Aaronw

How hard could it possibly be to scratchbuild a refer for the trailer? It is basically a box with some boxes attached to it. I'm sure the grating could be scrounged up from something, or fabricated from styrene or metal strip. Most of the truck guys seem to be pretty comfortable customizing. The Thermo King across the top would be the most difficult aspect, photo etch would be the best option, but DIY decal would probably do the job.

It is hard to sell kits that consumers can not find. Distribution seems to be an issue for them. Most of the vendors I've checked for Heller kits don't actually have many in stock. Heller has some good kits, and had a lot of interesting subjects in the works so I hope this isn't too big of a bump in the road for the future of the company. The google translation is a little weird, but I gather the parent company wants to dump its French connections and move production someplace cheap.

Isn't it an amazing coincidence that "the public" wants the kind of cars with kind of options that happen to coincide with the greatest profits for automakers? Surely marketing doesn't play any role in that...

Keep in mind what they were competing with, scale model wasn't a term in common use. Ever here the term "box scale"? That literally means the model was scaled to fit into a standard size box, that was still common in the early 1960s. Johan's early Cadillac kits are notorious for having shortened proportions, because Cadillacs were large cars and many wouldn't fit into the standard box Johan used. In 1961 plastic model kits had only recently replaced wooden model kits. You think Palmer kits are bad check out a Monogram or Strombecker kit from the 1940s or 50s. Hey kid here is a block of wood sort of shaped like an airplane, here are some pictures of what it is supposed to look like. Here is a knife, go. Their later kits like the 1940 Ford are much better than those early kits, not great, but better. Good enough that some people think they copied the AMT or Revell kit. Their early kits are similar to other brands early kits, kits many gripe about for being bad. Also cars do not appear to have been their strongest effort. Apparently their ship models are considered to be better. I'm not really much of a ship modeller, so don't know from personal experience but I have been told many of the better Lindberg ship models began life as Palmer kits. Monogram's kits from the late 1960s really stand out because they were so much better than most anything else being done at the time.

The lighting is the same problem as the models. Everything is there and in place, wires just just have to be connected, I'll get to it, its only been 4 years....

I built the one I have, it isn't a prefab Ikea kind of thing. It took some time to build in the evenings and weekends. Technically it isn't actually done since I've never got around to wiring the lights.... It hasn't been this empty in a long time. I do have plans to do another but, that is going to fill a wall. I have to design it, then it takes time to build and is a much lower priority than some other large home DIY projects. Building the case isn't like a model where an hour here and there gets it done, it is a substantial time commitment and can't just be tucked into a shoe box until I have time to get back to it. There is also the cost to consider, wood, glass and the misc hardware adds up quickly. Then there is the matter of a truck for hauling all the bits and pieces. A truck is something I no longer have. I agree just getting another display case would be nice, if only it were that simple. I can't do anything the easy way.

It may not have had anything to do with Revell's profits. Hobbico was much more than Revell and it is quite possible the issues were in other parts of the business. In fact I'm pretty sure some earlier posts explicitly said that was the case. Recently Airfix's new parent, Hornby was also having financial issues. Airfix itself was in the black and doing just fine, it was some of the other (non model) divisions that were having trouble.

RoG has actually been quite active producing military vehicles and aircraft in addition to cars and trucks. They have produced several large 4 engine passenger aircraft, cargo planes and bombers over the past decade. Off the top of my head the Lancaster, Halifax, B-17, C-54 / DC-4, Airbus 400M, and several new helicopter kits. I don't follow armor or ships that closely, so not as aware of re-issue vs new tool but seeing their yearly whats new lists it appears they have been busy in those areas as well. At a minimum Revell USA offers a huge assortment of tooling for kits that there is little competition for. American autos have always been largely an American model company thing, Revell, Monogram, AMT, MPC, Lindberg, Moebius. You can probably count the number of American autos done by Japanese or European companies on your fingers and toes with some toes to spare. Hopefully they have an actual interest in Revell / Monogram, but worst case they will likely hold out to find a buyer who does. At $4 million they could double there money without pricing the company out of the hands of a wealthy hobbyist (like Peter Jackson and his company Wingnut Wings) or a group of individuals with the experience and connections to run the company as was done with Round 2. I can not imagine anybody spending $4 million just to scrap everything. It is also not unusual for foreign model companies to have a US branch as you see with Airfix USA, Tamiya USA, Dragon USA etc if for no other reason than distribution. It is unfortunate for those at Revell who are out of a job, but none of us know what the new owners have planned. They could pack everything up and ship it overseas, or start hiring for a new Revell USA once they have an inventory and a plan. It is quite possible that they are as surprised as many here that they got Revell USA so cheap and are now trying to figure out how it fits into their RoG plans. I think it is way to early for doom and gloom.

