tim boyd

Like several other modelers, writers, kit builders et al, I had been campaigning for years for Revell to do a correct '70 'cuda. As part of that effort, I sent them an entire copy of the Popular Hot Rodding Feature of this car called "Chariots of the God" by respected author Paul Zazarine that appeared in October 2008 issue. (pp. 54-58). I pointed out to Revell how little it would take to do a 1970 spec S&M 'cuda as a second version of the kit idea. I would presume that they tracked down the owner of that car, in that condition, and based the kit on that car, as it appears to be (based on a quick inspection) a duplicate of the car in that condition. BTW the article text also states "A six-barrel, lift -off fiberglass hood was fabricated by Sox and Martin for the Hemi 'cuda." The article also reports that the car was restored by the then-owner, musclecar collector Todd Werner of St. Petersburg, FL, to "as raced" condition. The article generically mentions the quality and accuracy of his restorations. The article also shows the resto as being signed by Ronnie Sox, Herb McCandlees (sp?), and others; presumably they would not have done that if the resto was way off base. Now we all know that "as raced" varies from race to race during the year, but in this case what we should be referring to in reviewing the kit is, it would appear to be, this specific car and build condition. By the way, there are many images from that specific article on the web with a quick Goggle image search, including good shots of the engine compartment as mentioned in the above post. Hope this helps...TB

Thanks Brett for posting this. I got the 'cuda kit Saturday from The Model Cave in Ypsi,Michigan. Based on a quick once-over, it appears to completely and fully duplicate the '70 Sox And Martin 'cuda in the form it was shown in that 2009 issue of Popular Hot Rodding. As several of you have mentioned, the 1/1 scale '70 S&M was MUCH closer to factory stock than the '71 S&M 'cuda, and that reflects in the differences between the Revell and the JoHan S&M kits. If you use the JoHan kit as the basis for deciding whether the Revell kit is accurate, you will come to the wrong conclusion. Finally, I noticed that the box art model is incomplete in the engine compartment. It's missing the ignition coil that sits on the passenger fenderwell (and yes, it uses that unexplained hole that was in the stock kit version) and possibly other details. The coil IS in the kit contents. I was also surprised at the extent of the decal work. Looks like the only red you'll have to add to the car will be at the front and rear ends. Plus, as one of you noted above, looks like almost all the stock parts are in the kit as well. I'll try to post pictures of the kit contents in the near future. TIM

There is no sleeper in the new issue. I illustrated it with parts from the second (c. 1973) reissue of the original California Hauler, so you could see what you are missing. On my Fotki site, Tim Ahlborn reports Round 2 is going to do a plated Mercury sleeper as a Parts Pack offering in Q4 2014. Now that rocks! TIM

,,,back in the day, I would have passed on the A/C and Power Windows (too much weight, too much to go wrong), but the Torqueflite would have been a must! (Didn't really learn how to run a 4-speed manual until eight years later when I learned on a '78 Ford Fiesta(!) - not my car - and back then the Torqueflite was also a 'hot' ticket (double entendre intended) for the street drags...).TB

John...."Amen" to that Of course, if I had the opportunity to order, I would have ordered a '70 - instead of '71 - Hemi 'cuda convertible. The '70 was the original of that third gen 'cuda, and SO much more of a clean, uncluttered design, 'Billboard' notwithstanding. Then again, if I had had the opportunity, I would have gone with the '70 340 'cuda convertiblerather than a Hemi, hands down. Now I'm dreamin' for sure! Two more comments on this thread - there is a very informative article on hemi 'cuda convertible pricing in the current issue of Mopar Collector's Guide. Suffice it to say, the author was arguing that E Body Hemi pricing - which had reportedly taken a dip post-'08/'09 recession - was coming back strong. He predicted the auction last weekend would set a new record, but I doubt that he expected it to go so high. One other reason this one brought such a price was that it was reportedly more original (rather than rebuilt) vs. most of the other '71 hemi 'cuda converts out there. TB

Brett...I had the exact same experience as you regarding flash on the '40 Willys and '36 Ford kits. The California Hauler is nearly perfect - the only flash I found at all was on one of the parts runners. Thanks for posting the link to the Car Model article - I pulled out my old copy and re-read it this morning. While this link doesn't show the issue's cover photo, Phil painted his PB in '57 Chevy Tropical Turquoise (he called it '58 - I haven't checked yet to see if the color carried over) and '64 Ford Wimbledon White. Of course, these are both exact match aerosol colors in Testors Model Masters Lacquer paint can lineup... TB .

