Chuck Kourouklis

You bet! I'm jonesin' for some big kits now...

No sir. You have a look at that video, it says of the 1966 - Fiat 130hp - and I quote - "... the first 1/8 car model-kit ever." Now, I can't guarantee they didn't MEAN their first 1/8 car model-kit ever, but that ain't the caption.

Well, comes to that, they're claiming the Fiat from '66 was the first 1/8 kit ever, when Monogram had them beaten to that punch by a few years. Nevertheless, this is great to see! Got visions of sub-$1900 Rolls Ambassadors and Bugatti Surprofiles dancing in my head, and I might like another swing at the F40 and TR...

Well, register me as another emphatic vote for the Lusso - though I'd be plenty pleased to see Revell AG's own take on a GTO, if they were so inclined. The Fujimi 250GTO pretty much crushed all its predecessors in my book... but that doesn't mean it left no room for improvement.

Bear in mind I'm telling you this as someone who's test-fitted pretty deeply into both kits but hasn't finished either one: If you prize ease of assembly and you don't mind the higher price, the Fujimi may work better for you. It controls body sink marks a bit better, uses sliding molds to greater effect, includes photoetch in the standard version, and has fewer parts and that extra unplated set of wheels you mention (believe both sets are up-sized a scale inch as Fujimi likes to do). By nearly any other measure, the Aoshima kit is apt to be more to your liking. Even the version with the one-piece insert has more depth and detail in the engine bay area, the door hinges actually function, the tires are good P-zero representations, and the detail just pops more all around. Aoshima's separate detail-up kit is a sweetheart, with photoetch, adhesive metal transfers, and floor mats. And in those tiny, barely noticeable areas where the Fujimi and Aoshima bodies diverge, it's Aoshima that seems a wee bit closer. Realllly like my Fujimi, love my Aoshima - I'm guessing Aoshima's will be the kit with greater general appeal.

Kool! I'll be interested in how it works for you.

Yep, forgot that - I was under the impression that Revell went a little further than to plop a blower on their 4.6, but we are talking 13 years since the last one I went thru. And while we're at it, the Polar Lights Ford GT had a 5.4 32v supercharged - again, that "presentable" thing rears its head, 'specially compared to Revell's engine.

See, one of the things I dig best about those is the sound, man - rumpety-rump from a factory '32 all the way thru the wild ones like your link. They just growl like hairy, spitting beasts.

Yup, I sure did! Although if we're talking presentable engines, only the Magnum really counts. Escalade had a decent engine cover, but otherwise, it's as bad as you've heard.

Speaking as a guy who owns both, the DOHC is silky smooth and a winder, overjoyed to sing right into its rev limiter. The OHV is also a zinger by classic small block standards, but asthmatic and coarse next to the 32V - yet, also torquier from down low, and since it runs against higher gears, it actually has a prospect of high 20s mpg on the highway (actually hit 32 once under 60 mph drafting conditions). Don't think the cammer will ever get close, and that's the trade-off for squeezing 100 more hp out of 15% less displacement against a performance axle. I'll repeat and maybe embellish some of what's been listed (and this is probably partial 'cause it's off the top of my head): GM LS-series and derivatives: Revell/Monogram 1997+ C5 Corvette AMT 1997+ C5 Corvette Revell/Monogram 1999 Silverado Revell/Monogram Chevy SSR Revell/Monogram 2005+ C6 Corvette (LS7 - Z06, LS9 supercharged - ZR-1) Revell/Monogram 2010 Camaro GM 5th-gen LT-series: Revell/Monogram 2014 Corvette, available some time in 2017 GM/Lotus LT5: Revell/Monogram 1989+ C4 Corvette ZR-1 (1/24) AMT 1989+ C4 Corvette ZR-1 AMT Wagon Rod Ford Modular and derivatives: Revell/Monogram 1996 Mustang Cobra AMT 1997 Mustang GT (SOHC) AMT 1997 Mustang Cobra (DOHC) AMT 1997 Ford F-150 Revell 1997 Ford F-150 Lindberg 1997 Ford F-150 AMT Phantom Vicky Revell/Monogram 1999 Ford Lightning (just reissued, 5.4 DOHC supercharged) Revell/Monogram 1999 Mustang Cobra (DOHC, just reissued) Revell/Monogram 2005+, 2010 Mustang GT (3-valve) Revell/Monogram 2007+, 2010 Shelby GT500 (5.4 DOHC supercharged - also available in Revell 1/12) Coyote: waiting and waiting Chrysler late hemi: Revell/Monogram 2009 Dodge Challenger Testors/Lindberg 2006+ Charger (1/24) Chrysler V10: Revell 1992+ Dodge Viper and GTS (snap) Revell Dodge Ram VTS (simplified glue) AMT 1992+ Dodge Viper and GTS Revell Dodge Sidewinder Concept (simplified?) Revell 2003+ Dodge Viper and GTS

So Roger, you've got a replacement coming whichever way, right? You might take this opportunity to play around with just-off-boiling water, see if that helps you any with the warped one. You just take a saucepan or pot big enough to accept the frame and fill it with enough water to immerse the part. Bring that water to a rolling boil, then take it off the heat. Grab some tongs and drop in the part before the water cools, say maybe for three seconds at the start. You want to start off with short times and then work your way up as needed, so you don't immediately distort the part. If you get it to a point where you get the faintest whiff of hot plastic fume, it'll probably be ready to hold the shape you twist it into. I'd start by undoing the diamond first, then get it all on one plane. Of course, all the usual disclaimers about being careful not to burn yourself, blablabla. I've had good success straightening stuff out, eliminating body warps, and closing floorpan-to-rocker panel gaps this way.

