tim boyd

Dave....about that '30/'31 A Model A coupe....you are correct, there's never been a styrene kit in 1/25th scale. Your best bet is to use the Replicas and Miniatures '31 A Chopped Body...it's a better finished product than the Jimmy Flintstone offering (albeit at a slightly higher price), and includes a couple of building options (plain vs. hole-drilled sun visor, plain vs. louvered trunk, and a separate windshield frame that allows you to pose the model with the windshield cranked open at the bottom). The molding quality is just about flawless, and the master for the mold was well modified, requiring only some slight touchups in the rear quarter panels (below the C-pillar) and the C-pillars themselves (along the chopped area), which is very easy to accomplish with any hobby putty or auto body filler. If you are building a primered car, no touch up is necessary at all (due to the lack of a reflective, glossy finish). As far as future Revelll derivatives of the Model A Roadster, their recent business practice has been to bring out at least one, and often more, spinoffs of a kit if the initial kit release sells well. I do suspect we'll see a derivative of this tool, and hopefully sooner rather than later. Of course, the '30/'31 A Chopped Five Window Coupe is about the hottest thing in the 1/1 scale Traditional Hot Rod world these days, and I think that would be a slam dunk if Revell chose that as body style as a follow-up to the Roadster kit. Best....TIM

Dave...yes, a '26/'27 T of any kind (roadster, sedan, touring..) on '32 rails is feasible, and in fact many have been built as shown in Bill's follow-up post to your comment. A '27T on '32 rails won the America's most beautiful roadster award (a Roy Brizio build) a couple of years ago, too. That one would be a great place to start as a style guide for this type of model build. I did a '27T Roaster Pickup on '32 rails about 12 years ago, using a Tim's Resin Rods body on the Revell '32 Ford frame. The challenge, though, in both 1/1 and 1/25th scale, is that a stock '32 frame is too wide for the T bodies. So it has to be narrowed - not a job stopper, but not a slam dunk either. I did this project in the other magazine, I think it was in their Contest Annual around 2004 o4 2005 (I can look it up if need be). I'll also check my Fotki site and see if I previously posted pictures there.... Just more of the many, many cool ideas this kit will enable...TIM

Lee....you bet it would! And...that is exactly one of the first kitbashes I plan to do when the kit comes out.....TIM

Bill....I think you've very accurately captured the potential appeal of this Revell Model A kit, and the derivatives that will hopefully follow it. TIM

Charlie,,,interesting...about four or five years ago, I got an estimate of the Vendor costs for digital scanning a car from someone who is familiar with the work scanning companies do for the auto industry (including detailed exterior and underbody scans of their own and competitive vehicles). At that time, the estimate was around $4.000-$5.000, and costs should have come down since then. So what you are relating here seems "on the money", so to speak from a second data source. Of course, the kit sales volumes are much small these days. along with the kit development budgets. And I am not at all clear on what the overseas design base charges the kit makers to develop the digital data from pictures and measuring sessions, and translate that into a finished tool. Still...seems a development that should be investigated at the least. TIM

Detailed preview of this new Revell kit - and why you should consider it even if you only build full-detail assembly kits.... Thanks for looking....TIM

Just want to reconfirm the earlier posts here...the JoHan kit chassis is correct only for the Gene Snow 1970 Challenger. There was no other Challenger funny car back in the day (at least among ones covered in the magazines) that had a chassis even somewhat similar to this Gene Snow design...it was truly a one-off. What's equally interesting is that the Gene Snow chassis apparently evolved during the year (as did most other funny cars back then). The original version (at least the one I used as the basis for my scratchbuilt replica back then) used a direct-drive setup, whereas the JoHan kit had a Torqueflite tranny. I'm not certain which version came first, but my guess would be the direct drive. Here are some photos of the scratchbuilt (Styrene tubing and sheet) chassis I built back then, about 18 months prior to the debut of the JoHan kit...(note that while I based the chassis design on the Gene Snow Challenger, many other elements of the build differed, including the engine setup shown....) More pictures here Good lluck with this project...the original JoHan kit was among the very best (easily in the top 5) of all early funny car kits from the model manufacturers.....TIM

Richard....according to John G at Round 2, they added a bit of pearl to the plastic to repicate the color of the real car. The effect is there, but very subtle. I just checked my kit...there is only one swirl mark, across the upper rear quarter panel on the driver's side. Hope that helps....TIM Round 2 AMT Piranha first look

