Just bought Moebius 65 Satellite

[SteveG]

 Thanks for the info.I'm not gripping I like this kit.but like everything in life,nothing is perfect.the rearend looks small to me.what would be agood exchange from another kit? and from what I see its a 8 3/4 rear axle.I'm as well going to change parts about the rear axle and suspension. shaft has to be fixed.yes the wheel attachment pins I will remove and fix that part as well,if I use this rear axle.there is no seperation lines in the leaf springs..I may build my own leafs.my biggest question is there a better rear end from another kit to use? thanks guys......Chris 

Here's how the rear axle looks in the finished model,  I agree it's a little undersized but you can't see that it's hollow once it's all together.  

Two suggestions if you can't live with it is you could swap out the rear axle from the Polar Lights 65 Dodge Coronet.  It's the same style but a little larger.  I think that one's also molded hollow.

The Lindberg 64 Plymouth or Dodge's would also work but I believe those kits have the Dana style rear axles.  Both kits are pretty common to find if you don't have them already.

Steve

 

[Nova-ss]

 Thanks for the info.I'm not gripping I like this kit.but like everything in life,nothing is perfect.the rearend looks small to me.what would be agood exchange from another kit? and from what I see its a 8 3/4 rear axle.I'm as well going to change parts about the rear axle and suspension. shaft has to be fixed.yes the wheel attachment prepresentation Thanksd fix that part as well,if I use this rear axle.there is no seperation lines in the leaf springs..I may build my own leafs.my biggest question is there a better rear end from another kit to use? thanks guys......Chris 

Here's how the rear axle looks in the finished model,  I agree it's a little undersized but you can't see that it's hollow once it's all together.  

Two suggestions if you can't live with it is you could swap out the rear axle from the Polar Lights 65 Dodge Coronet.  It's the same style but a little larger.  I think that one's also molded hollow.

The Lindberg 64 Plymouth or Dodge's would also work but I believe those kits have the Dana style rear axles.  Both kits are pretty common to find if you don't have them already.

Steve

 

Steve thanks for showing what it looks like built.i decided to make my own mods to it.filling in the areas i want different...like the real one is.I have most of it done now.still working on the pinion top side...getting there.I will be drilling holes after I cut the snap pins off for the wheels...its fun to me.If you know...is this a representation of the 8 3/4 rear axle that was in these cars with the 426 wedge motor?

Edited August 9, 2015 by Nova-ss

[1972coronet]

 Thanks for the info.I'm not gripping I like this kit.but like everything in life,nothing is perfect.the rearend looks small to me.what would be agood exchange from another kit? and from what I see its a 8 3/4 rear axle.I'm as well going to change parts about the rear axle and suspension. shaft has to be fixed.yes the wheel attachment prepresentation Thanksd fix that part as well,if I use this rear axle.there is no seperation lines in the leaf springs..I may build my own leafs.my biggest question is there a better rear end from another kit to use? thanks guys......Chris 

Here's how the rear axle looks in the finished model,  I agree it's a little undersized but you can't see that it's hollow once it's all together.  

Two suggestions if you can't live with it is you could swap out the rear axle from the Polar Lights 65 Dodge Coronet.  It's the same style but a little larger.  I think that one's also molded hollow.

The Lindberg 64 Plymouth or Dodge's would also work but I believe those kits have the Dana style rear axles.  Both kits are pretty common to find if you don't have them already.

Steve

 

Steve thanks for showing what it looks like built.i decided to make my own mods to it.filling in the areas i want different...like the real one is.I have most of it done now.still working on the pinion top side...getting there.I will be drilling holes after I cut the snap pins off for the wheels...its fun to me.If you know...is this a representation of the 8 3/4 rear axle that was in these cars with the 426 wedge motor?

1965 was the last year that regardless of engine / transmission , the 8.75" rear was the only game. 1966 models had the Dana 60 ( ending in 1972 ) behind the following :

- 440 Magnum (Dodge) Super Commando (Plymouth) when equipped with 4-speed (3.54 gear standard , 4.10 optional) -or- Super Performance Axle Package (automatic ; 4.10 gear)

- 440 Six Pack (Dodge) Six Barrel (Plymouth) : standard and only diff with the mid-1969 Lift-Off Fibreglass Hood was 4.10-gear Dana 60 ; 1970-1972 when optioned with 4-speed ; 1970-1971 Super Perf Axle Pkg w/ automatic

- 426 Hemi : 8.75" w/3.23 gear with standard automatic ; 3.55 Performance Axle Package (automatic) . Dana 60 with 3.54 gear w/optional 4-speed ; 4.10 gear with Super Track Pak [sic] (4-speed) or Super Perf Axle Pkg (automatic)

The 8.75" diff is a solid piece . How it survived behind 4-speed-equipped cars (with the 426-W or Hemi [1964-1965]) is either a testament to its strength or an often-replaced sub-sized rear .

