Two Iconic ( and all we have ) kits with terrible chassis

[StevenGuthmiller]

4 minutes ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

That's what makes this hobby interesting, so much history, so much variety, so many styles.

If all the kits required a master builder to complete, that would become a detriment to newer builders just like simple kits are mundane to an experienced builder. But sometimes we all just want a break from the mega parts count, tax your eyesight and mental capabilities required for an enthusiast kit. Simple kits can be detailed out if you want them, that's why we are called "builders" and not "assemblers". It's the amount of creative input that you choose to improve the kit with. 

As for me, I'm just happy if the details and proportions that kit does include are accurate. The rest is up to me.

I couldn't agree more.

Besides, we all have seen how inconsistent some of the proportions have been on the bodies of a lot of the newly tooled kits.

I'll take a correctly proportioned old body over a detailed new chassis all day long!!!

 

Steve

[gtx6970]

46 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I couldn't agree more.

Besides, we all have seen how inconsistent some of the proportions have been on the bodies of a lot of the newly tooled kits.

I'll take a correctly proportioned old body over a detailed new chassis all day long!!!

 

Steve

EXACTLY

 

For an example. Take the original MPC 1970 Cuda kit. Body proportions were nearly dead on.,,,although the  chassis and engine compartment details left a lot to be desired to many. Compared to  the current Revell 1970 Cuda and no one can  tell me that  the older MPC kit just  doesnt 'look' better

[StevenGuthmiller]

18 minutes ago, gtx6970 said:

EXACTLY

 

For an example. Take the original MPC 1970 Cuda kit. Body proportions were nearly dead on.,,,although the  chassis and engine compartment details left a lot to be desired to many. Compared to  the current Revell 1970 Cuda and no one can  tell me that  the older MPC kit just  doesnt 'look' better

Recently, I was on a bit of a rant on the Lindberg '64 Dodge kits.

Exactly the same contrast between that kit & the Johan kits.

Although they are not the exact same body style, there is no comparison between the two.

Give me the slab chassis Johan kit!

 

Steve

[Snake45]

2 hours ago, gtx6970 said:

EXACTLY

 

For an example. Take the original MPC 1970 Cuda kit. Body proportions were nearly dead on.,,,although the  chassis and engine compartment details left a lot to be desired to many. Compared to  the current Revell 1970 Cuda and no one can  tell me that  the older MPC kit just  doesnt 'look' better

I couldn't agree with you and Steve more. 

[Lizard Racing]

I would have to agree with all the comments.  I have been working on AMT Corvettes since '63.  When I was 15, the detail was OK. But now the primitive kits seem SO primitive.

[Sledsel]

I personally do not mind the simplified chassis. These are really nice looking kits and pretty darn accurate body-wise. I'll take an accurate body over a detailed chassis any day.

 

[Greg Myers]

So what I'm seeing here is the acceptance of  a sub par "Promo" style chassis , and yet on so many other threads, members bemoan the fact that one thing or another is wrong and the ki should be reengineered. 

And this on two very iconic cars, yet we continually get remakes of so many other popular cars with more modern kits with multiple part chassis.

I get the feeling that in our old age so many of us are getting lazy in our build styles. Good enough at ten feet, no one will see the bottom.

And yet on another thread members are bemoaning the fact that pictures are so often being taking at an "Unrealistic" view from above.

Oh, and let's not forget, " A good modeler can throw down the price of  another kit" to remedy the situation, with kit prices already hovering at $30 !

[Snake45]

51 minutes ago, Greg Myers said:

So what I'm seeing here is the acceptance of  a sub par "Promo" style chassis , and yet on so many other threads, members bemoan the fact that one thing or another is wrong and the ki should be reengineered. 

And this on two very iconic cars, yet we continually get remakes of so many other popular cars with more modern kits with multiple part chassis.

I get the feeling that in our old age so many of us are getting lazy in our build styles. Good enough at ten feet, no one will see the bottom.

And yet on another thread members are bemoaning the fact that pictures are so often being taking at an "Unrealistic" view from above.

Yup, you've got it. And? 

Oh, and my only complaint with the AMT '66 Mustang is that they don't still offer it with the fastback body too (it became the AWB funny car, sadly). 

The Monogram '65-'66 Mustangs are fine kits, but they're 1/24, not 1/25. Not that I won't keep buying and building them anyway, y'unnerstand. 

Edited May 26, 2018 by Snake45

[Greg Myers]

Just had to bring that up didn't you Snake ?

Love those 1/24th Monogram Mustangs, Fastback, GT, Shelby GT350, GT350 race version, Convertible, Notchback (Coupe) . . . NOT ! 

Why'd they stop ? 

Where's the Coupe ?

Edited May 26, 2018 by Greg Myers

[StevenGuthmiller]

2 hours ago, Greg Myers said:

So what I'm seeing here is the acceptance of  a sub par "Promo" style chassis , and yet on so many other threads, members bemoan the fact that one thing or another is wrong and the ki should be reengineered. 

