Chuck Kourouklis

Eh, I'll take one. LOVE the trademark evasion on the tires...

The markings on the tires are absolutely anachronistic. The round-shouldered radial look, not so much. And seeing that a 205/70R14 is within the realm of conversion from E78 (10mm difference in width, or less than half an inch) on a tire easily stretched to a scale 15" rim, then if AMT absolutely had to use an existing tire, that E78 was far and away their closest at the time. I maintain that if Round2 wiped the sidewalls on those very tires and then tampo-printed them "Eagle GT", they'd pass muster well enough - particularly if you sanded down the knobbly texture of the treads some. Of course, if they could see their way to new Eagle GTs in the same sizes as their recent Polyglas sets, there'd be a TON of models to use them across 1/25 and 1/24 brands.

Eh, it looks like pretty straight down-scale pantograph of their 1/8 '80 Turbo Trans Am, which is why I'd suspect you're getting the impression of an '80 (and perhaps why Monogram wasn't any too specific about the model year on the box cover). And again, I'll break company with some of the other assessments here. One thing I did not suffer well even as a pre-teen modeler was the slop I was beginning to see from MPC around things like drip moldings, tire design, parts texturing and whatnot. To be fair, MPC's 1/20 Corvette of the time was based on tooling much older than Monogram's, which focused on one version. Monogram's may have been simplified, but they did a MUCH better and sharper job than their contemporaries sitting on a shelf looking looking like the 1:1.

I'd have to disagree with that. For proportions and detail accuracy, the AMT kit actually beats all other comers in 1/24-1/25 3rd-gen Camaros. The Revell kit had a bulky nose and a relatively crude finish in some areas, most particularly the kinda bashed-looking front end. The AMT kit was the only one in this scale to get the properly "scooped" sides of the headlight nacelles in the front fascia. Revell's rubber tires were square-shouldered but sure, I wouldn't mind a set of those for this kit - though if AMT had wiped the sidewalls of its tires and put "EAGLE GT" logos on the decal sheet (or better yet, tampo-printed them), they would have been vastly improved. As it is, the included tires are the only ones this kit has ever had. For whatever reason, even Revell's 1/16 3rd-gen Camaro was markedly superior to its own 1/25.

Don't know if I'd go so far as to say "shame", but sure, I'd grab up a '76-'78. Prob'ly make a Sky Bird outta mine.

For the more base-level taillight treatment, you can find that in last year's Fast & Furious variation of this tooling. Good to see the full-width taillight and door scoop covers nailed down absolutely for this version. And as you can see from the F&F kit or the instruction sheet in this one, the molds are all-new straight down to the chassis and suspension, though they hew very closely in appearance to the '68/'69 tooling. Axle pins and no positional steering this time.

Caps are on the chrome tree fwiw. Tires are the Polyglas made to replace TRX tires from the '91 Baldwin-Motion '69 Camaro onward, tampo printed narrow whites on the bare sidewalls. One possible surprise benefit? The 351 valve covers stamped "Powered By Ford" - weren't these missing from the Mach 1 Special Edition of the '70 Mustang? They DO specificy it's a Windsor this time for the Torino, so the covers don't appear to have the exact shape for the Mustang's Cleveland, scale fudging aside. But now we've at least got something to copy the script from...

Man. Had no idea how badly I wanted that Civic till I saw the announcement...

Based on the results I got with the McGriff OIds conversion, seems like applying the plate decal to thin plastic sheet stock and trimming around it might be a good compromise.

LOVE this kit and hats off to Sam Freeman btw - GREAT conversion. My A-pillars were flattened too.

"Why is youth wasted on the young?" I'd respond, "Why is wisdom wasted on the old", but... well, y'know.

HEAR HEAR! Not to discount your observations about vintage subjects - I too REALLY want an early '60s F-series - but you just brought up two of the most utterly tone-deaf omissions in the current market right now. I mean, bully for the Round 2 Gen-6 Camaro 'n all, certainly beats none; but it also demonstrates how criminally overdue we are for good 550s. Look at all the attention lavished on the 197.2. Guess Revell's got Mustang fatigue now, but the timing couldn't be worse. For that 350R to go uncovered...

WHUUUUUUUUUUUT?? AWESOME! Need me some o' that action for the '83 Olds too! Off and googling...

Kool! Only thing worries me are those bias ply-lookin' tires on the box. All this kit needs are the radials it's always had, hope those are the "Polysteel" ones mentioned on the lid. Would be even better if those were wiped on the sidewalls and tampo-printed "Eagle GT"...

