First detailed look - Revell's '29 Model A Hot Rod Roadster ...updated with photos of completed builds of both kit versions

[tim boyd]

Tim, to call it a nailhead is probably really stretching it; it was the aluminum Buick V8 GM licensed to BMC or whatever it might have been to put in limited MGBs, Rovers and Morgans. those are the Morgan (stock) headers on there, pretty wild. so while it has the dominant characteristic I associate with a "nailhead", namely the vertical oriented valve covers, it probably doesn't share much else. there was a very educational thread here some years back about the lineage of the motor, and possibly you and Bill both contributed to it. I obviously need to go back and reread it.

one thing I wish someone would reproduce are those spark plug wire covers that compliment so many 1:1 NHs. I have some on the old AMT 32 Ford/43(?) Willys kit that I built up years ago but of course that has never been reissued to my knowledge, and I have never seen that setup anywhere else on the available NHs.

I like what Bill is talking about too, the interchangibility of parts between different issues of similar cars. I would look at those rat rod pickups in detail too...for some reason I am thinking of an abbreviated truck channeled over the 32 frame

jb

JB...AHHH!!!!  That's the story - yours is the aluminum smaller Buick V8!.  I built one of those myself (from the JoHan kit) many years ago, but it wasn't detailed out like yours.   Way cool!  

Fully agree with you on those spark plug covers - they were on the Nailhead in the AMT Trophy Series Double Kit '32 Ford "Custom"/'40 Willys, and after about two reissues (late 1960's) the tooling for the '32 Ford Custom disappeared, never to return, except for the Tudor body which as released once in the AMT Street Rod Series in 1975 with the Vicky/Phaeton innards. Those spark plug covers would be a terrific aftermarket addition (Norm, are you watching this thread by chance???)    

With a bit of perspective, now that my box stock builds are done, Bill has hit on what is probably the most significant part of this new kit - its potential for use in literally thousands of kitbashing projects.

To add to Bill's info, the Revell '29A frame is slightly longer that stock (probably to accomodate the Nailhead as well as another engine that will surface later in the life of this tool), so it is just a tad too long to fit the AMT '29A Roadster fenders.  Shortening the chassis slightly, and removing (or thinning) the frame horns, plus creating space for the kicked rear of the frame by removing the AMT Floorboard beneath the trunk/rumble seat, and it should fit right under the AMT fenders.  I haven't been able to confirm that the stock chassis/suspension stance will work exactly, but it not exact, it won't be too far off.  Because the '29A frame is longer than stock, it aligns PERFECTLY with the Monogram 124th scale Model A fenders. Again, haven't been able to confirm the suspension/stance but shouldn't be far off.  

And this info (Bill's and the above) just begins to scratch the surface of what is possible using this kit as the basis.  

TIM

[jbwelda]

>How did you build the Rover V8?

southeastern finecast white metal kit, earlier thread will give details:

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/78922-southeastern-finecast-rovermorganmg-v8-engine-kit/

 

jb

 

 

[sfhess]

And this info (Bill's and the above) just begins to scratch the surface of what is possible using this kit as the basis.  

Wait until you see what's in the five-window coupe based on this kit.......

[tim boyd]

Here are some additional comparo photos in the "under glass" section, showing the completed Revell '29A Highboy compared to three previous Boyd '29A Highboy on '32 Rails models:  http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/105498-comparo-built-revell-29a-highboy-roadster-vs-three-previously-completed-model-a-highboy-kitbashes/

And here are some comparo photos of the Revell '29A Channeled Roadster comared to three other Channeled Ford Roadster models I've built previously: http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/105497-comparo-built-revell-29-a-channeled-roadster-3-other-channeled-ford-roadsters/

Best Regards...TIM 

Edited September 4, 2015 by tim boyd

[kingiguana]

Joe....I noticed this too and I did not use the shifter decal on the Highboy version a result.  I did use the "eyeball" shifter decal, which is the same size, on the Channeled version.  It fit fine, once treated with Micro Set applied before the decal, and MicroSol after the decal.  

Cheers...>TIM     

Thanks Tim, good to know.

[Dennis Lacy]

Somewhere among these 3 different threads the question was asked if the roadster could be built a 3rd way, not channeled but on the Model A frame. Tim Boyd said that he did some mock ups and confirmed that it absolutely could be if the bottoms of the hiboy wheels wells were trimmed to accommodate the flat shape of the A frame. 