Okay, so you can take a more straight-on profile shot like this: note that it's a bit elongated by the lens, and still correctly reckon that the upper surfaces look a bit disproportionate. You don't really need to take measurements to note that the top surface seems close in height to the surface directly below it, as defined by the mid-body crease and the one just above the rocker panel. Whereas in a side profile of the 1:1 - the difference between the upper and lower expanses is a little clearer. Though if you DID take measurements based on photographs - right at the midpoint between the fender and the front door line - you'd find that the upper surface on the model is about 80% the height of the surface just below it, where the 1:1 hovers around 70% - not a huge difference, but noticeable. Any number of factors can lead to this (is the center crease too low, is the rocker crease too high), you can point out that we won't know for sure until you take a tape to the car and the model, and you'd be right - but the two-dimensional analysis from photographs is close enough to start drawing conclusions. Now if we were talking deviations of hundredths, the "perfect model" concept might enter the discussion. But no, we're talking tenths - subtle, but visible to the unassisted eye. And nowhere is it in dispute that even with this deviation, it still blows the carp out of any 'Cuda Revell/Monogram has done before.

You can account for the fisheye effect and still find those upper surfaces a bit broad. This isn't the only angle which appears that way, and the obvious excess and flatness of the wheel arch lip stands no matter what the angle and lens distortion. Which isn't to say that there isn't a whole lot about this body shell that's much, much closer than the last two attempts - the last AAR took those same areas and made them way narrower for scale than these are wide. But as for "winners", my vote goes to Stu from page 9, who made a visual adjustment that resulted in an actual improvement.

Mmm, I dunno - I think some of the problems actually get louder as the wheel diameter goes down: Actually, the rear ain't lookin' so bad, but man, that front... One of the photo manipulations I've wanted to try (brace yourself for the irony: I've been too busy on an ACTUAL BUILD) is to sneak the shadow of that mid-body crease up just a smidge, just marginally.

And then the version AFTER that release will have the up-top.

Excellent! Thanks, Art!

Truth to be told, I had difficulty telling one '50s chrome mastodon from another until I started paying attention to them...

WHOAH, glad I saw this. Proweld has long been my weapon of choice. Bondene, Weld #3, Tamiya thin, are these all comparable in viscosity, so's you can use 'em with that glass-hypo needle applicator?

Oh yeah, Stu. The top fender expanses still seem a wee bit broad, but those arches look a lot better.

What Scott said, re the fender arches. Gentlemen, with all due respect, I'd really like to see what manufacturer has stopped making new model kits because of nitpicking - if anybody has an actual example, I'm all ears. Now some manufacturers have been prodded to improve their products - like the Lindberg '61 Impala, or the Pro Modeler '69 Charger, or Revell doing a new-tool 1/25 '69 Camaro instead of recycling Monogram's old dog, or Moebius tweaking the '53 Hudson - but seriously, to stop developing the new products your business thrives on out of a hissy fit over nitpicking? Revell/Monogram hasn't done business well-nigh these 70 years by being that stupid. The irony here is that this new 'Cuda is coming about in great part because Revell/Monogram's last two were so lambasted. You guys are in this hobby with the expectation that you will have a miniature that looks as close to its prototype as possible. There's no need to be cautious, circumspect or apologetic about that. In fact, it's those who attack the nit-pickers who have a far more limiting and inhibiting effect on this hobby than the nit-pickers themselves.

Funky carb setup, but the kit has distinct molded fuel lines for whichever you choose. Overall one of the best y-blocks/312s ever in scale. Haphazard bagging, but the body shell mold seems to have had an extra polishing on this one, for whatever reason. Probably luck of the draw for warps, but my floorpan, chassis, and interior mock-up snicked right into the body without any adjustment. And the body shell in this one is the single 2012 Revell kit that comes closest to absolutely nailing the 1:1 in every detail and proportion. The door/window frame deviations and rear quarter crease eccentricities are so slight they're barely worth mentioning, and just about everything else looks like it's down cold. Absolutely Revell's best this year, imho, and by a fair margin.

^This.^

Absolutely, Sir, jives pretty well with what else I'm hearing. Thanks again, and I hope your pursuit of info is just as fruitful - if I see anything I can help answer for you, I'll be sure to pitch in.

Woooow. EXCELLENT, and thank you very much for those pics, Larry! I can tell you that the Promolite body keeps the backlight the same, and I'm guessing this is because the difference isn't glaring and it makes it easier to use the Revell window pieces. Tom did redo the drip molding arc over the vent wings in a manner superior to Revell's, and he molded the actual vent wing frame into the body so you don't have to use Revell's somewhat fussy pieces there. It's a very high-quality conversion. I'm looking to gather as much input as I can on how the floorpan was factory-finished - bare steel with black undercoat spatter? - and I was wondering if you might have some info to add there. Thanks for all the info! NICE RIDES.

Oh yeah! What's more, 109 parts with separate doors and at least a fair-looking attempt at an engine. Be ready for seat lowers molded to the floor and some other interesting design touches...