Okay. That was funny.

Now now. We Coyote 5.0-bangaz can be a little more magnanimous than that.

Yeah, the MPCs had a good overall shape and with their Firebird counterparts were updated thru '92 by MPC and then AMT as the model years mandated. But they looked a little unfinished around their window moldings and they were a bit impressionistic in undercarriage detail. The AMT '83 had a somewhat dodgy rear hatch fit, but it was otherwise superior all 'round. Those headlight nacelles in the front fascia, scooped out deeper at the sides to curl back to the center to meet the hood at their tops? AMT nailed 'em, where the MPC and Revell 1/25 kits shot those lines straight down from the hood edges for a blocky and oversimplified look around the headlights.

Diggin' it. That there's quite possibly the best of the 1/25 Gen-3 F-cars. I'll have another just for the box and decals.

And the guy's dead wrong, because for the Foose truck, this kit is pretty dead-on - at least in terms of gross proportions. The scanning really shows good dividends here.

Thanks very much, Tim! Yeah, that's what I was also saying about the front wheel arches, Bill - sorry not to make that clearer. That roof lowering is really tricky, though. The lower body seemed leaner to me, but the nearly-stock side windows are still throwing me off. I can't make out the A-pillar chop, even though it seems pretty clear you can't tilt the roof forward without doing that. But coming back around to my original point: for matching the specific Foose FD100, Revell has done as well with this as they have done anything else, whether they owe that to the scanning or not. It really seems dialed in.

Man, that's cool. Work so quiet and sneaky you gotta look and look and look to start making it all out. You got a complete list of the mods some place, Del?

Huh. Well, here's the story from Chip Foose Design, and it seems to cover us both, Bob. There's a cowl and a cab sectioning at window level, so the roof is indeed dropped - but it's hard to judge that from the side window DLO, because it's nearly the stock greenhouse moved down into the cab some: "...In 2005, as part of the show Overhaulin', which featured Chip as co-host and lead designer, the truck was "stolen" from the Foose Design lot. Unbeknownst to Chip, his dad Sam led a team of builders and designers in reforming the '56 into the truck it is today. They were able to use Chip's drawings as their design template. Nearly every panel was reshaped, reformed or cut. The cowl was sectioned, the hood was pie-cut, the front wheels were moved forward, the rear fenders were widened and raised up, the cab was section cut 3 inches at the rear window and the front fender wheel opening was moved up. A Roush NASCAR racing motor, serial number 1, was installed and one-off wheels were cut." The hood's pie cut and the wheel well adjustments were pretty clear to me, but the greenhouse mods were definitely subtler. And yes, the Moebius F-series roof is kinda gross. The rounded C-pillars don't help matters much, and it's all pretty galling 'cause the resin patterns didn't seem to have any of those specific problems. That all has the unfortunate whiff of a more accurate earlier prototype "not looking right" and getting teased and distorted into what we have now. Just crossing fingers for the '65 - that's the one I care about.

Are you talking about the front wheel arches, Bill? Those are definitely moved forward relative to stock, but correct for the Foose truck. The closest thing I've seen to a justification for choosing this subject over the more novel ones Revell proposed is that it's a popular modification and some modelers will appreciate a kit with that work done already. And the top sure gives the impression of being lowered, doesn't it? But looking at a bone-stock truck, I'm not so sure...

The greenhouse doesn't look too much changed from stock, but I have no idea what mods were done or not done to that area on the FD100. If it is stock or nearly so on the Foose truck, I might be more inclined to go with the new kit's dimensions over the old one's. Revell may have sneaked some LIDAR scanning in on the C7 'Vette - if not, the kit is close enough to convince you otherwise - but this is the first Revell model in our hands for which we've actually seen development photos of the 1:1 getting a proper scan. And if Revell did indeed collect that data and they didn't tease any of the measurements in the translation, this kit should be pretty accurate mathematically. I haven't pored over it hard yet, but there don't appear to be many obvious goofs so far in comparison with the specific subject.

And the answer for anybody following who's curious: the original releases of the '62 Catalina did not have vent windows. I actually mentioned that in reviewing the kit when it was new, and the unofficial word we got back from Dyersville was "oops"... Round 2 fixed this problem in the reissue with the Arnie Beswick car on the cover. The windshield was modified to spread backward and fill out the vents in one piece.