tim boyd

James thanks for taking time to further explain your view of the Golden Age. Here's mine....I would characterize the First Golden Age of modeling as the period between 1959 and 1966 when model car building was on a huge growth curve, followed to a lesser extent by the period of the late 1960's, and to a lesser extent yet, the early 1970's. The ability to spinoff model car kits from promotional models during this period was a major factor, but in reading, talking to people in the industry back then, and personal observation, annual kits were but a part of the overall growth. AMT's Trophy Series kits (the first '32 Roadster, the AlaKart, the '57 Bel Air) sold in numbers that dwarfed the annual kits. Likewise the Roth series and racing kits from Revell...the Big T, Big Deuce and the like from Monogram, and later in the decade, the Monkeemobile and Tom Daniels kits, if the experts back then that I've talked to have recalled the situation correctly. Annuals were a factor, no doubt, but the hobby would have prospered (to a lesser extent) without them. . The First Golden Age of the hobby initially faded a bit with the advent of Slot Cars in the mid 1960's, and then moreso as the 1.1 scale automotive world lost its way (and not just with the OEM offerings, either) starting around 1971-72. For AMT, at least, the growth of their Semi-Tractor/Trailer product line was a Godsend, helping them to re-establish some financial health and momentum (info gleaned in part from reading their Quarterly Financial reports back then), but that too petered out by the mid 1970's. Product quality took a big step backwards,,,,we lost the two magazines covering the hobby (Car Model and Model Car Science), and by the late 1970's Revell was making due with toylike kits like the Charlies Angels Van and John Travolta Firebird. It was topped off with the liquidation of the 11 years of the MPC Model Car Championship, which had served as the underground of the then-developing adult model car hobby, after the 1979 contest season. To me (and many others I've talked with over the years), these were the dark ages. The Second Golden Age (as I think of defining it) started in the early 1980's when Scale Auto Enthusiast became successful, and with three...no make that four landmark product introductions. Each of these signaled that the model car manufacturers had finally decided that their futures lied with products targeted at the adult model car builder. This was huge, because back then, most people didn't believe there was any sort of sizable adult model car audience to speak of. Those kits were the Monogram NASCAR series, the Monogram Pro Stock series, the Fujimi Enthusiast Series, and the AMT-Ertl 1966 Nova kit. From that point on we enjoyed a glory-filled fifteen year run as many who built model kits as children and teens returned to the hobby as adults once their education, personal and family lives had settled down. The second golden age was capped off with a run of terrific AMT-Ertl kits in the late 1990's, some equally good from Revell, and even Lindberg, not to mention the continued growth of a viable and vibrant model car aftermarket. And finally, the advent of model car contests managed by model car builders, and the NNL Phenomenon of non-competitive model car meets, were huge factors as well. With the benefit off hindsight, the second golden age of model cars came to an end with the rise of affordable 1/18th scale diecasts, a viable option for hobbyists as they again became busy with their personal and family lives and had less time for modeling. RC's purchase and the subsequent mismanagement of the AMT/Ertl brand was a huge negative factor, only reversed with the Round 2 developments of recent years. The decision of WalMart to drop model cars was also a huge factor - though one I would argue was essential to set the stage for the Third Golden Age of Modeling, when the kit manufacturers would again target the serious adult hobbyist rather than the big box chains determing where the model companies spent their development budgets. . The Third Golden Age showed the first signs of emerging toward the end of the last decade, when Revell decided to start targeting the really hard-core modeling audience with kits like the Black Widow, Chopped Merc, Chopped '48 Ford, and so forth. Round 2's role has been huge. Likewise, the popularity of message boards like this one has been huge. Of equal importance, both the major model magazines kept at it, and helped to stoke the fires during the dark ages of the ealry 2000's. and hopefully now that the Third Golden Age is harkening. We've already agreed above on the generational forces feeding this wave, and that the latest wave of kit introductions globally and new or revitalized model car kit makers is critically helping to build the pace. And that brings us back to the purpose of this thread, to gloat over all the cool styrene at the IPMS Germany website. At this point i want to acknowledge that my view on this topic is hopelessly North American market oriented. While I had extensive global responsibilities (and global travel) in my full time career in the auto industry, regretably I never had the time during all of that to explore our hobby in other continents, so that is a factor that others may wish to weigh in on. Obvious from all of this is that I consider Golden Ages to be based far more on the enthusiasm of those in the hobby than the pure numbers of hobbyists and the sales of kits. We'll never return to the numbers of people or sales in the 1960's First Golden Age, nor even the Second Golden Age. But for those of us still involved, and those we can entice to revisit the hobby, plus the fresh new blood as cited in Jame's post above....I do believe we are on the cusp of a true Third Golden Age of Modeling. One more point before I sign off. I know that many who frequent this board, and the other boards out there, do not buy the model car magazines. History will show that the role of model car magazines has been, and will remain a huge factor in the success of our hobby. I would really, really encourage those of you out there who can afford it, to subscribe to Model Cars, as well as the other mainstream model car magazine. It's nothing less than an investment in the continued health and growth of this hobby we love. OK...who else has a thought on the Golden Age(s) of Modeling? I'd love to hear them as well.... Cheers to us...TIM

