Bernard Kron

I'm afraid you're ignoring the question. I'm perfectly aware that styles evolve and that sometimes they grow out of the technical changes that improve performance and reliability. Are you in fact saying that there's nothing that can be done about it? I'm asking you from the point of you of someone that does this professionally and must make considered recommendations to your customers every day. If you have a customer who says they just don't look right would you tell him that he can go to old style wheel/tire/wheel opening proportions but only at a penalty in comfort and handling?

A purely aesthetic challenge to the builders of modernized classics I'll pose is as follow: Accepting that all the standardized Rest-Mod techniques vastly improve the performance and drivability of these old cars, and that the overwhelming majority of them either are invisible or can be easily made so, the one thing that spoils them to my eye are the modern low-profile tires and out-sized wheels. I've noticed a genuine attempt to moderate them by using wheel designs that mimic older styles of wheels, but the overall proportion and configuration of these modern wheel/tire combos just doesn't look quite right to my eye in the wheel wells. Is their anything that can be done about that?

Having "resto-mod-ed" a tiny antique British sportscar I totally get it. And indeed I like a tastefully done muscle car. I think the GTO you're showing is very nice and have no problem with it at all. Sign me up! But as the object of my creative passion I'm coming from a different place. And that's where model cars come in. Discussing what people are doing in the 1:1 world is relevant and appropriate, but it begs the question of what to do when modeling cars. Some of us model our 1:1 fantasies and desires, some of us model our work vehicles, and some of us meticulously document history and childhood memories. But, as I mentioned earlier, what is somewhat unique in the car modeling hobby is the opportunity to do none of these things and just indulge our unfettered creative urges, whether it's "Imagineering" a semi-realistic hybrid of stylistic and mechanical elements, or even creating unrealistic and fantastic cartoons of vehicles that never could possibly exist.

Most of what you list is relatively invisible, but,assuming the exterior styling and color remain sensitive to the period of the original car, the two visible areas that would be of concern would be the under-hood presentation of the motor and the treatment of the modern interior pieces. Based on what I've seen up to now, both would present enormous challenges to get right and not clash with a period exterior. In fact, IMHO, if you guys do find a solution it would be important work towards the advancement of the Resto-Mod aesthetic. Last year I collaborated with a good friend on doing an AMT '39 Ford Tudor in a hybrid Traditional/Modern way. He is a true post-90's Street Rod modeler and has done exceptional and original work in that vein, His finished models stand out in that regard and it's helped him win quite a few contests with them But he's suffering from massive builders block in his car modeling which has lasted several years. Our collaboration was intended to tried to break through it. In any case we have yet to see the project to completion but it certainly started out promisingly. We chopped and sectioned the body, gave it slanted B-pillars and ran the oversized steelies and rubber band tires from the AMT Black Force. My friend retained the '39 Ford grill but reshaped it somewhat to blend in the profile of the front fender valances. But the challenge came as we confronted the interior and the motor. I wanted to use a modern motor but with the mechanical look of the past. I wanted to find a way to use exposed injectors and cam boxes on something like a Corvette LS1, without the blobs of plastic fairings which are so common now. The interior was also similarly challenging, coming up with something modern and elegant but still in keeping with the exterior. Unfortunately the builders block thing can be contagious and I bombed out while working in this area and my friend took the bait, putti9ng the project back on hold. Recently we discussed starting it up again... But this is definitely an example of the challenges we face in developing a new vernacular for an old tradition.

Always good to hear from someone in the profession. For me this underscores the difference between what we can do as modelers and what necessity, budgets and practicality imposes on us in the 1:1 world. I'm especially interested in your last comment about pre-'55 cars. As someone who builds almost exclusively pre-'55, I've noticed far more interest in more modern but nostalgic cars, for example the muscle car era, than the stuff I do. This is to be expected as the generations move on and nostalgia finds its home in more recent decades. But it's more affordable and practical to be a purist in scale than in the real world!

