Quick Overview: Revell Starsky & Hutch Torino

[Dave Van]

Thanks Chuck.....it looks good to me.......I'll have to see if a 72 front clip will match up well. 

Another movie car I found.......

 

Edited September 22, 2015 by Dave Van

[Sledsel]

Chuck, I hate to ask, can we get a straight on shot of the front? I want to see the headlight bezel shape and fender angle. Thanks!

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Ask away!  Ain' no thang. 

Let's drop the Android and iPod shots for a bit and go to the more pro setup. Stance mockups:

And while we're at this vantage anyway, full frontal for Andy:

The chassis is not fully settled, so you can expect an incremental drop at the rear, maybe twice that up front.

Did uncover a possible, ah, focus area as I was working thru this: the front suspension does not seem adequately drilled for the axle pins (the rear is fine). Because the outer wheel halves now have projections to press against the heads of the axle pins, that may result in a front track that's too wide, since the pins can't settle in enough to seat the wheels tightly.  Maybe count on a bit of work with a pin vise there.

We're really not seeing a lot new here except the naked plastic in color now, relative to the preview shots. Just now, I'm still gonna let the pics speak for themselves.

[Sledsel]

Thank you for the excellent pics Chuck. 

As much as I love the subject, it is going on the "Maybe if I find it on clearance" list. If found cheap, I may try to fix it, but in my opinion it is a tough fix.

Not going to go into why because I do not need to be called a rivet counter or anything.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Hear ya, Andy.

Wonder how the movie cars played into Revell's research, though - 'cause if you follow the starskytorino.com link Dave posted earlier to the 2004 cars, what do you find but that the two hero rides had built Windsors in 'em. Not quite outfitted the way Revell has it, but it seems the W found its way into a few striped tomatoes, anyway.

[charlie8575]

Thank you for the excellent pics Chuck. 

As much as I love the subject, it is going on the "Maybe if I find it on clearance" list. If found cheap, I may try to fix it, but in my opinion it is a tough fix.

Not going to go into why because I do not need to be called a rivet counter or anything.

To me, it looks like a Torino. 99% of the objective met. Yeah, I might buy one, especially if a suspension fix can be devised and I can procure more appropriate rolling stock. Magnums and whitewalls sound good to me, maybe in a nice pastel blue with a blue interior. Frankly, I find it refreshing to have a new kit that doesn't have a bajillion microscopic parts.

The preceding is my praise. Now comes a statement that expresses, as calmly and politely as possible, what I am now seeing as a major problem.

Now...we have a flaw that someone knowledgeable through documented ownership of these cars (Andy), has found, and in order to avoid a lot of problems, will now remain silent, rather than sharing knowledge. 

Speaking as former teacher and a lifelong academic, both as an instructor and student, I find coercion into the withholding of knowledge like that unacceptable. 

I think it's very disturbing that this is happening, and even more disturbing that parties in both camps have bullied, cajoled and poked each other's bears enough to now create a shut-down of the exchange of legitimate information. 

Censorship by intimidation, even if said intimidation was not intentional, is censorship at its very worst. 

Perhaps we all need to revisit our conduct, and if feelings might be hurt (which I doubt will happen if people remain civil and reasonable,) then so be it. However, part of the reason for the existence of this section of the forum is not to heap praise or blame. 

Rather, I use this as a way to become a better informed consumer, without which, the entire marketplace will end up failing in the long run, either because:

1. Manufacturers will no longer read see real concerns and make improvements to their products- see Moebius and the '53 Hudson and the C-pillar on the '61 Pontiac.

2. If major flaws are detected, but unspoken, modelers will continue to get less than what should, and could, have been. Yes, if these calls are ignored, it could result in a backlash of poor sales. Witness that kit which shall not be named.

Contrary to popular belief, this is not a call for perfection. It's a call for accountability from buyer and seller alike. And if each side of the equation does not respond to the other, everyone will lose in the long run.

The manufacturers (vendors) are accountable to us for providing the best product possible.

The consumers (buyers) have a responsibility to speak up about sub-standard goods and work with the vendors to help correct errors, especially in development of the product. 

Charlie Larkin

 

[martinfan5]

Well said Charlie

Nice thing is, this is not the only place on the web to voice legitimate criticisms about Revell kits.

Edited September 22, 2015 by martinfan5

[Sledsel]

Hear ya, Andy.

Wonder how the movie cars played into Revell's research, though - 'cause if you follow the starskytorino.com link Dave posted earlier to the 2004 cars, what do you find but that the two hero rides had built Windsors in 'em. Not quite outfitted the way Revell has it, but it seems the W found its way into a few striped tomatoes, anyway.

Well, factory built cars could have a 302, 351w, 351c (74 only) 351m or a 460. The 2004 movie cars had stroked windsors.

The kit engine looks to be a windsor. I could not see the pics of the block/heads well enough to tell though. The valve covers are definitely windsor.

[charlie8575]

Hear ya, Andy.

