tim boyd

I'm not going to suggest that Revell would win, but the company/team you are describing has moved on considerably over that decade and a half. My guess is that you would find them to be a very formidable competitor. TB

I kinda understand/sympathize with the sentiment here. But based on Revell's new '70 'cuda kit and all the factory-correct options that single kit includes, I don't think one should assume that a newly-tooled Revell Ford pickup kit would cover only one version, and/or that it would be the least desirable version at that. And while I have absolutely zero insider knowledge that would suggest such a project is under consideration, I would love to see Revell do a kit of the all-new, aluminum-bodied 2015 Ford F150. If they did, wouldn't it be cool to do a "fight to the death" duel/comparo between that kit and this new Meng F350? TIM

Mark...not at all. I think I read somewhere a long time ago that every year you live seems to go by twice as fast as the year before, and with two months to go until I turn 60, that sure seems to be the case here. Having said that, I sure don't feel anything like I'm 60 years old. Maybe model car building keeps us young at heart??? Best...>TIM

Brett.///...that is certainly some hot news! Thanks....TIM

Pat...the block castings are identical between the Parts Pack version and the Miss Deal version. And they both have the upper bellhousing as part of the castings. But to my understanding, only the real 331 Hemi had the integral bellhousing, it was removed for both the 354 and 392 Hemis that came later. Best regards...TIM

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade here, but I think I have to speak up once again about what constitutes an NNL Model Car Event. The intent of the original of the NNL was a group of model builders who wanted to get together in a non-competitive venue for enjoying their model cars and their friendship. Because of this, there was no contest judging, and most importantly, no awards. None. Not a single one. As the NNL grew, some of the folks who later took the lead in organizing the event decided to incorporate a people's choice award, voted on by the participants. Note that it was "People's Choice", not "Best of Show." Big difference there. Over the ensuing years, this has grown to typically a Peoples Choice, a Junior Builder award, and an Event Theme award. These vary by NNL event, but the common point is that they are 1) voted on by participants (not determined by judges), and 2) they are few in number. Because, at its core, NNL's are "Non Contests". They are not about who has the best model, they are all about showing cool models and enjoying camaraderie among each other. There are plenty of great model car contest for those who want to compete against each other. And more power to those of you who prefer to compete this way, and for the organizers who put in all the long hours and effort to make these contests work so well. But if you are traveling to an "NNL" that has a bunch of awards listed on the flier, and/or, it is not clear that any award is based on participant votes instead of judging, then most likely you are not traveling to a true NNL, regardless of what the event may be called. Part of the whole NNL idea was to keep things loosely organized and focused on fun, not rules and politics. So this NNL distinction between "non-competitive" and "competitive" events may not be as clear as it could be. As one of the organizers of the original, first ever NNL, and a strong supporter of the idea for the nearly 35 years (!) since then, I think the model car community needs to be reminded of this from time to time. For those of you who want to know more about this, I did a Commentary on this subject for Model Cars Magazine several years ago, you might want to look that up. Again, no intent to rain on anyone's parade here, just a kindly reminder about the core of what make an NNL, an NNL. Best regards...TIM

Sharp!!!! TB

Chuck...that is a great idea! For those of you considering this, just make sure your Ardun is from the second issue of the Revell '50 Ford Custom pickup (circa 2007 or so), as the Ardun in the first version of the Custom Ford Pickup was wrong in several areas (including siamesed exhausts that were great for a regular Flathead but completely wrong for an Ardun which has four separate exhaust ports on each head). TB

Pesonally, I would use the AMT '49 Merc engine. It is well designed, correct for the marque and model year, and includes desirable features like correct, separate exhaust manifolds. The '50 Ford truck would be an OK swap, but the '48 Ford is a prior generation Flathead, with the distributor in a different location and the water hoses from the radiator connecting in a different location, so it would not be a prototypically correct choice for a '49 Merc Woody.....TIM

Mark...that looks very sharp. And here's how I used it on one of my projects...http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/from-the-pages-of-y/from-the-pages-of-m/ TIM