James...while I may respectfully disagree with you on the definition and applicability of the words "Golden Age", I really appreciate the facts/ detail and strongly support the sentiments you expressed in the remainder of your post. Best Regards and thanks again for that...TIM

Thanks Howard....some great pictures therein.... I just don't get it. I say we are well into an upward curve leading us to the Third Great Golden Age of Model Car Building....and a stroll through this IPMS Germany website posting would certainly seem to reinforce that. Yet there is a view by some who are very important to our hobby that the model car hobby itself is on a downward death spiral...a philosophy that would justifiably lead to a lack of interest, little or no investment if you offer products or services to this hobby segment, and/or riding your existing business model at it sits, until it no longer supports itself. I just don't understand... Tens of Millions of Baby Boomers (who almost all built model car kits as kids) now entering a period of life when they'll have more time than at any point since adulthood for leisure time pursuits. A smaller, but significant portion of the next three cohort groups that have enjoyed model car building since their teens and still do....and a new generation (the grandchildren of todays adult model car builders) who are increasingly fascinated by the hobbies and interests of their grand parents....including cars....and model cars. Not to mention a period of investment by various business organizations in newly tooled model car kits, and an unprecedented level of restoring and revising older kits, that we haven't seen since the late 1990's. Somebody is missing the boat here. Big Time. Maybe it's me....but I think otherwise. All you have to do is....look at this IPMS Germany post. All-new 300SL with all the chassis tubing and a clear belly pan so you can see it when it's assembled? Porsche 918 in two versions? Even though it's not my scale, a 1/16th VW Microbus??? Round 2 reissuing AMT kits that haven't been down the production line in well over 40 years? Upcoming and aggressive kitmakers like Aoshima, Moebius, ITC, Meng? Man, that sure doesn't sound to me like a hobby that is on a slow death spiral! End of rant. Now...man it's going to be a long year waiting for some of these great new kits!!!! TIM

Nothing further to add ...all the references on 1964-71 distributor location above are correct-amundo! TB .

IIRC it was Wes Gallogly, who was one of AMT's top executives back in the late 1950's/early 1960's. Tom West was never associated with AMT to my knowledge; he did work for Revell, Aurora (via the wonderful 1/16th scale funny car series), Accurate Miniatures, and Galaxie Limited, and also did artwork back in the day for some of the car magazines, as well as DieCast manufacturers. TB

Wow Ron...thanks for posting the link to that video. Love the German-accented English overview, too! After looking back over my AMT kit, I too was surprised that the Tamiya kit does not have an opening "boot". But one presumes that it would be pretty easy to add. And that clear underbody tray? Gotta say, someone at Tamiya really "gets it" about how many modelers think with this kit. This looks like one of the highlights of the year, a year that when completed, is going to have a bunch of highlights for the model building community. And for those who say that "Third Golden Age of Model Car Building" is not underway, I say "TILT"! Wow...can't wait. TIM . PS - will I finally be able to forgive them over the butchered so-called engine in the Aston kit a few years ago? Maybe so, maybe so.... TB

