AMT 1/25 '64 Chevy Impala

[ANovaScotian]

Hey All

I'm in the market for a nice 1964 Impala and I'm torn between the Revell/Monogram and the AMT kits.  I figure the Revell kit would be the better of the two build-wise but I don't want a lowrider. The AMT (Super Shaker) offering has some nicer wheel and tire options.  I've scoured the internet looking for some reviews of AMT's Impala but have so far come up short.  

If anyone here has build the AMT 64 Impala, I would very much appreciate some feedback.

Regards

ANS

[russosborne]

Well, this probably won't be of much help.

I last built the AMT version 35ish years ago. I liked it.  For me it was a fun build. I can't comment on things like accuracy, not an issue for me and I am not a Chevy expert, much less the Impala. Fun kit, looked good when done. That's what I am about.

I was looking at the AutoWorld site and saw this kit, it's on my list to get again at some point.

Never built the Revell version. Zero interest in low riders.

Russ

Edited April 12, 2016 by russosborne

[bismarck]

Depending on what release you get of the revell kit, Its a 2 in 1 .  Stock or low rider. The Revell kit is much better than the AMT kit. Opening hood and trunk, separate frame and exhaust. Better parts count. MUCH better detailing. The Revell kit has the benefit of being a newer mold than the AMT 64. The AMT kit is still a good kit, but for finer details, the Revell has it hands down. IMO.

Edited April 12, 2016 by bismarck

[StevenGuthmiller]

I haven't built the AMT kit in many years either, but it's a fine kit.

The body is very nice but it's an old annual mold so you get what you did 50+ years ago.

I have the Revell kit, but have yet to build it.

The detailing is light years beyond the AMT kit & the issue that I have has all of the stock & low rider parts.

Personally, if I ever build one again, it will most definitely be the Revell kit.

 

Steve

[Fat Brian]

The AMT kit has a one piece chassis with the front and rear suspension and the exhaust system molded into the chassis pan. A metal axle runs through the engine as well. It looks good for what it is but it definitely shows its age. With the newer kit available I consider the AMT kit a nostalgia build, you build it to relive a part of your youth and the quality of the end result is secondary to the experience.

[ANovaScotian]

I'm not too concerned about detail level or accuracy.  I'm more curious about parts fit and how the kit builds up.

[unclescott58]

The old AMT builds up quite nicely. It's always looked right to my eye. It does not have the underside detail of a modern Revell kit. I like the AMT kit well enough, that I've never really considered a need for buying the Revell version. I like the simplicity of the AMT kit. It looks great sitting on the shelve.

[AC Norton]

I'm not too concerned about detail level or accuracy.  I'm more curious about parts fit and how the kit builds up.

....if you are looking for fun and fairly quick, the AMT SUPER SHAKER is a neat piece. great decal sheet, lettered tires, lots of drag and custom goodies, and less work overall to still get a nice car in the end. put a nice  paint job on it, wire the 409 using the chrome valve covers, hood scoop if you like, fat tires and Cragars in the kit,,,,you will love it...........the Ace.........

[Rotorbolt73]

I agree with Ace here..I'd build the AMT kit for all the reasons he stated..The Revell kit is nicer detailed but does not have all those cool options most AMT kits have.

[BIGTRUCK]

Wire axles vs detail on the chassis..my only issue with the AMT are the headlights, they stick out like bugeyes..This is one of the kits that had working lights at one time and now need to be drilled out and replaced with clear lenses..

[Lizard Racing]

I built a '64 back in the day.  Typical AMT molded suspension and chassis.  Good engine detail.  It was a premium kit ($2.50!) and had provisions for working headlights.

Typically, the Revell x-frame Chevys have really good chassis details, separate suspension and exhaust.  Some have a separate frame, so the frame can be black and the underbody the actual color, just like the 1:1.

[AC Norton]

I agree with Ace here..I'd build the AMT kit for all the reasons he stated..The Revell kit is nicer detailed but does not have all those cool options most AMT kits have.

thanks, Matt, ....but few of us think like the ol' Ace does nowadays...lol...lol...........AMT forever....the Ace......

[Eshaver]

I have unbuilt examples of BOTH kits . The AMT Impala was re worked years back as the Original had working Headlamps and tail lights . Now in 1964, this was TECH CITY!!!!!!!!!!! Building this kit in 1964 was challenging only in regards to the battery box sandwiched between the body and the quarter panels . The subsequent re issues , continued with some of the Advanced customizing parts removed and was a decent replica of a 64 Impala until the Revell piece came out . The Revell Impala has an opening trunk, nice chassis detail and makes for a very nice stocker . Revell did several re issues as "Low Riders " too. You need to watch these if you want a stocker . AMT retained a lot of the NASCAR stock car racing pieces . you need to determine if this is your preferred route . Both depict the 409 engine so that is off the table .