I blame Tim Boyd...

[Matt Bacon]

I don't build American cars, on the whole. OK, I have a Moebius Chrysler 300 and a Revell 2014 Corvette and an AMT 50th Camaro and a Cobra in the cabinet, but... I don't build American cars. Oh, and I have a couple of 67/8 Camaros and a Viper SRT-10 and a Mustang GT350H and a Revell 58 'vette and an Accurate Miniatures Grand Sport and a Moebius Hudson Hornet in the stash. But, anyway, I don't build American cars. Except now I have read Tim's excellent "Muscle Car Model Kits". And my stash seems to be lacking in some areas, I'll admit. So I made a little list of kits I should maybe get. The key criteria are very good kits of cars that I actually quite like the look of, and this is what I came up with:

• AMT 53 Studebaker Starliner
• Revell 66 Pontiac GTO
• Monogram 69 Pontiac GTO "the Judge"
• Lindberg 66 Chevelle SS
• Revell 68 Charger R/T
• Revell 68 Firebird 400
• Revell 65 Foose Chevy Impala (de-Foosed)
• Revell 67 Corvette
• AMT 70 Corvette LT1
• AMT 70 1/2 Baldwin Motion Camaro

(I already have a Monogram 70 Boss Mustang 329 and a Revel 70 Torino GT on the way...)

I'd quite like a 70ish Challenger, and can someone tell me if the Revell Daytona Charger comes with the parts to build it without the nosecone and wing? ;-P

So, what's missing from my shopping list? The most important criteria is an excellent, highly-detailed, accurate kit. After that it's "Do I like this car?" Which is, unfortunately, where a lot of new Moebius kits fall down: I'm just not excited by a Satellite, Belvedere, Comet or Ranger...

Any advice and suggestions very welcome!

And Tim? That's one of the most expensive books I've ever bought... ;-P

All the best,

M.

 

[1972coronet]

Tim's work has been a major influence on me for more than thirty years . Some day  I'll buy his book ...

RE : 1969 Daytona : You're better off buying a regular 1969 R/T , as the Daytona (and its 1970 relative , the SuperBird) are extensively modified , both the "1:1" and the kits . Unless you're wanting the flush backlight / aerodynamic roof of the Daytona model (which was exclusive to the '500' and the 'Daytona')  , you'd be dollars --and work-- ahead by simply buying the R/T .

[Snake45]

  On 6/24/2018 at 10:00 PM, Matt Bacon said:

•  
• Revell 67 Corvette

 

Expand  

The coupe is fine, but the front fenders of the roadster are a misshapen mess. If you want a Sting Ray roadster, and can live with a curbside, get the Revell '63 snapper, which is lovely. 

Another one that should be on your list is at least one of the Revell '68 or '69 Corvettes. The 8 is a roadster and the 9 is the coupe. Better yet, get one of each! 

[MrObsessive]

  On 6/24/2018 at 10:51 PM, Snake45 said:

The coupe is fine, but the front fenders of the roadster are a misshapen mess. If you want a Sting Ray roadster, and can live with a curbside, get the Revell '63 snapper, which is lovely. 

Another one that should be on your list is at least one of the Revell '68 or '69 Corvettes. The 8 is a roadster and the 9 is the coupe. Better yet, get one of each! 

Expand  

I built the convertible many years ago, and I can remember someone saying back then that the front fenders weren't quite right. Not having seen this model in some time (sadly mine is now trashed in a box somewhere), is it that the front fenders are TOO well defined and not as subtle as the coupe?

I have the '67 coupe as well, and I'd like to build that sometime............probably if I build another convertible I'd just kitbash the two.

Edit: Oh yes! I do agree about Revell's 1968-69 Corvette kits! One of their best and a MUST HAVE for anyone into Corvette models! Just goes to show that Revell can get things right on the money if they want if they don't try to compromise.

