Zoom Zoom

While we need a US auto industry, it seems clear to me they're going to have to practically start from scratch. I don't think bailing them out w/o them going bankrupt will ever work. Just a longer, slower death. All three of these CEO's flew private jets at huge expense to DC to beg for a bailout that will only prolong their agony towards bankrupcy. Read this and weep I can't stand the head of the UAW, but he was pretty honest and right on when asked in what order are the companies likely to survive. He said Ford has the best chance to survive, followed by Chysler, then GM. The cancer within GM is just too much...they cannot go on with business as usual.

Every Camero has Cragers. It's the law.

Keith Marks Decals Find what you want, email him at mofobow@hotmail.com, and he'll give you prices/shipping information.

50K? Try low 80's sticker for the GT500 KR, and dealers gouging them to the tune of $100K. Sorry...it's just a Mustang and only an idiot would pay that for one. At least via Feebay it seems nobody is actually biting on them...even at sticker...my how times have changed

One of my friends is a self-described die-hard Mustang fanboy. He could have bought a GT500 at sticker...he already had sold his Mustang race car and the pickup and trailer he used to take it to the track, and bought a Corvette C6 because it was the best performance car for the money and he could drive it daily and take it to the track...he drove that Shelby, thinking he'd really like it, and he was sorely disappointed at the handling because it's such a heavy car. Even at sticker it was more than he paid for his C6 new...Shelbys are merely driveway jewelry, they're not a performance bargain by any stretch. Think I'll just stick w/models of Shelbys and Mustangs, and consider other options for 1:1 transportation.

I am a former Mustang owner, two-time Ford owner, and swore them off after the second...loved my '88 LX 5.0 sedan w/the 3.08 axle, a true sleeper right from the factory. I hate to say it, but looking at the new Camaro, the fact that I love it's style, and the fact that even the basic car starts w/300HP, I'd be a lot more apt to buy it than the Mustang. If a white Challenger R/T w/6 speed manual came along at a very attractive price I'd also be interested more than the Mustang. I think I'd go w/a Pontiac G8 GT or GXP before a hi-po Mustang. The GT500 is my favorite from a style standpoint, but they are ridiculously overpriced when the dealers add their greed factor to it.

It certainly is a tour-de-force, and it's so well done that a lot of people have no idea how much of it is designed, machined, and fabricated. Well-deserving of it's top-ten award in Atlanta, and I won't tell anyone how Dirk finished this model on the stage in the morning after paying $20 for an unbuilt Chevelle for the taillight lenses Fantastic work as usual

Very attractive build of a very attractive car

They spent all-new money on all-new sheetmetal (aside from roof panel and glass), IMHO they didn't get their money's worth since so many think it's barely a change from before (and could just be lipstick on the corpse). They could have spent significantly less and done just a new interior and front/rear fascias, maybe grille...and probably retained as many sales. "More of the same" is what's gotten the auto companies in such trouble. Had this refresh been in its infancy now instead of 3 years ago, it probably would have been axed or significantly throttled back. I was disappointed with the '99-'04 Mustang "refresh", to my eyes it didn't look as good as the '94-'98. Sure drove a lot better, but visually the design details were rather raw and unfinished. I sure hope Ford still exists in 2015, and I hope by then we're not still seeing this same design. 10 years of retro on an original 2 year design is stretching it really thin...

Uh, they have plenty of all-new cars coming out at this time. Have a look at the Fiesta, and there's an all-new Focus (not the cheap rehash, but world car) coming in a year or two. The money spent on the Mustang has no correlation to their cash crisis today. Money was spent on it long before today's crisis and 2010 rollout. The 2010 has all-new sheetmetal except for the roof panel. I dare say they could have been a bit more daring w/the redesign since they already spent money to redesign every other panel on the car.

Harry, I think you may have misread his commentary...the jist of it is what I've complained about, and it's because Ford is stretching what was once a 2-year design (67/68) into a 10 year product that already looks dated, even with this refresh. Ford could have done a completely new 2010 Mustang design loosely based on the '69/'70 (or even '71/'72) heritage that would look a lot newer and fresher than the 2010 manages. The specialness of this generation Mustang is watered down because it's going to be on the street a lot longer than the original. To the point that even though they are retro, they've become entirely mainstream because so many of them are on the street, and will continue for at least another 5 years, and those cars will be on the road for a good 10 years after that. To me the vast majority of the '05-up Mustangs are pretty bland and mainstream due to so many of them on the roads. GT500's, Shelby GT's, Parnelli Jones variants are a lot cooler because the designs have more "oomph" and you don't see them often enough for them to get boring. GM's been showing us the Camaro for 3 years. We still can't buy one. We may never be able to. It already looks old and familiar...the impact when and if it hits the streets will be entirely watered down because the car is so familiar...there's no "shock and awe" factor when you play your cards so early and for so long...yet another bankrupt way of doing business that only Detroit seems to think is a proper way to conduct business

I'm a bit underwhelmed, with all the hoopla and teaser photos it looks kind of fussy and overstyled (grille and wheels) where the '05 looked a bit undercooked. Maybe I'll like it better in person? I'm disappointed that this basic styling will live on for a total of 8-10 years whereas the original Mustangs had 2-3 years before completely new styling. IMHO the 2010 is the car they should have made in '05, and they should have been giving us an all-new style for 2010 instead of just a refresh.