OK team, here's a 27-photo review and commentary on the Round 2 reissue of this iconic truck model kit, including a detailed comparison with the original T-500 kit dating from August, 1969. Make sure to use the "Roll" feature so you can view my comments (and add your own if desire) as you look at the images.....thanks for looking....TIM http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/new-amt-t500-califo/

Harry....there are more than a few people out there who would probably agree with you. But the sales growth of CUV's in the US, and indeed worldwide, suggest that there is considerable additional opportunity for new products of that type. As long as everyone has the ability to find a product that works for them individually, I'm OK. If it happens to be a CUV, whatever works for them. (I confess that I have a CUV in the driveway right now, and it is a very convenient/useful product. But I am still looking foward to when my '15 GT Convertible replaces it next year!!!) TB

Charlie....I remember that ad very well. I also remember that as recent as 1998, Lincoln was the #1 selling luxury brand in the US. You've obviously put a lot of thought into this subject and I can tell you care about the brand and its future success. I have no issue with your post (I don't agree with your comments about Lincoln, but every one has a right to voice their view), instead my point was simply that the review that you linked to was by some measure the most negative of all the MKC reviews I've read. I just wanted to make sure that those following this thread were aware that most of the other major auto reviews were more favorable, and in some cases, extremely positive. The author of that article is well respected, but I was surprised at some of his statements in the article that, in my judgment, do not align with the actual facts. (You may not be aware that I spent 35 1/2 years in the auto industry in marketing, product strategy, and design roles). I'm retired now from Ford but I can tell you that as of the day of my retirement, everything you read about Ford being serious about Lincoln as a luxury brand is very real. Obviously, I can't speak about it in detail, but the path that they are following has been very deeply thought out and ultimately the market will decide the success of that strategy. My own personal judgment is that the MKC will be a substantial hit. Time will tell all.... BTW, the next Lincoln product (after the MKC) according to press coverage, will be a production version of the Lincoln MKX Concept shown at the 2014 Beijing Motor Show. http://www.lincoln.com/2016-mkx-concept/ It sounds more like the car you were expecting per the last sentence of your reply. The MKC is a smaller product than that, and right now, unless I am missing something, only BMW (X1) and Acura (RDX) have something comparable to the MKC on sale at dealerships (the MKC is also at dealerships now). Audi, Mercedes, and Lexus will eventually have competing entries but to the best of my knowledge, they are not on sale at dealerships in the US yet as of this date. Again, thanks for your comments and thoughts...I don' t expect that I changed your mind, but at least we've had a good dialogue... TB PS - I just read on AutoBlog today that Lincoln was just ranked the #1 Luxury brand in customer satisfaction in the AutoPacific 2014 owner surveys.... http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/17/lincoln-gmc-win-autopacific-vehicle-satisfaction-awards/ ...one more small step in the right direction.

This is a much more negative article than just about any other MKC review I've read. You might want to check elsewhere (you could start with autoblog.com) for a more balanced view...most reviews I've read were generally complimentary, and a number of them predict the MKC will be a major success. The author's assumption that Lincoln is late to the party is completely wrong. The smaller "C" segment CUV market where MKC will compete is just developing here in the States. Most of the current competitors are "CD", "D:, or larger segment entries. And complaining about the platform strategy is a bit disingenuous when Audi uses the exact same approach on just about every product they sell. TB

Man this is a superb project! Congratulations and looking forward to seeing it finished.....TIM

Gee...Very, very sharp! Very period correct and gorgeous paint work too! Noticed your west London addy....are you anywhere near the route from Mayfair/Berkeley Square to Heathrow? Have traveled that route many, many times during my career. TIM

