Carmak

Regarding the Atlantis (Revell) 55 Chevy kit. It is amazing what the passage of a few years and some cool wheels can do for a kit’s reputation (those wheels really do help). As a kid in the 70’s the Revell Tri-5 kits were known to be somewhere between challenging and unbuildable. In the 90’s and 2000’s the model community was happy to get the AMT 55 sedan kit (based on the 55 Nomad) and thrilled to get the Revellogram 55 HT and convertible kits. No more having to deal with original Revell 55. As a more seasoned builder this kit moves more into the challenging category (now that I make my own door hinges). It looks like a whole generation is going to get a 60’s Revell history lesson, I hope they pass the test. 😊

Steve, that is an outstanding build. The look is just right! Would you share how you made the side trim? It really makes the build for me.

Also notice the 67-68 fender side leading edge is angled forward at the top. The 69-72 the visible leading edge is closer to vertical. The ugly notch is hidden under the 69-72 grille. The top radius looks to possibly be the same radius and in the same location, but the angled top surface extends further forward on the 67-68 fender. I love that this is a collaborative effort between the community and the manufacturer. Everybody DOES actually win.

Same question.

In the 1:1 vintage car show world I am not a fan of open hoods at car shows. I like to appreciate the shape and lines of the car being displayed and an open hood disrupts that. I appreciate that many of us in the model building world really live for engine and chassis detail that can only be seen with an open hood or on a mirror base. On the flip side I love seeing a model that can capture a look and pull you in with no engine or chassis detail at all. I think the new Round2 Craftsman Plus curbsides are a great compromise. They have open hoods and fair firewall and radiator support detail so adding an engine is not terribly difficult. Their simplicity allows subjects to make it to market that may not otherwise be seen.

Back in the early 90's I daily drove a 76 Dodge Aspen wagon \6 with a 3 on the tree. I bought the wagon from the original owner who had factory ordered that car (as a very low-cost family car). The original owner told me that what the car was delivered the dealer told him the 3 on the tree option had just been discontinued.

Those 65 Oldsmobile bolt on magnesium wheel covers are some of the most impressive wheel covers ever made!

I can't ID that boot, but this is what an Imperial boot looks like.

Of the kits you posted I feel the 69 Bonneville coupe would have the best chance at being cloned. As the 70 Bonneville convertible tooling is known to exist in good condition all that would be needed for a 69 couple is a body/hood, front and rear bumpers, rear glass and of course the canoe . The original 69 Bonneville kits used wheel covers, but Rally II wheels would also be correct. Interesting trivia: The Model king issue of the 70 Bonneville with the boat shows a built 70 Bonneville kit with what looks like 69 wheel covers however the kit contains a completely different style of wheel cover (similar in style to the 14" GP wheel covers).

I submit the Ford Magic Cruiser. Originally shown as a concept as a 66 and re-skinned as a 67.

The 63 Tempest AWB and the 65 Nova AWB may share the same chassis (if not they are of similar style). The original stock 63 Tempest and Stock 65 Nova did not share any tooling.

My advice is to watch E-bay and buy a nice built original MPC 72 Challenger ($60-$80) and rebuild it. It will require patience to find one, but the results will actually look like a Challenger. As for the Cuda the MPC 74 Easy Build kit is essentially an unassembled promo. If you are comfortable with removing the massive bumper guards from the 74 bumpers you can convert it to a 72. Watch out for the 74 Cuda Pro Street kits, they were issued in the 80's/90's and have a pro street chassis with large wheel tubs (probably not what you are looking for).

Kits manufacturers from the 60’s and early 70’s had very distinct personalities and styles. Each had pros and cons to their style of kit. Below are my general OPINIONS of each of the big manufacturers of 1:24/1:25 scale American car kits during the first golden era which ended in the mid 70’s. There are exceptions to everything I say below. These are my general OPINIONS. Revell. Pros: Kits with many functional features with good detail. Kits of actual show cars and competition cars. Cons: Cars were not their only kit type. Challenging to build with very fragile parts (early multi-piece bodies). Late 60’s into early 70’s kits design quality decreased. Monogram. Pros: Easy to assembly kits. Best molded in color kits ever made. Tom Daniels kits. Their “Classics” kits built well and look good. Con: Cars were not their only kit type. Inconsistent scale choices. Poor proportions on some kits. AMT / SMP. Pros: Promo based business model allowed for a very wide range of fairly well-proportioned annuals each year loaded with custom and race parts (3in1 kits). Most trophy kits were good subject matter and straight forward to build. Cons: Promo based chassis and interiors on most annuals. Late 60’s into early 70’s kits design quality decreased (poorly modified re-issues). MPC. Pros. Promo based business model allowed for a wide range of fairly well-proportioned annuals each year loaded with custom and race parts. MPC non-annual kits were good subject matter and straight forward to build. Stock bodied Funny Cars are either a Pro or a Con depending on the point of view 😊. Con: Promo based chassis and interiors on most annuals. 70’s kits design quality decreased (poorly modified re-issues). JoHan. Pros: Promo based business model allowed for a decent range of the best proportioned body annuals each year loaded with custom and race parts. Their “Gold Cup” kits were well proportioned and second to none for functional features. Con: Promo based chassis and interiors on most annuals. Slowly withered in the early 70’s with few new kits.