Until Bernie and Max are gone and F1 returns to North America, I'll be sleeping in on Sundays. I should have just quit for good when I threatened back at the Indy debacle.

I've seen it in person (they had a table and were selling them at our NNL on the 8th), it's a great conversion. The uptop is a very nice feature, and fits perfectly. If you dig through Gregg's photos from the Atlanta NNL he has several pics of this convertible as well. It is a standard Mustang, based on the '05/'06 body, not the newer GT-H or GT-500 body (which is all-new, Revell tooled a completely new body for them). Hopefully someone responds to Kevin and does a similar conversion for the Shelby cars. The 2010 Mustang is being revealed this week, so it's doubtful we'll ever see a convertible from Revell based on the '06-'09 Mustangs at this point.

Toughest one yet But there are just enough clues that I think I'm right...

I like a technique I heard about...using a white fine-tip gel pen and a circle template to make whitewalls. It's pretty easy and painless, and if you mess up you can wipe it up w/a bit of alcohol and start over. Same circle template can be used to airbrush wide whites. If you spray acrylic or even Tamiya white primer, wipe the template clean w/some 91% rubbing alcohol after you're done.

If anyone has deep pockets, AMT made very correct annuals (very rare, and the AMT '69 reissued any time in the last 20 years is an MPC and it's not a good model) of the '69 and '70 Mach I's, and Missing Link Resin Casters repops them in resin. They're 1/25 scale and proportionally are excellent. Perhaps combining w/some of the guts from the Revell '69 Mach I will yield a very nice Mach I.

I don't have any extras, but there are still some cheap Revell Minis out there if you look hard enough, and IIRC the Fujimi Minis come with two sets; one set "normal", one set w/washer (slight bump in the bezel and notch in the lense). Therefore it's conceivable that someone out there who has built the Fujimi has an extra set.

It's not just you. It's off a bit, headlights are a bit low, overall height a bit too tall. But it's a lot better than the Revell '69 Mach I front end which just looks sad because the outer headlamps are so much lower than the ones in the grille (they should be on the same level) that the entire front of the car looks like it's frowning.

It's your model, bought and paid for. Do to it exactly what YOU want to do with it! I'm pretty sure you know in your heart exactly what you want from that kit.

The Revell AG/Germany issues all have a few quirks, some more than others. Some of the fit issues are pretty well documented in reviews both printed and online. They're all quite buildable, and usually when boxed for the US the price is better, the white plastic is nicer, but I do tend to agree that the Revell kits tooled/produced in China are better than the ones from Revell AG that are made (primarily) in Poland. I just bought a really expensive set of wheels/tires by Scale Production (Audi RS4 wheels) to throw under my R8. Looking forward to seeing progress on this!

Thanks! The Hasegawa TR optional wheels are excellent. The only way they could be much better was if they were real hand laced wheels with round-section wires and not photoetch. Just follow the instructions to a "T", they look great. Most builders are hesitant to paint them silver (and like the bright appearance), but I had no problem painting them since TR's ran silver painted wire wheels.

Gregg's reply was amazingly diplomatic and well-thought considering the venomous tone of that letter. Put yourself in the shoes of the reviewer. He did a lot of research, he built the test shot to a high standard, presented it in a professional format both on the internet and in printed form, and then has some guy attempt to rip it and him and his credibility to bloody shreds. How would you feel about that if it were your work? I stand by Gregg's reply 1000%. I also stand by Bill's opinions 1000%. Before I even knew about that letter, I had lunch and dinner with Bill this weekend, we talked about the Nova kit, we are both dismayed at the negativity surrounding it and other excellent kits these days. It's sad, but it's like we're seeing the fabric of our hobby being torn apart at times by petty negativity, and that letter was classic example of it. I've built two of the Novas, and my opinions mirror Bill's. The kit's flaws pale in comparison to the joy of building it and the final appearance. Revell knows about the flaws, has fixed at least one of them, and any criticism needs to be directed in a civil and constructive manner. The letter was neither civil nor constructive, therefore I cannot take it at all seriously except as an example of how not to write a letter if you want anything positive to come from it.

Sorry, they worked earlier today...

See Top Gear YouTube Videos Here