johnbuzzed

I tend to be a purist, especially when it comes to street rods or street machines, but there are some combos that I can appreciate. I especially like how funny cars can have "Mustang", etc., in their graphics while in reality, they're all powered by a form of Chrysler's Hemi.

I don't think I'd want to spend more than... $75.00 for a readily available, brand new kit, and it had better be some friggin' really special kit for me to spend that much (and I mean SPECIAL). I read the reviews in FSM for some armor or ship kits, or the new 1/350 scale (TOS) Enterprise and I laugh at the prices. But, if I ever find the JoHan '67 Fury, heck, I don't know- maybe $125.00...???

I'm not sure if I'm going this year, Mike. But I do recall the photo requests at last year's show bearing the Model Cars Magazine logo, etc.

Whatever.

If it floats my boat (subject matter and overall general quality) I'll buy it- with all intentions of building it- new, reissue, original issue, modified reissue, out of production, from any manufacturer.

I'd go with the NASCAR motor.

Actually, the air cleaner used in the Air Grabber system did have the "coyote duster" decal on it. And yes, the system was introduced in '69, not in '68- my mistake. You can Google Image "coyote duster" to see various images of, well, the "coyote duster" logo and it's applications.

I like my Mopars, but my favorite '55 vintage has to be a Chevy. BelAir, 210, it don't matter, in the style of a Jr Stock from the late '60s or a classic gasser.

Does anyone know if coverage of the 2012 CKM NNL will be in the magazine one day?

Well, I'm not an expert, but that Coyote Duster setup is included in the kit and I don't recall if it ever included the logo decal.

Me, too.

No, they used the "Coyote Duster" in the '68 kit (and the real car).

Michaels down here has a not-too-large selection of Monogram, Revell and Maisto (sp?) kits that are way overpriced and they have a small selections of Testors paints. AC Moore has even less. Hobby Lobby has a better selections of Revell, Monogram, Round2(Ertl/AMT/MPC) and Tamiya kits. They have a good variety of Testors paints, airbrushes and supplies for them, masking stuff and masks and some materials for fabricating parts. Their prices are high, too, but whose aren't? I'd like to see them carry the Tamiya spray paints, then life would be almost complete .

That would be welcome. If I remember correctly, that's for clearance for one of the induction setups... I think. I think there are also tabs for locating the "Coyote Duster" setup. I'd like to see the one piece, "440 6 BBL" fiberglass lift-off hood w/scoop as used on the '69 cars in this kit, too. Nothing wrong with a little retrofit.

I know the manufacturers were not "related", so to speak. I just find it a bit odd, but the reasoning does make sense. Honestly, I don't even know if Mercurys were on the tracks in those days.

Very interesting, very cool, a little saddening. I was stationed at Selfridge Air National Guard Base, just outside of Mt Clemens, back in '74-'75. In my travels I managed to get to the Chrysler plant in Hamtramck. I wonder if it's even there now... I often drove past the MPC facility on Grosbeck Highway but I didn't stop, nor did I ever see the AMT facility out in Troy. I wish I had. Aurora had it's headquarters not far from my hometown on Long Island. Never made it there, either. Who knew? The homes of Grumman Aerospace Corporation and Republic Aviation Corporation, both manufacturers of some famous aircraft, are mere shells of what they used to be on that same island. Some old buildings, even those with history, are demolished in the name of "progress", while others- even towns and entire cities- are brought to the same fate due to politics and stupidity . Sorry if I went off the track here...

Nice build of a classic. I gotta get one of those kits. But does anyone else wonder why "Mercury" outboards would choose to sponsor a Chrysler and not a Mercury ?

I built the original issue back in 1991 and had no complaints- well, the taillights were awful, but that's about it. That kit had the pro street optional parts; that's how I built it. I was happy when it won a couple of contest awards. I built a second one of the same issue more or less "factory stock" a few years later. The first build was a parting gift to a friend who was moving and was subsequently, accidentally destroyed (sat on, I believe). The stock build languishes in a box somewhere (I think), perhaps in our garage after out own relocation. I am now working on the millennium issue that I bought in... 2000(?); this one does not have the Road Runner emblems, nor can you find any reference on the box art or the instructions or decals. This was probably due to licensing- I guess Warner Bros. wanted a lot of $$$. I don't think this issue had the pro street tubs but it does have a majority of the other pro street stuff. The engine is a Hemi with induction options and ugly headers; the driver sits on a bench seat (one does not sit in a bench seat). The taillights still suck, but I can better deal with that now. Also, the right side rocker panel suffered from a short shot- it looks like just a little more plastic could have been injected. I'm fixing that with some strip styrene. This one is being built as an early '80s street machine. It has some nice molded-in detail and plenty of additional detail parts and it's rather "delicately" molded. I'm not saying it's perfect, nor is the chassis up to current Revell B-body standards but this kit has a lot of potential and can be combined with different motors/transmissions/rear ends and other readily available kit parts to build several variations of Plymouth's B-body. It would be great if one of the aftermarket companies (Model Car Garage, maybe?) could create a photoetched detail set for it. Overall, it's a nice kit and if Round 2 corrected that problem with the rocker panel for the upcoming re-re-issue, I'll buy another one or two or three or more- even with the awful taillights.

"Measure"? What's that?

I forgot the AMT Double Dragster kit, most current issue. TWO cars, lots of building options and a whole lotta decals!

Ahh, I see- he was referring to those pictures in your previous post. That clears that up for me.

"Wrought iron or wooden porches" . Not to argue, but I'm not sure I understand the correlation or comparison here .

Well, I did a little research of definitions. For "model": the words "usually miniature" or "typically on a smaller scale than the original" can be found; for "replica": "especially on a smaller scale" is given. None of those adverbs mean "always", so I'm gonna think that it's in the eye of the beholder. I'd like to see the reactions of judges in this situation.

The Gundam kit would be a good candidate (my sons are heavily into them and I have built one so I am familiar with them), but I think I would go with... AMT's original '57 Chevy kit. There's a lot of building options in that box AND a tube of putty- even a sheet of self-adhesive upholstery material for seat inserts! There are several runner-ups, too- Revell's Deuce sedan, Ertl's original '68 Road Runner, MPC's '32 Ford "Switcher" sedan/vicky, et al.

With all the info which we have been provided in this thread, it amazes me how and why manufacturers can manage to mess up, a la the new Revell Mustang or the front axle on the Rat Roaster . Lost in translation, perhaps?