2022 Round2 Releases

[1972coronet]

1 hour ago, Robberbaron said:

Notwithstanding the '66 vs '67 [4-4-2] model year differences, I and many others would argue that the '66 is superior to the '67.

IMO, the 1966 W-30 takes it for the win (irrespective to scale model manufacturer). Last year for the Tri-Power [et al.] Oldsmobile (and Pontiac) insofar as factory production.

(The 1967 "wins" in the capacity of: disc brake option, and TH-400 option. But, the '66 just looks cleaner, IMO)

[Robberbaron]

9 hours ago, Robberbaron said:

Notwithstanding the '66 vs '67 model year differences, I and many others would argue that the '66 is superior to the '67.

 

7 hours ago, 1972coronet said:

IMO, the 1966 W-30 takes it for the win (irrespective to scale model manufacturer). Last year for the Tri-Power [et al.] Oldsmobile (and Pontiac) insofar as factory production.

(The 1967 "wins" in the capacity of: disc brake option, and TH-400 option. But, the '66 just looks cleaner, IMO)

My typing got ahead of my thoughts: my intent was to say that the AMT/Ertl '66 442 KIT is superior to the Lindberg '67 KIT.

The general body shape of the Lindberg '67 is just off in roof shape and the quarter panel and front fender profiles, whereas the AMT '66 seems spot on.  The Lindberg also has some fit issues with the front bumper/grill assembly and the separate chrome side trim.

The rear axle housing in the Lindberg also looks wacky because they tried to mold the rear sway bar with it as one piece, and it just ended up bizarre-looking.

Edited August 22, 2022 by Robberbaron

[1972coronet]

6 hours ago, Robberbaron said:

My typing got ahead of my thoughts: my intent was to say that the AMT/Ertl '66 442 KIT is superior to the Lindberg '67 KIT.

I'd re-re-re-read your original post after I'd thrown in my $0.02; however, I didn't feel compelled to edit my two cents' worth.

The AMT kit certainly does take the cake (I need to get the convertible version some day). It's too bad that Lindberg goofed the proportions on this (and the 1966 Chevelle SS-396), as its companion status would've been great.

[Robberbaron]

8 hours ago, 1972coronet said:

I'd re-re-re-read your original post after I'd thrown in my $0.02; however, I didn't feel compelled to edit my two cents' worth.

The AMT kit certainly does take the cake (I need to get the convertible version some day). It's too bad that Lindberg goofed the proportions on this (and the 1966 Chevelle SS-396), as its companion status would've been great.

I think the last time the AMT '66 was out was when they were getting blown out at Ollies (what, maybe about 12 years ago?). Unfortunately, there were no Ollies in my area at that time.

I always wanted to get a second '66 kit to try to graft the Lindberg front and rear ends onto the better AMT body.

[Can-Con]

20 hours ago, Robberbaron said:

 

I always wanted to get a second '66 kit to try to graft the Lindberg front and rear ends onto the better AMT body.

Only problem with that is the Lindberg '67 front end is wonkey. The hood area right above the grille is too curved. Should be a straighter slope with just a slight curve. also seems to be too high somehow.

Kinda gives it more of an early '60s Lincoln look to me. 

I've made an attempt at improving the one I have but it's what's always kept me from building the kit. My favorite uncle had a gold '67 when I was young, had it for a long time and I have great memories of going to the lake with my cousins in that car so I was really excited when the kit was announced ,, disappointed when I opened the box.

This pic pretty clearly shows the front of the hood. 

and here's one built by Randy Bodkin. Maybe it's just me but this just dosen't look "right" to me.

 

[keyser]

Nice build. 
Grille and lights look more recessed on 1:1, how I remembered it too. Opened mine years ago, got correct hood, fiddled and back in box. Maybe cutting grille from bumper and setting back a bit would help. As it is, I’ll never finish it. Really like that year. Never got the Amt was too disappointed with the Lindberg. Prob sell mine off. 

[bisc63]

5 hours ago, Can-Con said:

Maybe it's just me but this just doesn't look "right" to me.