Just a sheet with this style of tread plate would also be very handy.

Now this one I defiantly can see the Chevy influence.

I can kind of see that, but overall the car reminds me of a 52-54 Ford borrowing some styling cues from front end of the 57 Ford. I feel like I know what the Ford Falcon would have looked like if it came out in the 1950s instead of 1960. I think it is the relatively plain sides, most of the 1950s Chevy's had a lot more going on with the sides. Taking another look though I can definitely see a strong resemblance to a low option '55 Chevy 150.

Odd, despite the GM connection I would have guessed Ford related. I get more of a 50s Ford or early Ford Falcon in the styling, not really seeing Chevy. Nice looking car, I assume it was a smaller car, Ford Falcon / Chevy II sized?

I was kind of wondering about the upscale part myself, they were intended to be very inexpensive so I doubt they were adding leather seats and wood grain accents. I know very little about the cars but I've been in a quirky economy car mood and these rank high in that genre. They all kind of look the same to me but reading this thread there are obviously some subtleties to them. Pat the Airfix and Heller kits are the same, just different boxes? It is kind of funny that you have a Model T behind yours, I'm building a Model T and it is what got me into a mood to build more inexpensive little cars.

Maybe one of the Revell or Academy 1/32-1/35 H-13 kits? I'm not sure which engine they have in the kit or the quality but the Bell 47 / H-13 used a variety of 4 and 6 cylinder Franklin and Lycoming engines generally in the 335-435 cid range. The most common kits are later H-13H models which would have had a 6 cylinder Lycoming VO-435. There are some boxed as the earlier H-13D model which should have a 6 cylinder Franklin O-335, but I don't know if they are really different or just the same kit re-boxed. When you factor in the scale difference it might get you close enough for a decent starting point. I've seen some of these kits built with detailed engines, but not sure how much work was required from the builder to get there.

I wasn't aware of the book or show, but I am somewhat familiar with the expedition they are based on. One of the modern theories is lead poisoning played a part. Canned food was relatively new and the cans were sealed with lead solder. The ships were also provided with distillation systems allowing them to make drinking water from sea water. These systems used lead tubing to collect the condensed water. After months at sea and then more months trapped on the ice the crew was slowly poisoned by their food and water. The brain is particularly sensitive to lead poisoning and can lead to irrational behavior. The snow and ice detail is amazing. Other than the flag issue the only detail that jumps out at me is the lack of icicles which I imagine would have been plentiful. Better than anything I can do. That is a common error on sailing ship models. People are used to flags trailing the direction of travel, but being wind powered on sailing ships the flag should point with the wind. Kind of surprising to see that on a model that shows this level of skill. Not really sure how else it could be explained though.

I'm going to bump this one rather than start a new thread due to all the 2CV info here. Some discussion on the lack of an early 2CV. I ran across this resin body from Jimmy Flintstone, curious about thoughts on it as well as best donor for building an early 2CV. I'm familiar with JF castings, so mostly interested in the details shown rather than a discussion of casting quality. http://jimmyflintstonestudios.com/?product=nb251-1950s-citron In regards to the existing kits which represents the most common later model. It seems all are specialty variants, Charleston being a more upscale model, Tamiya's a variant for the Japanese market, RoG's Sausss Ente a variant for the German market. Is Heller the onl one to offer a base model 2CV? how upscale is the Charleston?

