Reissue the Revell double drag kits!

[Greg Myers]

Seems obvious from all these threads, some one is interested in these kits. 

[Casey]

Put me down for AT LEAST two of each. Maybe more.

How much would people be willing to pay for this true double kit? $50? $60? $70?

[Greg Myers]

Why so much ? We don't pay that much for other double kits. Yer slippin' buddy. Just stirring the pot.  and the AMT Double Dragster in the "TIN" only went for $35  and with a little finessin' you can get three (3) complete cars.

Edited September 23, 2015 by Greg Myers

[GaryR]

So, how do we let Revell know that we want them?

[Casey]

Call, write, or e-mail them: http://www.revell.com/news/contact-us.html

[Tom Geiger]

How much would people be willing to pay for this true double kit? $50? $60? $70?

The phenomena is that the minute it's issued people will be complaining that it's $18 with the Hobby Lobby 40% off coupon!

[mike 51]

The phenomena is that the minute it's issued people will be complaining that it's $18 with the Hobby Lobby 40% off coupon!

I can't recall anyone complaining that they purchased a kit cheaply....ever..  

[GaryR]

They aren't even on the horizon to be released and some of you are already worried about price?

I'm going to make a BOLD PREDICTION that if they are re released, they will still be cheaper than the $125-$ 160 the originals  go for today!

 

[Casey]

They aren't even on the horizon to be released and some of you are already worried about price?

Being honest, this type of topic has been discussed before, and expected retail price compared vs. expected units sold at that price is an important factor in deciding whether or not to even proceed with the kit. If it doesn't have a good chance of making money when the initial sales expectation numbers are crunched, it's not going anywhere, so yeah, it's a factor early on in the process. Might even be one of the reasons it hasn't been done yet, and might never happen.

[GaryR]

Being honest, this type of topic has been discussed before, and expected retail price compared vs. expected units sold at that price is an important factor in deciding whether or not to even proceed with the kit. If it doesn't have a good chance of making money when the initial sales expectation numbers are crunched, it's not going anywhere, so yeah, it's a factor early on in the process. Might even be one of the reasons it hasn't been done yet, and might never happen.

Well yeah, for the manufacturer of course.

But not for us guys on this board. Re read my posts, I said I was told it would require an extra "pull" on the tools. I don't have any idea wtf that means, but the same person told me that made it too expensive. It sounds hokey to me. The same guy told me the MPC funny car kits were gone forever, that they would require too much tool repair. Seems like there are a bunch of them made recently for being impossible.. AND I was told that parts packs were losers too because they were too hard to display. AMT seems to be doing OK with theirs, maybe because of some ingenuity in packaging. All this was from a guy who makes a living from model cars and has the manufacturers ear. Go figure!

If we had proposed an entirely new tool of the restored Chi Town Hustler guys would have said the subject was too obscure and it wouldn't sell. But Revell did one, along with the Hawaiian.

What's profitable and whats not is OBVIOUSLY the determining factor, I get basic business. I'm 62 years old and was a professional manager before retiring.

I will say that a few years ago if somebody proposed a Hudson Hornet model, the naysayers would have insisted that it wouldn't have broad appeal and it wouldn't sell. Same for the Chrysler 300 kits.

But Moebius DID take a chance, made 'em and has been  (as far as we know ), successful.

Same goes for Galaxy with their Chevy kits.

Why worry about bean counting, that isn't our job!

 

Edited September 24, 2015 by GaryR

[Casey]

On 9/23/2015 at 7:06 PM, GaryR said:

Why worry about bean counting, that isn't our job!

Because reality and economics have be be involved in the conversation at some point.

Your best bet is to contact Atlantis and ask if they have these molds. I see no reason Revell U.S.A. would've kept them post-bankruptcy, especially since previous incarnations of Revell had no interest in using them.

I really think this is a case where the number of existing original kits, parts packs, and built up models is sufficient to pacify 91.3% of those who pine for these kits.

[Greg Myers]

I know I am 

[Greg Myers]

One of each please 

[Ace-Garageguy]

Having a couple of each now, and enough parts-packs to build several more of each (except the Fiat), and having paid not-quite-stupid money, but definitely kinda a lot for the boxed kits, I'd STILL be happy to see them reissued...though I'm not really familiar enough with the level of interest across the car modeling spectrum to make a decision (or recommendation) as to bringing them back (IF the tooling even exists) if it were my own money or job on the line.

An interesting aside...I just got another one of the Fiat double kits, which I haven't built in decades. While reading through the instructions and smelling the old-kit nostalgia scent emanating from the 55 year-old box, I noticed the instructions call out using the headers from the Chrysler on the nailhead Buick. Interesting, because the exhaust-port spacing on the two engines is entirely different.

While Revell's tooling gurus got the port-spacing on the nailhead dead-on-the-money in 1962 (as opposed to the Chinese tool makers who got it wrong on Revell's latest version of the same engine), the fellers who did the instructions in '63 weren't quite so careful. 

[Greg Myers]

Seems worthy of a thread just for little gems like that. Weird stuff found in instruction sheets.  Maybe weird stuff included in kits , decals, patches etc. could be another.