MrObsessive

My sister would go crazy from all the penny candy that was in the store which believe it or not was right next door to our house. We lived there from '66-'72, but unfortunately the owner of the store had died maybe a couple years or so after we moved there. One type of candy that I think they still make today that I know was definitely for a penny was "Mary Janes". Hard as a ROCK!! But we loved 'em! Interesting that I had nary a cavity growing up........my sister gets that award. You'd never know that today as I'm the one with the dentures!

I guess I'm nearer the "Older than Dirt" crowd! I'm not familiar with the term "Butch Wax", but have certainly heard of Brylcream! I can remember party lines which we got from time to time as a kid in the '60's. I can also remember when the landlines had a different dial tone than they do now. I was a higher pitched tone, and IIRC it went to a lower pitched tone sometime in the '70's. Drive Ins?? One of the last times I can remember going to a Drive In was to see "The Exorcist" of all movies in a Corvair back in the early '70's. Those candy cigarettes would be considered illegal today because of out of control PCism. We "smoked" those all the time when we were kids, and it did NOT turn me into smoker! I tried an actual cigarette one time in Junior High School------coughed so hard that I saw stars and that was the last time I tried smoking a cigarette! There's one item on there that most here might remember but it's not on the list. Remember being able to cut a 45 RPM record off the back of a cereal box?? I distinctly remember cutting out The Archies "Sugar, Sugar" single out of the back of a Captain Crunch cereal box sometime during the summer of '69, and it played on my Mom's Hi-Fi set. My sister and I deliberately ate up that box of cereal awful fast so we could hear that song!

Those rally wheels hadn't crossed my mind as they're oh so common on most Camaro builds I've seen. The differences you speak of seem to be the cap itself for '67 doesn't have the "ribs" like the '68 and up design. Also the lettering is a bit different on the cap from '67 to '68. Chief Joseph's always up for ideas............you can drop him a line to see if they're in the works or if he's interested in making 'em. EDIT: I happen to have a pic on my hard disc of the '67 Pace Car with those wheels.........you can see the lack of ribs on the hub as opposed to the '68 and later ones.

I just thought of something else when I finished the last post. Do you have a dehydrator? If so, you might be able to set the chassis in the dehydrator, set the temp for 110º or so and carefully twist the chassis back to straightness. You'll have to keep an eye on other things such as delicate parts, tires, etc. It's worth a shot--------nothing's more irritating to me than warped kit parts which can render it unbuildable!

Wow. that's a tough one! Short of heating them up, I'm not sure what else can be done. One rule of thumb when assembling any model kit old or new, is to ALWAYS mock up/test fit out your parts before putting 'em together. In the case of both, you may be able to carefully take them apart and try straightening the chassis with hot water or very carefully a heat gun/hair dryer. Other than that, I'm not sure what else to add. Sorry this happened to you. It happens from time to time with the kit makers. Parts are pulled and packed too quickly, set in a twisted fashion while cooling, and you as the customer gets stuck with warped parts. Another fly in the ointment is that since Revell is for now kaput, I'm not sure you can get replacement parts for those. Hope the suggestion I gave can be of some help.

Oh yeah! I had a crush on her in my teens. I saw her on something not long ago, and despite being in her 80's now........she still looks pretty good!

For PE scripts and such, I've used Tamiya Clear Acrylic (X-22) or Future Floor Wax (Pledge with Future Shine). Works well for me, and if you mess up just a dab of Windex will take care of it and you can start over. Just be careful that the Windex or ammonia is not going to go on a water based paint..........might cause some trouble with the finish. Hope this helps!

Back in the early '90's I owned for a time a '67 Pontiac Catalina which had the exact same roofline. BIG 400 with no power anything! I only had it for a couple years and then sold it to someone local. Unfortunately, the buyer lived on a busy street where he parked the car, and one day going past his house I saw the car with the entire back end smashed in. Broke my heart as it was super duper clean when he got it, and was a powerful son of gun! I wish I had kept it looking back but it was for me a real handful to drive with no power steering or brakes (bought brand new by an elderly man originally), and I had at that time my ever cantankerous Fiat Spider, so I let the Pontiac go instead. Dummy me should have gotten rid of the Fiat before it decided to break its timing belt!

