Greg Myers Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) 1) Classic Original 2) Bad Man 3) '55 Chevy' Street Machine 4) '55 Chevrolet Bel Air Convertible Edited June 19, 2015 by Greg Myers
Jantrix Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 Just out of curiousity what order did they show up in and what molds are related?
unclescott58 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 The most recent tooled up convertible kit is the only one that really looks like a true '55 Chevy. The roofline around the "C" pillar on the other has never looked quite right. Scott
Brett Barrow Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 since you're including the new-tool convertible, where's the new-tool hardtop?
Brett Barrow Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Just out of curiousity what order did they show up in and what molds are related? The first 3 are related, came out mid 60's then mid 70's substantially modified to make the Tom Daniel Bad Man, then the 80's Street Machine was pretty much the Bad Man with different wheels and minor changes. Then late 90's brought us a totally new-tool Revell/Monogram convertible and then mid 2000's we got a hardtop based on that tooling. Edited June 19, 2015 by Brett Barrow
unclescott58 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 since you're including the new-tool convertible, where's the new-tool hardtop? Now for a hardtop, that is much better. Scott
Snake45 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 I'd love to own an unbuilt original, just for the nostalgia value. That was a cool old kit. I've built a Badman in my own style. Overall, though, not a fan of the '55 HT. Much prefer AMT's sedan and Nomad, and would love to see a SD and/or 2-door wagon.
chunkypeanutbutter Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 The Street Machine. Simple, easy to mod, plentiful.
unclescott58 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 I'd love to own an unbuilt original, just for the nostalgia value. That was a cool old kit. I've built a Badman in my own style. Overall, though, not a fan of the '55 HT. Much prefer AMT's sedan and Nomad, and would love to see a SD and/or 2-door wagon. This is not meant as a personal attack against you Snake, just an interesting observation. I agree with you, it would be cool to have an original unbuilt Monogram '55 Chevy for nostalgia sake. But, I find it interesting in reading your comments on the Polar Lights '64 GTO and others, about the problems with those kits. Again this is not meant to be a criticism. But, one of the things you dislike about PL GTO, the inaccurate design of the "C" pillar, is the same problem I have with the old Monogram '55 Chevys. And is something I'm okay with on the PL GTO. I find it interesting what we're willing to overlook problems on one kit, because we like it. But, can not tolerate them on another. And it's not just you Snake. I too have to same feels about certain models. I just ordered Revell's USRRC Cobra with the Ken Miles and Carrol Shelby figures. Car #98. It's my understanding that that car was power by a 289. Yet the kit comes with a 427. It maybe incorrect, but I plan on building it still with the 427. Because I think it's okay and cool that way. Other kits I would pass on because of such inaccuracies. Are we incorrect for feeling this way? Or having a difference of opinion? Of coarse not. I just find it interesting. Scott
Draggon Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 The original of course. Any kit that's got one of these is always a favorite in my book
unclescott58 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) The original of course. Any kit that's got one of these is always a favorite in my book You maybe should explain. I know what it is (the custom clear roof piece). But others may not. Scott Edited June 19, 2015 by unclescott58
chunkypeanutbutter Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 I thought it was a tinted scoop at first...
Snake45 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 This is not meant as a personal attack against you Snake, just an interesting observation. I agree with you, it would be cool to have an original unbuilt Monogram '55 Chevy for nostalgia sake. But, I find it interesting in reading your comments on the Polar Lights '64 GTO and others, about the problems with those kits. Again this is not meant to be a criticism. But, one of the things you dislike about PL GTO, the inaccurate design of the "C" pillar, is the same problem I have with the old Monogram '55 Chevys. And is something I'm okay with on the PL GTO. I find it interesting what we're willing to overlook problems on one kit, because we like it. But, can not tolerate them on another. And it's not just you Snake. I too have to same feels about certain models. I just ordered Revell's USRRC Cobra with the Ken Miles and Carrol Shelby figures. Car #98. It's my understanding that that car was power by a 289. Yet the kit comes with a 427. It maybe incorrect, but I plan on building it still with the 427. Because I think it's okay and cool that way. Other kits I would pass on because of such inaccuracies. Are we incorrect for feeling this way? Or having a difference of opinion? Of coarse not. I just find it interesting. Scott In this case there is a misunderstanding. I didn't mean I didn't like the Mono '55 Chev HT kit, I meant I just don't care for REAL '55 Chev HTs. Love the 2-door sedans but the '55 and '56 hardtops just leave me cold. I can tolerate the '57 HT, but even there prefer the 2DS.
unclescott58 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 In this case there is a misunderstanding. I didn't mean I didn't like the Mono '55 Chev HT kit, I meant I just don't care for REAL '55 Chev HTs. Love the 2-door sedans but the '55 and '56 hardtops just leave me cold. I can tolerate the '57 HT, but even there prefer the 2DS. Oh I understood you Snake. I was more wondering about your thoughts on the "C" pillar of the original Monogram '55 Chevy kit, when built as a hardtop. This "C" pillar also appears on the Badman and Street Machine kits. Which I beleive were made from original Monogram '55 tool. The pillar has never looked quite right to me. Yet if I had the original kit I'd have a hard time not using that roof. It has also not stopped me admiring the Badman kit. I've never owned one. But, I've thought about it plenty of times. Odd "C" pillar or not. Scott
Greg Myers Posted June 19, 2015 Author Posted June 19, 2015 Did you forget this ? You have to remember the original kit from whence the Badman and The Street Machine came from was made to be built as a hard top, convertible or with the bubble top, thus the hard top wasn't attached / molded with the body, giving us the wonky version later on.
Greg Myers Posted June 19, 2015 Author Posted June 19, 2015 http://public.fotki.com/drasticplasticsmcc/mkiba-build-under-c/monogram-instructions/automotive-cars--pi/chevrolet/1951-1960/monogram-1955-chevr/
gtx6970 Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 BADMAN hands down. But then I don't build shoebox chevies either
Snake45 Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Oh I understood you Snake. I was more wondering about your thoughts on the "C" pillar of the original Monogram '55 Chevy kit, when built as a hardtop. This "C" pillar also appears on the Badman and Street Machine kits. Which I beleive were made from original Monogram '55 tool. The pillar has never looked quite right to me. Yet if I had the original kit I'd have a hard time not using that roof. It has also not stopped me admiring the Badman kit. I've never owned one. But, I've thought about it plenty of times. Odd "C" pillar or not. Scott As I said, I'm not a fan of the '55 Chev HT so didn't obsess over the roof shape when I built my own Badman. As I recall, I only bought the thing in the first place because it was dirt cheap, having a damaged box and being sold at a deep discount, and it looked like it might be fun to Snake-slap together. As to my comments re the PL '64 GTO, I'm also not a huge fan of that car, and probably would have built it SOB without noticing the roof shape, but for comments expessed here about the "banana-bent" body. Decided to check that out for myself by comparing it with an original AMT body, and just happened to notice the roof problem. (I still don't see much of the banana problem, though I acknowledge that others do.)
slusher Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 I built the street machine version last year and liked it but interior detail could be better...
Hawk312 Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 since you're including the new-tool convertible, where's the new-tool hardtop? This one!!!! I have built two of these so far, along with the `56, and want to build more when I get the time. They build up real nice. If I had to choose from the list above, I would have picked 3. But IMO, the accuracy of the above kit eclipses that one. I really like them with the Torq Thrusts from the `56 kit:
peekay Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Doesn't get any better than this, David. True - great to see this again!
Mike Kucaba Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 The original of course. Any kit that's got one of these is always a favorite in my book I just went thru a box full of clear parts and that part is in it!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now