Road Runner - Missing in Action

[fseva]

I've been hoping for a new Road Runner, and it just doesn't seem to be happening - the only product Revell offers is the 1:24 issue by Monogram, which is cheap but is also pretty stripped, and it really looks huge compared to my 1:25 Camaros. When will someone announce a new Road Runner... and perhaps a return of all of the other iconic muscle cars?

Edited April 15, 2015 by fseva

[johnbuzzed]

"... almost unbuildable." Really? I have built two over the years, am currently working on a third, have one more on my shelves, along with a '69 GTX and '69 Super Bee and have used several of the AMT/Ertl B-body kits (of which that Road Runner was the first in the very early '90s) as parts donors and have found no problems that could cause such a situation. Maybe they are not the best detailed kits and some body contours might not be 100% accurate, when compared to the old Johan kits, but I would never in my life consider them even the slightest bit "unbuildable". And, that's after almost 55 years of building.

Edited April 14, 2015 by johnbuzzed

[mike 51]

There never was a 67 Roadrunner .....is your AMT kit too complicated for you? The JoHan 69 Roadrunner is both easier to build and better looking, but they can be expensive. The Modelhaus has repopped the kit in a "promo" style (offfers a six-pak version too) but it too is expensive. I wouldn't expect to see a "new" Roadrunner kit...and most of the other "muscle cars" of that era have been already been modeled.

Edited April 14, 2015 by mike 51

[Bill J]

I am presently working on an AMT 68 Roadrunner and I have no problems with any aspect of the kit. Everything fits. The only change I would like to see it the inclusion of a 383 engine option and some better detailed decals. Great kit and the chassis make a ice donor for other period Mopars.

I am also starting a 69 Roadrunner using the AMT 69 GTX kit and some aftermarket RR parts. The GTX kit I have came with the 68 RR hood but a fellow board member was kind enough to send me the correct 69 hood so I can make my 69 Roadrunner properly.

Sometime soon I plan on buying a 1/25th scale 70 Roadrunner resin body and interior and using a AMT 68 Roadrunner chassis. That will give me all 3 years of Roadrunners that I liked and all with the AMT 68/69 chassis.

I cannot understand what would be unbuildable about those kits? One of the better muscle car kits out there to me.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Bill J

[Snake45]

There never was a 67 Roadrunner .....is your AMT kit too complicated for you? The JoHan 69 Roadrunner is both easier to build and better looking, but they can be expensive. The Modelhaus has repopped the kit in a "promo" style (offfers a six-pak version too) but it too is expensive. I wouldn't expect to see a "new" Roadrunner kit...and most of the other "muscle cars" of that era have been already been modeled.

Quoted For Truth. You just saved me a bunch of typing.

I've built the AMT '68 Roadrunner. No problems, and while the body isn't as well shaped/accurate as the old JoHans, everywhere else it was superior in detailing. I hope to build at least one more someday.

[High octane]

Which reminds me that I need to dig out my Jo Han Road Runner and build it. Thanks!

[fseva]

"... almost unbuildable." Really? I have built two over the years, am currently working on a third, have one more on my shelves, along with a '69 GTX and '69 Super Bee and have used several of the AMT/Ertl B-body kits (of which that Road Runner was the first in the very early '90s) as parts donors and have found no problems that could cause such a situation. Maybe they are not the best detailed kits and some body contours might not be 100% accurate, when compared to the old Johan kits, but I would never in my life consider them even the slightest bit "unbuildable". And, that's after almost 55 years of building.

Well, here we go again... answers are pouring in... About my post? Not even close!

My question was in regard to Road Runners, and why there are no really great ones in the pipeline... You homed in on my comment about the latest AMT Road Runner, and jumped at a single word! As if that was the whole point to the question!

If you want to participate in this post, please address my question. OK? That goes for the rest of you guys, as well. Please don't fill up this thread with off-post arguments.

Edited April 15, 2015 by fseva

[mike 51]

"Well, here we go again... answers are pouring in getting intensely heated up about symantics..."