Just to confirm...everything Mark says here I agree with....TB

David...a lot of materials on the Hamtramck site are updated with mid-year changes, and often there are "Product Information Letters" posted there that cover in-process model year spec changes. But I checked, and just as you said, there's nothing in either category on the décor group for '68 Plymouths. So I looked at some other reference materials - in this case, the Dodge and Plymouth Muscle Car Red Book, Second Edition (Peter C. Sessler). Some disagree with me, but I have found this book to be a fairly accurate (though by no means bulletproof) source of Mopar info. It lists order code 360 Road Runner Decor Group for $79.20. The text says" The Road Runner Décor Group spiffed things up a bit with expanded interior color selection, a steering wheel with partial trim ring, center pillar moldings, and a rear deck lid applique." So apparently the décor group in 1968 1/2 was exterior/interior combined. Also checked the Road Runner seat and door panels and the seat sew style doesn't appear to match any of the seats shown in the Hamtramck Dealer Color and Trim Selector. It was probably an additional sew style introduced at mid-year with the package, and the interior door panels in the kit are WAY too deluxe to be the entry level Road Runner, they were clearly upgraded as well. Of course, there is always the possibility that the 1/1 car AMT/Ertl scaled was not factory correct, but for purposes of where we are right now, I would suggest you consider the kit to have the Décor Group and build it that way on both the outside and inside (including the Kieth Mark decals). That's the way I would build mine. Hope this helps...TIM

David...good questions there. When I factory ordered my '74 Road Runner, the exterior and interior décor groups were separate options...you could get one or the other or both (I got both!). As for '68, from what I recall, the Exterior Décor Group became available at midyear, about the same time as the Hardtop bodystyle was added. It may have been that the upgraded seat became available at the same time. I didn't know that the kit seat was the upgraded one. And I don't know if there was an Interior Décor Group at that point. I recommend you look at the Hamtramck Registry website and go through the '68 Plymouth Color and Trim/Interior pages they have posted there. That will tell all, I'm sure.... Best regards..>TIM

Bob...thanks for the feedback and further comments. When AMT did the art for the Countdown series, much of the Art Department was still intact (I was doing work for them at the time....the '65 El Camino countdown kit pictured the build they commissioned from me for that kit). It was probably about six months later, when the strike hit, that they laid off the rest of the Art Department. I had interviewed for full time work there, but the strike happened and they told me no job was available....weeks later I started at Ford and lost all contact with that group.... TB

Bill...thanks...I didn't notice that....but I just figured out...the side panel art in light blue with the vent windows is a direct lift from the "stock version" end panel of the '78 Countdown issue box art. I just noticed that the '68 blackout lower treatment is in this illustration as well. Seems we (or at least I) wasn't as sharp about catching these discrepancies back in the day. Thanks for pointing that out....TIM

Curtis...it's still there but should be a fairly quick and easy removal....thanks for asking...TIM

The AMT and MPC are both come from the same tool, and both are 1967 (not 1966) versions as far as I know. The tool was updated for 1967 during the original MPC annual kit run. The major difference is in the interior (the console is shorter on the '67) and the upholstery sew style. I don't have all reissues of this kit but the ones I do did not include the stock wheel covers. I'm writing all this from memory (without the kits in front of me), so if anyone has the kit in front of them and sees something different, don't hesitate to tell me I'm wrong! TIM Oh....I see Don posted while I was writing and said the same thing...TB

Sorry guys...I locked it until I was able to post the text, but then forgot to remove the password when I posted the links. It's fixed now. Enjoy...TIM Randy...fixed now...sorry for the confusion but glad you enjoyed the other content...Best Regards...TIM

Here's a link to a detailed review and commentary on this new kit release from Round 2 AMT. There are several reasons why I think this new issue is preferable to the one previous issue of the '69 convertible kit back in 1978 (both kit issues shown below). http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/first-lookwhats-new-1/ Thanks for looking...TIM

Wow Casey...I never knew any version of this kit existed with a set of surfboards and a blown 454 option! Thanks for posting this....TIM

Walter...that is looking super sharp so far! TIM

John.....WOW! Just WOWWWWW! Superb detailing you are doing there. Tim

John...no apology necessary or expected at all. Just passionate modelers having a good discussion. Cool detail on the tranny shaft - I missed that one! Best regards...TIM