Edited June 24, 2018 by MrObsessive

[gman]

I blame Tim Boyd for a lot of things...cementing my love for both street rods and models in the 80's (Modeller's Corner in Street Rodder magazine), and then doing so all over again in the "other mag", Model Cars magazine and on both forums with muscle cars. He did and continues to do a lot for the hobby, and I always look forward to seeing content from him and photos of his work.

[Snake45]

  On 6/24/2018 at 11:10 PM, MrObsessive said:

I built the convertible many years ago, and I can remember someone saying back then that the front fenders weren't quite right. Not having seen this model in some time (sadly mine is now trashed in a box somewhere), is it that the front fenders are TOO well defined and not as subtle as the coupe?

 

Expand  

The profile of the humps of the front fenders is completely wrong. They look like porpoises. And the front panel is a bit fat, too. The whole front end of the car looked inflated, like a blow-up beach toy. They fixed this with the '67 coupe and the two '63 snappers, which IMHO have the most accurate C2 bodies ever. (Yes, more accurate than the AMT or MPC.)

Yes, if you want a nice '67 roadster, the easiest way to do it is to kitbash the roadster and coupe. Personally, I'd cut off the coupe's top and graft in the roadster's deck. And while I was at it, I'd widen the whole rear end by an inch or or two--I think the AMT hard top would fit pretty well if this were done. 

[Snake45]

Oh, Matt, two more must-haves for your list are the Revell '67 Chevelle SS396 (a wonderfully easy build, too), and one of the Revell '69 Camaros--Yenko, Z/28 or convertible, take your pick. 

[randyc]

I got the book last week and am happily going through and remembering a LOT of kits from my youth.   And I always look forward to his articles.   I have built every kit on the OPs list except the 69 GTO.   And they are pretty much all "must haves", even if you don't build American cars.  

 

 

[Jantrix]

The 66/67 Charger are MY favorite muscle car, and Revell turned out a terrific kit of the '67. If the car suits you (admittedly not everyone gets it) , I do recommend it.

Looks like you do build American cars. 

[samdiego]

I owe Tim an apology from many, many years ago. Hopefully the thing has never crossed his mind and isn't anywhere on his radar so I'm not going to elaborate. But I can blame him for many hours of model history and reviews. Thanks Tim, for the press you've given me, for being with us  and for your contributions to this great hobby

Edited June 25, 2018 by samdiego

[Anglia105E]

I also do not build American cars, but I would very much like to. Due to the nature of my subject, which is a 1958 Rolls-Royce diorama, all my builds have to fit not only the period but the type of cars that you would expect to see in London, England at that time. I want to build a Pontiac Parisienne, the RHD Canadian version as I used to own the real car some years ago. Also, I like the 1950's Cadillacs and Chevys, and even the Foose cars too. Maybe I will get round to building those wonderful American cars when the diorama project is completed..... the ones that you don't build!

David

[Snake45]

  On 6/25/2018 at 5:25 PM, Anglia105E said:

...all my builds have to fit not only the period but the type of cars that you would expect to see in London, England at that time.

Expand  

Unless you have some laws in England that we don't have in the US, no, they don't. You can take a break and build anything you want to, at any time. You can even build a boat, a tank, or an airplane if the mood strikes you! Amazing but true!

Free your mind and the rest will follow!

[Anglia105E]

You are absolutely right Richard, and currently I have 5 kits lined up for builds, one of which is an Aoshima 1994 Mitsubishi Pajero short wheelbase, to be built as an exact representation of the vehicle that I drive now. Also, I have a resin cast 1960 Ford Anglia 105E that was the very first car I ever owned at the age of 17 years. The other three kits are Talbot-Lago GP, Talbot-Lago Drophead Cabriolet and a 1936 Tamiya Toyoda for an Austin FX3 Taxi conversion.

David

[RancheroSteve]

The AMT '67 Shelby Mustang is a fine kit, if that floats your boat. Excellent mechanical detail in particular, and recently available.