Wonder how the movie cars played into Revell's research, though - 'cause if you follow the starskytorino.com link Dave posted earlier to the 2004 cars, what do you find but that the two hero rides had built Windsors in 'em. Not quite outfitted the way Revell has it, but it seems the W found its way into a few striped tomatoes, anyway.

Point of clarification.

To make sure I'm following correctly, generally the 351-C was what was used in the Torino, and the 351-W either wasn't supposed to be used there, or was not a regular production engine (e.g. short on Clevelands, use Windsors in the supply chain?)

Charlie Larkin

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Well, we had it mentioned here earlier that Windsors weren't used in '75, and that's what I was responding to. My own knowledge of engines available in that series of Torino is incomplete.

[Sledsel]

74 the Cleveland was common. 75 and 76 windsors were more common. My 1:1 S&H had a Windsor from the factory.

Tried to send you a PM Charlie. Says I cant send to you

Edited September 22, 2015 by Sledsel

[Sledsel]

Ford Torino Engine Specifications

1974 engines[edit]

Engine	Horsepower	Torque	Carburetor	Compression Ratio	Bore & Stroke	VIN Code
302-2V Windsor V8	140 hp (100 kW) @ 3800 rpm	230 lb·ft (312 N·m) @ 2600 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 3.00"	F
351-2V Windsor V8	163 hp (122 kW) @ 4200 rpm	278 lb·ft (377 N·m) @ 2000 rpm	2-barrel	8.20:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
351-2V Cleveland V8	162 hp (121 kW) @ 4000 rpm	278 lb·ft (377 N·m) @ 2000 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
351CJ*-4V Cleveland V8	255 hp (190 kW) @ 5600 rpm	290 lb·ft (393 N·m) @ 3400 rpm	4-barrel	7.90:1	4.00" x 3.50"	Q
400-2V 335 series V8	170 hp (130 kW) @ 3400 rpm	330 lb·ft (447 N·m) @ 2000 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 4.00"	S
460-4V 385 Series V8	220 hp (160 kW) @ 4000 rpm	355 lb·ft (481 N·m) @ 2600 rpm	4-barrel	8.00:1	4.36" x 3.85"	A
460-4V** 385 Series V8	260 hp (190 kW) @ 4400 rpm	380 lb·ft (515 N·m) @ 2700 rpm	4-barrel	8.80:1	4.36" x 3.85"	C

 

1975 engines[edit]

Engine	Horsepower	Torque	Carburetor	Compression Ratio	Bore & Stroke	VIN Code
351-2V Windsor V8	143 hp (107 kW) @ 3600 rpm	255 lb·ft (346 N·m) @ 2200 rpm	2-barrel	8.20:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
351-2V Modified V8	148 hp (110 kW) @ 3800 rpm	243 lb·ft (329 N·m) @ 2400 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
400-2V 335 series V8	158 hp (118 kW) @ 3800 rpm	276 lb·ft (374 N·m) @ 2000 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 4.00"	S
460-4V 385 Series V8	216 hp (161 kW) @ 4000 rpm	366 lb·ft (496 N·m) @ 2600 rpm	4-barrel	8.00:1	4.36" x 3.85"	A
460-4V* 385 Series V8	226 hp (169 kW) @ 4000 rpm	374 lb·ft (507 N·m) @ 2600 rpm	4-barrel	8.00:1	4.36" x 3.85"	C

 

1976 engines[edit]

Engine	Horsepower	Torque	Carburetor	Compression Ratio	Bore & Stroke	VIN Code
351-2V Windsor V8	154 hp (115 kW) @ 3400 rpm	286 lb·ft (388 N·m) @ 1800 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
351-2V Modified V8	152 hp (113 kW) @ 3800 rpm	274 lb·ft (371 N·m) @ 1600 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 3.50"	H
400-2V 335 series V8	180 hp (130 kW) @ 3800 rpm	338 lb·ft (458 N·m) @ 1800 rpm	2-barrel	8.00:1	4.00" x 4.00"	S
460-4V 385 Series V8	202 hp (151 kW) @ 3800 rpm	352 lb·ft (477 N·m) @ 1600 rpm	4-barrel	8.00:1	4.36" x 3.85"	A
460-4V* 385 Series V8	226 hp (169 kW) @ 3800 rpm	371 lb·ft (503 N·m) @ 1600 rpm	4-barrel	8.00:1	4.36" x 3.85"	C

Edited September 22, 2015 by Sledsel

[ZTony8]

Other than seeing a built test shot at Sylvania I haven't seen the kit.But I'm wondering if the '71 Torino kit wouldn't cure most of the chassis concerns.

[Rob Hall]

Other than seeing a built test shot at Sylvania I haven't seen the kit.But I'm wondering if the '71 Torino kit wouldn't cure most of the chassis concerns.

Nope...that was a unibody design...the Torino switched to body-on-frame construction in '72.  This and the Johan '72 snap kit are the only stock '72-79 Ford midsize chassis in 1/25th I believe...

