Too bad Round-2 doesn't do modified releases

[Luc Janssens]

 

Cuz this one would be neat?

Photo courtesy of Hemmings

https://www.hemmings.com/classifieds/cars-for-sale/chevrolet/apache/2193580.html?refer=saturday

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by Luc Janssens

[MrObsessive]

That is a good looking truck Luc! I wouldn't mind a kit of that at all!

I thought I'd seen resin conversion kits of this on the 'Bay...........for me better to work in plastic, but when there's no other option?

[oldcarfan]

I've always thought AMT is missing out a chance by not adding variations on the 55-57 Chevy truck. I wouldn't mind seeing the 58 and on versions. The ones I want is the GMC trucks of the same years. It wouldn't require much in the way of additional tooling and it would give them a whole new line to reissue over the years.

[plastic trucker]

Modelhaus did make a resin one.

[Renegade]

Had a light green long bed probably 40 years ago. Count me in if someone makes it.

[Classicgas]

I t would be cool, but more involved than a modification. Entirely new cab, bed and interior. The only carryover I think would be chassis and drive train. Now like mentioned the 55 and 57 GMC would be less involved and very cool.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Classicgas

[Art Anderson]

42 minutes ago, Classicgas said:

I t would be cool, but more involved than a modification. Entirely new cab, bed and interior. The only carryover I think would be chassis and drive train. Now like mentioned the 55 and 57 GMC would be less involved and very cool.

It all depends on the size (dimensions of the original tooling), as if there was never a plan for further model years or versions, it would require another tool base, on which to create the desired GMC, and later versions--thus requiring two molding machines, and additional labor staff--thus meaning a higher cost for such modified reissues at the factory loading dock.

Art

[Aaronw]

8 hours ago, Classicgas said:

I t would be cool, but more involved than a modification. Entirely new cab, bed and interior. The only carryover I think would be chassis and drive train. Now like mentioned the 55 and 57 GMC would be less involved and very cool.

 

I think the stepside stayed the same into the 1960s, and they have a '57 stepside kit. New cab is a given, but that would allow much of the existing kit to be reused.

 

GMC in those years had their own engines. Would be neat if they tooled up a GMC 305 V-6 to go along with the necessary external changes. 

 

Edit, nevermind the V-6 came in 1960. GMC used a Pontiac based V-8 in 1955-59.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Aaronw

[Luc Janssens]

8 hours ago, Art Anderson said:

It all depends on the size (dimensions of the original tooling), as if there was never a plan for further model years or versions, it would require another tool base, on which to create the desired GMC, and later versions--thus requiring two molding machines, and additional labor staff--thus meaning a higher cost for such modified reissues at the factory loading dock.

Art

Indeed but are labor costs really an issue in China?

I remember Round-2 having to run the tool of Amt/Ertl '60 Ford Starliner twice, but each time in a different configuration to crank out a 2'n 1 kit of this subject, and back in the Ertl days, I was told the '70 Coronet was the most expensive tool production wise due to its set-up, yet they did it and still do, but now in China.

Anyway...that's why I'm a big supporter of having a cluster of smaller tools to form a certain subject, each tool having either model specific or common pieces.

Luc

 

Edited November 23, 2018 by Luc Janssens

[disabled modeler]

There are many that Round2 could profit well from if they were reissued in the original or a slightly modified version.  Id love to see some they have not seen the light of day in over 30 years make a comeback myself...and fulfill some dreams I have like others.   Everything has its cost to do but new tooling verses restoring old tooling seems to be the factor most times sadly.

[Luc Janssens]

59 minutes ago, disabled modeler said:

There are many that Round2 could profit well from if they were reissued in the original or a slightly modified version.  Id love to see some they have not seen the light of day in over 30 years make a comeback myself...and fulfill some dreams I have like others.   Everything has its cost to do but new tooling verses restoring old tooling seems to be the factor most times sadly.

Everything has a cost and a projected return on investment, be it in resto, resto-mod, modified siblings or all new tooling.

