Chuck Most

I saw this in Hot Rod Deluxe a while back, and I thought "Somebody (more skilled than me) needs to build a model of it!" John will do it proud!

I saw this one go together on your Fotki page, and I still love it!

Guess I can't help there!

I don't have too many of them, but here's what I've got-

Says who?

Well, Brian, the hardest part is picking a personal favorite! I'd love to have any one of 'em on my shelf, but I do say I have a soft spot for the very first one you posted, the early third-gen Bronco.

That's why you were looking for the '61 T-Bird kit! I KNEW IT!!!! I'll be watching this one.

I can't believe how good it looks, from every angle. It even looks impressive in 'test shot' mode! I knew all along I'd buy this kit, even if it were awful. I'm glad to see that it's a long way from awful!

I think it is separate- it's nowhere to be found in the low angle pics for which Chuck posted the link, and the Hudson's 'armored car' windscreen is in full view.

I took it easy today- I bought a Revell '37 Ford Pickup kit and Kenworth W900, and ordered a Jimmy Flinstone Bubbletop '62 Catalina body from STAR Models.

The windows are my biggest gripe thus far- the other problems may well be a figment of the imagination, mine or someone else's. If the final kit does still have issues with the widow shape, I think I'll just whack off the roof and put on a padded Carson top. That'll fix it!

Proof positive that even a basic "Kid" snap-kit can look cool when somebody takes the time to do it up right!

Love watching this one progress, Mike!

I've dealt with Norm Veber in the past, and will gladly order from him again and reccomend his products to anybody, but I'm just wondering if there are any online shops who carry his products. I've found a few who carry his Ferrari stuff, but nothing else. I'm planning to purchase the louvered '62 Pontiac hood, among other items.

And this still is a test shot after all, so there's still a chance of them catching any issues with it. Will they catch ALL the issues with it? I doubt it. I do know I'll be plunking down my twenty five bucks for one when they hit the shelves,though I do confess that perhaps the 1:1 subject is clouding my judgement just a little!

I don't have the '10, but the '08 is similar aside from the wheels and decal sheet. It's a pretty decent kit, though the way they did the front chin spoiler kind of baffles me! http://public.fotki.com/ChuckMost/kit-contents/amt/amt-08-dodge-challenger/

Actually, Mark, you're one of the 'fair and balanced' ones! You can point out a kit's faults, but still outline what's good with it.

I have absolutely no problem with a kits problems being discussed. Sheesh, the at-length and heated discussions about such things are some of the most entertaining conversations you can 'listen in' on! But, even so, show of hands... how many of you think this kit will be absolutely perfect (or even close) when it actually hits the shelves? Nobody? Thought so. Harry- you can lay partial claim to this kit's greatness by pointing out the goof-up you noticed earlier on. So we know Moebius is seeing this, and more importantly, listening. But then again, I'm pretty sure Revell is watching the message boards too, and odds are that Monogram '70 Mustang grille ain't never gettin' fixed no matter how many times it comes into somebody's crosshairs!(Iffy grammar used to enforce my point.) For me, it's the sweating of the 'little stuff' I just don't get. It's stuff like that Monogram '70 Mustang grille, which is so messed up and wrong that even a non-modeler doesn't think it looks right, that I can't abide. Yeah, the little things can and do add up, but if a company can avoid the big ones, the ones that really ruin the kit, I'm pretty happy. But some guys just like to make a witchhunt out of things!

I've never bought anything from you before, but I won't hold this against you. Keep on keepin' on- it'll get better.

And of course, there's always the fact that the images a camera takes are "open to interpretation"...

Here is what I really, really really really, really really REALLY really, re-he-heeeley don't get... When did we become so bogged down in the details that we can't just step back and look at the big picture? As I've said before, I'll reserve my final judgement on this and any other new kit until I have it sitting right there on my workbench in front of me, or on my lap behind the wheel of my car in the hobby shop parking lot. I look at the (mostly) assembled test shot, and I see a Hudson Hornet. Any gaffes I see (or think I see) can be explained away for now, and if there are any mistakes that still slip through the cracks, well, I think I can deal with those issues when needed! I know I may be a bit weird, perhaps outright crazy, but isn't the whole point of a model kit to build it, not to fret over the bumpers sticking .010" too far away from the body, or some other nonsensical tidbit that only you and five or six other people will even take the time to notice? There's never been a perfect model car kit, in terms of 'accuracy' and 'scale fidelity'. Never was, isn't now, and I seriosly doubt there ever will be. As long as it isn't some truly awful Pyro-style piece of junk, why dwell on what's wrong (EVERY kit has at least a few things going for it!)when it seems they got it right for the most part? There are some people who love pointing out what's wrong with a kit(and I can be one of 'em sometimes), but very few who like to talk about what the manufacturer got right!

I was thinking more "Darth Vader" from the post title... but I still dig what I see. Military models are some of my favorites to look at, even though I don't build them myself.

Yes, and somehow that 'knockoff' Hudson body style came out a year before the '49 Merc...

I did not need to narrow the front clip- but I did have to shorten the hood.