AMT '66 Mustang New Release

[unclescott58]

Hopefully the convertible will be re-issued so the '64 Indy Pace Car can be built.  Also, the fastback kit could be built as a Shelby (in '66 only?).  I would have preferred either over the hardtop, but I'm sure it will sell very well. 

Revell/Mongram makes a very nice '64/'65 convertible that was offered with Indy pace car decals at one point. And they also offer a Shelby fastback based on the same basic tooling. It too is very nice. What I'd like to see is a regular '65 coupe and plain non Shelby '65 fastback. Using either the old AMT tooling. Or based off of newer Monogram tool. I like both. At the same time, even though I like the Mongram convertible, if AMT ever offered their old kit as a convertible, I'd buy it.

Edited February 22, 2016 by unclescott58

[Travis T]

Does this version have the nice Shelby ten spoke wheels? They're the ones that should have been in the 68 Shelby kit.

[PowerPlant]

What I'd like to see is a regular '65 coupe and plain non Shelby '65 fastback.

I do agree with the coupe, but Revell/Monogram do have a regular, non-Shelby 65 2+2 fastback, don't they? As far as I know nothing in particular distinguishes it as a 66 (as the 350R and Hertz rent-a-racer, based on the same tooling)... I could very well be wrong, however...

Edited February 22, 2016 by PowerPlant

[sfhess]

The original Monogram Mustang kit was a 65 Fastback.

[Dave Darby]

I guess I realize that now (buyer beware), but I didn't when I purchased it, because I have a few other "retro kits" from AMT that don't share this same problem. As for just enjoying a trip down memory lane...I'm 29 and have been modeling for about a year or so, so there's no nostalgia in it for me. I may be new to the hobby, but I'm patient and I've built enough kits to not be intimidated by more complicated builds. I struggle more with achieving high-quality paint jobs than I do with detail building (using included parts, I've not dove into wiring engines quite yet). I guess the real reason it bugs me is because I paid the same price for it that I've paid for much higher quality models...if it were significantly less expensive, I wouldn't be as annoyed. Oh well, lesson learned...I'll probably just keep it around and use a few of the nicer parts for other builds (roll cage, tires, chrome pieces), and at least I can use the body as practice for my new airbrush that's in the mail or maybe even use it to practice weathering. I'll definitely pay more attention to these "retro kits" before I buy another one, as I was under an assumption that this level of detail was only found in snap kits, and I'm simply not eager to pay the same price for this level of quality as I do for superior products. 

 

I wouldn't equate parts count and detail to quality. If you want a great example of a kit with a high parts count and level of detail, simply look at the Trumpetor 1964 Falcon kits. They exhibit considerably more detail than does the AMT 1966 Mustang, but nearly every aspect of this kit only vaguely resembles the prototype. As far as Gen 1 Mustangs go, this AMT kit is (as far as the body goes) king of the hill. Better even than the more detailed Monogram kit in my opinion.

Also, like the previous posts state, this kit is steeped in history (as are many of the kits from all manufacturers out there - not just Round2). It has its origins in the 1964 Mustang Promo model, which actually came pre-assembled. A glue kit (from its own tool) of a convertible that would also build a coupe (separate hardtop) soon followed, along with a fastback. The fastback kit morphed into an altered wheelbase gasser, while the convertible/hardtop kit ended up as the Sonny & Cher his and hers kits after the 1966 run. Some portion of these tools were used to create the Autolite Mustang showcar from Ford, which ultimately became the Iron Horse. The Promo tool, which was updated to a 1966 was reissued around 1968-9(?) as the "Peony Pony" basically an unassemble promo, part of the Flower Power series. In the mid 70's, AMT opened up the hood, and combined the body and interior tub with the chassis and running gear from the Iron Horse to create essentially the kit you have now.

As stated before, this kit is very much state of the art for its time. Many of on the board are in our 40s through 70s, and grew up on these kits. We take it for granted when we see the 66 Mustang, that it will be just like the last time we built it, maybe in our teens. The Model kit industry had been around for a long time, and because of this, and the high cost of creating a new kit (probably just south of half a million these days) and low production numbers compared to the heyday of kits, you will see many, many re-issued older kits on the shelves. Reissues are rarely cheaper than the new ones, quite simply because it still costs a good chunk of change to run production. New box art, instructions, decals, labor, packaging and shipping all enter into the equation.

Anyway, long and short, don't beat up on Round2 too hard, they have a staff of well under a dozen, and they have to be able to keep the lights on. They are providing a great service, by restoring and preserving these historic kits for future enjoyment. And like Mark said, just look at the bottom of the box if you want something with more detail.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Dave Darby

[Harry P.]