Once again, I can't get the quote feature to work on this laptop, but Mark, the 1/8th Corvette is absolutely right at the top of the "never completed" articles I was thinking about. My memory says that there were any number of others, perhaps they were not as restricted to CM as I recall but more occurring over all the magazine, or maybe I was thinking more of "promises of future articles" that never materialized, or maybe I just plain remembered incorrectly. But boy, whatever happened, it sure made a strong impression on me, and there must have been more to it than just the aborted 1/8th Corvette funny car. Hmmm... Cheers...TIM

Yep...I thought about the Heller kit,,,I might even have it in the stash too, but can't recall for sure....TB

Here's my view....I for one enjoy reading the WIP postings. I believe they encourage other readers to try new ideas, and they also provide a source of encouragement and feedback for the person doing the posting. As for whether the WIP projects ever get finished....I learned long ago that a significant percentage of participants in our hobby get the most enjoyment out of starting projects....but not necessarily finishing them. Once they've done the basic work and "proven" that a project like that could be done, they become more interested in starting the next project, rather than finishing the current one. And you know what, I'm personally 100% fine with that if that is how they derive the most pleasure from building model cars. The hobby should be foremost about having fun, and having fun on terms that each of you define for yourself. It should not become a source of guilt or pressure hanging over your head that you "have to complete your model" because you started posting your progress. On the other hand, if it provides positive encouragement to you to finish the model, all the better! Now when it comes to preparing magazine articles, though, I completely agree with the original premise that the builder should finish the project before submitting a magazine article. This belief comes from the embarrassingly frequent situation in the 1960's with Car Model magazine, where they would start an article series with horns blowing and drums beating...only to have it fade away completely after one or two articles, with nary an explanation or acknowledgment as to what happened. So to summarize my point of view (no better or worse than anyone else's here), as far as I'm concerned, please keep posting the WIP projects....whether you ever finish them or not. And I'll keep finishing projects before I write an article on them.... TIM

Very cool....do I see a comparo in my future? Tamiya 300SL vs. AMT Trophy Series 300SL...assessing 50 years of kit-designing progress, and including acquisition cost of each (original issue c.1964/5 AMT 300SL's are more numerous than one would expect, and not that pricey, either....). Now that would be interesting (at least it would be to me!) Thanks for posting, Jonathon, and thanks for the pictures, Geoff. TIM

The "hangers" in this case were like coat hangers, and each one held a sleeve of clear plastic with all the parts runners for a given mold inside. Round 2 had apparently contracted for an extremely well qualified individual to go through the tooling bank and run test shots of everything there. (Reportedly this same exercise revealed all the parts of the original AMT California Hauler kit, which were welded off in the Peterbilt 352 cabover tool (e.g., it was actually a shared tool incorporating individual parts for the 359, individual parts for the 352, and parts common to both kits. As most of you know well, the California Hauler 359 was rumored to have been scrapped decades ago.) The pictures I saw clearly showed most of the components of the funny car version of the '64 Olds. TIM

I can't even begin to imagine putting this kit together in under one day and having it turn out like this. Amazing! TIM

Four most excellent upgrades...errr....corrections, Richard! Thanks for sharing....TIM

Lotsa truth in your post, Chris! TIM PS - If AMT/Ertl had done it when they announced their version, it would have been done extremely well to the 95% level and then stopped there, as it always seemed to me that many of the kits of the late AMT/Ertl/early RC era were excellent efforts that were taken out of the oven before they were quite done.....TB

Harry...I don't know the history of this kit, but is it one that saw life previously under the Entex label in the mid 1970's? If so, I can only imagine what you had to do to make it look this sharp....and it does looks terrific. Congratulations! TIM

Regarding the Olds topless roadster kit....a while back there was a post with photos of some of the "hangers" from an in-depth Round 2 tooling audit of the old AMT/Ertl archives...one of the hangers showed most of the unique parts for the '64 Topless Olds kit....but IIRC there were a few key parts still missing. Maybe someone remembers that post and the pictures that went with it? TIM