[ZTony8]

What I noticed before the size if the axle was how short in height the body side seems.I'm gonna break out a Polar Lights Coronet and make a comparison.I realize that both models may not be to exact scale but I want to see how similar they are to each other.

[Nova-ss]

ok,so the 8 3/4 was a capable rear axle for this car?thank you John for the info..I'm a GM dude and limited knowledge on Chryslers and Mopar.another question I have is I want to build traction bars for this car..are there traction bars available for them and who makes them....in 1/1.I've looked at Lakewood and Competition specialty  for pictures and info..I've googled it as well with really limited results...where do I find this info...thank you..Chris 

[1972coronet]

ok,so the 8 3/4 was a capable rear axle for this car?thank you John for the info..I'm a GM dude and limited knowledge on Chryslers and Mopar.another question I have is I want to build traction bars for this car..are there traction bars available for them and who makes them....in 1/1.I've looked at Lakewood and Competition specialty  for pictures and info..I've googled it as well with really limited results...where do I find this info...thank you..Chris 

Traction bars were largely deemed a hindrance to the Torsion Bar suspension's action , and were thereby almost universally ignored . Some early (1960-1962) Stock-classes MoPars employed experimental use of rearward-facing traction bars with mixed results . Truly , Chrysler engineered the rear axle to sit off-centre on the springs (slightly-forward of centre) , and a pinion snubber (adjustable in some cases , though not from the factory) to aid in traction .

The 8.75" rear is a stout piece . However , by 1966 , it was deemed incapable behind the then-new 426 Street Hemi ; durability from repeated hard acceleration (e.g. , "Supervised Acceleration Trials") was the concern .

1965 was the last model year for the 8.75" rear behind manual trans equipped high performance and maximum performance engines (440 four barrel , 440+6 , and 426 Hemi ), though it did live on as standard with the Torqueflite .

[Nova-ss]

Ok,so traction bars not used.whay traction producys were used on Chrysler cars of era say early seventy's were used on street use.I'm making this as a street car for about the early to mid 70's.thank John for help in pointing me in the right direction.....Chris

[charlie8575]

Actually, I don't mind the one-piece assembly of stuff like that. Less gluing! Looks good painted, too.

If the plastic tabs are a concern, snip 'em, find the centers (the snip stub will be your guide,) drill and run a brass tube through. I agree I prefer the metal axle (!) in the rear axle like that, but I've built a few models with the plastic stubs and haven't had too much trouble, either.

Charlie Larkin

[ZTony8]

Last night I compared the Satellite to a Polar Lights Coronet(same basic real cars).The bodies in general are close enough to each other so I'd say they're good.What I did notice was the difference in roof shape between the two kits.The windshield angles are different,the vent window framings are different thickness, and the roofs are noticeably different shapes.Is one more correct than the other?Beats me.

[Luc Janssens]

The mailman brought mine today, together with a Revell Del Rio and a '57 Bel Air coup I didn't have.

So I'm good

[Nova-ss]

Last night I compared the Satellite to a Polar Lights Chris(same basic real cars).The bodies in general are close enough to each other so I'd say they're good.What I did notice was the difference in roof shape between the two kits.The windshield angles are different,the vent window framings are different thickness, and the roofs are noticeably different shapes.Is one more correct than the other?Beats me.

Thank you and everyone who put thete two cents in....Chris

[6bblbird]

Ok,so traction bars not used.whay traction producys were used on Chrysler cars of era say early seventy's were used on street use.I'm making this as a street car for about the early to mid 70's.thank John for help in pointing me in the right direction.....Chris

The guys "in the know" would use a pinion snubber ( won't see it on a finished model). Other tricks were to take the straps off the rear section of leaf spring. Often, cars were lifted a bit with longer rear spring shackles. You would see shock extensions on some of these lifted cars. Bolt on traction bars were a big no-no on street driven Mopars. If you used them you were considered a dork!

WF

[Junkman]

The insides of the engine and transmission are hollow too!

I IZ DIZAPPOINT

[Deathgoblin]

In all seriousness, would it be possible to scratchbuild?  The hardest part from looking at the rear axle would be the rounded back cover.