Just to expand a bit on this topic...

In general, if you see the word "Retro" on the box lid of any AMT kit, buyer beware.

"Retro" is code for "reissued ancient kit that was tooled up a half century ago and will completely disappoint you if you were expecting a detailed, state-of-the-art model kit."

If you're ok with that, great! Have at it and enjoy. But if you want more in a kit, steer clear of the "Retro Deluxe" kits.

[Dave Darby]

Just to expand a bit on this topic...

In general, if you see the word "Retro" on the box lid of any AMT kit, buyer beware.

"Retro" is code for "reissued ancient kit that was tooled up a half century ago and will completely disappoint you if you were expecting a detailed, state-of-the-art model kit."

If you're ok with that, great! Have at it and enjoy. But if you want more in a kit, steer clear of the "Retro Deluxe" kits.

That is actually a somewhat inaccurate and borderline cynical statement. Witness the 1967 Shelby, 68 Road Runner, and Hurst Olds kits for example. They are marked Retro Deluxe, but are from relatively recent tools with more than adequate detail. The model kit industry is not vary lucrative, so I doubt the guys at Round2 are trying to skim us out of our dollars. There are plenty of better get rich rich quick schemes.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Dave Darby

[Harry P.]

All I'm saying is that the "Retro Deluxe" kits are reissues of old kits. In many cases, very old kits with very old tooling.

Maybe they should put a little blurb on the cover telling the potential buyer that the kit is a reissue of an old kit with old tooling, and not a newly-tooled kit.

Note the title of this topic...

[Bob Ellis]

This Round2 release comes with a convertible boot. I am pretty sure it has been lost since the 1966 annual kit. Check out the 1964 Impala reissue, same deal a boot missing since 1964.

There were no 1964 or 1965 Mustang annual kit. The just say Mustang on the front and back. I would say the coupe/convertible came out in the summer of 1964 and the 2+2 fastback in 1965. 1964 1/2 and 1965 Mustangs had Falcon dashboards.

In 1966 there were 2 Mustang kits; coupe/convertible and fastback. They had different grilles and dashboards with the fastback having a GT grille. I do not believe the GT has ever been done again? All these kits had single exhaust.

Sonny and Cher His and Hers custom Mustangs from Barris were produced in 1967.

The fastback became a funny car in 1967. Not easy, but it is possible to convert a coupe to a fastback. This has been reissued a bunch of times and is a good source for glass is you need to restore a kit or promo.

In 1969 the coupe/convertible became the Peony Pony, but still a 1966.

In the 1977/8 Countdown reissue, the coupe roof became permanent. no boot and no removable roof.

I think a Barris green plastic Crusin' USA custom edition in 1980.

In the '80s ERTL reissued the coupe kit. ERTL removed the screw hole chassis and made it dual exhaust.

A least 3 more reboxed ERTL 66 Mustang reissues before the Round2

 

 

 

[Dave Darby]

This Round2 release comes with a convertible boot. I am pretty sure it has been lost since the 1966 annual kit. Check out the 1964 Impala reissue, same deal a boot missing since 1964.

There were no 1964 or 1965 Mustang annual kit. The just say Mustang on the front and back. I would say the coupe/convertible came out in the summer of 1964 and the 2+2 fastback in 1965. 1964 1/2 and 1965 Mustangs had Falcon dashboards.

In 1966 there were 2 Mustang kits; coupe/convertible and fastback. They had different grilles and dashboards with the fastback having a GT grille. I do not believe the GT has ever been done again? All these kits had single exhaust.

Sonny and Cher His and Hers custom Mustangs from Barris were produced in 1967.

The fastback became a funny car in 1967. Not easy, but it is possible to convert a coupe to a fastback. This has been reissued a bunch of times and is a good source for glass is you need to restore a kit or promo.

In 1969 the coupe/convertible became the Peony Pony, but still a 1966.

In the 1977/8 Countdown reissue, the coupe roof became permanent. no boot and no removable roof.

I think a Barris green plastic Crusin' USA custom edition in 1980.

In the '80s ERTL reissued the coupe kit. ERTL removed the screw hole chassis and made it dual exhaust.

A least 3 more reboxed ERTL 66 Mustang reissues before the Round2

 

 

 

Peony Pony and the Countdown Series (and all subsequent issues are derived from the Promo body, with the hood opened up). The best of my knowledge the tool with the removable hardtop is still in the Sonny & Cher configuration. It would take a GREAT deal of rework to make that stock again. 

