AMT '66 Mustang New Release

[Tom Geiger]

On 9/9/2019 at 3:58 PM, Snake45 said:

I'm even older than that. I remember America. 

America was a couple of guys who were air force brats whose father's were stationed in England.  When I was an army brat living in Germany they played our school dance.  Ah history!  

There was that Horse With No Name....   recent TV commercials suggest the horse's name was Antonio!    ?

[Snake45]

31 minutes ago, Tom Geiger said:

There was that Horse With No Name.... 

Also known as The Song With No Tune. I HATED that song from day one, and still do. 

[ChrisBcritter]

I liked "Ventura Highway" much better, especially when I was driving on a nice open stretch of it.

[Casey]

On 2/22/2016 at 5:27 PM, Dave Darby said:

The Promo tool, which was updated to a 1966 was reissued around 1968-9(?) as the "Peony Pony" basically an unassembled promo, part of the Flower Power series.

Just found these images of the AMT T-137 Peony Pony kit, which is exactly what Dave stated it is. AMT calls it out as a 1965, but I don't know the differences between '65 and '66 Mustangs to tell which is correct for the Peony Pony issue. Now, who's going to build the model to match the box top illustration? ?☮️

Edited October 3, 2019 by Casey

[Mark]

12 hours ago, Casey said:

Just found these images of the AMT T-137 Peony Pony kit, which is exactly what Dave stated it is. AMT calls it out as a 1965, but I don't know the differences between '65 and '66 Mustangs to tell which is correct for the Peony Pony issue. Now, who's going to build the model to match the box top illustration? ?☮️

Says '65 on the box, pure, unadulterated '66 inside.  Half of the kits in that series ('61 Galaxie, '62 Buick, and the Mustang) can be had reasonably, I've given thought to sticking one together like that...

[Rodent]

1 hour ago, Mark said:

Says '65 on the box, pure, unadulterated '66 inside.  Half of the kits in that series ('61 Galaxie, '62 Buick, and the Mustang) can be had reasonably, I've given thought to sticking one together like that...

Notice that the box art cartoon car has '65 wheelcovers and grille. Looks like the art department wasn't communicating with the production department.

[Mercuryman54]

11 minutes ago, Rodent said:

Notice that the box art cartoon car has '65 wheelcovers and grille. Looks like the art department wasn't communicating with the production department.

But it has the 66 cove trim!!

[Rob Hall]

So that one was basically an unassembled promo.   The first AMT '66 Mustang coupe kit I built was the late 70s 'Countdown Series' one. 

[Mark]

The Mustang tool was probably marked "1965" because that's what it started out as.  Someone may have assumed that it wasn't updated to '66 spec.

On the other hand, in the "desert racer" series that was available at the same time, the '61 Ranchero was called a '62.  It was never anything but a '61 pre-Round 2.

The recently available '66 Mustang coupe combines the body, interior, and trim pieces from the Flower Series kit with the chassis and engine from the original annual kit.

[Greg Myers]

This is basically one pathetic kit, reissued beyond any reasonable length.  The body edges are sharp enough to cut you as any errant #11 blade.  The chassis a throw back to screw on pans of the "Promo" era.

Why have we been forced to endure such mediocracy for so long?

It would have been quite easy for Monogram to continue their early 1/24th scale Mustang series with a Coupe/ Notchback model.

 

Edited October 4, 2019 by Greg Myers

[randyc]

the body remains pretty good though, doesn't it?  Mine looked pretty sharp.  Edges,as mentioned, as well as shape, trim, etc.   And only game for now.   body shape is still better than the Danbury Mint diecast - I don't have a Franklin to compare it to.  

[Mark]

The bodies in the Monogram early Mustang kits are too "stiff", they don't capture the subject as well as the AMT kits.  Throw in the 4x4 stance, shallow headlamps, and non-stock exhaust system, plus the wrong scale, and I'll take the AMT kits any day.  It's only too bad that they haven't seen fit to return the fastback to stock forn.

[Snake45]

3 hours ago, Mark said:

The bodies in the Monogram early Mustang kits are too "stiff", they don't capture the subject as well as the AMT kits.  Throw in the 4x4 stance, shallow headlamps, and non-stock exhaust system, plus the wrong scale, and I'll take the AMT kits any day.  It's only too bad that they haven't seen fit to return the fastback to stock forn.

