News of Revell molding preparing in US

[Snake45]

1 hour ago, Rob Hall said:

Would be nice..

Is that a phantom or "tribute"? Couple tipoffs that it's not genuine....

[Robberbaron]

Well, since I recently got a Modelhaus recast of the original AMT '69 Chevelle bumper and taillights, along with their '68 conversion kit, I'll claim my share of the credit for new tool '68 and '69 Chevelles getting developed! ?

However, I'd also caution everyone not to get too ahead of themselves as far as expectations. It seems like old Revell had about a 50/50 track record over the last decade or so as far as accuracy/proportions of new tool kits.  Seemed like for every well done kit such as the '50 Olds or '70 Charger, we'd also get hot messes like the Mustang LX and the '67 Camaro.

If the '68 Chevelle made it to the test shot phase before the Hobbico meltdown, I'd say it's even odds whether the basic shape and details are accurate.  However, since the Revell USA development team was vaporized, has new Revell (Germany) found somebody competent to step in, iron out the details, and shepherd it to completion?  This may be a good test of their capabilities with new tool American subject matter.  Lucky for them, old Revell set the bar pretty low.

Also lucky for them, the old AMT '69 Chevelle also sets the bar pretty low for the subject matter  As it stands now, you can't build a presentable model out of the box with that kit due to the birth defect taillights that were grafted onto the bumper in the mid-70s.  So if Revell can make decent looking '68 and '69 Chevelle shelf models, they'll have a happy customer here.  I don't even care if they simplify the dirty bits, as long as it looks correct sitting on the shelf.

[Snake45]

11 minutes ago, Robberbaron said:

Well, since I recently got a Modelhaus recast of the original AMT '69 Chevelle bumper and taillights, along with their '68 conversion kit, I'll claim my share of the credit for new tool '68 and '69 Chevelles getting developed! ?

However, I'd also caution everyone not to get too ahead of themselves as far as expectations. It seems like old Revell had about a 50/50 track record over the last decade or so as far as accuracy/proportions of new tool kits.  Seemed like for every well done kit such as the '50 Olds or '70 Charger, we'd also get hot messes like the Mustang LX and the '67 Camaro.

If the '68 Chevelle made it to the test shot phase before the Hobbico meltdown, I'd say it's even odds whether the basic shape and details are accurate.  However, since the Revell USA development team was vaporized, has new Revell (Germany) found somebody competent to step in, iron out the details, and shepherd it to completion?  This may be a good test of their capabilities with new tool American subject matter.  Lucky for them, old Revell set the bar pretty low.

Also lucky for them, the old AMT '69 Chevelle also sets the bar pretty low for the subject matter  As it stands now, you can't build a presentable model out of the box with that kit due to the birth defect taillights that were grafted onto the bumper in the mid-70s.  So if Revell can make decent looking '68 and '69 Chevelle shelf models, they'll have a happy customer here.  I don't even care if they simplify the dirty bits, as long as it looks correct sitting on the shelf.

I could have written every word of that post, especially the first two paragraphs. Robberbaron, if you and I were to actually BUILD our Modelhaus-parts '68 and '69 Chevelles, that would seal the deal! 

[Rob Hall]

14 minutes ago, Snake45 said:

Is that a phantom or "tribute"? Couple tipoffs that it's not genuine....

Who knows...just googled and found a pic.  A Chevelle w Yenko stripes...

[Rob Hall]

1 minute ago, Snake45 said:

I could have written every word of that post, especially the first two paragraphs. Robberbaron, if you and I were to actually BUILD our Modelhaus-parts '68 and '69 Chevelles, that would seal the deal! 

I have the Modelhaus ‘68 conversion kit and an original 68 box, but the ‘68 Chevelle annual is one of the few late 60s AMT annuals I don’t have. 

[Exotics_Builder]

6 hours ago, Casey said:

Although a '68 (and potential future '69) Chevelle SS doesn't tickle my fancy, it's good to hear new tooling automotive kits were in the works. Hopefully this new '68 Chevelle is much like the '72 Olds Cutlass design and parts layout-wise.

A 68 would tickle mine.  Although a 68 Z/28 more so as I owned one.  And I got the Modelhaus conversion kit about 3 years back.

 

Edited August 16, 2018 by Exotics_Builder

[Robberbaron]

1 hour ago, Snake45 said:

I could have written every word of that post, especially the first two paragraphs. Robberbaron, if you and I were to actually BUILD our Modelhaus-parts '68 and '69 Chevelles, that would seal the deal! 

Uh oh, let's hope just buying the parts is enough to conjure new tools into existence.  If it depends on me actually finishing a build, we might all be doomed!!! ?

[Casey]

On 8/15/2018 at 7:31 AM, Jordan White said:

Dang, I must have missed that. Too bad they couldn't have given it stock style wheels.

Are the wheels in the AMT Escalade EXT the same?:

[Jordan White]

Yeah they would be the same, so at least there is a source. 

[Rob Hall]

The AMT kit had stock wheels and tires, the Revell kit had two sets of custom wheels, IIRC.

[Motor City]

The problem with a lot newer kits is the emblems are not engraved, so you are expected to affix decals.  It would be much better to have the emblems engraved so the end user can sand them off if not wanted.  Examples of this are the AMT '69 H/O, and the Revell '50 Olds 88 and '72 H/O convertible, and the Lindberg '64 Belvedere.   

