Chris V

That would be Modelhaus: They offered both the Carson top and Chopped Vicky roof section. Perhaps the (stock) roof from Lindbergs 1953 Ford Coupé can be used as base for a conversion?

They're exactly the same kit. However, in recent years the Revell AG kits (European issues) have had expanded decal sheets in a better quality than the US-versions.

That’s the best news I’ve gotten this entire week @Spex84!!!

Both Pro-Modeler issues are virtually identical except for the decals. 85-2824 is a stock-only issue with the 440 Magnum engine.

I can only imagine the structual stress on the bearings, bolts, joints and steering caused by fitting such ridiculously wide spacers.

Case in point:

I'm pretty sure that the Oldsmobile engine in John Gregarthy's famous "Grasshopper" '23 T, which was the direct inspiration for Monogram's original "Green Hornet" kit, was fully chromed (not so sure if the car ever ran under its own power, though...).

Speaking from experience you're better off installing the rear axle/suspension for positive location of the centre of the radius to clear the slicks. On this model I've even replaced the Chevy axle with a modified Olds/Pontiac rear axle out of Revell's "Beatnik Bandit" Showrod:

This other old thread elaborates further on the subject of the old AMT Trophy Series engines: AMT Trophy Series Engines On a related note, only a few of the early AMT kits included hop-up parts for the flathead engines, and only for the 1949-53 generation flatheads. However, the "Street Rods" reissue of AMT's 1940 Ford Coupé included a small additional sprue with a set of finned heads with separate water hoses. For some reason these have never been included in any subsequent reissues of the kit. Though crude by todays' standards they do offer you the option of building a hot rod with a simplistic charm that's very fitting for the old Trophy Series kits.

What he said! Straight axle swaps were by no means mandatory back in the day. To improve weight transfer and traction many racers simply swapped the front springs with heavy duty station wagon units in order to raise the front end of the car. On other models like 1949-54 Chevies and C1 Corvettes many fitted spacer blocks between the framerails and front suspension crossmember.

Actually the entire chassis is slightly off-center so the interior/trunk floor and wheel houses needs to be trimmed slightly for better alignment and to reduce structural stress on the thin rocker panels when the body is mounted on the chassis. On a side note, it appears that Atlantis is planning to include a plated version of the ex. Revell "Dragster Wheels" Parts Pack in the Chevy.

I would strongly recommend stripping the previous primer to avoid excessively thick layer buildup and prevent possible paint compatibility issues.

The Nailhead valve covers and exhaust headers are from the original issue of the ‘40. Sadly they were later replaced with finned valve covers and some blobtacular exhaust manifolds which somewhat lined up wit the molded-in exhaust system.

Jimmy Flintstone offers a ‘51 body with separate bumpers and “bullet”: ‘51 Studebaker

Tamiya makes a special paint remover similar to the old Testors “Easy Lift Off”: You brush it on, leave it to work for 5-10 minutes, brush to release the dissolved paint, wipe off with a paper towel, and repeat if necessary. Once all of the paint is gone and the paint remover been thoroughly wiped off, you clean the model with dishwashing detergent and rinse off with water. It even removes some of the most stubborn other types of paint, that brake fluid and lye-based degreasers/cleaning products can’t.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not arguing against a Bulletnose Studebaker - Just stating that there are many other more obvious choices with broader appeal in that subject matter segment . And with no preexisting Disney ties I have a hard time imagining that Round2 will pony up the cash to acquire the licensing for the Muppets franchise just to sell a single kit…

At risk of sounding negative that’s not very likely to happen - for the exact same reason we haven’t seen a 1948 Tucker commercially kitted (aside from exclusive small volume aftermarket kits): Though the cars themselves are iconic, the appeal of the subject matter is simply too narrow. There’s virtually no potential for alternate versions to increase return on the tooling investment. No significant body style variations, commercial applications, modification-, movie- or racing history. Unlike the ‘50 Oldsmobile (which was based on a Racing Champions coin bank modified with parts from AMT’s 1951 Chevrolet Bel Air) no images of an actual model was used, when the box art for the “upcoming” Studebaker kit was announced in the early 00’s. To this day I don’t think it’s ever been confirmed, that development of an actual model kit had progressed beyond the preliminary box art design to gauge the customer demand.