[Junkman]

RUMOR has it........the pre-orders are way up on this kit....so there is a demand for American 70's era cars.....hope we get a 77 Thunderbird out of this tool.......it'd sell even better.

Of course there is! The only ones not realising this are those slowpokes in the Plastic Belt.

77 T'bird would be epic, so would be the Bluesmobile.

[Sledsel]

Nope...that was a unibody design...the Torino switched to body-on-frame construction in '72.  This and the Johan '72 snap kit are the only stock '72-79 Ford midsize chassis in 1/25th I believe...

The Johan Torino stocker has an excellent stock chassis, but you need the floor.

Of course there is! The only ones not realising this are those slowpokes in the Plastic Belt.

77 T'bird would be epic, so would be the Bluesmobile.

If they do a Thunderbird, I would hope it is better than this. Yes, it resembles a Torino, but needs a bunch of work still. Personally, rather disappointed.

If I build this, I will document the build and corrections.

[Dave Van]

Just a thanks to Chuck for all the info.   mine will not be here for a few days but I have wanted to see a production kit for over a year!!!

I am lucky enough that my want for this car is blinding me from all the 'warts' others see.....I am happy to have this car in plastic.

[Bob Ellis]

There are no common chassis frame parts from the 1970 Torino to use on the 1972-1976. The 1972 body is Ford's answer to Federal safety regulations which the 1971 body did not meet.

The  2 dashes are common from 1972 to 1979 including TBirds, LTD II, Gran Torino Elite, Mercury Montego, Mercury Cougar and Ranchero. One dash has speedo, fuel/temp and clock and the other has full instrumentation of fuel, temp, oil, amps and tachometer. Some have black plastic and others can have wood appliques.

The rear quarter windows operate on the 1972 and 1973. In 1974 Ford cheapened the car by making those windows fixed and can not be opened. If you build the model, you need to put the rear quarter windows in place with a small chrome strip to the front.

Apparently, Ford produced 1000 replica Starksy and Hutch Torinos in the Spring of 1975. Magnum 500 wheels were the only choice close to the movie car wheels.

[Bob Ellis]

I started thinking; I know that is bad.

The 1977-79 Mercury Cougar was very popular. Might be nice to see it done with a 1977-79 TBird. Virtually the same car. A few different parts.

Probably 5 years from now, if ever.

[Ron Hamilton]

I placed my order before Chuck's post. I am a little miffed about the red styrene, but I can work around it. I have a couple of JoHan Torino bodies to work with, as I want to do a detailed '72 Gran Torino Sport. I wonder who will do a '73 conversion? The front end with the exception of the grille will work. Once I get mine, I'll see what the differences are between the two.

[Junkman]

There are lots of Irishmen on Britmodeller.

[Junkman]

 

It seems there aren't many 'entusiasts' around as a percentage of buyers, so they can pump out a new kit that looks like an 80's model kit and it will still sell.

The 'enthusiasts' have been starved for 40 odd years! They will buy ANYTHING. And if it is a bloody Hudson, of all things.

 

Edited September 22, 2015 by Junkman

[Casey]

 Or buy one of these?

I can't see any logical reason there would ever be another Torino kit released, based on this kit's design/tooling. The fact that this specific version was a famous TV car is the only thing it has going for it in terms of sales potential to the mass consumer. Think about any variation on this kit, then honestly consider how many kits Revell could reasonably expect to sell. 20,000? 10,000? This is not solely directed at you, Scott, but try to put aside your personal wants, desires, and dreams of building a model of the car your grandparents owned and truly consider if releasing another Ford/Mercury variant would result in profits for Revell.

Taken with Dave Van's earlier comment, I think everyone who wants a mid '70s American car should stock up on this kit while they can. Considering the offbeat '70s subject matter and Revell's past history of discontinuing kits shortly after they've been released (Blue Bandito, etc.), you may be out of luck should you decide to wait for something which might never come.

Back to the kit, it looks like the frame rails are a bit shallow, but perhaps that's not the case? I keep getting an "It looks close, but we didn't exactly go all out getting the out-of-sight bits totally correct" vibe from this kit. Still bummed about the messed up rear wheels, especially since they front wheel bolt circle was correctly registered.

[Bob Ellis]

Casey is probably correct, another Ford car will never be done with this tooling. I didn't realize how much the S&H label was in demand and that is what sold the kit.

The closest bet would be Clint Eastwoods Torino and that might not have enough followers. 

[Luc Janssens]

Casey is probably correct, another Ford car will never be done with this tooling. I didn't realize how much the S&H label was in demand and that is what sold the kit.

The closest bet would be Clint Eastwoods Torino and that might not have enough followers. 

The design of the chassis and where it connects to the rear bumper, makes a '72 doubtful IMHO and will jack up the prices of the Jo-han kit some more....

Edited September 22, 2015 by Luc Janssens