I just got my first two copies of this kit today, cleared a spot on the bench and spent the afternoon with one of them. After a bunch of horsing around I decided to get started on a new project and wanted to try building it not channeled but on the A frame. After trimming the bottoms of the hiboy wheel wells everything falls together. I removed 3/32" to fit the step in the frame. (I didn't get the model taped together tight enough for pictures so the fit isn't as bad as it looks.) The front angled edges of the cut actually follow the shape of the step in the floor, not the frame which is why there is a wedge shaped gap.

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

And a mock up of where I'm headed with it. The back was lowered 1/16" by using a round file to sand the axle mounts deeper. The front still needs to be reworked to get it about 1/8" down so it sits like the picture below. The '32 grill is from the Revell kits. Front tires are from the new kit with Revell Race Master slicks and chrome reverse wheels from Revell's '49 Custom Mercury. Engine is going to be the kit Nailhead. I'll start a thread in the Work Bench section soon. 

Hosted on Fotki

Playing around some more, I also found that the new kit '32 frame fits the old AMT '29 Roadster body like a glove!

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

Great info, Dennis.

Here's something else interesting. In the one major area I've researched carefully so far, the new Revell body shell is MORE accurate than the old AMT '29. 

I've been looking at and building the AMT '29 for so long, and just blindly accepting the body shell was right, I thought the body in the new Revell offering looked off in the rear.

Comparing the two on the bench, I found the old AMT body begins its downward slope behind the cockpit just AT the cockpit rail. The new Revell kit is noticeably flatter out to the forward edge of the decklid.

So, which is right? This is particularly important to me at the moment because I'm starting a build of a very famous car that is subtle and beautifully proportioned. Body-line flaws ain't gonna cut it on this model...to look right it's got to BE right.

Surprise, surprise...the new Revell kit is dead-on in this critical area.

After making measurements of a 1:1 gennie car last week, and carefully photographing a new Brookville shell, plus finding every clear, scalable profile shot of a '28-'29 body shell I could online, printing some out, and comparing them to both the old AMT and the new Revell '28-'29 body shells, the Revell work is the clear winner in at least this one major area.

If I had used the old AMT shell, which I thought I'd have to when I noticed the differences between the two, I would have ended up with a model that just didn't capture the look of the original...and I wouldn't have known why.

Sometimes being an obsessive "rivet-counter" (with an objective outlook and an open mind) reveals that a kit is BETTER than first appearances suggested.

Thanks again, Revell.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Johnny99]

Hope to see someone find a simple way to lower the front and keep the crisp look of it.

I think the shockmounts/headlightmounts need to be modified to get the headligths lower as well.

 

Edited September 6, 2015 by Johnny99

[tim boyd]

Somewhere among these 3 different threads the question was asked if the roadster could be built a 3rd way, not channeled but on the Model A frame. Tim Boyd said that he did some mock ups and confirmed that it absolutely could be if the bottoms of the hiboy wheels wells were trimmed to accommodate the flat shape of the A frame. 

I just got my first two copies of this kit today, cleared a spot on the bench and spent the afternoon with one of them. After a bunch of horsing around I decided to get started on a new project and wanted to try building it not channeled but on the A frame. After trimming the bottoms of the hiboy wheel wells everything falls together. I removed 3/32" to fit the step in the frame. (I didn't get the model taped together tight enough for pictures so the fit isn't as bad as it looks.) The front angled edges of the cut actually follow the shape of the step in the floor, not the frame which is why there is a wedge shaped gap.

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

And a mock up of where I'm headed with it. The back was lowered 1/16" by using a round file to sand the axle mounts deeper. The front still needs to be reworked to get it about 1/8" down so it sits like the picture below. The '32 grill is from the Revell kits. Front tires are from the new kit with Revell Race Master slicks and chrome reverse wheels from Revell's '49 Custom Mercury. Engine is going to be the kit Nailhead. I'll start a thread in the Work Bench section soon. 

Hosted on Fotki

Playing around some more, I also found that the new kit '32 frame fits the old AMT '29 Roadster body like a glove!

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

 

Dennis ... That is exactly how I trimmed the inner fenders on my A framed highboy project.   Can't wait to see how yours develops....Tim

[Ace-Garageguy]

Hope to see someone find a simple way to lower the front and keep the crisp look of it.

I think the shockmounts/headlightmounts need to be modified to get the headligths lower as well.

 

Piece of cake. Look at Tim Boyd's photo from his first build thread on this kit, and follow along.

To lower the front suspension, simply remove material from the top of the front spring, and/or slot the crossmember deeper. You can remove all but the lowest spring leaves and still have a correct representation of some cars in the real world that run a mono-leaf spring. Do it clean and square and you can get at least a couple of scale-inches of additional drop.