Looking over this thread several times since I last commented, I can see where this can be a daunting conversion and I love it! Just a little observation in the bodywork area if you don't mind along the lines of what Mike said...........and this is up to you. When AMT modeled this particular body style, I always thought that the rear fender "bulges and creases" were a bit exaggerated. Taking a look at the mid line crease on the body to the upper most curve of the rear fender bulge, it seems that to my eyes there's just a bit too much real estate on the kit body. It's hard to tell on the black car pictured..........I ran across this green one which highlights the body crease just a bit better. This ones a '68, but the bodies were essentially the same. Also if you take a look at the beltline area just behind the door, notice how it's a bit more level, and not as curved as the Impala hardtop is. GM's new for '67 B Body hardtops were attempting to be a bit more imposing and "daring" than what they were before. Again, it's up to you as this might require sectioning that quarter a scooch, and reshaping the crease. Just the same....keep up the good work! Plain Jane bodystyle conversions always get my attention!

Yeah, just saw that. I'm just getting up for the day, and saw that someone was PM'ing me about something. Tried to respond and got that ever annoying error message. Just now I was able to get back to them............

As far as I know, all Chevrolet B bodies for 1965-'66 had the same wheelbase. The other divisions back then had different lengths-------Pontiac comes to mind with the Bonneville/Ventura.

Well it's happening again! I'm trying to send someone a PM that was nice enough to write, and I keep getting the danged "404 Page Not Found Error". Sigh..............I may as well use a carrier pigeon some days to try to get a message through................................

Marty, weren't those unibodies pretty much the same save for the engine crossmember and wheelbase differences throughout the '60's into the '70's? I'm asking because I'd like to update a Johan or two using that frame in the future. Some don't mind, but I'm just not a fan of the molded in stuff at all.

Yup! Any conversion to other divisions of that Colonnade body style should be based on that. While Monogram's Monte Carlo is OK.........it always appeared to me that the cowl area (to the top of the windshield) is a bit "short". I've got two junk bodies in fact of that Monte. I'm saving 'em for future projects as I need the back roof section to make an Olds Cutlass, and down the road a '76-'77 Buick Regal. No timeline.........just an idea rolling around in my head for a number of months now. Looking at that #11 Olds NASCAR reinforces everything I see wrong in the new Olds NASCAR kit body. I'll hold off judgement of the Monte till I can see good pics of the kit in plastic. Hard to go by 3D images as those can change from now till production. I'm a bit passionate about these cars...........they were mainly what I saw on the road back when I was learning to drive in the later '70's, and in fact a '77 Olds was our Driver's Ed car back in high school along with a '77 Grand Prix. Now THAT I'd like to take on as a project someday! I can certainly remember them from new, and while they were not fast cars by any means, they were certainly good looking and one of the few bright spots of '70's cars.

They're similar, but you'd still have to do some tweaking...............

Wow............I get up from sleeping after working all night long, and now I see this! I've run into Del many times over the past 20 years or so at the NNL East particularly, and I'm really shocked to hear this! I just saw him in fact at this past NNL and had no idea that he was ill. Yeah, he built some FANTASTIC stuff, and his work will be greatly missed. Anyone know how old Del was? I'm curious as to me he wasn't "old".......although this sort of thing can strike at any age sadly.