I don't think they've ever altered the body--all the various issues I have have identical bodies--but it's been a long time since they issued it in stock form (i.e., not a Shelby of one sort or another). 

[Mark]

I didn't make it clear, I was referring to the AMT fastback, which has been the altered wheelbase version since about 1967.

[vamach1]

15 hours ago, Greg Myers said:

This is basically one pathetic kit, reissued beyond any reasonable length.  The body edges are sharp enough to cut you as any errant #11 blade.  The chassis a throw back to screw on pans of the "Promo" era.

Why have we been forced to endure such mediocracy for so long?

It would have been quite easy for Monogram to continue their early 1/24th scale Mustang series with a Coupe/ Notchback model.

 

Agree 100%.   Any why has a 67/68 convertible never been done.

[Dave Darby]

On 10/4/2019 at 10:01 AM, Greg Myers said:

This is basically one pathetic kit, reissued beyond any reasonable length.  The body edges are sharp enough to cut you as any errant #11 blade.  The chassis a throw back to screw on pans of the "Promo" era.

Why have we been forced to endure such mediocracy for so long?

It would have been quite easy for Monogram to continue their early 1/24th scale Mustang series with a Coupe/ Notchback model.

 

Except when it's built, it looks more like a Mustang than the Monogram kit does. You know how to make a small fortune manufacturing model car kits? Start off with a large fortune. 

[mk11]

On ‎10‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 10:42 AM, Mark said:

The bodies in the Monogram early Mustang kits are too "stiff", they don't capture the subject as well as the AMT kits.  Throw in the 4x4 stance, shallow headlamps, and non-stock exhaust system, plus the wrong scale, and I'll take the AMT kits any day.  It's only too bad that they haven't seen fit to return the fastback to stock forn.

 

On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 3:12 PM, Dave Darby said:

Except when it's built, it looks more like a Mustang than the Monogram kit does...

Fully agreed on this point. The monograms make good parts cars though, as Mr Reckner has proven.

Picked up a radio car reasonable enough that I can use the body to complete another project. I'll try a promo coupe body on the radio chassis.

[Casey]

On 10/3/2019 at 11:35 AM, Mark said:

I've given thought to sticking one together like that...

I'm trying to think of a source for 1/16 scale '60s vintage stryene tires...?

I recall Round2 using this box art when the kit was first issued, but it looks like this was just unique packaging for one company:

[Snake45]

6 minutes ago, Casey said:

I'm trying to think of a source for 1/16 scale '60s vintage stryene tires...?

I recall Round2 using this box art when the kit was first issued, but it looks like this was just unique packaging for one company:

Yah, I've seen those on ePay being touted as "special limited edition box" and so forth. Asking price seems to be a few dollars more than the regular one. 

[Mark]

I believe the "special edition" box was originally done for Auto World as an online/mail order deal.  I have seen them being sold by a couple of show vendors also, maybe those are unsold ones from the original offer.

[Greg Myers]

On 10/4/2019 at 10:39 PM, vamach1 said:

Agree 100%.   Any why has a 67/68 convertible never been done.

 

[vamach1]

23 minutes ago, Greg Myers said:

 

Is that a Palmer?  If so it barely counts.  ?

[Bob Ellis]

11 hours ago, Greg Myers said:

 

AMT made an effort to eliminate convertible kits about 1965 and out by 1970

[Greg Myers]

44 minutes ago, Bob Ellis said:

AMT made an effort to eliminate convertible kits about 1965 and out by 1970

A couple of questions come to mind,

Why did they do this ?

Where did you come up with this information?

[Mark]

11 minutes ago, Greg Myers said:

A couple of questions come to mind,

Why did they do this ?

Where did you come up with this information?

Just look at the catalogs and the kits that were/weren't made.  Prior to 1965, if something was made as a promotional model, it was also offered as a kit.  That started changing in '65: the big Pontiac, Buick, and Oldsmobile were made as promos but not kits.  Later promos like the '69 and '70 Chevelle, and '70 Impala didn't get made as annual kits (the '69 Chevelle convertible kit did get made several years later, but not as an annual kit).  Someone at AMT must have looked at sales numbers and decided they didn't need to offer everything as both hardtop and convertible.