Of course you'll have to shorten the shocks a bit to compensate. If you cut the shock shafts off at the shock bodies and drill the bodies the diameter of the shafts, you can simply slide the shafts into the bodies to fit the lowered axle exactly.

To lower the headlights, simply remove the mounting pads from the headlight support brackets. If you want to go lower, deepen the notch in the brackets where they attach to the frame. You'll have to shorten the shocks as noted above if you do this, too.

 

Edited September 6, 2015 by Ace-Garageguy

[Johnny99]

I've been thinking in that direction , but doesn't that change the angle of the shocks?

How much can I change the angle and make it still look proper? 

 

Piece of cake. Look at Tim Boyd's photo from his first build thread on this kit, and follow along.

To lower the front suspension, simply remove material from the top of the front spring, and/or slot the crossmember deeper. You can remove the entire two top spring leaves and still have a correct representation of some cars in the real world. Do it clean and square and you can get at least a couple of scale-inches of additional drop.

Of course you'll have to shorten the shocks a bit to compensate. If you cut the shock shafts off at the shock bodies and drill the bodies the diameter of the shafts, you can simply slide the shafts into the bodies to fit the lowered axle exactly.

To lower the headlights, simply remove the mounting pads from the headlight support brackets. If you want to go lower, deepen the notch in the brackets where they attach to the frame. You'll have to shorten the shocks as noted above if you do this, too.

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

I've been thinking in that direction , but doesn't that change the angle of the shocks?

How much can I change the angle and make it still look proper? 

The change in the angle of the shocks will be so small that they should still be within acceptable limits if this were a real car. They'll look fine. Honest.

[Johnny99]

The change in the angle of the shocks will be so small that they should still be within acceptable limits if this were a real car. They'll look fine. Honest.

I trust you. Think I will make new mounts so they will be painted with the frame.

Thanks for quick answers.

[tim boyd]

One more piece of advice for anyone building the Model A chassis.

The two holes in the bottom of the number 62 floorboard that fit the tranny crossmember pins need to be fully drilled through the floorboard.  Do this and your body will sit parallel with the bottom of the frame rails.  Don't do it, and your body will sit too high at the cowl.

Takes about one minute to do,but makes a big difference in the finished appearance.

TB

[mike 51]

I plan on using lever shocks on my 1950ish style highboy with a much thinned spring..with ticket baiting  lowered headlights.  

The kit's 30-31 firewll vs. a 28-9 is presenting some issues right now.

The K member from the 32 kits can be trimmed to fit to aid engine/trans swaps.

[Dennis Lacy]

One more piece of advice for anyone building the Model A chassis.

The two holes in the bottom of the number 62 floorboard that fit the tranny crossmember pins need to be fully drilled through the floorboard.  Do this and your body will sit parallel with the bottom of the frame rails.  Don't do it, and your body will sit too high at the cowl.

Takes about one minute to do,but makes a big difference in the finished appearance.

TB

I actually went the other direction and shortened the mounting pins on the cross member. Works either way. 

[Jim_Kampmann]

New parts for the '29 Roadster from Replicas & Miniatures! (photos courtesy of Facebook - Maryland Automotive Modelers Association).

 

[DaveM]

Nice!  I'm going to have to get some of those valve covers and taillights.  What wheels do the cheaters fit?

[alan barton]

Firstly, like everyone else here, a huge thanks to Tim for the awesome review. I'm so tempted to copy Tim's colour scheme and just swap the steering column to the correct side.   Here in Australia it will probably be 3-6 months before we see it, if recent new kits are anything to go by, and at between $50 and $60 a pop.  But as the owner of a real 29 roadster, I will be buying a bunch.

The wheel arches won't trouble me too much because I have a good stash of AMT bodies but I do have a suggestion for Revell if they go down this path again.

See, they already made the inner wheel wells as part of the interior panels, right?  So imagine if they had made standard wheel wells for the highboy interior trim panel and raised wheels wells for the channelled interior trim panel.  Then, mould  the roadster body with stock wheel arches but with a little groove marked on the inside of the body showing the cutting line of the raised wheel arches.  After all, it is far easier to hog out some wheel arches than to reduce the arc of them.  Having the correct size wheel well panels would make it a doddle to finish off either version. 

And for once, here is a suggestion that that the manufacturer could do without any change at all to pattern making costs, parts count or plastic quantity.  Wouldn't it be fantastic if the 30 Coupe body came that way (and the 29 coupe, 29 Tudor, 29 Tourer, 31 Vicky ........... I can dream can't I?