For this type of kit, the model companies are designing for the adult hobbyist, and from what I know the buyers are almost all adult model car builders. Children (or parents buying for children) usually go for the simpler, "snap kit" or "fast build" products today. TB

John...good points, all. Ideally we'd get a direct response from someone inside the companies, but I don't expect that is going to happen any time soon. As an outsider looking in, perhaps I can add some perspective that will hopefully be more correct than not... First, the model companies I know of today are VERY small, tight-knit organizations today. The remaining industry volume and sales revenue for model car kit sales just can't support larger or even moderately sized organizations. So in the situations I am aware of, the "Suits" as they are sometimes call here, are heavily involved in the creation and production of the kits. In fact, the most senior person I currently know well in the model companies is a die-hard car enthusiast who has owned (and maintained, and worked on) C2 Corvettes for virtually his entire adult life and regularly travels to the Woodward Dream Cruise, Oakland (now in LA) Roadster Show, and similar car-guy events. My guess is that he probably knows more about the insides of a carb than 90% of us who read this forum. Second, I can understand the frustration with inaccurately rendered carb venturis and seven vs. eight hole distributors, but for some on this board to discredit this entire kit on the basis of those and some very evident overdone wheel lips, strikes me as a case of possibly missing the bigger picture in this case. As you put it, I mean no disrespect, but...what about all the stuff Revell got right with this kit? The correct factory stock building options like the plated as well as correctly shaped Elastomeric front bumpers? The overall appearance of the finished chassis and the interior? The shape of separately molded, plated fishgill rocker panels or the engraving on the pistol grip shifter handle, for example? I'll be very up front here - I built two of these kits and I still missed both the distributor and carb venturi goofs, probably because so much of the kit was right. Could that have been what happened at Revell? Finally, all consumer products are the result of tradeoffs. In this case, the model manufacturers have to work with Artisans that are half the world away, who in most cases have never been given the benefit of seeing in person what they are being asked to recreate in miniature. The volumes involved can no longer financially justify having the tools created just 60 miles down the road (e.g. 1225 East Maple to the former tooling house in Windsor, Canada) any more. The alternative would be no new kits at all. Instead, the model companies work with their suppliers and overseas tooling houses to get these products right as much as humanly possible, and those suppliers also do their best to get it right. Then there's the timeline. At what point do you hit the "publish" button? If you were the product manager, would you have held the kit up yet another 3-6 months (uneducated guess here) to fix the distributor and carb? Now it's time for me to question something. Having spent my 35 1/2 years in the auto industry of which the last 12 were senior positions in the Design department, I agree with Chuck K. on the following - I do not understand why the model companies are not using 3D digital scans in the development of their 1950's to 1970's model car kits. By this point in the 100 year development of the automotive styling profession, each 1/1 scale car design was the result of thousands of hours of studio designers and engineers fine tuning things like - for example- wheel well openings and fender lips. Or in this case, the artistry of the surfaces in the '70 'cuda taillight panel cove, which no one - MPC, JoHan, or Revell - has correctly captured in their kits. There just isn't time or money to continue to develop a 1/25th scale tool to catch all these subtle tweaks. On the other hand, the cost of a high quality digital scan is now in the mid 4 digit range (e.g., just $5,000, more or less), and with some additional expenditures to process the scan results, and perhaps to ship, prep, and clean the 1//1 scale car post-scan. This digital scan could at least give the overseas toolmakers a huge head start in capturing the subtle surface nuances of the original 1/1 scale designs. It would seem to me that the incremental cost of this up front expenditure would be more than offset by not having to retool body castings to correct mistakes that were the result of trying to design a model from 2D pictures alone. To me, personally, this is a much bigger issue than some embarrassing omissions or engraving on small engine parts. Once again, I'm struggling to find the right tonality in these remarks. I feel that there is a great deal of misunderstanding in the hobby community about how the model car industry actually works. As a result there are often statements made on the model car boards that are, at best, unfair to the hardworking people at these companies. But on the other hand, and as you John so succinctly and correctly put "you represent the guy that they are selling to". Hope this adds a little bit of insight. Others with industry contacts, feel free to step in with your knowledge and views as well, whether they agree with me or not! TIM