[Justin Porter]

19 minutes ago, Motor City said:

The problem with a lot newer kits is the emblems are not engraved, so you are expected to affix decals.  It would be much better to have the emblems engraved so the end user can sand them off if not wanted.  Examples of this are the AMT '69 H/O, and the Revell '50 Olds 88 and '72 H/O convertible, and the Lindberg '64 Belvedere.   

I'd disagree and say that model car companies should take their cue from armor and aircraft kits and provide a choice of decal or P/E. If you look inside the box of an Eduard Profipack 1/48th or even 1/72nd scale airplane kit I swear you'll see just how gypped auto builders really are!

[SfanGoch]

It'd be nice to see more engine compartment and data plate decals. 

Also, designing the kits to be more accurate in terms of replicating the construction of the actual vehicles would be a plus. I don't care about large parts counts. I'm used to that building armor. Say what you want about Trumpeter's '60 Bonnrvilles; but, their chassis are spot on replicas of the real thing.

[Bainford]

1 hour ago, Motor City said:

The problem with a lot newer kits is the emblems are not engraved, so you are expected to affix decals.  It would be much better to have the emblems engraved so the end user can sand them off if not wanted. .   

I agree 100%. This trend of not engraving emblems and badges on the body tooling is very worrisome. Anyone for whom realism is a goal, PE rarely looks right, and decals are a pathetic representation of badges or scripts. Good clean molded in scripts and badges with sharp relief can be made to represent 1:1 items very nicely, much better than any other method I've seen or tried yet, with the exception of some well done metal transfers, but those are expensive and will not likely be seen in kits such as marketed by Revell (and they are easy to screw up).

[StevenGuthmiller]

19 minutes ago, Bainford said:

I agree 100%. This trend of not engraving emblems and badges on the body tooling is very worrisome. Anyone for whom realism is a goal, PE rarely looks right, and decals are a pathetic representation of badges or scripts. Good clean molded in scripts and badges with sharp relief can be made to represent 1:1 items very nicely, much better than any other method I've seen or tried yet, with the exception of some well done metal transfers, but those are expensive and will not likely be seen in kits such as marketed by Revell (and they are easy to screw up).

I agree.

I am not a fan of decals in place of scripts.

On occasion, they can be useful, but I would much rather have the option of using the decals & not be forced to.

As far as PE scripts go, it's not likely you will see a lot of them in car kits given the sobbing about kit prices that we see on a regular basis.

 

Steve

[StevenGuthmiller]

 

I wholeheartedly agree!

I have been using some of "Speedway Decals" "Mini Sheet" stuff for my builds.

They come in very handy, especially when you're building old kits with no decals.

 

Steve

 

 

Edited August 17, 2018 by StevenGuthmiller

[Bucky]

17 hours ago, Motor City said:

If any cars cry to be made in multiple versions, it would be: 

'70-'72 GS and GSX

'68 and '69 Cyclone GT, '69 Spoiler, '69 Spoiler II

'72-'76 Ranchero GT or Squire

'77-'79 Ranchero GT

'73-'77 El Camino or GMC Sprint

These are no-brainers!  Of course, all would be 1/25th scale.

These are all great ideas.

Another new tool I'd like to see is a '59 Buick hardtop or convertible.

I'd also like to see a '75-'77 Chrysler Cordoba, Dodge Charger, and the '78-'79 Dodge Magnum.

If the '68 Chevelle is produced, I'll do my best to grab one.

[Luc Janssens]

1 hour ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I agree.

I am not a fan of decals in place of scripts.

On occasion, they can be useful, but I would much rather have the option of using the decals & not be forced to.

As far as PE scripts go, it's not likely you will see a lot of them in car kits given the sobbing about kit prices that we see on a regular basis.

 

Steve

I’m not a fan of P/E too much of a hassle, metal transfers like Tamiya and Hasegawa use is IMHO the best way to replicate scripts.

[martinfan5]

58 minutes ago, Luc Janssens said:

I’m not a fan of P/E too much of a hassle, metal transfers like Tamiya and Hasegawa use is IMHO the best way to replicate scripts.

And the winner is.

[martinfan5]

Whoops, double post

Edited August 16, 2018 by martinfan5

[Justin Porter]

Agreed. The metal transfer Alfa Romeo script on the deck of my Giulia was such a lovely thing to add plus it meant the decklid could be more easily wet sanded.

[OldNYJim]

On 8/15/2018 at 4:53 PM, Dave Van said:

Let's hope.....many could care less about the TD stuff....but I still enjoy....thx

Me too!  They've got my $$$ if they reissue ANY of that stuff - even if I've got it already I'll pick up extras to support them

[ChrisBcritter]

Too bad the proposed '57 Ranchero didn't make the cut; I know it was a dead issue before but I was hoping for a miracle... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[niteowl7710]

2 hours ago, ChrisBcritter said:

Too bad the proposed '57 Ranchero didn't make the cut; I know it was a dead issue before but I was hoping for a miracle... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well you have to remember in the era we're in the vast majority of a kit's life span is built into it from Day 1. All the tooling is cut at one time, and then they just run the inserts and tooling blocks needed for a given project. The Moebius F Series is a prime example of that, if you remember far enough back someone accidentally posted test shots way back before the first kits were even issued that showed the 4x4 parts. Meaning those pieces have existed since 2014 and have just taken over 4 years to finally land on the shelf.

Long story short, if Revell ever planned to make a Ranchero out of this, it would have been decided back in 2011 before the kit was ever tooled so everything could be interchangeable. It's up to the new ownership to decide if they want to run the tooling in that configuration.

[250 Testa Rossa]

Hopefully they bring back the Monogram 1/24 '65 GT350 again.