And this on two very iconic cars, yet we continually get remakes of so many other popular cars with more modern kits with multiple part chassis.

I get the feeling that in our old age so many of us are getting lazy in our build styles. Good enough at ten feet, no one will see the bottom.

And yet on another thread members are bemoaning the fact that pictures are so often being taking at an "Unrealistic" view from above.

Oh, and let's not forget, " A good modeler can throw down the price of  another kit" to remedy the situation, with kit prices already hovering at $30 !

All I can tell you is to wish in one hand, and defecate in the other & see which one fills up faster!

We can't expect that every "iconic" car, (and there are a boat load of them) is going to be revisited with brand new tooling just because some of us would like it, especially with the condition that the kit companies are in today.

Personally, I have very little interest in either one of these cars & would likely not buy them even with new chassis.

As a matter of fact, I was not even aware of what type of chassis these kits had!

So you see, not everyone is going to be as enthusiastic about your choices, or mine, or anyone elses, and the kit producers will not plow headlong into a new tooling until they are assured that they will sell.

As far as those "horrible chassis" go, as far as I'm concerned, they are not the be all, end all of a model.

I've gotten some pretty positive feedback & have won several awards for old kits that have those chassis.

I'll probably never win a "best in show" at one of the big contests, but seriously, ask me if I care!

They look great to me sitting on my shelf & I get lots of comments on them, so who cares about chassis!

 

Steve 

 

[Greg Myers]

"We can't expect that every "iconic" car, (and there are a boat load of them) is going to be revisited with brand new tooling just because some of us would like it, especially with the condition that the kit companies are in today.

Personally, I have very little interest in either one of these cars & would likely not buy them even with new chassis.

As a matter of fact, I was not even aware of what type of chassis these kits had!

So you see, not everyone is going to be as enthusiastic about your choices, or mine, or anyone elses, and the kit producers will not plow headlong into a new tooling until they are assured that they will sell.

As far as those "horrible chassis" go, as far as I'm concerned, they are not the be all, end all of a model."

Pretty much the stock answer one gets with most of these threads, except you missed the part about the experienced modeler could fashion his own detailed chassis from scratch or purchase a donner kit and use just the chassis.

And those two MOPARS are very worthy .

[MrObsessive]

8 minutes ago, Greg Myers said:

Pretty much the stock answer one gets with most of these threads, except you missed the part about the experienced modeler could fashion his own detailed chassis from scratch or purchase a donner kit and use just the chassis.

And those two MOPARS are very worthy .

Yup! I'm one of those that does care about what's underneath............just one of my "Obsessions" in this hobby I suppose among other things.

The Shelby I'm working on has really tested my patience when it came to the chassis and suspension details as there was NOTHING that came close to what that IRS looked like. FINALLY I got it done, so I've moved on to the interior, and yup............gotta scratchbuild some things for that too!

Such is the fun in this hobby!

[StevenGuthmiller]

38 minutes ago, Greg Myers said:

Pretty much the stock answer one gets with most of these threads, except you missed the part about the experienced modeler could fashion his own detailed chassis from scratch or purchase a donner kit and use just the chassis.

And those two MOPARS are very worthy .

Well, that makes perfect sense because I'm a pretty "stock" kind of guy!

I'm just being realistic in my realization that most of these old kits are never going to be re-tooled or improved & either we need to find our own ways to improve upon them, or learn to live with them.

I, for one, will not rule out building a great old AMT or MPC Pontiac Bonneville kit just because there is no suitable chassis for them.

There has not been a new tool full sized Poncho kit tooled since 1970 & everyone of them has a slab chassis.

The only option for a modern tool chassis to go under them is either the AMT '62 Catalina, or the Moebius '61.

I have resigned myself to the fact that the likelihood of a new tool '58-'70 Bonneville kit being released in my lifetime are virtually non existent, so rather than pretend that these wonderful old kits don't exist, I will learn to live with what is available.

 

Steve 

[OldTrucker]

On 5/18/2018 at 12:55 AM, Sledsel said:

I personally do not mind the simplified chassis. These are really nice looking kits and pretty darn accurate body-wise. I'll take an accurate body over a detailed chassis any day.

 

That is true but I take these kits for what they were and are and build them the best I can as is.

I look at it as a trip back in time when things were slower and we wern't as detail obsessed as we are now with the kits! We were just happy to have the kits of cool cars to build!

Some times now I will try and improve by kit bashing on some but it seems to take the fun out of building at times! Becomes more like.....dare I say it??? WORK!

[MrObsessive]

1 minute ago, OldTrucker said:

Some times now I will try and improve by kit bashing on some but it seems to take the fun out of building at times! Becomes more like.....dare I say it??? WORK!

