Longbox55

Yeah, the Contitrac wasn't a very good tire. We sold them for a while, had plenty of them come back for tread separations. Same for the direct predecessor of that tire, the General Ameri-Trac (same tire, different sidewall lettering).

I have one that I got as a builtup. Under the rather thick red paint, it was molded in white, and I have seen unbuilts in both red and white.

I noticed that in your pix. Hankook tires would also have been correct for OEM. From what I see, I only really see a couple of things that are off to my eye. One is the seats. They look a little "blocky" to me. The other is the tie rod. It looks more like a tie rod assembly from a '99-'07 GM 4x4 rather than a Super Duty Ford. Granted, I'm only going from the pix of the parts still on the tree. I'll be finding out soon enough, should have mine in a few weeks when Big 4 in Indy gets them in. Yeah, I know I mentioned in the other thread I most likely wasn't going to get one, but it's just too neat of a kit to pass on.

The Phantom van does have the "Chateau" markings on the front fenders, it's the same body as the Coo-Coo van.

Oil filter decals can have the same issues, they just simply haven't caught it yet, or the companies gave permission to use their logos.

While I do agree that it would be a good product idea, it could potentially get into the same issues as tire sidewall markings. Especially if you get into the aftermarket battery brands (Die-Hard, Duralast, Everstart, etc).

Looks good, the match looks pretty spot on to me.

Believe it or not, the '65 and '66 Chevrolet truck 283 and 327 V8s were actually green, rather than the usual orange-red associated with Chevrolet V8s. The Trucks didn't adopt the same colors as Passenger engines until '67. Here's a pic of an original unrestored truck. I have seen this color vary in shade, some are more of a spruce green, some are more of an Alpine green (think Detroit Diesel green).

Yup, the engine and trans are the main issue. The kit has a 440 B block engine and an A833 4 speed, rather than the 360 LA small block and Torqueflite 727 that the 1:1 has. There is also an issue with the rear ride height, it sits way too high. Seems that the rear springs are holdover parts from the original long bed version of the kit, and are for the 4x4 option. That one is an easy fix, simply shave down the area where the axle mounts to the spring flush with the lowest leaf. That'll correct the height issue.

OK, just did a very brief check on a couple sites with the specs/option breakdowns. Looks like cars #53 and #59 both have the cambered exhaust option. Not sure about any of the others, might have to do a little more looking.

Cambered exhaust. I believe it was available on them, but I don't know if any were actually built with that option. That's another one of the quirks of the Revell '69 Camaro, as that option was not very common on the 1:1.

The GM cars you have listed are actually A body, the B body was the Fulls size, C bodies were generally Cadillacs.

The Dana 70 is also very common in Chevrolet and GMC duallies from the late '60s-early '80s. It also pops up in some single wheel GMC applications and Chevrolet single wheel Camper Specials. IHC also used them, for both front and rear axles (Dodge also used in the front in some years). The Willys FC with duals also used it, as well as one oddball option on the CJ2/CJ3, which also had dual wheels for rear mounting of heavy equipment, such as a post hole auger. As far as I know, there isn't one in scale. As highway stated, the one in the Monogram F350 is the 10.25" Ford axle, rather than the Dana 70.

So far, the only version of the Revell '68-9 Corvette I've seen with headers is the '68 "Rebel" Racer variant. They're side pipe style headers, not sure how well those would work.

That's not really correct, GM passenger cars had body color wheels back then, especially with the smaller hub cap. Also, Mopars weren't necessarily "all body color" either. I know of several 1 owner late '60s/early '70s Mopars with black wheels, rather than body color.

That's one of the glaring errors in this and all the other versions of the Revell '69 Camaro, no cast iron exhaust manifolds. All the versions of this kit have the same tube headers found in the original Yenko kit, except the Z/28, which has small block headers (still no cast iron manifolds as the oem would have, though). The headers that come in the kit are very nice, though.

That's an area I where I got lucky with my '55. Other than a little rust on the lower fender tips, the rest of the the fenders were in pretty good shape. Unfortunately, I can't say the same for the doors, which had the typical '50s lower door rust. BTW, while for the most part, I will agree that modern cars are much safer, I have had the misfortune of seeing just what a '50s vehicle will do to a modern vehicle in straight bumper to bumper collision. I had a little under 30 mph accident in the '55 with an '05 VW Jetta. The other drive had to stop short because the traffic ahead of him had stopped (the light was green). I didn't catch in time and was a little too close to stop (would not have mattered if I had modern brakes or not). Tagged him pretty good. While there were no injuries, the VW took the brunt oof the damage, about $5600 worth. The whole trunk got shoved forward about 6". Mine ended up with a slightly kinked fender, a bent front bumper/broken LH bumper bracket, and a hole punched in the radiator from the core support shifting on its mounts. My end came out to $1700 to repair. Not necessarily defending vintage cars, more of a real world first person experience, rather than a worst case scenario.

