Force

This kit is a old MPC kit and it's quite crude compared to more modern toolings, none of the engines are really that accurate to what they are supposed to be and doesn't look right everywhere. The small block in the kit is most likely supposed to be a 351 Windsor based on the shape of the valve covers, and the 351 Cleveland came in late 1969 for the 1970 model year. Ford used a oil filler tube on the 221-260 and early 289 but if it would have been this oil filler tube it would have been only on the drivers side of the water pump going into the upper part of the timing chain cover on that side. But it went away in 1964 beacuse the '64 Fairlaine with a 289 I used to own didn't have this tube, after 1963 they moved the breather to the drivers side valve cover and you filled the oil through it, they also added a PCV valve to the other valve cover, so Ford didn't use oil filler tubes in 1969 and the 351W never had one. Apparently didn't MPC do the homework right before they did this kit.

The printer plate is just a thin sheet of aluminum used in an offset printer, go to your local printer and see if they have any old used ones you can have. Otherwise you can use an aluminum soda can or use the material from disposable aluminum foil pans or serving trays wich is thinner than the cans but holds the shapes good, there are some on the market with quite large flat surfaces one can cut out and use.

Well said. Anything we say at this moment is just pure speculation as there are not much facts regarding this yet. I think we have to wait and see what will happen.

Well I can't really take credit for it, the last reply made by Casey Littmann in the linked thread above about the Pro Modeler '69 Charger kit addresses the issue, I read it there back in January when he wrote it and put it in my memory bank, so I got from him...but yes it's a good tip. But as I said, the tooling for the body was fixed before the second run of the Pro Modeler kit and it's the one they still use for the '69 Charger. If we go back to the Pro Modeler '69 Daytona, the intake manifold for the optional Hemi is right for a street car as all Street Hemi's from 1966 to 1971 had inline dual 4bbl carburetors, but none of the air cleaners in the kit are the right style for the Street Hemi, a correct one can be found in the Revell 67 Plymouth GTX street car kit. On the other hand, the intake manifold for the optional Hemi is not correct for NASCAR as they were only allowed to use one carburetor in NASCAR competition at that time, so they had single 4bbl on a special intake manifold often called "bathtub" on the Hemi's, the shape of the air cleaner is kind of correct for a NASCAR car tho'. The "Bathtub" intake manifold they used in NASCAR is a large two part kind of a crossram intake with long runners under the bolted lid, but for one carburetor, the carb is mounted in a recess in the lid to get it low so everything would fit under the hood. I have not seen a correct "bathtub" intake manifold in a kit or anywhere on the aftermarket but a rough bathtub shaped intake manifold can be found in the old MPC NASCAR Mopars with Hemi, some have casted this intake and I know The Modelhaus had it...the style is right but it's not really correct it lacks the right details.

Exactly, the Daytona doesn't have a vinyl top either, the 69 Charger do. But all 69 Pro Modeler Chargers didn't have the wrong shape "chopped" body, Revell corrected it and cut a new tool for the body for the later run of the Pro Modeler '69 Charger so they have a new body with a better roofline and it's the same as in the non Pro Modeler issues. I bought the first issue when it came out and when I read you could contact Revell for the corrected parts I did that and asked for all the corrected revised parts for this kit, but I didn't get all the unplated parts, in that case it would have been easier to send me a new kit. No the things I got was a new corrected body, new corrected clear parts, a new slightly different decal sheet and new instructions if I remember correctly...it was 20 years ago you know. You can spot the difference on the box, this is the first issue with the wrong shaped body, notice the R E V E L L - M O N O G R A M script under the Pro Modeler '69 Charger R/T 1:25 text. And this is the box with the revised corrected body where it says Pro Modeler By Revell-Monogram '69 Charger R/T 1:25, no R E V E L L - M O N O G R A M under it.

Please go off the caps lock, typing in all capital letters is considered as shouting on internet and forums.

Revell-Monogram didn't hit the market at the best time with the Nitro drag racing kits as they evolved dramatically from in the mid 80's when they issued the first FC and TF kits until the last issues they did in 2002. Revell did not keep up with the evolution as it was faster than they managed to do updates and the last issues of the TF dragster from 2002 and the FC from 1997-98 wasn't really accurate to what they ran at the time, if they had done all the necessary updates back then at least the TF kit would be pretty much up to date even now 16 years later with a couple of small things added The Pro Stockers was a bit easier as they didn't change that much and they kept up pretty good over the years until they stopped doing them. So a new Top Fuel Dragster kit wouldn't be that hard to do from the last version of the tooling, some small updating to the chassis, new puke can, a belly pan, update the engine to todays specs with a setback blower, new fuel pumps and fuel systems, MSD Pro Mag 44 magnetos new valve covers with spark plug covers, new wings (one piece front and three element rear), new wheels, a head shield for the roll cage and maybe a DSR canopy as an option. The Funny Car kits are pretty much the same, some updating to the engine like on the TF, new oil and fuel tank, new puke can and belly pan, update the chassis and new bodys...and of course wheels as they haven't been good since the Weld Pro Star wheels in some of the Olds Funny Car kits, after that they did the disaster by combining the nice Weld Pro Stars they had with Center Line Convo Pro rims...not that good of a result. The Pro Stockers are another thing, I believe they have to be totally redone with all new tooling to do an accurate Pro Stock kit. Revell just issued new tooling full detail NASCAR kits last year and those haven't been around that much lately either, but now with the new ownership we have to wait and see what will happen.