The new issue also has a bunch of previously welded off parts from the Superstang Gasser variant of the Mach 1, Autolite Special/ Iron Horse kit. Before it got those rather poor Shelby wheels, it had the Rader Wire Mags left over from the Iron Horse kit that supplies the running gear and a slew of custom parts to this kit. I believe it was Tim Boyd, who did a Mustang history in SAE back in the 1980s. I have or have had many of these kits in my collection, and it all jibes with my parts layouts, etc. Note that although they refer to it as a 1965 Mustang, the model inside is a 1966. Note the one piece promo style body and chassis. I stand behind my statement that all AMT 1966 Mustangs from the Peony Pony on, are based off of the promo tool that originated in 1964.

[Bob Ellis]

Dave, your photo brings up an interesting thought. I thought Peony Pony was the 1966 coupe/convertible body tool. Now, it appears that is incorrect.

Like many of the AMT 1969 lineup of the Flower Power cars, they were based on promo bodies, but not all. This mustang might be where the Countdown kit came from with permanent roof.

Like the '64 Galaxie, the kit got modified, but the promo remained untouched.

[louie]

Dave Darby thank you for the pictures. Love em and much appreciated.         Jeff 

[Snake45]

 

The fastback became a funny car in 1967. Not easy, but it is possible to convert a coupe to a fastback.

 

 

Here's what that looks like:

This lash-up of the leftover pieces shows where I made the cuts. BTW this was a trashed original '66 GT body, not the funnycar, but the principle is the same:

[Bob Ellis]

That's funny. I sort of did the same thing repairing a '65 2+2 fastback body. The nose was ruined. I cut up a round2 issue and glued on a new nose. Then I replaced the single exhaust ('65 kit) chassis with the new chassis that has dual exhaust. Replaced the engine and all the chrome too. It became a Spenser For Hire Mustang.

[Mark]

Round 2 provides a parts breakdown on the bottom of every kit box.  If you wish to avoid "ancient, less detailed" kits, all you need do is take a glance at the underside of the box.

[niteowl7710]

This is just the unfortunate side effect of putting EVERYTHING into retro box art. Not EVERYONE has been building for the past 50 years and they don't necessarily know what every kit contains. The box art looks great, but makes it difficult to understand the origin of a kit when 1965 kits and 1995 kits all look the same.

[AC Norton]

Here's what that looks like:

This lash-up of the leftover pieces shows where I made the cuts. BTW this was a trashed original '66 GT body, not the funnycar, but the principle is the same:

boy, I have to say, Richard,,,,your wasting your talent with all this amazing cutting and chopping......forget models , you should have been a surgeon...lol.......I hate models that take this much heavy lifting......your a trooper, for sure.......the Ace.....

[Snake45]

boy, I have to say, Richard,,,,your wasting your talent with all this amazing cutting and chopping......forget models , you should have been a surgeon...lol.......I hate models that take this much heavy lifting......your a trooper, for sure.......the Ace.....

Thanks for the kind words. The process was actually pretty simple:

1. Let your brain "back burner" the problem for about ten years, until it comes up with the best cutting plan.

2. Measure twice, cut once. Lay out identical cuts on both bodies with masking tape, but with the masking tape on opposite sides of your cut line to take the kerf into account.

3. Relax. Cut. Pray.

The joint only required a little superglue for filler, no putty or bondo. It all fits exactly how you hope it would.

Notice that my FB is not a GT, just a base fastback. Still has the rocker moldings and emblems of the coupe, plus the coupe's non-GT grille and gas cap.

[louie]

Snake45 ,that is pretty sweet. I agree with the Ace, you have a lot of Talent and it definitely shows.  Thank you.    Jeff 

[AC Norton]

Thanks for the kind words. The process was actually pretty simple:

1. Let your brain "back burner" the problem for about ten years, until it comes up with the best cutting plan.

2. Measure twice, cut once. Lay out identical cuts on both bodies with masking tape, but with the masking tape on opposite sides of your cut line to take the kerf into account.

3. Relax. Cut. Pray.

The joint only required a little superglue for filler, no putty or bondo. It all fits exactly how you hope it would.

Notice that my FB is not a GT, just a base fastback. Still has the rocker moldings and emblems of the coupe, plus the coupe's non-GT grille and gas cap.

......relax,,,cut,,,pray....see, I told you that you should have been a surgeon, Richard... we should address you as DR. SNAKE from here on...lol......the Ace.....

[The Junkman]

What could you swap out for chassis/interior while using the body.  67 AMT Mustang?  Too wide?