Wow! Great suggestion. I hadn't thought of that! I just bought some beautiful Moon Tanks from Joe Cardoza at JDS Racing while attending this year's NNL West. The prettiest machined aluminum tanks I've ever seen, especially the glass beaded one. This will be the perfect accessory for it, especially using your BMF trick. See: http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=93632

I just bought some of these from Joe at this year's NNL West. They are gorgeous, especially the glass beaded ones. They're so nice I'm planning a build that will feature it!

For what it's worth, I have a British Racing Green Series 1 Frogeye (Bugeye in the USA) Sprite with a highly tuned 116 hp motor under its all-steel (tilt forward) hood. The smartest things I ever did when I was building it were to 1) run a modern A-Series motor overbored to 1348 cc, 2) install a Datsun B210 5-speed, 3) mount Triumph Spitfire front disc brakes, 4) install progressive rate front springs and 5) install a limited slip differential. The dumbest thing I ever did to it was install Heim joints in the rear suspension... pandering to my worst boy-racer instincts. The car maintains the spirit of the original but is now practical to drive on the highway and is powerful and well-behaved enough to almost pass as a modern car despite the fact that it's 65 years old and weighs under 1500 pounds. Despite all this seeming heresy in my 1:1 world, I still enjoy modeling hot rods that are as period correct as my stash of parts and inherent laziness will allow.

The nicest ones I've found (although I haven't seen RepMin's version which are no doubt as nice as anything out there like everything else Norm does) are from the Divco style or Mil Truck wheels Modelhaus. The have various versions and can be found here: http://www.modelhaus.com/index.php?c=0&p=69897 http://www.modelhaus.com/index.php?c=0&p=69898 http://www.modelhaus.com/index.php?c=0&p=70131 I've used them in the past and they look like this: They also make a set more like the RepMin wheels ('37 Ford?) that can be found here: http://www.modelhaus.com/index.php?c=0&p=69896

I searched on Moon Fuel Tank images. The trick is to find a huge image with a clear representation of the label. I found one that was 2593 x 1936 pixels at 96 dpi. It looked like this: A few minutes of Photoshop magic and I came up with this: Shrunk down to the appropriate size and printed on white glossy paper or white or clear decal paper it should look fine. I blanked out the capacity amount (7 gallons in the original) so you can put in your own if you like. Thanks for mentioning this as I've been wanting to do one of these for a while. It was quick work and now I have one for my own use. I have a 600 dpi orginal that's much larger if you want it, Just PM me with your e-mail and I'll send it to you

Oh Nico, your such an old traditionalist!

Greg, I have to agree with you that the tuner/import has always held promise as the true contemporary hot rod, but again it's an established style that has largely stopped evolving, and of course ignores the whole continuity of the other, older, "hot rod" tradition. Are we at a dead end in that and should we look to the tuner/import area for guidance? Unfortunately this movement, too, is due for a refresh or reset.

Given my recent postings on the Revell '29 A Roadster pre-announcement thread, I find it odd to perhaps be taking a different tack on the OP's excellent question. My feeling is that period perfect recreation, either in 1:1 or in scale, is a simple solution to a thorny problem. What exactly is a modern hot rod? For me time seems to have stood still. Hi-Tech, a noble effort to take hot rodding into the final years of the 20th century, is played-out and, with Billet, became its own caricature. Pro-Mod offers another outlet since it is based on a later generation of cars, but it has grown overly elaborate and expensive in its own way. The Traditional Rod movement once beckoned and found its voice in the pages of The Rodder's Journal and on-line with the H.A,M.B. But today it has become the domain of the rich man's plaything. And much like Billet came to distort the vision of High-Tech, Traditional found its own unruly cousin in the Rat Rod movement. I feel like we are at some sort of stylistic juncture that requires a new response. While I enjoy creating models of hot rods which evoke the "look and feel" of the 1940's through the 1960's, I sometimes long for the skills and abilities that would allow me to tackle something truly modern, perhaps even post-contemporary. I've always felt that auto modeling was unique in the scale modeling world, at least until the emergence of Fantasy modeling, in that it has always had a tradition of making models of cars that have never existed, even in styles that have never existed in 1:1. I wish I didn't have such an affinity to these old Traditional Hot Rods, an affinity which has created a backlog of unrealized projects which demand to be built. It's time I created something new, post-contemporary and forward looking. If I ever do it, it won't be from a kit that one of the model companies has given me, although I'm sure I'll steal liberally from the wonderful parts they will have given me. That's where the skills in scratch-building and kit-bashing will have a large part to play. But for some reason I haven't seen much in this vein in the 1:1 world. Perhaps some of you could show us some examples...

