Chuck Kourouklis

THANK YOU, Rob! No wonder I couldn't find these under a search for 1970 Mustang wheels. And the set I found on Ebay are supposed to mount on 15's. So now I'm really wondering why Revell did 'em the way they did...

So Larry, had a chance to dig on what they did with the wheels and tires yet? The new simulated alloy 5-bolts are real clean, and the tires, which started life in the Pro Modeler '69 Charger, are certainly in better shape than the old Monogram GT Radials that mount on the Magnum 500's. Problem is, the tires are 1/25; even scaled up to 1/24, they'd be a bit small for this car. And of course, each wheel option has its specific tire, so swapping in the other tires is not an option. I like the crispness of the Polyglas tires in AMT's stock '71 Charger, and they certainly seem more appropriately sized in the wheel wells of this Mustang. I'm guessing Revell did this because the argent wheels were 14's, but at this point, I'm wondering if it might have been better for them to fudge the simulated alloys up to a 15" diameter, clean up the GT Radials a bit, and leave it at that... Can't complain about all the other goodies, though!

ZIL beat it down pretty good up there. Only point of departure I have is that I dig all the working features on the Toppolino, so I'm a little more forgiving of it. I was also glad to see the old IMC Cougar and Mustang II concept kits back, too. I'd say that what chinks exist in Lindberg's reputation are owed mostly to the Palmer and Pyro reissues - certainly not the IMC kits - and maybe to a wee bit of shakiness as they geared back up with 1/25 in 1995. There were slight issues with the Dodge 330, and the '61 Impala really came under fire for having an inaccurate cowl and a few other niggling issues in its first release (to such a degree that there's an apocryphal tale of some sniveling, spineless little punk reporting the kit to GM licensing, right when we'd all pretty much determined that the various automotive licensing departments were the bad guys). The 330 was still arguably close enough, and how did Lindberg respond to the problems with the '61? With a massive retooling that corrected not only the cowl, but a host of other details not mentioned by the rivet-counters. And never were these '90's kits cantankerous to build - in fact, having built and reviewed all of 'em through the '66 Chevelle, I can tell you their fit was very well worked out. The series reached its peak with the '53 Ford, which was fully the match of the best '50's offerings of the time from AMT and Revell/Monogram. And as best I can tell, the new J Lloyd stuff has started at the same level as that '53 Ford and is escalating from there. It only remains to be seen if the new offerings will sell as well as they deserve to. You have to acknowledge that the Pyro and Palmer stuff are disasters. But you also have to acknowledge that Lindberg acquired them after the fact, and that many of the true vintage Lindberg kits - and ALL of the new ones - are in an entirely different league.

I'm on record as being a little more forgiving with the Monte Carlo, Ken - I just have a soft spot for kits that respond well to some extra attention, and this one is like the new-tool AMT '66 Fairlane in that regard, at least to me - but worst idea? Oh, you bet. At least the early eighties produced the Pontiac STE and a renewed Mustang/Camaro rivalry; there wasn't anything worth a cold, wet loaf in the mid to late '70's. I have to echo Bob Paeth's sentiments; I'd rather have some fit problems in a kit with the potential to look like its prototype than a nice builder that doesn't cut it at all - the JADA-inspired Evo caricature from AMT is the most vivid recent example I can think of. Fujimi's recent Cobra is another; it's agreeable enough to build, and the body's in the general zip code - but NOTHING ELSE in that kit looks right, or even completely developed. Why bother when you can get a 20-year-old Monogram kit or a 45-year-old AMT kit that totally trounces it? That Airfix/MPC Bentley, on the other hand - I did mine without any trouble as a 14-year-old, and the only questionable aspect of the texture on the parts was resolved for me when I realized that the body of the actual car was covered in canvas, or leather, or something other than sheet metal. And some of you list kits and only mention one aspect of them that's not satisfactory - remember, the thread's about the "worst kit ever". Polar Lights had a decent start with their funny cars, but hit a rough patch pretty quickly with their early '70's stock cars. You could beat the Talladega into some kind of shape, but the Cyclone was rough. And the Charger, oh man - crude, inaccurate, nearly unbuildable, and totally beyond excuse as a 2002 release. In pointing this out, my conscience is balmed somewhat by the fact that at least Polar Lights didn't end this way; their Ford GT in particular was fully the measure of most any other domestic release. I like the idea of "Biggest Letdown" that was brought up earlier, and I'd have to say that most AMT releases after 2000 fall under that category. What a cruel twist of fate after all the steam they'd gathered up till then. Only the '56 Thunderbird and F&F Supra kits approach that pre-millennium standard, and the concept Camaro is close enough to sneak in the back door. Every other AMT release since 2000 is a testament to what happens when a company fails to appreciate its assets in product development. But the question was about the worst kit ever; and I'm sorry, but I don't see what could surpass the Pyro Auburn that yet cowers in the deepest recesses of Lindberg's reissues. Come on. Just look at it. More than any other kit in history, this one transcends that pet pretext of all those insufferable pontificators who prattle so piously about "modeling" - even a "kit assembler" could do better with a bar of soap and a swiss army knife.