Right now they're riding the nostalgia train, it's working for them, but personally, I'd like them to have a plan-B as well, I know they can pull it off, they have the right people on board or access to,  I'm pretty sure it's just a matter of the Head honcho Ok'ing it

 

Luc 

 

 

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

Unless R2 gets a different tooling crew than the one that did the recent '36 Ford "restoration", I don't hold out a lot of hope for the quality of anything new.

The ORIGINAL AMT '36 Ford chopped 3-window hit the proportions of THE BEST chop on those cars. Dead on. Perfect. Just right. Fine, fine, fine.

The recent re-release with a newly-tooled chopped top misses by a mile...and I can NOT understand how it's possible.

You have the ORIGINAL part to pull your dimensions from DIRECTLY. No way for scrambles to creep in due to international data transfer, "artistic interpretation", "language barriers" and the myriad other excuses we get for proportion and line faux pas...and STILL, the top looks goofy and fits like dog squeezings.

Glad I got a bunch of the REAL ones years back.

Granted, the recent release has a smokin' set of gorgeous chrome-reverse rims, and tires to go with them.

But that's not the point, is it?

Edited November 23, 2018 by Ace-Garageguy

[dodgefever]

In fairness, their recently tooled wheels and tyres have been quite decent.  That chopped top is pretty bad though.  Let's hope that Sci-Fi stuff makes enough money to allow for some automotive subjects, done properly.

[Art Anderson]

On 11/23/2018 at 2:58 AM, Luc Janssens said:

Indeed but are labor costs really an issue in China?

I remember Round-2 having to run the tool of Amt/Ertl '60 Ford Starliner twice, but each time in a different configuration to crank out a 2'n 1 kit of this subject, and back in the Ertl days, I was told the '70 Coronet was the most expensive tool production wise due to its set-up, yet they did it and still do, but now in China.

Anyway...that's why I'm a big supporter of having a cluster of smaller tools to form a certain subject, each tool having either model specific or common pieces.

Luc

 

Yes, labor costs in China have gone up, and rather dramatically over the past 10 years or so.  At any rate,  a one piece body shell is actually done from a 6-piece tool, that is part of the whole plastic "tree".  The body shell's upper surfaces are cut into the steel tooling as a fixed location, with each body side, the front and rear surfaces being "slides" that when the tool is closed for the injection of molten plastic, then have to slide away from that molded part, before the body can be removed from the "male", or the side of the entire tool that will do the upper and outer parts of the body, along with the rest of the parts tree, as the half of the mold block itself moves away from the molded plastic tree for removal of the entire sprue assembly.  Those tools are hardened steel, which makes retooling virtually impossible.  To do a modified version of that tooling thus would require retooling both sides of the molds, with that becoming a serious cost, what with all the other parts on the tool having to be cut anew as well.  It is my understanding that nowadays, body shells are often cut in a separate tool from the sprue unit that connects all the smaller parts, meaning that a body shell tool can be made anew, apart from the rest of the model kit, but that is a major expense, many thousands of dollars, while the market for the newly-done-version of any kit today is a great deal smaller than what it might have been back 50+ years ago.   Today, many newly tooled model car or truck kits are done in such a way, that any and all parts that require different slides or sections can be done in a separate tool, at about the same cost as the old-fashioned "do-the-kit-in-one-single-large-mold-base" as used to be done.   In short, while you have the cost of all new tooling,  having to run the product in two separate molding machines, which also adds to the cost.  And where back in the 60's, it was very possible to amortize the cost of new 1/25 scale kit in a year or less, today it can take upwards of at least two or three years to just pay for the tooling costs, and of course, the costs of developing that newly done body shell have to be added in as well.  And then the ultimate manufacturer, even though he must pay those tooling costs before production can begin, faces a rather considerable price just for shipping all the way from China, and then across the US from whichever coast the new product arrives, with a considerably longer period of time in which to get back just to break-even.