As always, thanks for the additional insights, Tim. I don't think including a modern rear suspension in this kit is a "mistake" in the sense that I don't think it will have a perceptible negative impact on initial sales. You'll notice a lot of qualifiers in that last sentence. That's because the kit's potential as a parts kit is somewhat hampered by having a rear suspension that, as I said above, from a marketing perspective is essentially "invisible". The more I hear about the gestation of this kit the more I think I was on to something when I said that perhaps "it's a cultural issue at Revell to document contemporary rodding whenever they can...". The fact that a leaf spring rear suspension was proposed and then decided against could be seen to indicate something like that. Certainly it seemed to be the case in the 90's with the original Deuce series with its bagged rear suspension, tubular axle, wide front tires and disc brakes (not to mention the cassette player and air conditioning outlets in the Highboy's dashboard ). Perhaps it would be more correct to say that Revell prefers to document well-established trends rather than emerging or newly-established trends. I certainly don't consider the Traditional Rodding trend an emerging trend but, as Dennis pointed out, it's still a small minority of the street rodding world. I recently attended an informal "car show" in the parking lot of the mall that serves as home for the Blackhawk Museum. It was the Sunday after the NNL West. It's called "Coffee & Cars" and, as I understand it, it occurs the first Sunday of every month. There were literally hundreds of cars on display. All of Silicon Valley's automotive world seemed to be there and there were Lambos, Ferraris and Porsches by the dozens. There were only a few rods to be seen and virtually all of them dated from the Hi-Tech and "billet" era. Most owners were struggling to "update" them by, ironically, backdating them. So far they seemed to have spent their money on tires and wheels, and, budget allowing, a repaint. Tweed and sculpted leather and aluminum were still to be seen in abundance in the interiors. I mention this because trends overlap and change comes slowly and not without cost. So it's not the case that one trend instantly replaces another, that for example Traditional Rodding is the "current" trend to the exclusion of modern mechanicals and styling elements. Like you, if I were to build a street rod today I would run it with coil-overs and, most likely, I would run disc brakes as well (although I might hide them if my budget permitted). But I do think that model cars allow for a bit of "fantasy" as well, and in this sense I will miss a traditional rear suspension in this kit - but not too much because I'm well practiced at making the conversion. I made my "slightly out of step" crack to encourage some lively discussion and I guess I succeeded...

TJ's Custom Casting, they serve the Jalopy and Dirt Car modeling community, mainly: http://stores.tjscustomcastings.com/columbia-2-speed-axle/ I've bought stuff from them. Prompt service and high quality castings.

Very well put, Dennis. Today, virtually everything about period-perfect hot rods, if you insist on the real thing, is unobtainium and, as you document, will drive costs to areas only the John Mumfords of this world can afford. The 2013 AMBR winner proves that - a V8-60 Ardun...really? But that's where model cars come in, they put unobtainium within reach. So that's why I'm surprised that Revell continues to choose the more "realistic" approach rather than opting for the "fantasy" element. I just don't see a marketing benefit in an accurate representation of a contemporary street rod rear end. The Nailhead is the stuff of TRJ-based fantasies already (a sort of Traditional Rodding holy grail motor), as is the '29 Roadster itself. It's no mystery why this body was Brookville's choice for their first metal-bodied reproduction effort many years ago. It was simple to reproduce and desirable. The only reason I can think of for their decision to go with a modern Dana setup, other than it's a cultural issue at Revell to document contemporary rodding whenever they can, is that, like the flathead that had to wait for release #3 in the Deuce series, there's no advantage to doing everything in one go, especially if your contemplating a series of releases over time. Here's hoping... Also, a thought about quick-change rear ends. From their inception, these were always expensive, and while they solved a very real technical issue, allowing rapid and convenient change-out of rear end ratios, they were only of benefit in competition applications, and even then only if frequent final gearing modifications were necessary. Even in the earliest days of using them on the street they were jewelry, as they are today. A good example of the "fantasy" side. The modeler with an inclination towards a more real world application might have wished for something like an Olds rear end for his Old-school representation. But, in that case, he'd want a small block Chevy with stock valve covers, too...