OK..........got to remember where I put my flame suit, but those tops for the '62 Chevy's don't appear correct to me at all. For one, the trouble I've always had with AMT was them trying to take the '62 Bel Air hardtop and turn it into a convertible. The problem is, the windshield for that is too tall and in 1:1 the two do not interchange. A quick and dirty search on the 'net yielded these few pics of how the 1:1 '62 should look with its top up. OK, I threw a '63 in there..........all the same from '61-'64. A better candidate for a convertible would have been Revell's '62 Impala.........same (and correct) windshield frame and the same glass. I don't want to come off sounding harsh, but roof shapes including convertible tops are very important to me, and the errors in this one stick out like a sore thumb to me. I'd like to build a '62-'63 Chevy Impala convertible someday--------however those tops just ain't cuttin' it for me. Just my 2¢ worth........

Bob, look no further than this thread here. I've complained about this car forever (no, not the '58 Plymouth----another one ), and when it occurred to me that Round 2 will NEVER fix this one, I set about and made the corrections myself. No CAD, no drawings, no fancy tools. Just good 'ole eyesight engineering. The conversion is not done as of yet as this was not a WIP. If I can do this with just basic tools and practically zero dollars, why can't the model manufacturers even get the basic things right??

Bob, I gotta disagree with you there. I'm not an expert by any means in kit manufacturing......quite the contrary. However, when somethings not right it isn't right. This may not be a good analogy, but if I'm spending upwards of $15,000 for a car (my '11 Challenger for instance when I bought it in '14), and it's got a flat tire right off the bat, I expect the dealer to make it right. Not make an excuse by saying "But Sir.......it IS a Dodge Challenger!" Sorry, but one need not be an expert to point out an error when it's a HUGE one. If you're talking about those on the board that do have that kind of experience, well that's up to them to comment but give the average Joe among us some slack when there's things wrong with a particular product. In this case it happens to be a model. In the case of this Olds........despite it being a NASCAR, there's just some aspects of the car's body shape that aren't right. At least that's what my two eyes are showing me, and despite failing sight in the past couple years, I can still see when there's glaring omissions/incorrect proportions. OK.....that's my 2¢ worth.........

I totally missed these on his site! I was totally zeroed in on those '67 wheel covers! These are perfect if you want to build a sleeper '69 with a 396/427. Nosing around on Joseph's site, I see some other goodies I'll be asking him about-----I was just on there for a moment when I saw the '67 Camaro wheels.....I gotta check there more often! Looks like I'll be spending some more money!

Yeah................'68's are a bit different Carl. Although it wouldn't hurt to have these even done someday!

This is a bit time consuming, but here's a cheap way to make pulleys and what I use for realistic belts. If you go here and start with pic #122, I go through a mini tutorial with my Shelby buildup on how and what to use. Just another thing to consider if you're not happy with the kit's molded in belts and pulleys.

That sounds like an interesting technique that should work, but there's a caveat. When it comes time to paint, I seriously recommend washing the body parts in very lukewarm water as opposed to hot. You've bent the plastic to shape, but it still has its "memory" and as soon as any type of heat is applied to it, it'll want to go back to its original shape which was straight. The same can apply to resin too.........that can be fixed with some heat, but I strongly advise against washing the parts in hot water, or using a dehydrator to dry the paint. One thing that can also help in keeping the shape of that trunk lid is to perhaps epoxy some brass strips on the inside perimeter of it, which will help reinforce it against any possible deformation. Hope this helps, and keep us posted how it turns out!

What inspired me to ask Chief Joseph about making these was this................. These pics were taken at last years LCBC show here in Lancaster County PA. The lady who owned the car said that she bought it brand new in '67, and specifically wanted those wheel covers instead of the Rally Wheels with redline tires. Soooooo, this is definitely another future project, and gives me a reason to fix some of the Revell kit's foibles among other things.

Got these in the mail today after hoping someone would 3D print these someday.............. Another KNOCKOUT product from Chief Joseph of Fireball Modelworks! If you're tired of seeing '67 Camaros ALWAYS done in the ever present rally wheels, you need to get a set of these! You'll have to find the appropriate tires to use with them.........frankly, I think these look best in a set of redlines but that's just me. A must have item!