And some of the 80's-forward Pro Stock and Funny Car kits, they vere also originally 1:24th scale.

To keep the facts straight, Revell did not buy Monogram...it was kind of the opposite way depending on how you see it. Monogram was bought by Odessey Partners of New York in 1986, later the same year Odessey bought Revell and merged them together, 1994 the company was bought by Hallmark/Binney Smith and from 2007 until last friday Hobbico. The kits was sold as separate brands until the mid 2000's when the Monogram lable pretty much disappeared and was used more sporadically on kits from both manufacurers regardless of what brand the kits originally was released under.

The Ranger and Pacer are based on the Ford Fairlane, the station wagons Roundup, Villager Bermuda on the Ford wagons, and the more expensive Corsair and Citation are based on the larger Mercury Montclair.

I wish they would on all of the original Monogram kits, when they use the brand names as they have done lately it just gets confusing. It's a little easier if you have been around in the hobby the last 30-40 years but for a newcomer it's not easy to know what the kit originally was. They could use the Revell name on the 1/25 kits and the kits made after the merge in the mid 80's and use the Monogram name on the old original Monogram 1/24 kits.

It's a nice kit...you can't say anything else. This one together with the '60 Ford Galaxie Starliner kits are my favourites from the AMT later tooling lineup and holds the same standard detailwise. But I allready have a couple of the earlier issues of the '62 Pontiac kits so I will probably not buy another one right now.

And the other Revell modern era Funny Car kits from the mid 80's and forward, the Pontiac Trans Am, Ford Mustang, Oldsmobile Cutlass, Dodge Avenger and Pontiac Firebird FC kits has the same engine with some small updates over the years.

As many here has allready said, this is not all new kit and it's not based on any annual or even the old Polyglass Gasser kit, the kit is the same as the pre RC2 and Round 2 late 90's then all new tooling 62 Pontiac 421 SD and Custom kits combined to a 2 'n 1 kit, so what's new from those issues are the box, decals and tires, everything else is the same as the late 90's kits.

I have nothing against diggin up old threads for research, of course everyone can dig up any old thread they want, I don't care about that, it's the bringing them up to the surface with a new reply several years after the thread was last replied to that I don't see necessary...and some here seems to think it's funny to rub it in...none mentioned, none forgotten...pretty chilidish as I see it. But as most here seems to missunderstand what I meant with this post, maybe because of the language barrier, I give up and will not continue this so this whole thread may be deleted by the moderators as far as I'm concerned.

Yes I know that.

Impressive work Yuri, thanks for showing us.

Nice and clean build you have there Juergen.

I haven't commented on this before but I'm really impressed, the material choice might not be my cup of tea but your work is outstanding. I can't wait to see the finished product.

Okay, so many here thinks it's allright to dig up for example an old review thread every time Round 2 or Revell decides to reissue a kit that has been out last at least once 5-10 years ago and add to that old thread instead of starting a new one about the new reissue wich in fact can have been changed from the last one...well I don't but that's me and I might be old and stubborn. I would start a new thread, describe what's in the kit with text and pictures and tell what's different from the earlier issue if there are any, and in this thread one can refer to the older review thread and link to it and all who are interested can click on the link and read it if they want to. Of course all old threads should be left on the forum, there are lots and lots of information written by many of the talented and knowledgeable participants of this forum, so it's a goldmine of knowledge and shouldn't be lost...so it's not that I react to. And it's allright to continue on an old project thread when it is started up again after a long hiatus, otherwise it's hard to keep up with what it is.

I don't have anything against keeping the older topics on the forum as they can contain useful information and the forum is somewhat searchable, but unfortunatley many of the pictures in the old topics are gone due to the PB issue, but I don't see any reason to delete them for that. But I find it a bit frustrating when I open a topic up high in some of the category pages like the Car and Truck Kit News and Review pages as someone has replied to it recently, and when I open it I find out that it's an old old topic wich was originally posted in for example 2006, and most of the other replies except for the last one or two all are from the time the topic was originally posted...a topic like that is quite cold as I see it.

If you do a long extended frame behind the drive wheels you have to do an extendable telescopic reach for the trailer drag bar as the turning point of the log load and the turning point of the coupling are on different places and too far from eachother so they will work against eachother otherwise. The extended frame and extendable reach setup helps the trailer making tighter turns on the narrow logging roads.

Why do a lot of people dig up old old threads on this forum, it has happened a lot lately. I don't know but topics started and discussed, and the last reply before the new recent ones are from 6-12 years ago isn't that interesting now, especially when the pictures are gone due to the photobucket issue, it has to be better to start a new topic instead of digging up an old pretty much dead one. That's what I think anyway.

The last issue I got before this one (#204) had the address lable on the outside of the plastic bag...much better.

Nice to see you take up this project again Rickard.