whale392

I have a soft spot for the FOX vert........both the 1:1 and the model so far look good!

I didn't see any of that here in this thread. So your 'whatever' and counter-arguement are null and void in this thread. thanks for trying though. As far as ignore function, not gonna happen. Why? As a forum, we are bound to have our disagreements. Just because we do doesn't mean we just ignore one another. If we ignore in such a manner, we may miss real good conversation and/or ideas. Now, with that said, I read BOTH MCM and SA for different reasons. I have my opinions as to which I percieve to be better, but that is just a PERSONAL PERCEPTION.

All Cranky did was express what he saw as a difference in magazine style and what he liked about MCM this issue. So Lee, do us a favor and stuff the 'attack on SA' canned bologna you are shoving here. Nothing dorogatory was said about SA, unless you consider 'the other mag' a dorogatory wording. Thank you for your opinion on the nmatter, but until SA comes DIRECTLY under attack, spare us all. Thank you for your thoughts on this isuue Cranky.....I have yet to see it (or even its earlier sister) in this area of the country.

As stated earlier; in the 1:1 slammed world, when a truck with that radical of a drop is laid-out, it will sit with silly negative camber (most have WAY more camber than yours shows now). When they raise up to roll out, the camber corrects itself back to a more livable angle. Unfortunately, unless you have an engineering degree and access to more tools than Chip Foose, this is just the nature of the game. Yours is actually exibiting less camber than a similar 1:1 slam.

This is a beautiful build, from start until now. I have been watching this progress and love it. The colors go well with the body style, and it definately has a very aggressive appeal to it. Are you going to paint the wheel centers the same color as the silver stripes and leave their lips chromed?

Personal opinion alert! While I think you are doing an overall outstanding job on this; unless you are going to move the headlight buckets forward or do something with the leaned-back angle of them, the hood front looks like somebody got suckerpunched in the lip. It juts out too far and too flat vertically for the tilt of the headlights......just looks wrong. Personal opinion over.

Ok; as a magazine, I find MCM to be a broader coverage publication than SA(E) WHEN I can find it. SA(E) seems to me to have gotton thinner with more ads than it used to be. While SA(E) does have the tips and tricks section (I do like this feature of the magazine), MCM goes into areas that SA(E) wont go. I have both, and I pick both up when I hit the Hobby Shop and they have both in stock (I also pick up certain issues of MAX Modeller as well). Which do I prefer............MCM wins by a nose. While SA(E) does have some usable content that MCM doesn't have (and sometimes it is the other way around), the political tilt (read, WAAYYY too P.C and 'let's not possibly offend anyone) of SA(E) is a massive turn-off for me. If I want politics and touchy-feely B.S, I will watch TNN. MCM is a lot more gritty with an 'in your face' feel sometimes......something that is needed to keep the hobby retailers/producers honest. If your product sucks, you will more than likely find out in MCM, not in SA(E) where it gets glossed over.

Thanks for taking the time out of your busy day to talk to me the other day about this Coupe. Shoot me a PM and we'll go a little deeper, or give me a shout! (I got the texts by the way..........get a hold of me and I will give you my impressions)

PM replied to Kris/Jeff.

Dave did a fix for his that was very simple and looked good. I would suggest talking to him. I cut vertically down between the too-high side and the rest of the manifold, splitting it into two pieces (I used a photoetched blade so as to not remove too much material/destry too much detail). Then, I glued the too-high section back on at the right height and once the glue dried sanded the now staggered bottom of the intake back flat. Cleaned up my cut lines on the front and back of the intake face and I was pretty much done. Seemed to work ok (a little of the sides had to be smoothed/thinned for proper fit as I already had the heads glued to the block).

Thank you Kris. As a FOX lover, I am very sceptical whenever someone says they have a 'correct' coupe. Even with me working with Ed Sexton on bringing a 1991-93 1/25th Mustang Coupe to market, I am scaptical as to how correct it will be. I see this is an early cars (1979-82) and based on an MPC offering. With a nose and taillight swap I can do the 83-84 as well. This is a good thing. maybe, if I can get more than one, I will master up the 85-86 nose and body molding. I look forward to more pics and info as it comes; and keep in mind that if Ed and Revell are dead serious about their coupe, that this would make a great retrofit to backdate their offering.

See my 'Ohio stash' thread here in this section for mine. Keep in mind that the Ohio stash of mine is only about 300 of the 1100+ kits I have (the rest are in Florida).

Don't take this the wrong way, but: I and countless others have been bit by bad or highly inaccurate attempts at a Mustang coupe before. Not saying that this offering will share the same fate, but I am sceptical of it. I am a huge FOX fan, and would gladly dish the $55 for a good and accurate 4eye coupe. Let me know when it is ready and I would like to have a go at one of these (I have about a dozen of the MPC 1/25th offerings and plenty of AMT and Revell chassis/drivetrain donors). Lots of pictures from all angles will help out as well; giving those who might be contemplating this a good overall look at the kit.

Yup Eric, that is the one I was talking about. Everywhere I went, it wouldn't let me copy/paste the images of it (so I referenced the MM&FF article). I have a set of fenders and quarter panels from a wrecked Capri sitting in my garage for just a build as this.

What Dave is talking about is the kit intake carb plates being on two different height planes from one another. If you look at your reference photo and other real intake photos, the carbs are on the same height plane (one carb is not sitting higher than the other). Take a good head-on look at the kits intake and you will see that one carb plate sits higher than the other. That is NOT correct. Your work looks good so far, and these 68s are my hands-down favorite A-body.