That's true to an extent...........but you can always stop when you want and come back to it later. Can't do that on the job though as that can be firing time!

[StevenGuthmiller]

1 hour ago, MrObsessive said:

Yup! I'm one of those that does care about what's underneath............just one of my "Obsessions" in this hobby I suppose among other things.

The Shelby I'm working on has really tested my patience when it came to the chassis and suspension details as there was NOTHING that came close to what that IRS looked like. FINALLY I got it done, so I've moved on to the interior, and yup............gotta scratchbuild some things for that too!

Such is the fun in this hobby!

And we all have different expectations from the hobby.

Some of us need everything to be perfect to meet our expectations, & some of us have lesser expectations.

I for one just strive to recreate a "reasonable representation" of a particular subject.

As my father would say, "that's good enough for the girls that I go with".

 

Steve

[Oldcarfan27]

3 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

As far as those "horrible chassis" go, as far as I'm concerned, they are not the be all, end all of a model.

I've gotten some pretty positive feedback & have won several awards for old kits that have those chassis.

I'll probably never win a "best in show" at one of the big contests, but seriously, ask me if I care!

They look great to me sitting on my shelf & I get lots of comments on them, so who cares about chassis!

 

Steve 

 

Looking at these two rare, unobtainable trophy winners - and can I tell they have flat, promo chassis? Only if you tell me they do.

Now am I going to reach over there and pick them up to check that they have a basic chassis? Not if I don't want to lose an arm!

Point made!?

[StevenGuthmiller]

27 minutes ago, Oldcarfan27 said:

Looking at these two rare, unobtainable trophy winners - and can I tell they have flat, promo chassis? Only if you tell me they do.

Now am I going to reach over there and pick them up to check that they have a basic chassis? Not if I don't want to lose an arm!

Point made!?

The '60 Dodge is a complete curbside build.

I did embellish the engine compartment a bit on the Chrysler to give the illusion of a more detailed model.

I removed the screw posts, opened the grille with some mesh & added various panels & pieces to upgrade it a bit, but the engine itself & the chassis are all Johan.

 

Steve

 

[Oldcarfan27]

19 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

The '60 Dodge is a complete curbside build.

I did embellish the engine compartment a bit on the Chrysler to give the illusion of a more detailed model.

I removed the screw posts, opened the grille with some mesh & added various panels & pieces to upgrade it a bit, but the engine itself & the chassis are all Johan.

 

Steve

 

Simple and looks great!

[unclescott58]

Congratulations again Steven. Your work is always fantastic. Sorry I didn't see or get to talk to you again at this year's NNL North. Another great show. 

 

[StevenGuthmiller]

4 hours ago, unclescott58 said:

Congratulations again Steven. Your work is always fantastic. Sorry I didn't see or get to talk to you again at this year's NNL North. Another great show.

I caught a glimpse of you there Scott, but I never got a chance to talk to you.

You must have bugged out early.

A great showing this year.

I heard someone say that there were over 400 models on display!

I didn't do as well this year, but I did manage a "peoples choice" for my '58 Ford convertible.

Can't win them all I guess!

 

Steve

Edited May 27, 2018 by StevenGuthmiller

[unclescott58]

3 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I caught a glimpse of you there Scott, but I never got a chance to talk to you.

You must have bugged out early.

A great showing this year.

I heard someone say that there were over 400 models on display!

I didn't do as well this year, but I did manage a "peoples choice" for my '58 Ford convertible.

Can't win them all I guess!

 

Steve

I did bug out early. I had Buick Club banquet to go to at 2. Sorry we missed each other. We need to make a point to say hi to each other next time.

[StevenGuthmiller]

34 minutes ago, unclescott58 said:

I did bug out early. I had Buick Club banquet to go to at 2. Sorry we missed each other. We need to make a point to say hi to each other next time.

I will look for you next year!

 

Steve

[Greg Myers]

Can't wait 

[Oldcarfan27]

23 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

There has not been a new tool full sized Poncho kit tooled since 1970 & everyone of them has a slab chassis.

The only option for a modern tool chassis to go under them is either the AMT '62 Catalina, or the Moebius '61.

I have resigned myself to the fact that the likelihood of a new tool '58-'70 Bonneville kit being released in my lifetime are virtually non existent, so rather than pretend that these wonderful old kits don't exist, I will learn to live with what is available.

 

Steve 

I'm confused, you stated there hasn't been a full size Pontiac since 1970, then you also acknowledged the 61 and 62 new tools. And don't forget the Trumpeteer 60.

Donor chassis for any 62 - 70s could also be the new tool Impalas, of which there are many!

Always remember, GM was king of "badge engineering", and underneath the skin, a lot of their cousins shared components. Especially chassis frames.

So if you DO want to improve those cars, you do have choices.

The fact that there have been new full size Pontiacs kitted at all, means we shouldn't give up hope.

I'd personally like to see the 67 - 69s again.