While this thread has been overwhelmingly positive, and deservedly so, the frustrating predilection Revell has to remain slightly out of step with automotive trends, especially in hot rodding subjects has to be pointed out here. Why yet another contemporary rear suspension which will hardly be noticed by the average modeler, when a modern tool of a traditional rear suspension setup would have been a signature feature of this release? Could it be a case of too much of a good thing? Perhaps it's best to hold something back for the next round. Here's hoping that the '29 Roadster is a strong and steady seller and Bill's wish becomes reality!

That and the I-Beam axle, the juice brakes, a full channeled option, and a highly desirable period motor in the form of the Nailhead. That's why I agree that this kit will likely form the root of another successful series, much as the Deuce series did starting with a classic 90's style rod. In this case it will be based on the current popularity of Traditional rods. That's why the too-modern coils & Dana rear end is so frustrating for some of us. Regardless, this is a huge step and I just can't imagine Revell using all this tooling for just one kit.

EXACTLY! This kit is aimed squarely at kitbashers although I'm sure the OOB builds will be just fine, too. Unless the parts are wildly oddball or out of scale I don't see how using them successfully with various pre-existing 1/24th and 1/25th scale kits of similar cars will be a problem for most moderately experienced modelers.

I've only been back in this racket about 6+ years now, but I've done the same thing. That's why I'm so conflicted about this. But at the end of the day I've gotten what I asked for so, like you, I can only hope Revell did a fabulous job and made my whole stash besides the point. Going forward I'm gonna have to build some pretty nice models from my soon-to-be obsolete heap-'o-parts...

Tim, I acrtually have mixed feelings about this kit. Partially it's because I have so much time and work invested in conquering the AMT version, so seeing so much of what I've been asking for for years, the I-beam axle, the small-section bias-ply style tires, a decent tuck 'n' roll interior, etc., is almost a shock, and certainly has me re-thinking some future builds I have planned. But I still will have to make a proper transverse leaf spring rear end if I'm to build an older period car. And Revell has once again tampered with the body, much as they did with the Rat Roaster, in order to accommodate more contemporary aspects. Like the Rat Roaster, I'll have to buy a kit and work with it before I come to my conclusions about it. In the case of the Rat Roaster I finished up by being very disappointed because Revell had to modify so many key parts to create a reasonable replica of the 1:1. So, even now, I still hoard the occasional Good Guys Highboy to make sure I have intact frame rails and a proper rear valance. My first reading is that the Revell '29 A-Bone is a whole different animal than the Rat Roaster, more akin to their Slingster release which features considerable attention to detail and seeks to take advantage of the all new tooling it required. I think it will be far more than an excellent parts kit and give the '29 Model-A a new lease on life as a car modeling theme. It's high time! As you pointed out, it certainly has the potential to be the "anchor" release for a whole new series. I earnestly hope that will be the case.

Thanx Tim for the great writeup! Here's a graphic I prepared summarizing this landmark release, quoting liberally from Tim's superb reporting.

Thanks so much to all of you for all the very kind comments. I think I'll set this project aside for a bit while I ponder how to make the inner bulkheads and body supports. This will be my first full envelope body where I've had to create the internal structure from scratch. It's a whole different deal than building a chassis for an open-wheeled hot rod! In the meantime, here's proof she actually made it to Santa Clara:

Another great show! Here's a link to the photos I took: http://s16.photobucket.com/user/gbk1/library/NNL%20West%202015?sort=2&page=1