Next release of Revell '70 Cuda; any update information?

[Brett Barrow]

  On 12/14/2015 at 4:44 PM, Casey said:

This is something James Duff has pointed out a few times when modified reissues are discussed, and I tend to agree with him, especially when one takes the time to look at Revell's pattern regarding all-new kits of the past six or seven years. '50 Olds, '57 Ford Sedan, '72 Cutlass, etc. Two versions of the same basic kit design are what we should realistically expect from any given bi-scale Revell subject, so I don't forsee any "additional" kits based on the '70 Hemi 'Cuda.

The 57 Ford being an oddball because we got the Del Rio as a 3rd variant that wasn't part of the initial design. 

For an example of a kit that hasn't sold that well, see how long it's taken for the 2nd version of the 67 Camaro to come out and it came out before the Cuda.   

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Beggin' your pardon, Brett, but pretty sure the '67 Camaro was a '14 release. August or so?

Special Ed 'Cuda was absolutely Nov/Dec '13 as many say.  Two years ago.

[Casey]

  On 12/14/2015 at 7:49 PM, Brett Barrow said:

The 57 Ford being an oddball because we got the Del Rio as a 3rd variant that wasn't part of the initial design. 

I would agree, and James' theory seems to have held up very well. Maybe the '69 Camaro spoiled us, or maybe that kit was the oddball which was able to spawn (and sell) multiple variants of nearly two decades.

I'm just not seeing huge demand for an AAR 'Cuda kit, especially since the Hemi 'Cuda will always be the star of the '70 Plymouth F-body lineup, IMHO.

[Sport Suburban]

Casey, The 70 Cuda is an E body. I hope you were thinking Aspen / Volare when you posted F body and not the GM Camaro / Firebird. We might have to take your Mopar card away!

[Craig Irwin]

  On 12/14/2015 at 7:49 PM, Brett Barrow said:

For an example of a kit that hasn't sold that well, see how long it's taken for the 2nd version of the 67 Camaro to come out and it came out before the Cuda.   

The body and grille in that kit were worse than the old AMT kit, but a Motion 427 version soon.

 

[Mike Chernecki]

  On 12/14/2015 at 10:39 PM, Casey said:

I would agree, and James' theory seems to have held up very well. Maybe the '69 Camaro spoiled us, or maybe that kit was the oddball which was able to spawn (and sell) multiple variants of nearly two decades.

I think the Camaro was so successful because they got it right the first time and its variations were right (the Yenko was correct and didn't need the next variation to complete it). I think the camaro is the best kit Revell ever produced. 

I waited for years for a new Nova kit only to be disappointed by a wierd angled backend, sharp body crease and incorrect wheel openings. Also, a 69 copo never existed , there was a 1970 copo Lt-1 Nova. Also, if you look at the copo they include a 69 grille and a wrong 70-72 grille. 

They screwed up the front and rear of th 67 camaro. I don't think it will ever reach the popularity of the 69 for these reasons. 

The cuda is fairly good but again a few small details would have made it great. 

If Revell would correct, better yet not make these errors, the above kits may have the long life the 69 camaro had.

Edited December 14, 2015 by Mike Chernecki

[unclescott58]

By the way, I thought everybody hated this kit and the '67 Camaro. So why are we looking for future variations?

['70 Grande]

Unclescott58,

Well, for starters, I know that I never claimed to hate this kit!  Its just that I've always wanted a well-done '70 AAR Cuda, (as far as I'm concerned, the AAR was the "star" of the '70 E-body lineup; yes, the Hemi has more bang-for-the-buck, but the AAR is an example of small-block automotive perfection, IMHO).

[horsepower]

They have been in a clearance bin at our Wal-Mart store for $9.98, and sat for two weeks, I don't know if they sold or not, the bin was removed for Christmas displays.

Edited December 15, 2015 by horsepower

[The Junkman]

  On 12/14/2015 at 2:48 AM, Craig Irwin said:

I personally thought that the 70 Hemi Cuda was the number 1 overlooked best seller kit that could be tooled, but I don't think sells were anywhere near expected levels. Maybe that's why we haven't seen a modified reissue.