This came out very nice. This is my favorite series of Chevy truck.

I love starting projects, not so good at finishing them. You can keep putting problems off until you get to the end, then you have to deal with them. Much easier to put it aside and start something new. Another thing I've found is I am much better about finishing models when I have a place to display it. I have had a steep decline since my display case got filled. I had a particularly productive period right after I built it and had a ton of room to fill. It takes away some of the fun if finishing the model just means you have to find someplace safe to put it.

This is a Utility Body Company brand body, assuming it is the same vintage as the truck it is mounted on this would be an appropriate style for the Moebius Ford trucks. Stahl Truck Bodies was founded in the late 1940s. The Utility Body Company started building truck bodies in 1953. Reading Truck Body started in 1955. Knapheide was founded as a wagon builder in the late 1800s, and began building truck bodies in the 1920s, but they didn't begin offering service truck bodies until the late 1960s. Those would be my guesses as to the likely suspects for a vintage utility body. The kit piece very much resembles a modern-ish utility body from Reading or Knapheide, but as seen in the photo above the basic style really hasn't changed that much in 50 years. I bet Moebius sells a lot of kits just for that body. It should look right on just about any full size truck from the late 1960s through 2000.

Bay window micro bus, Squareback and VW 181 "Thing" all seem like they would do fairly well. At least as well as another bug or split window and probably better than the Vanagon which has been kitted.

Long before my time but an older ship modeler told me that in the 1950s-60s Pyro and Palmer were so notorious for copying ship models made by others that they were referred to as the Plastic Pirates.

So basically the same idea as the fake woody "wood" paneling on station wagons in the 70s or PT cruisers in the 90s.

Model Round up has it listed for $36 with an expected arrival of May 2018.

That really kills me. I had a 1996 Tacoma which was a very nice size truck, no issues parking, 26 mpg, decent power and a 7 foot bed so not difficult to haul 2x4s, or a 4x8 sheet of plywood by dropping the tail gate. 1996 was a few years before they started to grow. In 2008 or 2009 I remember parking my station truck a 2005 Ford F150 4x4 nose to nose with a Tacoma which was taller and wider than the F150. I checked the Toyota twice because I was sure it must be a Tundra, but it was a Tacoma. I have trouble these days telling a "compact" Chevy Colorado from a "full size" Silverado and forget about trying to find a 2 door cab truck. My Tacoma got wacked in 2014, the insurance gave me $3500 which I thought was pretty good for an 18 year old truck with 300,000 miles. Then I tried to buy another... I couldn't find one for less than $5000, I only paid $7500 for the truck in 2000. If you just need an occasional truck I've found U-haul is quite reasonable, $20/day + mileage for a 1/2 ton pickup. Not a bad price for hauling stuff to the dump or picking up some lumber particularly if you combine both tasks in the same day.

The grousers are perhaps exaggerated but not grossly inaccurate, just an extreme type. I'm guessing they based them on a brand new very aggressive track for use in terrain, something like you might find on a logging dozer. You will find tracks vary greatly in design depending on the intended use from nearly flat to very aggressive similar to what is in the kit. Here is a nice set of photos like might be useful for detailing the kit. Also shows similar tracks to the kit although not quite so tall. https://www.purplewave.com/auction/150910/item/J8575 and another without ROPS and a much less aggressive track style https://www.purplewave.com/auction/130227A/item/C3395 The grill on the box art actually looks more accurate that the last issue. The grill is probably the most disappointing aspect of this kit. The last RC2 era issue had regular plastic for the tracks, I hope this issue does the same I had no problem painting them. Decals are fairly easy to get around. For most of the production Caterpillar used simple block letters, the stylized C A T came late in this models production. The rippers are also easily cast. I made a few copies so I could build mine with 3. Unfortunately I had some resin go bad and refuse to cure remaining a gooey mess. Since I had what I needed I tossed the mold.