[Dave Darby]

OK, here is the history of the current 66 Mustang kit and its connection to the Mach1/Autolite Special/Superstang/Iron Horse kit according to Mark B, who has to be the all time king of model kit history. For the original post, just do a search for " AMT Iron Horse." This explains when the dual exhaust happened (Iron Horse). And now that I have seen all of the parts to the Sonny & Cher kit, I know the Rader Space Age Wire Look mags (Mark refers to them as Appliance Wire Mags) date back to the S&C kit as well.

From Mark (Talking about the Iron Horse, but also peripherally about the 1966 Mustang):

There were four issues of the custom fastback:

Mach I concept: issued 1967 (though the box art resembles the '68 annual kits). The chassis and engine are from the Sonny & Cher Mustang kit, a custom-only '66 convertible itself made from the annual kit. (There were two AMT '66 Mustang annual kits: the fastback, and a convertible with separate glue-on roof with vinyl texture.) The chassis was altered to add dual exhaust (up until then, it had a single exhaust setup molded in). The Mach I body was new tooling, the interior probably altered from the '66 fastback annual (the body from that kit went to the altered-wheelbase funny car kit). The Mach I was molded in red.

 

Autolite Hi-Per Special: issued 1968. changes included different wheels (Appliance "Wire Mag" replacing the Mach I's Apache wheels). I believe the cut line for the "roadster" option was added to the body at this time also. Molded in metallic (not flake) blue.

 

Superstang Gasser: issued 1969. This issue had a full-length plated parts tree (Mach I and Hi-Per had half-length trees). This issue included a drag version. The Appliance Wire Mag wheels are replaced by the "baby moon/chrome reversed wheels" that AMT put into a lot of kits over the years. The drag version had slotted wheels, slicks, and 13" tires for the front. Molded in yellow.

 

Iron Horse: issued 1975 (possibly '74). This issue went is much the same as the Hi-Per Special; the drag version parts are removed. The Appliance Wire Mags are back, the chrome reversed/baby moons are out (though they are on the car in the catalog illustration). Molded in white.

 

The chassis/engine and half of the plated tree from the Iron Horse were later united with the '66 Mustang coupe promotional model tool (issued once in kit form, in 1969 (*Peony Pony) to create the oft-reissued '66 Mustang coupe kit that we know today. Remember, the '66 annual was not a coupe but a convertible with separate hardtop roof.

 

 

[Kmb0319]

OK, I had been considering this as a separate topic, but this seems like a good place to bring it up without completely hijacking Mr. Buick's thread:  Let me say, first of all, that I don't mean to come off and it isn't my intention to complain... I am extremely thankful for what Round 2 is doing in giving back to us some great kits of the past, and I'm happy to purchase anything from them to continue supporting some of the awesome subjects they continue to put out.

However, I just posted my 68 Road Runner in the Under Glass section, and lamented the poor quality of the kit in several areas.  AMT, beyond any other brand, is SO inconsistent in its quality...  and I realize these kits are reissues of old ones with old tooling, so going from one AMT kit to another can be apples/oranges.  BUT... and this is less a question of Round 2 than of AMT originally...  would it have been so hard to utilize components from other kits to improve reissues back before they were acquired and became Round 2?  For instance, I've heard the AMT 71 Charger is a fantastic kit, with a lot of detail, and I've seen lots of people utilize the chassis from that kit to build other cars, like the 68/69 Road Runner/GTX.  I've built the 70 Camaro from AMT, and that was a great model with a ton of detail.  I have the 67 Shelby GT350 sitting in my basement as the next car to build, and was amazed at the level of detail and how nicely it builds up from my research.  I've heard the 70 Monte Carlo is just as good, as are several other AMT kits.

 Meanwhile, the Road Runner I just completed was plagued by fitment issues, parts like the exhaust system cast way too thick, killing their realism, and wheels with far too wide of a lip, making them appear toy-like.  The AMT 68 Camaro I built was the worst, least detailed model I have ever built... there was almost no detail in the interior or engine bay.  I've seen plenty of upgraded tires to the pad-printed variety... what stopped AMT earlier and Round 2 now from utilizing suspension, exhaust and other components from other kits to bring reissues up to speed without casting all new parts?  The 289 in the 67 Shelby is nicely detailed... far more than this half-transmission engine in this Mustang reissue, and the wheelbase can't be that far off..  As Mr. Buick said, he's not been at this long enough to feel confident kit-bashing, but why should he have to?  There are components from other kits that could be utilized to fit other kits without molding new pieces that could be utilized, minimizing tooling costs and making better models.  That would make sense to me, but I'm genuinely asking the question, not griping.  I hadn't built a model in 28 years until I got back into it last year, and I don't claim to understand everything that goes into molding/tooling costs, but I do feel like there's an opportunity to vastly improve some of the kits like this one that would be big sellers if they were improved.