Fred...yeah, that is my signature on your SVT Cobra certificate. I signed all the certificates for SVT products from mid-1995 through 1998 model years, the period when I was the Team Leader for SVT at Ford. I certainly considered a '13 Shelby, but the GT 5.0L is such a powerful car these days that it best met my needs (I need to use my car year 'round and the winters around here are pretty tough). Using a Shelby in the winter here seems almost sacrilegious. I had planned to buy my '13 when the lease ran out, but some idiot backed into the front fender and so I decided to let it go and order the '15 instead. I'm very excited about it, for all the reasons people have mentioned above. Best regards...TIM

There was an excellent story in the Wall Street Journal (I believe it was a week ago Saturday) that had much more details on the Source Interlink Distribution business and its failure. I would imagine it's now at WSJ's website (www.wsj.com) TB

Actually Harry, that is great example you cite - and we see where that got them (this took place mostly during the pre-bankruptcy era at GM, based on what I've read). The amount of the switch cost I've seen is just a little more, but regardless the cost, it was clearly the wrong tradeoff. TB

Harry....sorry...had to go pick up Michelle at the airport....no I have not driven any of the new Mustangs yet. I did have a Lincoln MKZ on loan earlier this year with the 2.0L EcoBoost and I was very, very impressed with it. The new Mustang engine is a 2.3L EcoBoost so it is larger and more powerful. You can read the reviews of the new Lincoln MKC which uses a less powerful version of the new 2.3L EcoBoost (the Mustang version will be 300hp plus (they haven't released the final ratings yet). I also had a second leasecar in the family fleet for several years with the 3.7L EcoBoost V6 (an awesome Ford Flex Limited AWD). All I can say is that once you've driven EcoBoost cars and you go back to a regular car, you'll miss the instant throttle response, low end torque, and endless power of the EcoBoost. At least I do. (Cheezzzz....sounds like a commercial????) I ordered my '15 with the 5.0L because I've always been a high performance V8 boy, but the technologies these days are making the other engine options more and more attractive. TB

Let's be honest: no spare, a few bucks cheaper to make the car. And for every customer that orders that $200 spare tire... ka-CHING! It's all about the $$$, nothing else. ************************************** Harry....that may have been the case years ago, but now, no consumer goods company can get by over the long term with that type of attitude. Trust me on this (I've had to make these types of decisions myself in the past)...it's not about the dollars, its about the tradeoffs of how those dollars are spent. What represents the best use of that hypothetical $200....given what you know about the customer and their preferences/usage/value tradeoffs? Most customers get a better value if that money is spent in other ways on their behalf (increased standard equipment levels, or bigger brakes, or improved acceleration, or larger standard wheel/tire, or the latest safety or fuel economy technology, etc.) than by covering the situation where someone gets a flat tire and cannot (using the alternatives provided) get their vehicle to a place where the tire can be fixed. TB

Guys....I can't state the exact reason why or why not a given car no longer carries spare tires, but among other factors are: - increased weight of the spare tire, which reduces performance, and sometimes places cars in the next-up federal government emissions test weight class, which can have negative implications for performance and fuel economy ratings, among other factors. - increases rear overhang (distance between centerline of rear axle and edge of rear bumper), which further increases overall weight, and goes against current customer design preferences which favor shorter rear overhangs (with current rear impact and bumper standards, there has to be quite a distance of impact zone, which partially takes up space that used to be used for spare tire clearance) - flat tires are very, very rare these days. When they do happen, many cars include an aerosol kit which is very effective at allowing temporary transportation to a place where the tire can be fixed. - cost of the tire and the spare - one of the toughest things a car manufacturer has to deal with today is tradeoffs on cost - where does the customer get the best value for his/her very hard-earned dollar? Cars that tend to be geared toward the average (non-enthusiast) customer may retain spare tires, but many cars these days (I think many of you would be surprised at the number) no longer contain spare tires oftentimes for the reasons stated above. Sometimes customers have the option to add a spare tire at extra cost, but in those cases, few customers exercise that option. . Hope this adds a bit of insight - note that these comments are very generic to the auto industry as a whole, and do not necessarily apply to any one manufacturer or carline. TIM

I could not agree more. Bob absolutely NAILED his build of that model. TIM

The F-Type Coupe is a two-seater while the Mustang, Camaro, et al are four-seaters....big difference in terms of design and capability.. and proportions required to make room for those in the second row. I also like the F-Type Coupe but the Mustang should be compared to 2+2's out there....not two seaters, while the F-Type should be compared to other two seaters like the Corvette, Aston Vantage, et al. As for the XK, I absolutely loved the coupe version of the first generation XK8/XKR ( which is a 2+2), but the current generation (2006-2014)of that product just doesn't do it for me for some reason. Personal taste, i guess.....TB ... PS - when you see a '15 Mustang on the road, bet you change your mind.....!