Here's some shots of 1/1 scale Model A's that show the difference between the '29/'29 and '30/'31 bodies that are described in the posts immediately above... * '28/'29A Five Window Coupes (and a Sport Coupe bonus) Photo Album: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/correcting-or-kitba/192829-model-a-coupe/ * '30/'31 A Five Window Coupes Photo Album : http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/correcting-or-kitba/193031-model-a-coupe-1/ And below are a couple of images from the above albums: * '28/'29 A Five Window Coupe on a '32 Ford Frame - * '30/'31 A Five Window Coupe on a '32 Ford Frame - Cheers...TIM

Bill...thanks...got it, and yes, i was aware of that problem, just didn't recognize that specific issue is what you were talking about. Really appreciate the follow-up (also sent you a PM). Best Regards...TIM

Bill...I've been cataloging all the tweaks needed to take the Revell '70 'cuda body from "pretty good" to "nearly 100% correct". But I am not aware of a problem with the rear quarter panel line. Can you explain further (or emai mail me privately) with what you are referring to? Thanks a bunch...TIM

One of the first products from Missing Link Resin (bought my copy in 2005) was a rebop of the AMT 1969 Mustang body, which is clearly the best of the lot as illustrated by the pictures from Mike above. Surprisingly to me, apparently it didn't sell that well and it's been out of their catalog now for a number of years. One has to wonder if the AMT 1970 body mold (last seen as the "Mach Won" funny car) still exists in the vast AMT/Ertl (now Round 2) toollng archives. Still, even if it did, returning to 1969 status would be problematic (the body was hogged out for the rear funny car slicks, and the rear quarter panel scoop was redone - incorrectly as it turns out - to replicate the ventless 1/1 scale 1970 body....). TIM

I'm hearing rumblings (not directly from Revelll) that it will be introduced around July-ish. Recommending you get those pre-orders in now, though! TB

Great idea - but why not run this with NO restrictions - just let people exercise their creativity, as long as they start with this new kit. And don't award "places" or designate an overall winner, just let the models appearing in the magazine be the award and recognition for the builder, not to mention a fantastic source of inspiration for all who read the magazine. . This new kit was born to live for kitbashing. Trust me on this. Gregg/Harry/Darryl - I'd love to see you do this. I might even be willing to write the photo captions and help you choose the cars to appear.... TIM

Interesting thread here... Some really sharp builds, too. Just a quick note that the '40 Ford "Early Modified" box art on page one is an entirely different kit series...it's the AMT Early Modified kit tool from the mid 1970's, and the tool also includes a Plymouth and Chevy (and probably others that I can't recall at the moment) bodies in the tooling. It's an interesting kit, reasonably well detailed, but suffering from the fit issues of many AMT kits developed in the mid 1970's era. TIM

Thanks Skip - great reference pictures there...>TIM

Thanks everyone for your feedback on that '69 Cougar XR7 build....it was a fun build for me. Best Regards....TIM

Frank...sounds like your mind is made up....but for the rest of you following this thread.... I have had work published in over 30 publications during my modeling/writing career, and I cannot recall a single instance where any editor materially altered a negative comment or overall conclusion I made about a kit. And if it ever happens in the future...well I probably wouldn't be doing kit reviews for that publication going forward. I'm not saying it never happens, but I can definitively say it's never happened to me. And I can say that, whatever disagreements I may have had with one editor or another on unrelated subjects, my overall impression is that they have all prioritized "the truth" about a kit over other considerations, including advertising considerations. TIM

Yuri...congratulations...that is some spectacular model you've built. The paint finish and the interior finish, plus the overall detailing....I'm very, very impressed! TIM

Very sharp! TIM

Tom...just saw your comment. I like your "Amnesty" idea and have followed some of your prior amnesty builds on the message boards. I did do this a couple of years ago with one of my models, a '53 Stude Gasser kitbash I started in the late 1960's////it was finally finished and ended up as a cover article for Model Cars. Likewise with that '70 El Camino style Dodge Super Bee that was a two-parter in Model Cars about four or five years ago. I just need to do it more often! Cheers...TIM

