Lindberg Dodge 330

[1972coronet]

2 hours ago, Snake45 said:

JoHan did a '64 Dodge 2DS? 

I've only seen the hardtop ; not sure if they made a 'sedan' .  

When I bought the Lindberg version (for the sum of its parts) , I ostensibly gave little-to-no consideration of the Lindberg's proportions ; I only wanted its Slant Six / 727 , and some of its other parts for a planned Slant Six 1968 Fury Patroller .

But , when I did peruse the kit's contents , I did find that the body didn't look right , but gave it no consideration beyond that .

[StevenGuthmiller]

I'm not the type of guy who generally gives much attention to accuracy claims.

If I like the subject matter, I'll build it as a rule.

What puzzled me more than the inaccuracy of the kit itself was the absence of any acknowledgement of the inaccuracies.

I surely cannot be among the first to notice these issues, especially in light of the fact that I don't even own one.

 

Steve

[StevenGuthmiller]

38 minutes ago, gtx6970 said:

IMO,,,, No model kit is perfect. Someone can find fault in ANY kit.

 

To me the biggest issue this kit has is the cowl area at the base of the windshield is bowed up to much.

Otherwise I personally don't see much issue with it. I look in my display case and see a decent representation of a 1964 Dodge 2 door sedan . And for that I call it good

There are few kits that I would not buy or build because of egregious issues with proportion.

Most of them I can overlook.

This is not one of them.

The front fender trim alone is enough to kill it for me.

Especially since there are other '64 Dodge options.

 

Steve

[ZTony8]

I noticed that the forward tip of the front fender slopes down on the model but not on the real car. And now that I study things on the model the more I see wrong. Oh well.

[Robberbaron]

When the Moebius '65 Belvedere sedan came out, Tim Boyd did a comparison to several other kit bodies, including the Lindberg Dodge, on his Fotki site.  His comments focused mainly on the roof of the Lindberg:

https://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/new-moebius-65-plym-1/new-moebius-65-plym/?view=roll#2

As for why most of us originally didn't hear too much commentary about the many inaccuracies, I suspect much of it has to do with the original release of this kit occurring before internet usage had become widespread.  I'm sure many people familiar with the 1:1 cars saw the problems instantly, but at the time there wasn't a method to instantly share those observations with thousands of people worldwide, including with comparison photos.

In my opinion, a similar situation has occurred with the AMT 68-69 Roadrunner and GTX kits. Lots of legitimate gripes about the bodies in those kits, but I sure don't remember hearing about those problems when those kits were originally released.

It may also have something to do with the 1:1 subject being a little more uncommon than many other subjects.  While a '64 Dodge 330 may not qualify as a "rare" car, it certainly isn't as common as something like a 67-69 Camaro or Tri-Five Chevy, which you're likely to see at almost any large cruise night.  So I suspect that many people, even if they liked the kit and bought one, might not have been familiar enough with the 1:1 subject to actually spot most of the problems.

[High octane]

7 hours ago, Xingu said:

Looks like it has the same sloping trim as the '58 or maybe the air shocks are a little low.

Has there ever been a scale model made the someone didn't find fault with?

I truly believe that someone would find fault with ANY model kit.  In the beginning the promos that were given to possible buyers of the real car were supposed to be a "likeness" of the real thing and not an EXACT replica. Then came the 3 in 1 kits that were for the enjoyment of kids, both pre-teens and teenagers. As the years went by the model car kits got better to some extent but were never claimed to be 100% accurate. In order for a kit to be 100% accurate it would cost thousands of dollars more to engineer and tool and the kits themselves would be too pricey to market and for the manufacturers to come out ahead.

So we have what we have and I personally enjoy model car building and don't lose any sleep over whether the kit is 100% accurate, and I don't want to build my kits at the level either. It's a hobby and supposed to be FUN and I don't want to spend years of my time making this kit or that kit an EXACT replica.

[ChrisBcritter]

I picked up one of the first issues of this kit around 2000 or thereabouts; what caught my eye first was the shape of the cowl and windshield being too flat. IIRC, there were some writeups in either Scale Auto or Model Car Journal about the problem - or I might have had a phone chat with Dennis Doty; not sure. I ended up buying a Jo-Han '64 Dodge for the cowl and windshield, but I got rid of both before doing anything with them. I frankly expected Lindberg to fix the problems with it - after all, they retooled their '61 Impala to fix its many issues - but they never did.

I guess if I really wanted to bother, I'd put a roof from the Jo-Han '63 Plymouth on the Jo-Han '64 Dodge, scratchbuild the B-pillars and window frames, and use the guts from the Lindberg '64 Dodge.

Edited May 14, 2018 by ChrisBcritter

[StevenGuthmiller]

57 minutes ago, High octane said:

I truly believe that someone would find fault with ANY model kit.  In the beginning the promos that were given to possible buyers of the real car were supposed to be a "likeness" of the real thing and not an EXACT replica. Then came the 3 in 1 kits that were for the enjoyment of kids, both pre-teens and teenagers. As the years went by the model car kits got better to some extent but were never claimed to be 100% accurate. In order for a kit to be 100% accurate it would cost thousands of dollars more to engineer and tool and the kits themselves would be too pricey to market and for the manufacturers to come out ahead.