Really? "intensely heated" about symantics {sic}?

Maybe if YOU were a bit clearer.....those responses might be "better". Think about it......

Edited April 14, 2015 by mike 51

[gtx6970]

If your waiting / hoping for an all new 1968 thru 1970 Road Runner kit

My gut says dont hold your breath.

As far as the AMT 1968,,, Its a far cry from unbuildable . I have several of the original issues so I cant comment of the quality of the newer and/or newest releases

[DaveM]

Those '68/'69 Plymouth B bodies (Road Runner, GTX etc...) were some of the earlier kits after the big changes occurred in the late '80s. The '66 Nova kind of started the trend to more detail, fitted glass, multi piece suspensions, platform interiors and slightly more complicated builds. Newer kits really have the fit and finish down, and the manufacturers have found ways to make very detailed kits that fall together. (So called "Shake The Box" kits) Some of the earlier kits to feature the extra parts, like the platform interiors, separate inner fenders, firewalls, radiator supports, glass that is not on one big runner etc... could be a bit tricky to build. It is up to the builder to make sure everything is lined up and assembled squarely throughout the building process. Some of the kits in that category would be the '66 Nova, the '66 Fairlanes, the '67 Comets, and the '68/'69 Plymouths. They are buildable, but they take a bit of extra care and patience. When they are done, the detail is still impressive and they are still competitive as contest builds. Later kits learned to incorporate the same details with a bit better keying to maintain alignment even if the builder got a bit sloppy.

I would like to see a '70 Road Runner based on the AMT B Body platform, but I won't hold my breath. They could also do a '68 and '69 Coronet off of the same platform, and would probably get more sales from that then a '70 Runner. I can't see a company tooling up a new kit from the ground up when there is a fairly contemporary kit of that subject available. One thing I would really like to see is a reissue of the old MPC '71 Road Runner. Even with the sort of goofy "Superbird" parts, it was a pretty good kit for its day. I think it would still make a decent model and by kitbashing it with a '71 Charger, you can make a really nice contest model. Also, the '67 GTX didn't come in a "Road Runner" version, but Revell's GTX is a really nice kit.

[Rob Hall]

Well, here we go again... answers are pouring in getting intensely heated up about symantics... My question was in regard to Road Runners, and why there are no really great ones in the pipeline... You homed in on my comment about the latest AMT Road Runner, which was so badly flashed over, it wound up in the garbage can. Please don't pick on what I just said, by way of clarification!

What's the point when the AMT and Revell-Monogram ones are readily available..

[Snake45]

My AMT '68 RR came out okay. I could do better today, but I built it over 20 years ago.

[unclescott58]

I too found AMT's '68 Roadrunner to be a pretty good kit. And I also can not see the model companies tooling up another one, when most seemed pleased with what's out there. There are many car kits that I'd like to see a more modern or better tooling made of. At the same time there are a lot of perfectly good older kits I'd like to see reissued. If they are going to make a new die/tool I'd rather see it be of a car or truck that's never been done before. Or was only done once year ago. Something like the long ago promised '50-'51 bullit nose Studebaker.

Scott

[fseva]

If your waiting / hoping for an all new 1968 thru 1970 Road Runner kit

My gut says dont hold your breath.

As far as the AMT 1968,,, Its a far cry from unbuildable . I have several of the original issues so I cant comment of the quality of the newer and/or newest releases

I guess I won't be holding my breath... Are you building the LATEST release of the AMT 68 RR - released by R2?

[fseva]

I would like to see a '70 Road Runner based on the AMT B Body platform, but I won't hold my breath. They could also do a '68 and '69 Coronet off of the same platform, and would probably get more sales from that then a '70 Runner. I can't see a company tooling up a new kit from the ground up when there is a fairly contemporary kit of that subject available.

Well, I don't know if this qualifies, but it seems Revell did a new tooling in the 68 Charger RT... or was that one that had never been done before???

Edited April 15, 2015 by fseva

[fseva]

What's the point when the AMT and Revell-Monogram ones are readily available..

