niteowl7710

The 2013 announcements from Revell AG are due soon, as are the 1Q (Jan-March) Japan manufacturers, which includes an all new Super Car tool from Aoshima they've been teasing.

If only out were that easy, as of this last batch of reissues, EVERYTHING has been coming out under that Monogram "Wheels of Badly Reissued Dreams" label as the Lighting F-150, Ram V-10, '99 Mustang Cobra, and Dodge Viper amongst others are 1:25 scale Revell kits.

The idea that making a model "harder" to deal with out of the box is the result of it being geared towards a more experienced (or Very Experienced) adult modeler puzzles me. Please list me another career, hobby, or anything that the more experience you garner in it, the less quality/ease of use one should expect. It's not like R.C. planes are more likely to crash the more experienced you are in flying them. Model trains are harder to track the larger your layout. Hey congrats on that promotion at work in addition to more responsibilities we've hired Bruce here to pre-sabatoge everything you do. I bought this kit last weekend, and there are 3 paths to solve the "problem" of the mold lines, but if treating adult modelers to that kind of "quality" is Revell's idea of stepping up their game or offering something extra (as in the Pro Modeler Series) then they aren't aiming at VEAM, but a mediocre middle of the road customer who is willing to accept whatever they dish out and be happy with it.

What you need to do then is find the kit your showing a picture of, it's part of the Aoshima "New Trend USA" series which were sold here in the U.S., and had several of their JDM cars that were also sold here in 1:1 form equipped with LHD and "American" logos...you'll notice that picture it has Infiniti markings and the steering wheel on our side. I know there was a US version of the Prelude and Lexus LS400 (which is the one that AMT reboxed) as well.

AMT's instructions during the Ertl days were probably the best domestic sheets. The technical drawings are clear, the parts have names, numbers and color callouts, and usually included a factory exterior/interior chart. You could debate the accuracy of that information, but at the time there was no google images. Tamiya has the best sheets overall for concise multi-paint parts, bringing well researched color callouts, and the interior/exterior factory color guide. I can see how the paint callouts individually could be frustrating to some, but I use their paints, and I know the colors by their codes (eg XF-16 = Flat Aluminum), so I personally enjoy not having to wonder what shade of gray "Light Gray" really is... Moebius is taking strides in the right direction, but currently the color charts on the Hudson & C300 border on useless as you need to make a copy of the back page or suffer through constantly folding the directions open and shut. Not to mention a GREAT deal of parts don't even have mention as to what color to paint them at all. Go ahead and paint the ¢300 engine without using any reference pictures, just straight from the information (or rather lack thereof) on the instructions. Lastly a big thumb down to Revell with the beginning of 2012 started using the old style instructions with no parts names or colors on the.steps, but rather the little letters in block squares that correspond to a color chart at the beginning. It's very 1980's Monogram and annoying in that way. Honorable disappointing mention goes to the reissue of the '69 Olds Hurst 442 which has tiny drawings and no words or colors which is stupid, they should have reprinted the excellent ones from it's 1996 AMT/Ertl issue.

Little boy parts on the ultrasound "pictures". My model stash has a male heir apparent!

I specified it was the US re-box, along with the part/kit numbers, which are not the same between the two. They said they had gotten no other complaints about warping. Which I guess meant I was trying to scam them, rather than the fact the kit had only been on the market for a week.

That pretty funny, when I wanted a replacement Audi R8 Spyder for the warped washcloth they included that was impersonating as the body shell, they wanted me to ship it to Illinois on my dime to inspect it first.

There's nothing til the SHMA Show & Three River IPMS Show in March after the Potbelly Show this Sunday.

I'll be there, and yes it's still at the New Stanton FD.

Ahh the first glue kit I ever soloed. In my 9 year old mind Testors Gloss Yellow was a perfect match for that Gold. Yikes! Snagged one off eBay for $6 last year to give that another whack as an adult.

In a manner of speaking, you got an uptop for the Olds eventually, that didn't make it in the first issue of that kit either. I'm surprised we didn't see the '58 and/or '59 get reissued in '13. Try to find one of those '59's...if I recall neither of those kits come with any roof options either.

My local one just had 4 flats that were pretty much all the same 5 colors of dark blue, dark green and dark gray. I got 2x each of the ones I didn't have, but a disappointment from the usual pallets of them they traditionally get in normally. It's not uncommon for me to walk out with 70+ cans other times. My store also had a pile of Crown Vics, F-150s and '53 Ford Convertible Indy Pace cars. Not sure where those went because they've been somewhere else for most of this year...amazing they still are stuck with those things at this point. I think they're a buck cheaper ($7.99 vs. $8.99) this go around.

Umm nope Pat fraid not. Your entitled to have your "opinion" here, and we all are entitled to complete ignore it. I don't get why you're a bitter person, but it isn't going to affect me. Which is the exact basis of every counter-arguement Pat has ever posted on this forum. It's all straw man stuff...look at this definition of what a straw man argument is and tell me how it is at all in any way different to what Pat has posted throughout this thread (and pretty much any other one he decides is worth his bestowing us with his trolling... The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument: Person 1 has position X. Person 2 disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the superficially similar position Y. The position Y is a distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including: Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position. Quoting an opponent's words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent's actual intentions. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person's arguments — thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated. Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical. Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version. [*]Person 2 attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position. It would just be beneficial to just pretend he's not even talking when he post around here. You hear a bitter angry sounding noise? Me neither...

