mikos

I’m sure BMW and their racing teams, sponsors, etc would be at a much higher licensing rate than doing a cloned kit of a mid ‘60’s Cadillac. I could be wrong, but my gut instinct tells me those premium German luxury brands would demand a much higher licensing fee than a domestic brand. Cloning can give us those old Johan kits again and they can market them under the nostalgic branding of the Jo-Han name. I’m sure they would make money on it. You just got to get the right people in, not the naysayers who say it can’t be done, to do it. That’s why I think it’s imperative to have a parent company with deeper pockets be on the deal as well. That’s why I suggested Round2. Unless we want to just see some esoteric 3D printed trailer out of resin and call that the new Jo-Han, financial risks will have to be taken. Deeper pockets can take more risks. I think it would be worth it.

You don’t need the old tooling anymore to reproduce a Johan kit. Cloning technology gives you the ability to do it without it.

Steve G. from Round2 reported that it did NOT cost $250k+ (or nowhere near that number) to produce a cloned kit. Why do you keep insisting on that number? It’s incorrect and misleading. Licensing is also not the impenetrable barrier that people make it out to be. Cost, licensing and tooling have been the three can’t do it excuses people have used for decades to explain why there will never be another Jo-Han or Jo-Han kits. Well, cloning blows the old tooling won’t work excuse out of the water because you not using the old tooling or whatever you can find of it to make the kits. The cost not as prohibitive as the people around here said it was because Steve G. already told us it’s not as expensive as we all thought is was. So, what’s left? It’s the licensing that is the final challenge. Maybe Steve G. from Round2 could enlighten us on that one as well and set everyone straight.

The licensing might not be as much of a problem as you think it is. A lot of people on here thought it cost $250k+ to reproduce/clone a kit and had to sell in the 10’s of thousands to make a profit until Steve G. from Round2 finally set them straight.

You don’t need the old tooling anymore. You just need the ability to clone an existing kit to make a new tooling mold that could work in a modern injection machine.

If the 3D market can help them to eventually clone and reproduce a vintage styrene plastic kit like Round2 from their archive, I’m all in for that. Just don’t have the 3D resin be the focus of the company. Utilize it as a stepping stone to get making plastic kits again.

Is that because it would reduce the collector value of the vintage kits that you now have in your stash? Don’t be mad at me. There a lot of people like me who would like to see many of those vintage kits cloned/reproduced without having to spend collector prices for them. With an expensive collector kit, most people would decide to leave it unbuilt because it would ruin the value. I like to build some of those kits and have new ones to build from as well from the Jo-Han catalog. Right now, many of them are too expensive and very collectible so what does that do for the hobby? Nothing, except for padding the pockets of the collectors/speculators who keep them unbuilt. The future of the hobby, if we want it to have a future, can’t depend on expensive collector kits everyone is afraid to build because it would harm their collector value. Let the old promos take over that function, not the model kits.

There is nothing wrong with being another Round2. Also, Round2 is not just cloning ancient kits, but also developing new tools like the new Bronco. Of course, that’s due to help from the auto manufacturer (Ford) like in the old days with the promos/annuals. I think if they want to get this new Jo-Han LLC off the ground, they will have to tap into the nostalgia market with cloning/reproducing a few vintage kits. 3D resin would not cut it because those would be at a much higher consumer price point than doing them in plastic. Cloning the vintage kits would pay for the new tooling and bring the name into the 21st century that you desire so much.

I think Round2 needs to do the (General Lee/City Slicker/Coca Cola) Charger snap kit with stock wheels/tires and some stock decals. That would be a nice addition to their recently released cloned Craftsman style kits. For the old (ex General Lee) Country Charger glue kit, I think they should just clone an original annual body and use that instead. Then, if need be remake some of the custom parts that the original annual kit came with. They would have the late ‘60’s Charger market covered since it doesn’t seem like Revell will be reissuing their Charger kits anytime soon.

Where’s the early ‘80’s ProStreet Camaro Z28? I thought that was supposed to be coming out later this year or early next year?

Paying $250+ for a sealed kit that you can never hope to open because it will ruin the collector value…..no thanks. Plus, how do you even know what is actually in the box? People (and hobby shops) have been known to acquire shrink wrap machines to reseal kits.

I couldn’t agree with you more.

You’re right, they are decals. I wish they would have Tampo printed them on instead of going with cheesy decals. If you’re making the ‘007 Mustang, whitewalls are the way to go. Even if I wasn’t building the movie car, I would elect to put whitewalls on it. They give the car a nice vintage look IMO.

That C8 looks great.

They should (Tampo?) pad print them on like Round2. I’m hoping they are.

I hope we get whitewall tires with it.

I hope they include the whitewalls too.

I think YOU need to READ for comprehension.…Rodent. GMP440 asked, hot or cold, if the new reissue coming out would perhaps be the AMT ‘67-‘68 Ford Galaxie. I replied that it would be a cold no. Read it again. The last time those were issued was back in ‘67-‘68 during their initial annual run. So, I responded to him that if they did reissue them, it would have to be a clone since the tooling is probably long gone. I did NOT say that it would be the new reissue coming out. Since they were never reissued in the late ‘70’s or any year prior since their original annual run, the ‘67-‘68 Galaxie would not be the kit (that was last available in the late ‘70’s) that is mentioned by Steve G.

This will be 1/24 scale?

I wouldn’t mind Harry Dean Stanton’s ‘71 Impala 4dr. sedan from the movie. For some reason, very few of the 3D resin prints I see look good.

The Revell Chevelle is close, but it’s not dead nuts accurate. The rear wheel well opening upper line seems to be slightly too flat giving the illusion it tilts upward towards the rear. The front wheel well opening seems to be a hair too small. Also, I see problems with the upper curve height of the side windows…it seems to make the side window opening slightly too big in relation to the body or something. However, these are dead nuts accurate nitpicks. I think the original AMT kit got the wheel well shapes better on these cars.

It looks like they just added a different insert to make the hardtop out of the convertible tooling. The front wheel well shape has the same inaccurate stretched out flattened shape as the convertible. That is, unless they copied/cloned the convertible tooling and made a hardtop version out of it.

Thanks. I didn’t know it was that much.

It throws off the front fender shape as well. It’s like the front half of the model is slightly stretched out.

Also, there were variations in the early issues. The Craftsman Jr. and the Wonderbird Trophy Series kit. The latter had an optional hardtop that was flatter at the front, tunneled rear window and it narrowed at the front near the windshield header. The earlier Craftsman Jr. kit had the most accurate hardtop shape. The WB Trophy series and beyond all had the inaccurate hardtops in them. I believe there were two molds of this kit. The Craftsman Jr., the most accurate of the two, was based on the original promo tooling. I don’t know about the other one.