Well, that's your problem right there: its well known the #1 overlooked best seller would be the 289 and FIA Cobra done with modern moldings.   Now, back our regularly scheduled programming.

[Casey]

  On 12/14/2015 at 11:05 PM, Sport Suburban said:

Casey, The 70 Cuda is an E body. I hope you were thinking Aspen / Volare when you posted F body and not the GM Camaro / Firebird. We might have to take your Mopar card away!

Whoops. I did own an F-body Mopar wagon for a few years, though. 

[Robberbaron]

 

  On 12/14/2015 at 11:38 PM, Mike Chernecki said:

I think the Camaro was so successful because they got it right the first time and its variations were right (the Yenko was correct and didn't need the next variation to complete it). I think the camaro is the best kit Revell ever produced. 

I waited for years for a new Nova kit only to be disappointed by a wierd angled backend, sharp body crease and incorrect wheel openings. Also, a 69 copo never existed , there was a 1970 copo Lt-1 Nova. Also, if you look at the copo they include a 69 grille and a wrong 70-72 grille. 

They screwed up the front and rear of th 67 camaro. I don't think it will ever reach the popularity of the 69 for these reasons. 

The cuda is fairly good but again a few small details would have made it great. 

If Revell would correct, better yet not make these errors, the above kits may have the long life the 69 camaro had.

When I first saw the issues with the '67 Camaro grille and the back end, I stated this same opinion.  I expected that sales would initially be good, because the general buying public either doesn't know or doesn't care about the accuracy issues.  Even among the hardcore model enthusiasts that populate this forum and others, many bought this kit, even knowing about those issues.

However, by not correcting those problems, Revell forfeited a good chunk of sales to potential buyers that ended up taking a pass on that kit (such as myself).  Just as important, even for the buyers that did buy one of the '67 Camaro kits, how many of them bought additional kits after that first one?

One of the charms of the '69 Camaro kits are that they pretty much fall together, and when completed, they do a pretty good job of looking like the 1:1 when they're sitting on the shelf.  You just can't say that about the '67 without putting in some major effort to address the grille and back end proportions.

After I built my first '69 Camaro kit, I went and got 2 more.  I suspect that isn't happening with the '67 kit.  I think for most buyers it's a "one and done", quite likely due to the fact that it just doesn't look right when it's built box stock.

There was (is?) potential for at least as many variations of the '67 tooling as there have been for the '69, when you consider that the '67 body shell is clearly designed to also be used for '68 variations.  In addition to small block and big block SS versions of each year, there are also Z/28s for each year, plus all the possible drag variations (Grumpy's Toy, etc).  IMHO, Hobbico shot themselves in the foot by not making the effort to get the basics correct on the '67 Camaro.  I suspect that the core team at Revell probably wanted to get things right, but weren't allowed by corporate  to do any more tooling changes.

Now for the Cuda and the Nova, for whatever reason I was able to look past those issues and purchased those.  However, the Mustang LX fell into the same category as the '67 Camaro for me: all set to buy multiples until I saw the proportions...

Edited December 15, 2015 by Robberbaron

[Sport Suburban]

I was in high school when the Revell 69 Camaro kits came out. I don't remember which one came out first but I think it was the Yenko. I enjoyed building that so much that I bought all three versions ( Baldwin and Z/28) when they came out. I still have the Baldwin and Yenko from back then. It is such a good kit that I have bought more of them. I have 3 of the converts, 3 Z/28s, 1 Yenko, 2 Baldwin, and 1 ZL1. So that is the result of a great time building the first ones.

Another one for me is the 66 Shelby GT350. I built a GT350H back then and a 66 GT350 back in 88 I think. I wanted the 65 GT350 so bad but could not find one untill I got back in the hobby in 2000. I finally got one through eBay back then when they were just getting going. I probably have 10 kits of that tooling and built all variants of it!

[69NovaYenko]

A 1/25 scale replica of this venerable Mopar has been LONG over due. Revell`s 1/24 scale attempt at this car was sorely lacking in many respects. Revell`s newly tooled 1/25 scale replica of the `70 Cuda is a much better platform to build from...yea I know there are those who have issues/concerns with the newly tooled kit but; it`s a far sight better than the old MPC `70 Cuda annual kit...IMHO. Prior to the initial release of the stock `70 Hemi Cuda there was talk of the Sox & Martin kit being the next spin off from the new tooling and the third spin off would be a `70 "AAR" 340 Cuda. Well they have done the stock and Sox & Martin variants. So, after two years have come and gone its time for the AAR Cuda moment in the sun. In the words of John Fogerty 1985 song “Put me in coach I`m ready to play today.”