Should also be noted, all the so-called "rust" that most folks like to point out in that video, is actually dirt. Those late '50s cars were known for collecting dirt in the fenders, especially over the headlamps (that's one of reasons you see that area rusted out so often). For those who believe that modern video was faked, here's one that was filmed back when these cars were new. http://youtu.be/-MGKBD4BA6E WARNING, this video is rather graphic, with actual accident scenes and victims.

That is correct. Externally, there is little to no difference between the 194 or 230. For the rear axle, the one from either the Trumpeter Nova or the AMT '66 Nova will be fine for the base model van, or any GM 12 bolt Passenger axle from a Chevelle/Camaro/El Camino/Revell Nova will work. In addition, the base model wheels were a 5 lug version of the 13" wheel found on the Nova, with a 14" wheel optional.

The tires from that kit leave a lot to be desired. They're not even really truck tires, but the old Monogram Goodyear tire that they used as the option oversize trie in their 1/24 scale muscle car kits. The correct OEM size for the F250/350 is 215/85/16, though finding them with 245/75/16 (SRW) or 235/85/16 (DRW) is not uncommon. The E 250/350 vans generally run the same sizes, most of them I've ever worked on have the 245/75/16.

http://youtu.be/joMK1WZjP7g

I would agree with that for the most part. However, what about the "ringers", cars that by definition, would be a muscle car, but were put together by an authorized dealership? Case in point, the Yenko and Baldwin-Motion Chevrolets and the Grand Spaulding Dodge/Plymouths. But,these models would also be avaliable as 4door,wagon and el-caminos Funny you mention that. The El Camino could be had with any engine/trans combo that a standard Chevelle could have, just not the Super Sport package until '68. The real question is whether an El Camino is a car or a truck (different discussion for a different time). Now on the station wagon front, there actually was a Super Sport station wagon. It was only built for 1 year, 1973, but did get the full SS treatment, including an available LS4 454 engine. That's a whole different can of worms there. Generally, a Hot rod is considered to be a vehicle altered aftermarket by the owner, usuallybeing a vehicle of 1948 or older model year. Again, different debate for a different time.

Tell me about it! My daily driver has '50s era brakes, 4 wheel drum, no power assist, and is a single circuit brake system on top of it. definitely have to plan the stops. Fortunately for me, I have a nice big ol' size 14 that puts plenty of force on the whoa pedal!

Generally speaking, most consider a "true" muscle car to be an intermediate size car with a large/high performance displacement engine, usually over 380 cid, and built between 1964 and 1972. However, the term is open to discretion, as there are cars that by definition, are not "muscle cars" that tend to get included, for example, the Camaro, Mustang, 'Cuda, and all the other Pony Cars. I have also seen sports cars, like the Corvette and Cobra included (Muscle Car Review 100 Fastest Muscle Cars). The you have all the full size cars that tend to get included on some lists, like the Z11 Impala and the Max Wedge Plymouths. As far as which was was first, gets a bit muddy there. By definition, that title should go to the 1964 GTO (there was no '63), but then again, some consider the '57 300 the "first". Others consider the '55 Chevrolet V8. Then, going further back, I have heard of some folks considering the 1932 Ford Model 18 as the first muscle car, usually citing Clyde Barrows preference for using them as getaway cars because of their superior speed to other low priced cars. I've even seen Deusenbergs put on some lists.

I hate that, too. I went to a swap meet in Indy with a friend of mine (W-M-D on here) in Indy a while back, left my truck ('55 Chevy 3200)at his place up in Lafayette. Never had anyone mess with it before, but hen we got back later that day, sure enough someone at his apartment complex had tossed a few pop bottles in the bed. Back on topic; At first, I considered the price of this kit to be high as well, never mind that I most likely will not pick one up as I'm more into vintage trucks than late models. However, there is one way to look at it. How many of us have bought resin kits/conversions over the years? I'll use a recent resin kit as an example, the Modelhaus Dodge D100. While very nice, those kits have basic chassis detail, plus no engine or transmission. They run right about $100. Looking at it that way, the Meng F250 isn't really that bad. Granted, it really isn't a fair comparison, seeing as one is a mass produced injection molded kit, the other is a hand made resin cast.