Well as absolutely riveting as it is to watch Pat throw up page after page of straw man replies to nearly every post here, back to the matter at hand. I've been playing around on the 3d02.com website and am I willing to pay $100 for some of these 3-D files if I had a way to print them...yup. Now of course there's the concept of scaling the file to print out a 1:24/25 scale object. It would also probably take work to print it out as an actual model kit in separate pieces rather than a 3-D printed promotional model. But the wide variety of vehicles out there is surprising, and I found the experience every bit as satisfying as browsing any other online marketplace.

Well Harry remember it's daylight 24 hours a day up there 6 months of the year or something...no need for shop lights then

Hmm someone lost their bat-wing I see. Tsk, tsk tsk.

I'd be interested to watch a feed of the control base during the free-fall. Because you know no matter how much they planned, plotted, practiced and had contingencies once he got up there and stepped off that platform if something went wrong he was taking a 24 mile plunge into the ground at 800MPH. There has to be a point when worry, second guessing, and "edge of your seat" adrenaline turned into a "Holy heck I think we're going to pull this off, this is REALLY going to WORK"...on the video at the beginning of the thread you can see everyone in the control room lose it when he sticks that landing, and still that part amuses me, after you fall 24 miles I'd give it to you if your landing isn't graceful, but it was like he was just doing some local skydiving, no biggie.

I think the real potential here lies within a business model being adopted by the Revells of the world. This tech still needs work in refinement and price, but unlike traditional means of manufacturing this is TECH we're talking about here which means it will grow exponentially while falling in price. So it's probably a good 5-7 years out still, but imagine if you will for a second where these printers are around $300-500 and can spit out things that are at worst good quality resin, and more along the lines of current model kit parts. The business model then becomes this...say for a kit like the much vaunted '70 Hemi Cuda. Everyone seems to have an idea about how this kit should be done and optioned....AAR, 340, 6 cyl, which wheels, etc etc etc. So Revell sells you your $30 Cuda kit, and includes a redeemable code to 3D parts. You enter the code and your printer fires off a 6 cyl and dog-dish hubcaps. If you decide later you'd rather have a AAR, for $3 viola you have all your AAR specific parts. The variety is endless to make base model cars, to make special edition cars, to make sedans (Print up a new body and interior) and on and on. This could potentially free up gobs of development cash because Revell (or Moebius) would just have digital files of all the "off-the-shelf" parts so one kit of a '57 Chevy could be built as a 110, 210, Bel Air, 4 door, 2door or Convertible with whatever engine and transmission choices you wanted, and they wouldn't be forced to eat the cost of tooling anything other than the initial kit. I bring up the Tri-5 kits because Revell is finally doing a '57 Convertible...and it's what...25 years after the '55 BelAir Convertible introduced the tooling? I think they would sell an equal amount of kits, perhaps more if they released a '55, '56 & '57 "base kit" so you would have all the basic mechanicals and parts to build a model of a Bel Air of each vintage. Then for a fee (which wouldn't be anything resembling the cost of an entire model kit itself -- since you'd be printing the specific parts yourself) you could then print out a '55 Nomad, '56 Convertible and '57 210 Sedan, each of which would require the base kit for the "guts" but the model company itself wouldn't be incurring the cost of modifying the tooling repeatedly over the course of 2 and Half DECADES (and we still don't have a '57 Nomad or '56 Convertible yet). The same thing goes for the '69 Camaro, that tool is a zombie at this point and they're still putting out variations. Imagine after they tooled the original kit, for $5 a piece you could have printed the necessary conversion parts for the B-M, Yenko, Convertible and ZL-1 versions right at your work bench. Revell gets what they want, you buying multiple copies of a kit to pay off the tooling. We get what we want which is every version of the model NOW! O.K. so perhaps there's a bit of over-the-top instant gratification in that. Everyone at Revell keeps their jobs because kits will still be produced and people will be needed to design the parts and how they attach to the base model, draw directions for the kit and parts and all of that. There will still be basic styrene kits for the base kits, and those who for whatever reason (can't afford a printer, are too cheap, are mortified of new Tech) can't/don't want to participate, and I can have a Ferrari Italia Spyder without waiting on Revell AG to decide to modify/create new tooling for one.

Give him 10 bonus points for sticking a perfect landing on top of it all.

A Cain Saw ehh? Bet Abel wished he had one of those...

Seems like the last several runs of those quarter cans all came out of NAPA's Denver warehouse if the shipping labels were correct.

Wouldn't the '57 Convertible have the same setup as the BelAir? The kit already exists, they're just "cutting" the roof off. Beyond the required convertible parts I wouldn't expect much new.

Me thinks those dates on the new tools (Mustang & Cuda) are wildly optimistic.

I stand corrected then, as I will bow to your knowledge of what kits are and aren't currently active. I guess the point I was trying to get at was it was announced back at the time the Gearz contest started, and at that point it was an active release. My LHS has the current former Firebird kit, and it's $5 less than the Foose kit. Man you really gotta want to do THAT car really bad considering you can't build the car in it's stock and drag variations out of the box.