Ordered a '15 GT Convertible a couple of weeks ago...but probably won't get it till January or February (perfect timing for a convertible here in Michigan!!!). And yes, I still ordered the Spoiler Delete! Harry....what are you thinking of getting? TIM

Cool story....great example of why Mustang is a cultural phenomenon...everybody (it seems) has a connection to it somehow. Congrats to you and your daughter....TIM

Oscar was co-publisher of Car Model magazine for quite some time, later on it was Bob MacLeod on his own. For those of you who follow this sort of stuff (I always did), for a while in the mid-;ate 1960's Joe Oldham was edtior of Car Model. Yes, that Joe Oldham. The one that went on to author many muscle car era articles for the east coast car magazines, and then much later was edtior for Popular Mechanics for the better part of two decades during which it became a huge (in terms of circulation) heavyweight in the magazine world. He is now retired by pens a column in Hemmings Muscle Machines and wrote a cool book a couple of years back about his memories (including a bunch of street racing in NYC) of the muscle car era. Nearly as interesting, it is my understanding (Gregg/Harry, correct me if I'm wrong) that Robert Schleicher, who authored numerous articles in Car Model and Model Car Science, is a major domo in Golden Bell Press and publisher of Model Cars magazine. And the creator/long time publisher of Collectible Automobile magazine Frank Peiler, won first place in the Car Model/AMT/Meyers Manx Dune Buggy contest back in 1969. As we've said above, what goes around, does indeed come around! TIM

Interesting...if I think to the Lonestar Roundup in Austin, TX I attended a few months ago....plenty of graybeards to be sure...but even more of the 20-35 crowd....they were everywhere and having a great time. Come to think of it, pretty much the same at the Detroit Cobo Autorama or Goodguys shows I attend. While I too wish there were more current kit topics, but from a kit manufacturer standpoint, a hot rod, pre muscle car era, or muscle car era kit probably will have a much longer active/productive/relevant lifespan, and if the shows I attend are any indication, that will continue even as the "AARP Modelers Generation" start to pass away..... TB

Danno....this is one of those "stranger than life" stories...or as you say so correctly, funny how life turns out. Being an architect was actually career choice #2...#1 was (surprise) being a car designer/stylist, but this was the point at which Nader his crowd were getting underway and I did not want to be designing cars that were rolling tanks (or so I thought). So I worked in an architect's office one summer during high school but I really did not like it. At that point I was disillusioned and gave up on college. After working year after high school I took some business classes at a local university. I decided to actually do all the homework and reading and see what happened. Straight A's. So I decided to go ahead and work through college. Took five years and was hired at Ford the day I graduated. The first 20 years were marketing assignments, including three years at the healm of Ford SVT. Then I was promoted to a position that dual reported to the Group VP of Marketing and the VP of Design (J Mays). After three years, I was asked to become the Business Director of Design (sort of like a Chief of Staff job). So in 2001 I transferred to Design. I don't know of anyone else in the industry that successfully made that move (Marketing to Design). I that position years later, I was asked to put together a strategy on a particular subject, working with several company leaders. The strategy was agreed at the top, and then I was asked to become the leader of that group. So the last five years of my career was, I wasn't designing cars, but I was globally responsible for three advanced design studios globally that were, and working on many other strategy projects involving Design, product, etc, etc. I've often thought how blessed I was that I did not go into architecture. I am so much better off than I would have ever been as an architect, and for much of my career, worked side by side or for some of the industry's top automotive leaders and car designers. Not to mention my continued role in the model car world. Strange how life turns out, indeed. Best regards..TIM