So we have what we have and I personally enjoy model car building and don't lose any sleep over whether the kit is 100% accurate, and I don't want to build my kits at the level either. It's a hobby and supposed to be FUN and I don't want to spend years of my time making this kit or that kit an EXACT replica.

I am by no means a stickler for 100% accuracy either.

I know that nearly every model kit, whether old or new, probably has some issues, and I am not a crusader for perfect replicas.

I, like you, will usually figure that if a model is an acceptable "recreation" of a particular car, I will settle & live with it.

Even a kit like the AMT '58 Plymouth's obvious problems are not particularly noticeable to someone who is not hugely familiar with the body design, and even knowing what I know about it now, I would still purchase & build another one.

I could very likely overlook nearly all of the inconsistencies with this '64 Dodge kit, but that front fender trim that bows upward making the front end of the car look like a banana is just one step too far for me.

Even though I have almost zero familiarity with this particular car, that mistake was so obvious to me when I first saw it that I would never be able to live with it.

I guess that we all have different thresholds when it comes to this sort of thing, but this is just one that I wouldn't be able to abide.

 

Steve 

[PARTSMARTY]

15 hours ago, restoman said:

Yeah, it is pretty awful, but like most Mopar guys, we only see what it represents and what used to be.

The '64 Dodge is very high on my "what I would buy if I won the Lottery" list, and the odds of winning that are slim, so I'll settle for the inaccuracies of the Lindberg kit.

x-actly

[PARTSMARTY]

7 hours ago, High octane said:

I truly believe that someone would find fault with ANY model kit.  In the beginning the promos that were given to possible buyers of the real car were supposed to be a "likeness" of the real thing and not an EXACT replica. Then came the 3 in 1 kits that were for the enjoyment of kids, both pre-teens and teenagers. As the years went by the model car kits got better to some extent but were never claimed to be 100% accurate. In order for a kit to be 100% accurate it would cost thousands of dollars more to engineer and tool and the kits themselves would be too pricey to market and for the manufacturers to come out ahead.

So we have what we have and I personally enjoy model car building and don't lose any sleep over whether the kit is 100% accurate, and I don't want to build my kits at the level either. It's a hobby and supposed to be FUN and I don't want to spend years of my time making this kit or that kit an EXACT replica.

Right on Nick-let's enjoy-i have several 330 models !!!

Edited May 14, 2018 by PARTSMARTY

[gtx6970]

9 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

There are few kits that I would not buy or build because of egregious issues with proportion.

Most of them I can overlook.

This is not one of them.

The front fender trim alone is enough to kill it for me.

Especially since there are other '64 Dodge options.

 

Steve

Steve,

I hope you didn't take this as a personal jab at you (trust me,  it wasn't honest )

it was more a generalization of the hobby as a whole .

 

Take the current Moebius 1965 Plymouth. With the leading edge of the roof looks like it has a fat upper upper lip. Or the Revell 1970 Cuda with its exaggerated wheel lip moldings.

I may try to fix such issues if I feel the need . BUT,,,,,

As Ive grown older Ive  learned to accept faults with most kits today and move on , especially if its a subject i like. And being a huge fan of the early 60s super stocks I have loads of the this particular model. With zero intentions of ever fixing said inaccuracies.

Kudos to those who do though.

 

 

[High octane]

8 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I am by no means a stickler for 100% accuracy either.

I know that nearly every model kit, whether old or new, probably has some issues, and I am not a crusader for perfect replicas.

I, like you, will usually figure that if a model is an acceptable "recreation" of a particular car, I will settle & live with it.

Even a kit like the AMT '58 Plymouth's obvious problems are not particularly noticeable to someone who is not hugely familiar with the body design, and even knowing what I know about it now, I would still purchase & build another one.

I could very likely overlook nearly all of the inconsistencies with this '64 Dodge kit, but that front fender trim that bows upward making the front end of the car look like a banana is just one step too far for me.

Even though I have almost zero familiarity with this particular car, that mistake was so obvious to me when I first saw it that I would never be able to live with it.

I guess that we all have different thresholds when it comes to this sort of thing, but this is just one that I wouldn't be able to abide.

 

Steve 

It is SO right to have our own opinions and feelings about certain model kits, and how much or how little we care about correcting the inaccuracies. This is a hobby and to me should not be like work, where one has to be there, has to sweat, has to get it done, etc. Enjoy the hobby in the way you know best.

[StevenGuthmiller]

12 hours ago, gtx6970 said:

Steve,

I hope you didn't take this as a personal jab at you (trust me,  it wasn't honest )

it was more a generalization of the hobby as a whole .

Absolutely not Bill!

I always try very hard not to take anything said on the forum personally.

I figure that this is a "forum" and is here for the sole purpose of discussion.......so, let's discuss.

 

Well guys, I guess I've said my piece.

If nothing else, I suppose that this discussion has served to enlighten a few more people to another badly proportioned model kit foisted upon us.

Like that is some sort of surprise!

 

Happy modeling all!!

 

Steve