My point is to get one in 1:25 and let it be a new release so that it won't be stripped of its goodies so that they can make more money on an OLD tool!

[fseva]

My AMT '68 RR came out okay. I could do better today, but I built it over 20 years ago.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could get a brand new version that uses all of the modern technologies? Otherwise, I probably should start looking for an older release...

[fseva]

I too found AMT's '68 Roadrunner to be a pretty good kit. And I also can not see the model companies tooling up another one, when most seemed pleased with what's out there. There are many car kits that I'd like to see a more modern or better tooling made of. At the same time there are a lot of perfectly good older kits I'd like to see reissued. If they are going to make a new die/tool I'd rather see it be of a car or truck that's never been done before. Or was only done once year ago. Something like the long ago promised '50-'51 bullit nose Studebaker.

Whoa... now you've given me a chance to say... "Don't hold your breath!"

[Carmak]

To address your original question it is quite probable there will never be another new Road Runner kit.

For absolute best body proportion your best bet may be to get JoHan 69 and 70 Road Runners off e-bay (expensive).

For best detail I would say the AMT 68 is the best we will likely get.

Many people (myself included) have combibed AMT and JoHan Road Runners in an effort to get the best total results.

Lastly the Revell 67 GTX is 1:25 and is top notch kit.

Carmak

[fseva]

To address your original question it is quite probable there will never be another new Road Runner kit.

Lastly the Revell 67 GTX is 1:25 and is top notch kit.

I'm sure getting that feeling... I don't know how long Revell/Monogram thinks they can keep reissuing the 1:24 Road Runner!?

BTW, Road Runner is spelled ROAD RUNNER... not GTX!

[mike 51]

"BTW, Road Runner is spelled ROAD RUNNER... not GTX! ^_^"

Odd comment for one who talked about "67-70" Road Runners....

oh you deleted that and the "unbuildable" comment from your original...hmmmmmm.

Edited April 15, 2015 by mike 51

[Carmak]

Revell / Monogram has been selling that 1:24 70 Plymouth B-body (it started as a GTX and then was modified into a Road Runner) since the mid 80's. As long as it sells they will continue to sell it.

I personally would like to see a 68 Coronet (Super Bee or R/T). I have a couple of the original MPC kits but I would like more - I have a 1:1 68 Coronet 500 convertible. At this point I am not expecting one to ever be released

Carmak

[unclescott58]

Whoa... now you've given me a chance to say... "Don't hold your breath!"

Ertl was talking about a new model of a '50 or '51 Studebaker about 15 or 20 years ago. At the same time they were talking about tooling up a a '49 or '50 Olds. We didn't get either from Ertl, but just a few years ago we got the Olds from Revell. And I know a lot of guys out there who still want a model of bullit nose Stude. So it could still happen.

Scott

[johnbuzzed]

Well, here we go again... answers are pouring in... About my post? Not even close!

My question was in regard to Road Runners, and why there are no really great ones in the pipeline... You homed in on my comment about the latest AMT Road Runner, and jumped at a single word! As if that was the whole point to the question!

If you want to participate in this post, please address my question. OK? That goes for the rest of you guys, as well. Please don't fill up this thread with off-post arguments.

Well, if you read my post, you'll see that I did address your post. OK? I "homed in" on a comment that you made; I addressed your comment. What's your problem with that? The current AMT/Ertl/Round 2 '68 Road Runner is a decent kit. I most certainly do apologize if I didn't address your... complaints in a manner that did not suit you.

Please, in the future, do advise the rest of us as to how you would like us to respond- in a positive or negative fashion, in concurrance with your feelings or not, offering just the advice that you're looking for or maybe something slightly more educational.

You do know that the kit in question is far from "almost unbuildable" by now, don't you?

[johnbuzzed]

"BTW, Road Runner is spelled ROAD RUNNER... not GTX! ^_^"

Odd comment for one who talked about "67-70" Road Runners....

oh you deleted that and the "unbuildable" comment from your original...hmmmmmm.

Yep- nice job of covering one's... tracks.