In the full size Pontiac world there is a well know LOADED 65 2+2 convertible painted Cadillac Samoan Bronze. In this case it was a Brass Hat car but it was still given a factory custom paint.

It is a rear door so you load it then very very carefully move it.

Space was an issue with me. In the early 90's I got a 70's? issue Big T that was on display at my local hobby when I was a kid. I stored it for years. About 3 years ago I found the perfect 1/8 scale display case and put the Big T in it. A month later I locally stumbled onto nice survivor Big Rod, Big Tub, Big Drag and a 65 Vette. All I need now is the pedestal for the display engine.

I was born in the late 60's and I saw the very end of the first golden era of model cars. As a 60's car nut I remember being frustrated as a kid that I missed out on all the cool models. I trolled yard sales and flea markets in the late 70's thru the mid 80's looking for 50's and 60's era kits. My hoarding stems from this early experience that what is available today may be gone tomorrow. My stash exceeds 2,000 kits (a couple hundred pre-1975) and 1,000 pre-1975 re-builder projects (with a couple hundred "donor" kits for the re-builders). I'll never do them all. I am okay with that

Last night I compared a Hasegawa 65 to an AMT 65. the wheelbase looks to be the same. I did a quick bumper check, and the Hasegawa parts are a little narrower than the AMT parts and the pocket for the grille is shaped a little different. The Hasegawa body is definitely 1/25 scale.

Here are some pics of the slot car in its original form. The body was copied from an AMT promo back in the day so the proportions are actually okay. The chassis and interior were designed years later (after the slot car boom went bust) and they are super generic and kinda suck. Having said that, I have one .

The color "Mink Silver" was a special color in 68. A good friend of mine had a Mink Silver 68 with Black Buckets with a floor shift that he bought in 68 as a 6 month old used car (the original owner bought the car specifically to take a large cross county road trip).

Years ago, I drove a friend's 66 Corsa 140 (4 carb) 4spd. It was a glorious machine, like driving a full size go cart! In the 90's and early 2000's I parted out cars as a side hustle. I had friends that were scrapers, and they would call whenever they got anything mid 70's or older. Early on one of those cars intercepted on the way to the crusher was a 66 Corvair 4dr with the 140, 4spd and a telescopic column. It was Iowa rusty and on the edge of losing structural integrity, but the engine turned over and I don't think it had been taken off the road much before I got it. What a cool 4dr that must have been when new!! I sold it to a local Corvair guy as a parts car so he could upgrade his more standard 65 coupe (he really wanted that improved 66 4spd trans).

First off, not a Nader fan, but..... I read "Unsafe at Any Speed" years ago. The book does not focus on the Corvair in particular. Where the book does discuss the Corvair it explains and shows how the 65 rear suspension resolves the issues with the 60-64 rear suspension. The reason everybody knows Nader - the book - it's connection to the Corvair is GM. They attempted hired a group of people to attempt to ensnare Nader with a young woman to smear his reputation. It blew up on GM and became front page national news. GM's attempt to smear Nader actually got him the publicity the books release did not. Nader didn't kil the Corvair, the Mustang did. When GM released the F-body cars (Camaro/Firebird) to compete with the Mustang there was no need for two sporty coupes. GM made Corvairs until 69 but effectively stopped development after 67.

I also plan to build a Coronet 500 using the R/T kit. The 1:1 68 Coronet has stamped aluminum headlight bezes with the mesh area in the bezels as raised ribs. The center grille is a thin aluminum eggcrate. I am going to cut the center out of the kit grille and replace it with a fine mesh (I have to find one). Remember - unless your Coronet 500 or R/T was a dark color the radiator support was painted black so you could not see body color thru the grille.

The AMT Craftsman kits do not have engines. They are "curbside" style kits as are many European and Japanese kits. The AMT "Craftsman" kit type dates to the 60's when AMT would sell unassembled promo cars (typically molded in color) as an entry level kit for younger builders. The modern Craftsman kit are designed to accept an engine if the builder chooses as they have a separate engine plate, the hood opens, they have a firewall and radiator support detail. In the future these kits may be issued with engines. The 63 Nova wagon was initially issued as a Craftsman and later issued with an engine and other parts (trailer with a separate engine). Craftsman kits also work well with the trend of using 3D printed engines. Hope this helps. Carmak

I will speak to two different versions of (MPC/AMT/ERTL) plastic model kits. The first version of the General Lee was made by combining pieces of a Daytona stock car kit, original 69 tooling and some 71-72 Charger tooling. The body had the Daytona flush rear window, It didn't have and taillight bezels, the grille inserts were 71-72 Charger, nothing fit really well, and the tooling was worn. It then became the best-selling model car kit of all time. The second version was revision of the first version. The rear window was fixed. The tail light bezels were sorta molded into the body. It got a little better in some places but the tooling was even more worn and nothing fit. I grew up building these kits (multiples) and I loved them. An okay model can be built using either of these kits (not accurate, just okay) if you put some work into it. If I wanted to build a nice, detailed replica I would use the Revell kits.