You are correct Tony; you will have to cut styrene to the wheelwell shape, glue it in behind the existing wheel opening, and sand the Mustang lip from the fenders to closely mimic the Capri units. And yes, the Revell McLaren M81/Enduro kit you have is the same body as the Capri I have above.........completely incorrect for a real M81/Enduro. , (thanks to 79Pace for hosting these images) As to your thought on the Capri/Mustang mix.........look up a guy by the screen name of RCoupe (I think he is on Corral, and I know his car has been on foureyedpride). his coupe started as an 89, has a 1979 Pace Car nose and hood scoop, Capri fenders/quarters, and fat meats wrapped in BBS RKSports. All of this slathered in Lovely Red........makes me tingle remembering that car. (Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords did a spread on his car a short time ago)

If memory serves me correctly, the Dodge and Plymouth wheelbases were 1" difference............hardly noticable in scale (.040"). Killer car you are replicating, I like the Black on Black/White over Blue combo.

Very cool indeed! We had a few autographed 'handouts' from Don hanging on the garage wall in the shop. Sadly, the fire destroyed them all, along with the ones from Ronnie Sox.

No problem Mark, and no worries. (insert appropriate linguistic stresspoint font here) Harold, keep at this kit. Fixing its ills will bring about a very nice representation of this oft-forgotton Mopar.

Steelies and these cars just go together, in my opinion. to me, the most beautiful B-Body cars ChryCo ever styled were the 1964-67 Plymouths and the 1965-67 Dodges, followed by the 1963 Plymouth Fury. I will be looking in on this build Mike....you and Harold have my attention!

No Tony, those are the Mustang fender lips, as I was telling you in the PM. Revell cast this kit with the Capri fenders AND the Mustang wheel lips so that they could use the same mold for both bodies. Unfortunately, it is inaccurate for both of them. The body is the same as the later Revell 'Turbo Cobra' kit that was offered at Wal-Mart forever. This kit is VERY basic in its original form.

Well Mr.Moore, considering I own 2 of these cars, I think I can be a pretty darn good judge of these kits when compared to the REAL cars. I do NOT need to go see a friend to compare.....I can compare them directly to MY REAL cars, and I WILL do just that. While you have your opinion, I have mine and we will have to disagree. I do not have to rely on foggy memories and 'I think, let me go look at so-and-so's car', I can walk to MY cars and compare. As to your comparing it to equal timeframe kits, I can agree. Polar Lights did indeed screw up almost every offering they put out. Did they have the research and Developement dollar that the big companies did? Well? And don't I hear complaints about the 'Big' companies botching kits up in the very same time frame? YUP! So step off your horse and accept these kits for what they are/were. They are full of inaccuracies, and if we want to go there; your vuanted JoHans,Revells, and AMT/SMP kits from the 'Golden' 60s and early 70s are too. C'mon, you want me to take metal axles and holes in the engine blocks seriously. Oh, and Chassis plates instead of real suspensions? Great idea to have lowering blocks for chassis pin-points and screws to hold it all together. GREAT TECHNOLOGY! Yes, they had great body detail...........that's it! Every generation will look at their kits as the best. 10 years from now we will look at what was released today and complain as to how inaccurate it was. This 'hobby' has become full of those who 'demand' absolute accuracy. Remember that when you pay $25-$30 for a kit now. R&D isn't free. So, I am done 'peeing and telling you it is raining'. As wise as you are, I am sure you can tell the difference. Now, back the the 'horribly inaccurate' 65 Dodge Coronet500 vert build, already in progress. (And if you have anything else you would like to point out, we can do so in PM, so as to NOT clutter this build thread any further)

Tony, you drive a hard bargain.............I will give you these few shots. They suck, so be warned! , , I have done quite a lot more since these were taken, but have yet to load the pics. Also, some engine shots (they may be blurry as I was just learning to use my camera when they were taken): , , , , This Capri was started over 5 years ago, just as I found out about using the later chassis under these cars.

Remember Mike, you would also have to change the interior pattern as the Coronet500s these R/Ts were based on had different patterning. Also, the R/T never had bench seating as it was the upper trim level of the Coronet line.

Yes Mark, I agree with the rear springs being out of scale.......and this really WAS a glorified snapper so I expected that. The side trim is a sticking point for a lot of people. The angle is off, but I live with it (or fix it on a later build). The taillights depict the Coronet500s well (and only the 500s got those, as the 330s and 440s taillights were different), and the trunk dress panel is close enough. The grill doesn't have the correct taper from center to its edges...barely noticable in scale. Interior has little issues, but again correctable or live withable. This IS a glorified snap/simplified glue kit after all. Look at the later model GTO they did.........same deal. Now; your Taxi looks cool and all and with no disrespect intended, would never work in 1:1. And you have thrown some SERIOUS discrepencies into it by building it as such (although I will admit to thinking of doing a Taxi-look to my convertible and picking people up at MCO and taking them to their destination in style! ). As we have become spoiled by the ever-increasing detail level of todays kits, we look back on older kits with some disgust. Being as I own 2 of the REAL cars, I look at this kit (discrepencies and all) as a blessing to have at least raw material to start with. 80% I can live with and work the other 20%. Good looking build Harold.........maybe I'll dig out my vert and get back to work making the model of my car.