Fat Brian

Ron Olson has a 3d printed version on his Shapeways store. I don't have this in particular but everything I've gotten from him has been high quality. I'd opt for the smoothest fine plastic, the price difference is usually worth it. https://www.shapeways.com/product/BSBRUX77W/427-sohc-1-25-w-hilborne-injection

The ignition coil on the 86 is between the battery and shock tower on the (US) drivers side of the engine bay.

The AMT 69 Galaxie has a Hilborn injected cammer and is pretty easy to find.

"Wanted" is for a obtaining a thing you lack, "Trade" is for getting rid of a thing you have in excess.

Ok, the Hobby Lobbies in my area all carry the US boxing, I picked one up a few months back.

The price on these might drop once the Bronco kit hits shelves, the Cougar was out recently too so it isn't hard to find.

That's the US boxing, due to the size of the parts trees there's no way they could get it in a US style box. The US box is smaller than the German boxing, the instructions get bent up a bit. German box US box

...

That's all that had to be said, if the expected return didn't justify the amount to design a modern style tooling that's something I can understand. Saying the choice was made because "old kits have a fun factor" sounds like public relations speak. And yes, if the old tool could have been found and run again that would have been great and no one would expect anything other than what it originally was. But when something brand new was created and purposefully made in outdated style and the reason given doesn't make any sense it draws some questioning. So, I withdraw my complaint.

I think based on the responses in this thread it's obvious why they chose to do the kit this way. Which I still don't understand because it's not like y'all wouldn't have bought the kit if it had been better. To everyone saying "you can't see the chassis when its on the shelf" that doesn't matter to me, I want it to be there. You can't see the engine either but I doubt many of you would be okay if they'd have made it curbside. There are many things we do that aren't obvious without a decent inspection of the build.

Yes, honestly this is the most baffling option they could have chosen. If they had decided to make a new body and interior panels and put it on the Roadrunner chassis and retooled some of the Coronet stock and custom parts I would have said that's a smart use of existing tooling and getting the most out of new tooling dollars. But if you're going to start completely from scratch why intentionally recreate something outdated? They could still have included the retooled custom parts for the "nostalgic fun factor" but make the bones a good kit. This tool will live in their inventory long after they people who remember the annual kit are gone, make something that will stand on its own merit without the rose tinted glasses of childhood nostalgia. This just feels like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, and I say this as someone who will probably buy both of them... and put some other chassis under them.

I don't think there is a better alternative to bare metal foil but, there are some things you can try. There are Molotow paint markers, they come in at least two sizes and offer a very shiny but very delicate finish. The pens also seem to have a short shelf life so some folks have opted for using the refill bottle and just applying it with a brush or toothpick. Silver Sharpies have a matte finish and can interact with paints sensitive to alcohol. Also Easy Chrome seems to be the most durable of the chrome paints but it is pricey, though the amount you get will probably last a good while. There are a few more, and more all the time, I'm sure others will post more.

I hadn't even noticed that on the original plans. The rear axle is backwards with an offset differential, I imagine the transmission output also moved over so the driveshaft could clear the oil pan.

Yes, it has the 250hp non-turbo Cummins. It's technically a bit too modern for a 30s vehicle but you can always say it was repowered. The 30s is right in the transition period from big gasoline truck engines to diesel so its possible this was intended to have something like a Hercules straight six gasoline engine. These were big flat head sixes.

I'm going to push back on this just a bit. I cruise a lot of the modeling sub-Reddits and see so much frustration from newer model builders who don't know that some of the kits you guys are putting out vary in age considerably. I've seen several folks swear off AMT kits entirely after getting the tin box Daytona for Christmas and it being, well... what it is. This was a chance to put the AMT name on a new tooling that could have been great but it's just copying 50 year old design philosophy. It didn't have to be groundbreaking, even on par with the late 90s and early 2000s kits would have been exceptional. It just seems like a missed opportunity to make something the best it could be.

If you want a single rear axle I'd either use the Freightliner cabover with the red and white truck on the box, it has both the single and dual drive suspensions, or one of the Ford C600 kits.

If you didn't want to fab up the angle drive setup you could probably accomplish the same thing vertically since you don't have to worry about a bus floor. Set the rear axle with the pinion facing front like normal then set the engine facing backwards behind the axle. Now comes comes the fab stuff, you'll need to build some kind of transmission where the output shaft is higher than the rear axle differential, then a short driveshaft to a drop box that bolts to the front of the rear axle. Something like this but with the input and output on the same side, driveshaft comes in the top and the bottom is bolted to the rear axle where the pinion shaft comes out.

I agree, there's plenty of 3d printed Coyote motors out there if someone wants to spice up the Bronco. Though it is a shame we're not getting a modern small turbo motor for transplanting into smaller sports cars.

Some rear engine buses use this rather ingenious method of getting the power to the wheels. It will be a good bit of scratchbuilding but would be interesting.

Thank you for both clarifications, I'm wanting to build an F250 4x4 with the 65 box body truck and I did notice a lot of the early bed trucks but didn't know the reason. I'm waiting on a bumper from Olson Brothers and some wheels and tires from Scenes Unlimited to get started. I guess I also need to hog out the front wheel arches. I'll round up some front leaf springs too.

Considering the Roadrunner/GTX was tooled over 30 years ago that's faint praise. If they're doing a new kit from the ground up I can't understand they you wouldn't do it to modern standards.

The Dodge guys got the grail for the time being, let's start the 69 AMX hype train.

They're starting to lose me with promo style chassis. I'll save the rant for confirmation but those aren't words I want to hear about a newly tooled kit.

I'm doing research for an upcoming project and I've noticed that the front fenders on some 65 Ford 4x4 trucks are different than others. Some have the same fenders as the 2wd trucks and others seem cut out wider, with the innermost part of the fender inside the body crease removed. It seems too common to be a "field modification", we're extra clearance fenders an option for 4x4 trucks? There doesn't seem to be any correlation to a model, I've seen F100s with the wide fenders and F250s with the standard ones. This is an F100 4x4 with the wider wheel opening This is an F250 Camper Special with the standard fenders

The Coronet looks like new parts, the body has a ridge for the hood to sit on that none of the none of the current AMT Roadrunner/GTX/Superbee kits have and the inner fender parts look different as well. It's also great to see the Bronco while it's still a new model.