Steve...you did a spectacular job on that model - and it was a great choice to begin with. I've always liked the '63/'64 Chryslers as they were unique in the Chrysler family at that time and very distinctive in the marketplace. You mentioned you're now working on a '65 300....will be watching for that one too! The paint detailing....accurate appearance, and the underhood wiring/detailing...all really, really sharp. Way to go.... (You may remember that I did a buildup/restoration of a discarded '63 Chrysler 300 a little over 20 years ago for the other model car mag...) TIM

I was doing some work for AMT back when this change took place. The revised two-piece tires required all-new tooling; as I recall the decision was made due to costs of raw materials used for the kits which had gone up stratospheric-ally as a result of the first Arab Oil Embargo, and AMT was looking for every opportunity to reduce their kit piece cost. Again, my 40 year old memory on this is pretty vague, but apparently the cost of vinyl for their old solid-core tires of many sizes was quite high - more than enough to offset the added cost of tooling up all-new tire molds. As I also recall, the AMT Engineering Dept. personnel weren't too happy with this move, as the new two-piece tires had a very obvious seam when assembled, they didn't glue together well with styrene glue, and the tires tended to be distorted coming out of the mold making it a poor match when the two halves were assembled together. This was just one of a number of changes made at AMT that seriously compromised the quality reputation of their kits back then, and was in my view one of several factors leading to a long term sales decline and the eventual sale of the company to Lesney circa late '78/'79. TB

There were four funny car kits that shared this chassis - Nitro Charger '71 Charger, El Toro '70/'71 Torino, Novacaine, and the FunnyHugger II, which was the old AMT '69 Camaro Funny Car body (the one with the horribly radiused rear wheel wells) wherein the original Logghe chassis replaced with this new digger style chassis instead. This last version was reissued a few years back by The Model King. I am not aware of any other kits using this chassis. AMT released yet another, all-new funny car chassis about 2-4 years later, and that underpinned a whole series of funny car kits, with the first one out of the gate being a Ford Mustang II fastback body. A few years ago I built up the Nitro Charger version, using a discarded / damaged Nitro Charger body and engine along with the FunnyHugger II Model King Chassis. It's quite a well detailed chassis, by the way, but the layout and assembly of the interior paneling is not well described in the instructions. It does go together, and fits fine, but you'll need to experiment to figure out the assembly procedure. Each kit version has its own engine - I liked the NitroCharger when it first came out (circa 1971 or 72) because it was the first kit to include the Hampton style blower (instead of the usual 6-71 blower). TIM

This topic was covered in a kit review of the Revell '50 Olds in the other magazine not long ago, but not nearly in the detail of Bob's post above. I think Bob's recollection of the timing may have been a bit off....by 1966 Monogram was starting to enter into its "thingie" and Tom Daniel kit phases; I think a more logical time frame from both Monogram and Revell perspective might have been 1964 or 1965 (perhaps right before or after both companies introduced their 1955 Chevy Bel Air kits in 1963 and 1965, respectively). Regretably, as we all know, Bob Paeth passed away a number of years ago, so we can't revisit the subject with him now. And for some reason I was under the impression that Bob Johnson didn't join Monogram until much, much later than in 1966. But I could be wrong... Casey, I for one am enjoying these old posts that you are bringing forward. And like all of you, I too miss Bob. TIM

Dennis...thanks...I thought that might have been the case. One of these days I need to go reread all those Modeler's Corner columns....TIM

John...count me in. I had the eight track back in 1969/70....which of course gave up the ghost many years ago....so I got the CD also many (now) years ago...maybe I need to dig it out and play it again! TIM

Jeff - I've long wondered about that very point. Several Revell's Executives (past and present) are (were) very accomplished model car builders. TB

..and that's your choice, rightfully so. My statement reflected my view of the situation, but apologize if that was broadly interpreted to speak for everyone in the hobby.... TIM

Stephen....yes the rear chassis pan needs to be trimmed (as noted in the instructions), but what they don't say is that it must be trimmed laterally along the back, but also additional triangular sections off the far rear corners of the pan....do that and the rest falls into place (reasonably well). TIM