Yes: The Street Machine is based on the same tooling but can’t be built stock. It does however come with a Big Block/Automatic transmission and some beautifully detailed Cragar “Street Star” Wheels. In my humble opinion the “Mueller Era” ‘57 Bel Air Street Machine would have been far more appealing with the wheel/tire combo from the Corvette Street Machine.

What you have is the Revell “Highway Pioneers” 1:32 Scale 1932 Ford Roadster. It is one of Revell’s earliest car models and dates back to 1954:

The ARII Challenger is essentially a seventies’ toy. There’s no point in trying to detail it further. Despite being advertised as 1:24 scale just about nothing from the ex. Monogram 1:24 1970 Challenger T/A kit will fit without extensive modification. Your best bet is to find a decent MPC 1972 Dodge Challenger rebuilder, and detail it with parts sourced from AMT’s 1970 R/T and Revell’s 1970 ‘Cuda.

You'll find there are about as many opinions as people to respond: Essentially it's mostly a matter of personal preferences. It's important to remember that the larger makes have been around for many decades, and thus their tooling archives reflect the technical advancements and changing consumer preferences throughout history. Furthermore there's no definitive correlation between the age of the tooling and quality of the model: Some models dating back to the early sixties are amazingly enjoyable to build and feature an impressive level of detail, while others are crude and toylike with the added risk of worn or damaged tooling. However, even newly tooled kits can be somewhat simplified and suffer from poorly fitting parts and accuracy issues, bodywork proportions being one of the most commonly noted issues. As a glutton for punishment I sometimes opt to base my builds on kits known to have certain issues or shortcomings - just to prove a point that they can in fact be built into nice models.

My vote is for the following: - The finned 2- and 3- carb fuel distribution blocks - The Halibrand QC conversion with Model A rear crossmember and leaf spring for Revell's line of '32 Fords (perhaps as a double set like the conversion for Revell's new Model A kits) - The Olds Rocket and Ford Y-Block Hop-Up kits (the separate items were beautiful but disproportionally expensive due to Shapeways' pricing structure)

But it has… 3DScale Parts offers the rollbar, header and steering wheel package for the “Big Drag”. The biggest issue seems to be chrome plating the 3D printed items.

No they don’t… I snagged the 5W as soon as it was confirmed that it is in fact molded in white 😜 Just like Bill @Ace-Garageguy and several other responders I like to build traditional Hot Rods with an old timey flavor: I found that by lopping the front frame horns off of an AMT ‘32 Phaeton/Vicky Chassis and cutting the front frame off of an AMT ‘32 5W/Roadster just behind the crossmember, you can graft the framerail pieces together with the Phaeton/Vicky chassis to achieve a more accurately proportioned ‘32 Chassis. This can then be further enhanced by adding the caractherisic upswept sidewall stamping detail and a rear crossmember and spring from AMT’s ‘29 Model A Roadster. I’m not too concerned about the funky body proportions of AMT’s ‘32 Fords, though: Since the frames are already slightly narrowed at the at the rear, they’re ideal for a Model A body-swap - Which is exactly what I’m planning!

Though the car has obviously been extensively modified, I just have to point out that this is not a 1971 Barracuda/'Cuda but a 1972-74 model - the most obvious giveaways being the square side marker lights (The 1970-71 models had countersunk oblong lenses) and the squarish headlight surrounds (The 1971 models had dual headlights as a one year only design feature). It appears to have been fitted with modern aftermarket heads. As @Mark stated above, the real experimental DOHC "Doomsday Machine" supposedly never ran under its own power. Nice and clean build!