportedly replicated by both the the Revell '29A, AND the AMT-Ertl 1966 Riviera kits. As mentioned above, the cylinder head exhaust port configuration and port spacing are clearly different than the engine Martin measured (which has to be the engine replicated in the Revell Parts Pack). This might explain why the outer two exhaust ports, and headers, would appear closer together on those model kit engines than on the Revell Parts Pack engine. Bottom line, it would appear that both camps here are correct - earlier 364/401 Nailheads had the outer two ports spaced farther apart than the late 425 Nailhead. Thus the Revell Parts Pack engine is correct for the 401, while the Revell '29A kit and AMT-Ertl '66 Riviera are correct (or very close to correct) for a 425 Nailhead. Imagine that. I have not taken these new 425 dimensions and compared them to the actual Revell kit piece - as I said earlier, I've got to get a second kit to make that comparison. I also checked my definitive source on early OHV engines, the Peter C. Sessler book "Ultimate V8 Engine Data Book 1949-1974", and while it contains a detailed chapter on all the Nailhead V8s, and the cylinder head casting numbers for the '59-'63 401, it curiously omits any mention about differences in the 425 cylinder heads vs. the 401, and it does not give the cylinder head listings and casting numbers for the '63-'66 425. So while the cylinder head exhaust port shape and spacing is clearly much different between the engine Martin measure and the engine Revell measured, there is still some conjecture on my part in the info posted above. TIM

Thanks Dodge...I'll fix that. Cheers...TIM

Mike....did some looking while I was painting the interior parts over the last half hour. For plated versions - As Gerald mentioned, the Revell Tony Nancy Double Dragster kit has the stamped valve covers for the '29 A Altered. These are my top choice for stamped Nailhead Valve covers. - The original (1960 issue) ONLY of the AMT '40 Ford Coupe Trophy Series has plated ones. All issues thereafter (including the "woodgrained box" version), apparently replaced these with the familiar ribbed valve covers. These original issue kits are very rare and go for big bucks. The Revell Nancy kit is a much better choice, not to mention a fraction of the cost. - The Monogram Orange Hauler engine has a 1/24th scale Nailhead, and it includes plated, stamped valve covers and also the very cool spark plug covers. Unfortunately, these are all cast together as a single part along with the intake manifold and top of engine, and looks a little toy-like to me in the box (maybe it would look better built up). For non-plated versions - The AMT 1963 Riviera annual kit has non-plated stamped valve covers for the stock version's engine. I don't have an AMT '64 Riveira kit but I believe that also has the same valve covers for the stock version's engine. - The AMT 1964 Buick Wildcat annual kit has the non-plated stamped valve covers for the stock version's engine. I checked the follow-up 1965 Buick Wildcat engine, and it has the ribbed valve covers only. I presume the '66 annual kit also has the ribbed covers only. I built a '29 A channeled roadster (heavily kitbashed) a few years ago using the Revell Tony Nancy valve covers, but I don't have any pictures posted in my Fotki album. It was a buildup, I believe, in SA a few years ago. Hope that helps...TIM