Frank...I've been following this thread since the beginning, and since no one else representing the "media" has weighed in here yet (at least that I've seen), I guess I need to speak up. First of all, for someone returning to the hobby after quite some time away, it's not hard for me to understand why you would be disappointed by a kit like this one based on late 1960's kit tooling technology. Point taken and understood. Second, I have written kit reviews occasionally, for Model Cars (such as the recent two-part "Odd Rods" kit series), for the "other" model mag, as well as for my own Fotki site. I always endeavor to include a kit's history at the start of a kit review, and then I also try to give a fair assessment of the plus points of the kit, as well as the drawbacks. As an example, I am looking at a kit review I did of the AMT 1940 Willys Coupe/Pickup Gasser I did for the other mag in their February, 2014 issue. In addition to the first two paragraphs of the review which recapped the kit's origins and history (including dates), here were the "negatives" of that kit that I mentioned: 1) Excessive flash 2) Ejector pin marks on some parts 3) Rear metal axle needs to be shortened 4) Front axle needs to be moved forward to align properly in fender wheel well openings 5) Supercharger drive belt guard too thick 6) Seat mounting points in floorboard need to be filled from underneath 7) PIckup bed locater holes for fenders need to be opened up on the outside and filled on the inside 8) Interior was a tight fit in the body, requiring Super Glue and Accelerator to stay put Hmmm....that's a pretty comprehensive list of "negatives".... As for my Fotki site, here are links to two reviews I did (I don't usually do reviews of old kit reissues there, but these two were an exception): Round 2 AMT 1968 Plymouth RoadRunner: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/refreshed-amt-round/ Here you'll see that I provide a history of the kit including photos of prior releases (Slide 9), and while I am highly complimentary of the new box art, I point out areas of the kit that have been criticized (slides 14 and 15), and then i conclude with several slides comparing the AMT body to the original JoHan 1969 Road Runner kit. Again....pulling no punches, just an attempt at a factual, matter of fact review. Round 2 AMT 1969 Chevelle SS396 Convertible: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/first-lookwhats-new-1/ - Here I include the kit history (again showing, in this case, the box art of the single prior release), and I have a photo showing the additional work required on the passenger side rear quarter panel (slide 7) and the oft-criticized rear tailamp feature (slide 10). Even so...some people thought I was too kind with this kit (as you'll see in some of the review comments). In all, there are over 30 kit reviews posted here http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/ and most of them follow a similar format (I recommend you use the "Roll" feature to see the photos in full size and read the captions that go with them). I always call 'em as I see 'em. I've been doing this for over 35 years, and I honestly can't recall, except for one instance about 13 years ago, where I was told that I had made a not-factual statement (it was an assumption, but an educated assumption that has never been proven wrong), that my kit reviews have ever been toned down by "the media" that published them. I can't speak for others that review kits, but my overall take is that most all kit reviewers try to give an honest assessment of the kits, both the plus points and the negative points. I also realize that many participants in this forum don't read either of the model car magazines, so it is possible that in this case, maybe the "media" you are referring to is some other venue than the two magazines. One final comment; I don't have this latest reissue of the Cougar Eiminator, but I have built the original kit (in my case, the 1978 "Countdown" series issue, pictured below), and I have also built the Boss 302 engine that was added in the 1990's redo of this kit, and I presume is in this new reissue (if that is not the case, please disregard the following comment). My take is that the original kit was among the better of the late 1960's model kits that were tooled then, and that the Boss 302 engine may be the best miniaturization of that engine to be found in any scale kit. But again, this comes from my perspective as one who has built models pretty continually from the early 1960's to today. I can certainly understand your point of view as someone who left the hobby, then returned years later and expected that the kit quality would have uniformly improved during that time. Best regards...TIM

As I had hoped, the Chip Foose '65 Impala, named "Imposter" and owned by Don and Elma Voth of Abbotsford, British Columbia, was the winner of the 2015 Ridler. Well done and Congrats the owners and to Chip and his team. Best Regards...TIM

...just completed and posted here... http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/11-scale-automotive/2015-cobo-autorama--2/ There are some really great model building ideas and inspiration here. Thanks for looking (Related albums if you're interested:) * 2015 Cobo Autorama Day 2: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/11-scale-automotive/2015-cobo-autorama--1/ * 2015 Cobo Autorama Day1 (previously posted in "Contests and Shows" Folder): http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/11-scale-automotive/2015-cobo-autorama-/

When I retired some 17 months ago, I made a list of my started/not completed projects, some dating back to the late 1960's. The total was....ta-dah.....65 projects! Since retiring I've built a number of models, but virtually all of them are new projects, some involving not-yet-released kits. So I haven't made any progress on the existing projects list. Still, I'm havin' fun...so....onward! I would also like to restore my "Dominator" funny car from the 1968 Dodge Fever MPC Car Model contest (fourth nationwide). So don't feel bad...just have fun! TIM