 

Cheers

Alan

[Speedfreak]

Tim, Is there a build thread for the Highboy? If there is I can't find it. Thanks.

[tim boyd]

Gene...yes there is....at this link  http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/105160-revell-29a-hot-rod-roadster-quickbuild-update-4-final-photos-of-completed-kit-and-my-final-thoughts/  on the MCM Forum, and at this location in my Fotki album  http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/tim-boyd-on-line-mo/tim-boyd-on-line-ho-6/

Best regards...TIM

 

 

[Speedfreak]

Thanks Tim!  

[jbwelda]

>This ruins the first impression of the engine for me entirely. I'll be putting all the engines from this kit up for trade... for those of you who don't see it

> or don't care...

>I guess if a couple of scale inches is considered "very close to being correct", well...that explains a lot.

>But hey, what do I possibly know about anything anyway. In MY world, accurate measuring counts.

 

kool! I will take you up on that trade of all the engines from all the copies of this kit you buy. and trade, sure I will trade something of like value. you say this engine is basically worthless to someone like you in whose world accurate measuring counts? great. then the value would be pretty much zero. tell you what, I will split the postage with you to relieve your world of these abominations unto God. just PM me and we will take care of it, kool amigo? because in MY world its a pretty neat little engine and I am always there to help a fellow modeler achieve their successes, even if its only to relieve them of the horrible stresses that inaccurate "models" present. Remember, just after you said what was quoted above you stressed how important first impressions are to you, so please, help me help you, and get those pieces of junk over to me pronto!

or should this be in the trading forum?

jb

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

>This ruins the first impression of the engine for me entirely. I'll be putting all the engines from this kit up for trade... for those of you who don't see it

> or don't care...

>I guess if a couple of scale inches is considered "very close to being correct", well...that explains a lot.

>But hey, what do I possibly know about anything anyway. In MY world, accurate measuring counts.

 

kool! I will take you up on that trade of all the engines from all the copies of this kit you buy. and trade, sure I will trade something of like value. you say this engine is basically worthless to someone like you in whose world accurate measuring counts? great. then the value would be pretty much zero. tell you what, I will split the postage with you to relieve your world of these abominations unto God. just PM me and we will take care of it, kool amigo? because in MY world its a pretty neat little engine and I am always there to help a fellow modeler achieve their successes, even if its only to relieve them of the horrible stresses that inaccurate "models" present. Remember, just after you said what was quoted above you stressed how important first impressions are to you, so please, help me help you, and get those pieces of junk over to me pronto!

or should this be in the trading forum?

jb

 

OK JB, tell you what. 

I should have kept my mouth shut about everything EXCEPT the dimensional discrepancy until AFTER I actually had the kit in hand. My bad. I admit it like a grown-up...might.

Calling it "worthless" is a stretch, as, since I've seen it in the flesh, I realize it has much to recommend it, like a stock front-cover / water pump setup, and the multiple-carb intake manifold option that the 50+ year-old Revell version simply lacks in any form

This makes it useful, at the very least, for swapping said parts on to the OLD Revell basic engines which lack the stock front-end, and only have an FI manifold.

Or, I may swap the Ivo heads, of which I have many, on to the new engine...and correct the new exhaust headers accordingly.

I'll be doing a lot of work with this engine to see just how well everything fits and swaps back and forth with other nailheads (similar to what I did with the 303 in the Revell '50 Olds kit).

I SHOULD have mentioned these things earlier.

Thank you for reminding me that I had a little crow to eat.

 

[unclescott58]

Holy cow! Picked mine up last night. Been fooling around, doing some test fitting of pieces and minor sub-assembly. Is this a nice kit! I am going to do a channeled rat rod.

I am really glad for the warning about the part #13, interior floor and not using it. That part #62, interior floor is the correct part for both variations of this kit. Again test fitting bares this out.

I only have one minor complaint. And this has been brought up by others. I feel it's very minor. That is the molding of inner fender wells with the interior. Again, very minor. It will just require a little tape in painting the two different colors on those parts. I think I can handle than.

Over all I'm not a big Model A fan. But this kit one of the nicest kits I've seen. Being a big Buick fan, I'm very excited by the Nailhead. By the way, the exhaust port spacing looks okay to me. Nailheads have weird exhaust port spacing that doesn't look right even on the real thing. That and valve cover setup are part of their charm.

Edited September 10, 2015 by unclescott58