MrObsessive

Super sharp Paul! I never knew AirTrax made this one! Yeah, I'd sure like to see more four door models available.

At times yes............. I wanted to get rid of that "sparkle" as you described, so I painted over the powder with a semi gloss red paint (acrylic). Since this car had opening doors, the interior would be seen easier and I wanted that sparkly look to be knocked down a bit. For the Corvette I'm working on now, I used black embossing powder and I didn't do that...........a very small area that covers so it's not as noticeable.

WOW! At first glance I thought this was out of the comic books! VERY impressive and you nailed the 'one dimensional' appearance that the cartoon strip Jeep has.

I have to echo what others have said about this kit. I built this too years ago and it was rather.......let's just say fiddly. Yours looks TERRIFIC and the ride height looks fine to me. This kit is NOT for the faint of heart and while it can be done as you've shown, this is one of those that you REALLY have to take your time on! I restored a 356 Coupe which I had showed here on the board and even getting that one back together after disassembly was tricky at best. Short of it not running, I'd say it goes together almost like a 1:1. Separate frame sections and all!

Thanks for the offer Steve! I bought a '65 roof section a few months ago for a someday '66 Bonneville four door project. Instead, I think I'd end up using the roof from the Monogram '64 GTO and then try the '65 GTO roof on the Chevelle. That's failing I can reshape it without a lot of drama. Of course, the more I look at the Z-16, the more I see other areas that'll need to be worked on too.

I sure do! Here are a couple............. I swapped the roof from the '59 for a '60 for pretty much the same reason. I didn't like the vent window/roof header shape of the '59 and since the '60 was essentially the same, to my eyes it looks much better. If you're interested, you can see all the build pics here.

Lookin' good so far Tony! Personally, between this and the AMT '64, this one has the better body shape. AMT's '64 roofline never looked quite right to me as the C pillars seems too 'thin'. Their '63 is the same way, but then Revell's '63 to my eyes looks too exaggerated as far as the roof creases. If ever build a '63, I'd probably do a roof swap using AMT's '63 lower body and Revell's '64 roof. Sorta what I did with Monogram's '59 Chevy.

I have this same project in mind, 'cept I have a resin '63 Catalina I've had for probably ten years now. I don't know who made it as I picked it up in an unmarked box at our Super September Showdown. I test fit the AMT '62 Catalina chassis under it and with some slight tweaking it should work. Since the frame is a separate part from the floor, it shouldn't be too hard to lengthen the frame rails and a slight stretching of the floor to make things work. Of course that's my crazy mind talking here and it's not for everyone.

Well said and let's not forget the upcoming advances in 3D printing that's happening. The sky's the limit on what all can be done with that and the tech can only get better.

You'll be dealing with one of the tops in the biz! I've met Tom a number of times and he's always been great to deal with and a genuinely nice guy!

The '60 was still using the X frame. The '64's were using a perimeter type frame starting with the '61's.

To add what Nick said, you might want to test a very small portion of the decal to make sure there's no reaction between it and the clear lacquer. Sometimes vendors can change things without notice for whatever reason. Some decals may play nice with it------some don't. If there's an issue you might want to give this a try. This links to an auction, but you may want to check with your LHS to see if they might have it. Hope this helps!

You'd have to do some work, but the closest thing would be the '90's AMT '62 Catalina. That's pretty much the only game in town ('cept for the Moebius '61 Ventura) that would be detailed for an early '60's Poncho chassis. Chevy, Buick and Cadillac were still using the X-Frame during that era and there's never been a correct Olds chassis for back then, but the '62 Pontiac would work for that too.

Absolutely Gorgeous Steve!

Oh no I hear ya! It's just that if I mention who it is, it can quickly devolve into that. I've heard the horror stories about PayPal so I know where you're coming from. I had a run-in with them years ago when they froze my account immediately after someone paid me a large sum of money for a 1/12 scale Danbury Mint model I had sold. No reason given.........the person that bought it from me was from Russia so I don't know if that had anything to do with it or not. Just the same, I betcha if there was a thorough investigation of PayPal and the things they may be into, there would be some massive turning of stomachs. It will come out about them sooner or later.............it's just a matter of time.

If there could be given 'likes' for posts, this would be it. In no way do I want to turn this political, but PayPal was started by a certain individual who's very much wanted (not in a good way) in other countries. Do some digging on PayPal and you'll see what I mean.

Pretty sure it was AMT.

Ooooh! Very, very nice! Those wheels and tires suit that to a T! Believe it or not, I have one of these kits and I've had it ever since it first came out. I've never touched it and seeing yours gives me a bit of inspiration. I never knew these were in high demand as I've heard others say the prices for these can be outta sight.

As Wayne mentioned and looking at this pic here, your side windows appear to be the culprit. I built this one too back in the early '90's but I left the side windows out. I had no problem with the floor pan sticking below the rockers. If it's not too late and you don't have things fully glued you might try taking the windows out and test fitting it to see if it'll go up further. Chalk another reason why I try to avoid kit glass as much as possible. Too thick and many times too distorted which drives me insane. Just the same, that is a very good looking model and that color suits it for a '62. As you might remember with the '59 Chevy I did, I got so frustrated with the rockers hanging below the body, I got out my Dremel and ground away all the excess. With some exceptions this is a malady that afflicts many Revell kits and a lot of times it's due to their 'platform' interiors. I see models from time to time that sit too high and this is part of the reason. When I can I try to avoid it, especially with detailed builds. Real cars don't have 'tubs' for interiors and it just increases the chances of 'stacking' in kits.

One annoyance about Revell's '67 Camaro is in fact the front end itself including the grille. The very front end of the fenders are not shaped correctly so if they did a correct '68 grille, the fenders would also have to be corrected to get things right. I have both the regular '67 Camaro as well as the 'Nickey' one.........that would be the first order of business in fixing that front end as well as the too sloped rear end. Granted, some don't mind the inaccuracies of that, but with me once I saw the error, I can't unsee it.

WOW!!

Had Pontiac survived this would have been among its lineup. It's a shame as IMO this is a great alternative for those of us that don't care for big, tall trucks and wouldn't want to be seen in an SUV/CUV. What might have been..................

I'm not good at photoshop, but I'd extend the taillights all the way to the tops of the fins. Actually, this would make a VERY neat model project!

Yeah, they're a bit too small. Could stand to be made a larger a tad. Not a hard fix, but not a super egregious error either.

Christian, your pics aren't showing (at least on my end) but the Imperials did have basically the same frame rail setup as the shorter Chryslers. One difference for 1957-'58 is that there was an X member in the chassis for all models. '59's they eliminated this no matter if it was a hardtop or sedan. If you're showing shop manual pics, those can be deceiving. A lot of the time car makers may use the same pics to carryover from one year to the next.