I see a big part of the problem there: the "roll" at he front of the hood is too far back from the front edge, and this is what makes the front look too tall. The angled planes at the front of the hood are rendered longer (not really taller) because they extend back too far. This can be fixed with putty and files, I think. Thanks for the excellent comparison pics; this is great reference material. I have a couple of these myself, and am a big fan of the body style. Tweaking the bumper/ grille assembly upwards a millimeter or so couldn't hurt, as well as refining the bumper ends, which are goofy.

[bisc63]

58 minutes ago, keyser said:

Never got the Amt was too disappointed with the Lindberg.

Two ENTIRELY different animals. The AMT 66 kits, both hardtop and convertible are just gorgeous. They are from AMT's 1990s renaissance period, and should be in every model builder's stash, especially the Olds fans! Go get one right now, I'll wait here...

[Luc Janssens]

Has this been shown previously?

[bisc63]

Interesting parts in that kit, though not my favorite over all look. I never liked the top. Worth bringing back for the other pieces, though. Hadn't seen the box art, thanks for posting that!

[Dave Van]

Top is junk, Lots of modern street rod parts. 

[Plowboy]

What kills the Phantom Vickie IMO is the goofy Duvall windshield and top. But, the rest of it makes a great basis for a modern hot rod. I also like the engine, wheels and tires for other modern type builds. Still, with some parts swapping, you can make a pretty cool hot rod with it. For me, it's a fun kit to see what I can make out of it with different parts.

 

[stitchdup]

I kinda like the look of the top, not on the long body but I think it would work shortened on modern style roadster like a 33-4. I might get one for just that reason and the chassis would save work for the same build.

[tim boyd]

I think it is bad-boy cool.   Plus, the tubular crossmembers in the frame are the best ever for a contemporary street rod project.  Rear suspension, though, is unrealistic as configured in the kit....TB

[tim boyd]

And as the basis of a slightly more involved kitbash also using parts from Revell's '32 Ford kit series....(and yes, obviously, looks like I need to have a wax-cleaning session with a toothpick and polishing cloth on those cutlines and moldings)....TB 

Edited August 29, 2022 by tim boyd

[stitchdup]

12 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

I think it is bad-boy cool.   Plus, the tubular crossmembers in the frame are the best ever for a contemporary street rod project.  Rear suspension, though, is unrealistic as configured in the kit....TB

much nicer than the box art

[GMP440]

 

  Is the 32 Ford Phantom Vicky kit the big annnouncement  Round 2 was going to make?

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by GMP440

[slusher]

15 hours ago, Luc Janssens said:

Has this been shown previously?

Reminds me of the Proshop version of 2000 , was prepainted in purple"..

[Raoul Ross]

17 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

I think it is bad-boy cool.   Plus, the tubular crossmembers in the frame are the best ever for a contemporary street rod project.  Rear suspension, though, is unrealistic as configured in the kit....TB

Finally some modern tires! What engine is that?

P.S. The site is really slow!

Edited August 29, 2022 by Raoul Ross

[ScaleSpeedShop]

1 hour ago, GMP440 said:

 

  Is the 32 Ford Phantom Vicky kit the big annnouncement  Round 2 was going to make?

 

If it is, I'm very disappointed.

 

[bisc63]

Like I said, lots of interesting parts, some downright cool, but look at how much better the builds above look without the top! ?

[Plowboy]

This is the coolest model I've seen built with the Phantom Vickie. It's from the talented hands of Rockin Rodney Rat.

It even looks cool with the top on.

[Stef]

I want to like this one, though I do agree, the windshield and roof complicate the simplicity of the design.

Put this PhotoChop™ together super fast. Thoughts?

[Stef]

Another PhotoChop™, this one more drastic. Would probably need an all-new re-contoured roof to accommodate both lengthening and a gentler arc. Wheelbase lengthened and body stretched behind the doors a few inches. Thoughts?

[Oldcarfan27]

4 hours ago, tim boyd said:

Not bashing your build Tim, just the kit.

Problem with this design, as I see it, is the top is all wrong for this car. A Miata yes. But for a 32 Ford ?.

Besides, it looks like this:

When an original phaeton top looks like this:

Which is cooler!