[Luc Janssens]

1 hour ago, Art Anderson said:

Today, many newly tooled model car or truck kits are done in such a way, that any and all parts that require different slides or sections can be done in a separate tool, at about the same cost as the old-fashioned "do-the-kit-in-one-single-large-mold-base" as used to be done.   In short, while you have the cost of all new tooling,  having to run the product in two separate molding machines, which also adds to the cost.  And where back in the 60's, it was very possible to amortize the cost of new 1/25 scale kit in a year or less, today it can take upwards of at least two or three years to just pay for the tooling costs, and of course, the costs of developing that newly done body shell have to be added in as well.  And then the ultimate manufacturer, even though he must pay those tooling costs before production can begin, faces a rather considerable price just for shipping all the way from China, and then across the US from whichever coast the new product arrives, with a considerably longer period of time in which to get back just to break-even.

 

It seemed to work for Revell USA.

Take the recent '66 Chevy Suburban kit f.or example, which is based on the 90s designed '65-'66 Pickup, or the '66 Impala which is also based on the '90's '65 tool.

Okay, production costs are higher, but investment costs are much much lower, plus you have what looks like an all-new product.

Also with clever engineering, I'm sure a tool base can be designed which also holds a couple of wheelsets, or combined with the clear parts inserts (with separate raw material feeds) so that "waste" in production time is reduced,  just thinking out loud (Bill Engwer please correct or enlighten me if I'm wrong) , my past job at GM was in part eliminating waste in production time.

 

Just thinking out loud.

 

Luc

 

 

Edited November 24, 2018 by Luc Janssens

[disabled modeler]

22 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

Everything has a cost and a projected return on investment, be it in resto, resto-mod, modified siblings or all new tooling.

Right now they're riding the nostalgia train, it's working for them, but personally, I'd like them to have a plan-B as well, I know they can pull it off, they have the right people on board or access to,  I'm pretty sure it's just a matter of the Head honcho Ok'ing it

 

Luc 

 

 

 

That would be so nice... There are many Id love to see come back for us all Luc.   Plan B is always a good thing as well.

[MrObsessive]

Luc, there are instances where Revell for whatever reason didn't follow the model you suggested. In particular, I'm thinking of Revell's very nice '56 Chevy Del Ray, and then the later '57 Chevy 150 Black Widow. Even though they're essentially the same car in 1:1 save for some body changes and other small details, to me it appears that Revell chose to not modify the existing '56 tool, but tooled up a completely different body. That might have been the smarter thing to do cost wise, but in doing so they missed the mark on some things.

It shows to my eyes in the shape of the roofline particularly the rear half. The '56 captured this very well, the '57 not so much.

There are times when they will modify an existing tool, but there's always that little detail that they'll skip over which to me is a signature of that particular car. One example that comes to mind is the taking of the '57 Chevy Belair two door sedan and then modifying that into the Bel Air convertible. Not a bad kit at all, but one area that sticks out to me like a sore thumb is Revell didn't bother to modify the upper halves of the convertibles doors, which have a distinct 'sweep down' appearance in the beltline, as opposed to the straight across appearance of the sedans.

Another one of those 'signature' details that many of us out here in the lunatic fringe (and maybe not so lunatic) notice.

Just my 2¢ worth!

[Ace-Garageguy]

On 11/23/2018 at 5:20 PM, dodgefever said:

In fairness, their recently tooled wheels and tyres have been quite decent.  That chopped top is pretty bad though.  Let's hope that Sci-Fi stuff makes enough money to allow for some automotive subjects, done properly.

Yeah, the wheels and tires in the '36 Ford are real beauties, as are the entire lineup of tires. In a way, I feel kinda bad criticizing R2, because their restorations of some older kits, returning the original parts to the box, is just great. Fine with me, and I've bought most of them. 

But I was just SO disappointed by the top on the '36. I honestly would have bought multiples, as a chopped '36 Ford is absolutely one of my favorite things on the planet, and those new wheels and tires make a nice bonus. But after seeing the newly-tooled roof, I just can't figure out what went wrong.

As I mentioned, when the original parts still exist, looked fantastic just as they were, and fit the bodies quite well, HOW and WHY would you not just pull your dimensions DIRECTLY from an original?

[Oldcarfan27]

On 11/24/2018 at 3:19 PM, Ace-Garageguy said:

...HOW and WHY would you not just pull your dimensions DIRECTLY from an original?

Guess they couldn't find one on Ebay?