I assembled a hood hinge from one of the Bonnevilles and honestly did not find it that difficult. The copper wire they supply is malleable enough that you can thread it through two of the PE pieces, trim it down to around half a milimeter on either side, then mushroom both ends just by squeezing the new joint between a pair of needlenose pliers. The resulting hinge is a little tight in its action, but you can loosen it pretty easily just by working it some. It's enough to leave me wondering if people have actually tried building 'em, or they're just intimidated by the prospect...

Here you go, Len: I was skeptical at first, too. I thought someone might have been confused about GMP's MK1's, but it looks like GMP has covered the entire series in 1:12. More here: http://motorsportcollector.com/GMP12FordGT.html As for the spottiness of Trumpeter's military offerings, I believe the courtroom term is "asked and answered". I'll reiterate: the earlier releases had lots of problems. The newer ones have far fewer. Any reason the automotive releases absolutely can't follow the same trend?

Heh heh, yeah. Roger that, Izzy! Roger that. But that test shot looks bitchin'...

Well an unassembled GMP wouldn't be catastrophic news to me - sign me up in fact, 'specially if it's $200 or less - but along with most, I'd certainly prefer all-new plastic tooling, especially if it's within about 90% of a comparable Tamiya twelfth-scaler. The relative merits of Trumpeter's foray into 1/25 are actually debatable. Yes, the kits were visibly off, and the engineering deteriorated by the time the Monte Carlo was released. They flung hundreds of pieces and photoetched hinges at an increasingly crotchety crowd that'd rather just have a correct body and a promo-plate chassis. Trumpeter would have been better advised to flip off 1/25 and all the baggage that comes with it; it's had its day, and Revell is the only manufacturer left with any true understanding of 1/25, anyway. All that notwithstanding, it's still arguable those kits weren't a total waste of time. The Bonnevilles in particular were ground-breaking in design, and their general fit is impressive for having those hundreds of parts. There were positive aspects to these kits, and I think writing those strengths off in anticipation of the GT40 isn't entirely fair. But even so, let's assume the American-catered 1/25 kits offer a dire indication of what's ahead. We're also ignoring a pretty good fire engine in the mix, and Trumpeter's aircraft and armor haven't even entered the discussion yet. That stuff has been improving by leaps and bounds, enough that this die-hard car guy couldn't help trying a few. And if Trumpeter's new military kits look a lot more like the intended subjects than the earlier releases did, I don't see why the automotive releases can't follow the same trend. If Trumpeter builds on what's been established in 1/12 the same way they do on 1/32, 1/48, 1/350, and so on, this new GT40 could actually be pretty impressive. Stellar, even.

Yezindeed, Rob. They actually instituted that change with the AAR 'Cuda reissue, which might have been scheduled originally to come out after the '55 Chevy hardtop - that was the last kit with the blue logo.

lol, yeah - probably because you provided the evidence that it's not!

Perhaps it's because there's nothing really to notice. That vent may be missing on the boxcover, but it's right there on the actual Revell body shell. Double-click the first photo in this thread and have a closer look. You can just about make it out in Dave's photo of his green car, as well.

Don't forget one other thing, y'all - The mounting pins on these trim bits are long, because they were originally designed to be heat-swaged from inside the diecast body shell. This opens up two possibilities: you can either mushroom the pins yourself from inside (that is, if you have a bit less trouble with heated screwdrivers near your painted body than you do with glue or shaky blades), or you can trim the pins a bit and apply the glue from inside. All told, this set of trim promises to be a bit easier to deal with than what you see in some other kits **COUGH-TRUMPETER-COUGHCOUGH**.