[boss 302 mustang]

You can't just take stuff from one tool and put it in another

[Robberbaron]

OK, I had been considering this as a separate topic, but this seems like a good place to bring it up without completely hijacking Mr. Buick's thread:  Let me say, first of all, that I don't mean to come off and it isn't my intention to complain... I am extremely thankful for what Round 2 is doing in giving back to us some great kits of the past, and I'm happy to purchase anything from them to continue supporting some of the awesome subjects they continue to put out.

However, I just posted my 68 Road Runner in the Under Glass section, and lamented the poor quality of the kit in several areas.  AMT, beyond any other brand, is SO inconsistent in its quality...  and I realize these kits are reissues of old ones with old tooling, so going from one AMT kit to another can be apples/oranges.  BUT... and this is less a question of Round 2 than of AMT originally...  would it have been so hard to utilize components from other kits to improve reissues back before they were acquired and became Round 2?  For instance, I've heard the AMT 71 Charger is a fantastic kit, with a lot of detail, and I've seen lots of people utilize the chassis from that kit to build other cars, like the 68/69 Road Runner/GTX.  I've built the 70 Camaro from AMT, and that was a great model with a ton of detail.  I have the 67 Shelby GT350 sitting in my basement as the next car to build, and was amazed at the level of detail and how nicely it builds up from my research.  I've heard the 70 Monte Carlo is just as good, as are several other AMT kits.

 Meanwhile, the Road Runner I just completed was plagued by fitment issues, parts like the exhaust system cast way too thick, killing their realism, and wheels with far too wide of a lip, making them appear toy-like.  The AMT 68 Camaro I built was the worst, least detailed model I have ever built... there was almost no detail in the interior or engine bay.  I've seen plenty of upgraded tires to the pad-printed variety... what stopped AMT earlier and Round 2 now from utilizing suspension, exhaust and other components from other kits to bring reissues up to speed without casting all new parts?  The 289 in the 67 Shelby is nicely detailed... far more than this half-transmission engine in this Mustang reissue, and the wheelbase can't be that far off..  As Mr. Buick said, he's not been at this long enough to feel confident kit-bashing, but why should he have to?  There are components from other kits that could be utilized to fit other kits without molding new pieces that could be utilized, minimizing tooling costs and making better models.  That would make sense to me, but I'm genuinely asking the question, not griping.  I hadn't built a model in 28 years until I got back into it last year, and I don't claim to understand everything that goes into molding/tooling costs, but I do feel like there's an opportunity to vastly improve some of the kits like this one that would be big sellers if they were improved.

To follow up on what Boss 302 said, for the most part, you usually can't take individual parts from one tool and put them in another.  (I believe that sometimes wheel inserts are interchangeable between tools.)  Most of the parts you see on a parts tree are all machined out of a single hunk of tool steel. Or actually two hunks - top and bottom for each parts tree.

Sometimes it is possible to use an entire parts tree from one kit in another kit, such as engine/transmission components, as long as all those necessary parts are on the same parts tree.  On rare occasions kit manufacturers have combined newer components from one kit with an older body.  The best known example of this might be the AMT '70 Coronet Super Bee kit, which used the old MPC body and interior tub with the newer chaasis/mechanicals from the '68 Roadrunner/'69 GTX kits.  Even in this case, however, the builder needed to trim the chassis and the glass from the Roadrunner to actually fit in the Coronet body.

Regarding some of the kits you mentioned, MOST of the kits that AMT designed and released in the '90s are good quality "modern" style tooling with excellent detail.  The '68 Camaro you mentioned was actually developed in the late '70s, so it's a nearly 40 year old design now.  Nevertheless, it has separate drivetrain and exhaust components, unlike the "plate" or promo style chassis such as the '66 Mustang.  Currently available AMT kits range from the top detail mid-90s designs, all the way back to the Ford Falcon Ranchero kit, which was originally released in 1961, and recently was backdated with a newly tooled 1960 grille and hubcaps for the "Ohio George" version.

The only way to truly know what you're getting is to research a potential kit purchase on a forum such as this.  Round 2 does also include a depiction of the entire kit contents on their box bottoms.  Kind of hard to make out all the specifics, but you can at least see if there's separate chassis components, engine components, etc.