But I sure Revell is aware that a “street stock” 'Cuda AAR would be a fairly simple addition to the kit tool. Just as they continued to develop derivatives of the '32 Ford Street Rod series over the life of that tool. It would be nice to see them incorporate further fine tuning of the body casting to address some of the minor errors, as part of engineering any additional variants of the kit.

What upgrades should they include for the AAR 340 variant:

340 block with 3X2 intake setup

AAR exhaust 340

AAR front chin winglets

AAR rear deck spoiler

AAR grille (they are different from Cuda)

AAR lights driving lights

AAR Trans Am exhaust with the fluted chrome tips

 Rear window louvers8.75" axle (a Dana 60 never was an option with the 340 nor the 383)

Rear splash pan (the Sox &Martin  kit already has the "blank" panel)

And, the inclusion of the 727 Torqueflite transmission (in addition to the 4-speed) as well as a 440 big block  with headers and stock exhaust systems (I know they have a very nice examples of both the 727 Torqueflite as well as the  440 big block in their existing tooling inventory) and they would have a second 2-1 kit bring to market.

 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2015 by 69NovaYenko

[unclescott58]

Just to be clear, I was being facetious about hating the '70 'Cuda and the '67 Camaro kits. Heck I even like the notchback Mustang kit. Despite the mistakes, I still say to average person these kits look pretty good. But, there has been so much complaining in other threads here, I had to make the comment that I did.

[gtx6970]

For the rescord, i dont hate the 1970 Cuda kit .I have 2 of them and was planning on buying multiples, untill I saw the body errors . And the enterily  wrong hood scoop has kept me from buying the sox and martin version completely

 I just think they missed the mark . But with some minor tweaking it can easily be a top shelf kit .

[Brett Barrow]

  On 12/14/2015 at 8:23 PM, Chuck Kourouklis said:

Beggin' your pardon, Brett, but pretty sure the '67 Camaro was a '14 release. August or so?

Special Ed 'Cuda was absolutely Nov/Dec '13 as many say.  Two years ago.

Yeah, you're right, Sept '14 is the oldest order we have for it.  I just remember having an email conversation about it with someone at Revell back at my old job and since I took this new job in May '13 I haven't really spoken to anyone there about any new stuff.  Must have been while it was still in development, I thought it was after it came out.  Anyway, the Camaro has not sold as well (in my experience) as the Cuda or the notchback Mustang.   Will have been a year and a half when the Nickey version hits, we got the 2nd Cuda and Mustang in about half that time.

Edited December 15, 2015 by Brett Barrow

[jeff f]

I have a different thought . Use as many Cuda' parts as possible , and release a 70 hemi Challenger . I know , I know that the WB is longer . How about a Dick Landy pro stock? I think they would sell .

Jeff.

[Luc Janssens]

  On 12/15/2015 at 6:06 PM, jeff f said:

I have a different thought . Use as many Cuda' parts as possible , and release a 70 hemi Challenger . I know , I know that the WB is longer . How about a Dick Landy pro stock? I think they would sell .

Jeff.

Since they already have a ex Monogram 1/24th scale and the one with diecast DNA, I highly doubt that Revell would tool up a whole new Challenger kit, in the foreseeable future.

But for argument sake what percentage of Cuda kit parts could be used for a Challenger, 20, 30, 40%?

[Rob Hall]

  On 12/15/2015 at 7:27 PM, Luc Janssens said:

Since they already have a ex Monogram 1/24th scale and the one with diecast DNA, I highly doubt that Revell would tool up a whole new Challenger kit, in the foreseeable future.

But for argument sake what percentage of Cuda kit parts could be used for a Challenger, 20, 30, 40%?

Hmmm...different body and trim, similar interior (not sure how much would be common), different but very similar chassis (3 in. wheelbase difference, I believe), same suspension, wheels, tires, engine, engine compartment parts...