62rebel

that's a pretty good start for advanced bodywork and fabrication of parts. not to mention, that's a fiddly kit to build out of the box! it was state-of-the-art in the late '70's when AMT released it and the other '51 Chevies it shares parts with... your flames look pretty good, your detailing looks believable; as the Mythbusters might say: "Plausible!" keep at it!

ow! i liked the long hood.... but, keep going! you shouldn't ditch the lights; even aircraft have to run lights!

it's not over in the models; it's in the Hot Wheels area, and they've listed the scale wrong as 1:32 when it's easily 1:24 or 1:25. it might be friction powered, i'm not sure. it's military, in OD green, and i think it was about 9 bucks. on a related note; Tractor Supply Company stores have a boatload of diecast trucks in stock for 8-12 bucks AND they're knocking them down discounts..... a Plymouth pickup, a pair of Fords, in 1:24 scale. they are Ertl tooling from what i remember. they also have a few Ertl 1:24 diecast muscle cars.... four or five years ago Sams had dozens of decent diecasts (different models, LOTS of different models) while this year they struggled to present about six different cars and trucks. i picked a couple of the more realistic and accurate ones for my Grandson for Christmas, and filled out the rest of his stocking with Hot Wheels and Matchbox cars.... that boy is gonna know cars if i got anything to say about it!

when my cousins and i were kids, the lockdown went into effect on Thanksgiving! and to top that, we coudn't drag out our "OLD" stuff until after New Years! it was like that into our teens, at least!

it was in at least ONE of the several AMT '32 kits, as i know i've had them in my stash. i like the decal, but thought it was more fitting for a nose-art design for a WW2 bomber!

that box cover will be framed. dang it... now i need at least three of those. and a couple more Hudsons.

HAH! you should look at our local (Charleston SC) Craigslist. EVERYBODY is selling 100pointer cars at showroom prices... or so they think. rusted out $8tboxes with blown engines and toasted transmissions for dollars on the penny. i'd rather keep my Falcons and my F150 running than indebt myself for more than my house cost for a "new" car and then have to deal with warranty issues and depreciation and outright crooked dealing with dealers. gadgetry and bells and whistles be d**ned.

did you get that by mail or pick it up at a hobby shop?

me too. i looked one of these over today at the Hobbytown near me and put it back. come to think of it, i've been in there four or five times this month and bought nothing but some paint and styrene strip..... just can't justify another reissue right now while i'm waiting for the Moebius '55 Chrysler, which doesn't seem to be on the LHS radar.

it's all in whether the reviewer can remain objective or become subjective in his critique. i don't like to see the phrase "just like the rest of ABC's offerings, this one is abject junk" whenever i read a review. i don't like to spend good money on a kit and be surprised, either; which is why i home in on reviews of reissued kits; to see whether something important has been cut out of the tool, put back in, or whether it's simply a rebox of the LAST issue. we can hack on kits that have simplistic chassis or all-in-one piece suspensions, but put that into the perspective of a beginning modeler who might not have the patience or skill to assemble, say, the rear suspension from AMT's '58 Impala.... not the friendliest design out there, but state of the art around 1962. it might behoove the kit makers to give the original issue date of their kits, even NEW ones, on the box; and maybe follow recent AMT protocol and print a shadow depiction of the kit contents on the box bottom for those unfamiliar with the kit.

lately, as a matter of fact for quite a while now, it's been de rigeur to bash the heck out of reissues for lack of scale accuracy, ill fitting parts, and poor quality control.... fun, huh? barrel of laughs. my Dad built Hawk models as a teen, in the early dark days of this hobby; a roughly shaped block of wood, some metal or plastic detail parts (metal that had to be polished smooth and shellacked to get to shine), and a set of plan view drawings to follow, often very basic and you were expected to turn that into the picture on the box, with no internet for reference, no aftermarket parts to speak of, actual auto paint or whatever HIS dad had around the house... and shaping that block of wood was done with single edge razor blades and sandpaper. KennB builds from sheet styrene.... he doesn't even HAVE a kit to blame for any out-of-scale or ill-fitting parts, but have you read any harsh words from him? lighten up on the bashing, please. sure, there's a lot of substandard stuff out there in light of what we've become used to in the last decade, but it represents what the industry had at the time, and if some of that negative energy is redirected toward putting effort into them, they often turn out fairly well. i've encountered very few kits so bad that NOTHING could be done with them.

that's a pretty darn good finish for a kit almost universally loathed.... which gets me to thinking about perception and reality.

if you can get access to one, LeRoi "Tex" Smith has an excellent book on '50's era hot rods; i can't recall how many clear chassis shots there were, but lots of good reference for builders in scale and 1:1. if you're not a member of HAMB, i recommend joining there to get to some really good "like it really was" information... beware the langauge and temperament, however. i'm happy to be of any help whatsoever! BTW... i built one '29 A with a strip styrene chassis and little idea of what the heck i was doing..... in my '30's. had a spare body i wanted to use up....

i wonder how many '50's-'60's cars would look this "right" as flying cars..... Gerry Anderson of Thunderbirds fame would be proud.

i like this.... meet George Jetson....

the transverse rear spring and 4 link aren't compatible. moving the radius rods to parallel the frame rails if you're going to keep the rear spring would be okay; but 4 links have to be parallel to each other or nearly so, and use coil springs more often than not. usually, the builder of a car would usually (not always, for sure) have the same type of suspension at each end of the car; hairpin rods up front and spread radius in back; or corvair up front, 4 link in back, later on in the '60's, and when Mustang II stuff came along it was popular to do parallel leaf springs out back and MII up front. of course, every builder had their own preferences. ferinstance: any time your car has radius rods from the front axle back to the trans x-member, it should have them from the rear axle also. there are steering dynamics at work in that arrangement that can't be dismissed. split the front bones, you must split the rear.

i hate to be a buzzkill but 5 feet is 60 inches, period. 5 foot 8 inches, is 68 inches. sorry.

rethink that rear 4-link... that arrangement won't work in 1:1.

i haven't built the new one, but i've done the old one..... it does take some effort and patience to get good results and there are definitely several weak points to overcome with it, AND the similar '56 and '57 kits. in it's day, it was probably the best out of the three available, from AMT, Monogram, and Revell. get the new one, and copy the kit on the old box.

the problem with a working suspension other than complexity and durability is establishing a zero point for the model to stand at; springs have to be carefully chosen or hand-wound to suit the weight of the model and the level desired, or a hidden bumpstop to maintain proper height installed.

i'm wondering; what are they offering as lowered/modified suspension in this version? those donkey cart wheels would be in the trash can right out of the box IMHO......

those are cool, Nick!

the AMT kit is old tooling and benefited from the updated parts they added back in the '90's; AMT never had the taillight area molded open, you had to figure out exactly where and how they located on your own. i've never had any issues getting it to sit right, or in getting the posable steering to look right, but i wondered why AMT never gave anything in the way of period correct custom bumpers to put on it..... several different grilles, a set of custom taillights and rims, a nice Wedge Chrysler.... but roll pans and no bumpers.... hmm. remember, 'shine runners had to "blend in" with everyday cars, not stick out like a sore thumb. not going to find a Hirohata clone running 'shine.

while it is an impressive car, i ain't feeling it. stuck in the fifties/early sixties when i think of 39/40 Fords.

i've been there! that is a fun place to wander around, dreaming of what you could do with THAT.... good thing i didn't have any money to spend then or i'd own a halftrack now.