2022 Round2 Releases

[keyser]

Over, Unger. 

[Rob Hall]

2 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

Wait wait wait. So you're saying a domestic kit company is capitalizing on the value of its licensing to create new sales opportunities that are getting their products into the hands of new customers? Surely you jest!

Inconceivable!

[Plowboy]

On 8/28/2022 at 8:55 PM, tim boyd said:

 Rear suspension, though, is unrealistic as configured in the kit....TB

The same can be said about the Revell Model A kits.

[tim boyd]

5 hours ago, Plowboy said:

The same can be said about the Revell Model A kits.

Not sure I understand your point, Roger.  The Revell Modal A kit rear suspension design is right out of the Roy Brizio Street Rods "design 'em to be driven" playbook from the last 40 years and still very much in use today in the hot rod world.  They are clearly not hardcore "traditional hot rod" transverse A spring quick changes, but that doesn't make them unrealistic per se, at least in my book. 

In the case of the AMT-Ertl Phantom Vicky Phaetion, and going from memory here (admittedly somewhat dangerous these days, but you guys will catch me if I'm wrong), unlike the Mustang GT suspension the kit was patterned after, the kit itself omitted any sort of upper rear axle locating arms, meaning the first time the driver hit the pedal hard, the entire rear end would wrap/twist and tear itself out.   Perhaps I should have been clearer about what I meant by "unrealistic?"   TB

Edited September 1, 2022 by tim boyd

[Plowboy]

2 hours ago, tim boyd said:

Not sure I understand your point, Roger.  The Revell Modal A kit rear suspension design is right out of the Roy Brizio Street Rods "design 'em to be driven" playbook from the last 40 years and still very much in use today in the hot rod world.  They are clearly not hardcore "traditional hot rod" transverse A spring quick changes, but that doesn't make them unrealistic per se, at least in my book. 

In the case of the AMT-Ertl Phantom Vicky Phaetion, and going from memory here (admittedly somewhat dangerous these days, but you guys will catch me if I'm wrong), unlike the Mustang GT suspension the kit was patterned after, the kit itself omitted any sort of upper rear axle locating arms, meaning the first time the driver hit the pedal hard, the entire rear end would wrap/twist and tear itself out.   Perhaps I should have been clearer about what I meant by "unrealistic?"   TB

My point is that I've never seen a full scale hot rod with the rearend welded to the frame. The Model A's also don't have a panhard bar to keep the rearend centered and from swaying side to side in turns. 

In the case of the Phantom Vickie, there simply isn't room for the upper control arms. Even if there were, they would barely be visible. 

 

[tim boyd]

9 hours ago, Plowboy said:

My point is that I've never seen a full scale hot rod with the rearend welded to the frame. The Model A's also don't have a panhard bar to keep the rearend centered and from swaying side to side in turns. 

In the case of the Phantom Vickie, there simply isn't room for the upper control arms. Even if there were, they would barely be visible. 

 

OK, I see what you are referring to about the Model A kit.  I think we are all pretty well aware that Revell added the molded in brackets on the Model A Hot Rod frame as an assist experienced builders assemble their model correctly, not as a representation of the real thing having the rear end solidly mounted to the frame. (They used the same approach on their Foose FD-100 kit)  Many more experienced builders (including myself) cut away those mounting brackets during assembly.   

Regarding the lack of a panhard bar - many 1/1 scale hot rod builders use a "triangulated" approach to rear suspension geometry, where the front bars are mounted to the frame in a position closer together, leading out to the rear axle where they are mounted farther apart.  This "triangulation" approach prevents the side to side motion.  Some builders add a panhard bar in addition, but not all.  

As for the Phantom Vickie, my point remains unaltered.  

Others are, of course, welcome this differently than I do. 

I think it's probably best on my end to not comment any further; don't to create a controversy about this.  Best....TB    

Edited September 2, 2022 by tim boyd

[unclescott58]

34 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

OK, I see what you are referring to about the Model A kit.  I think we are all pretty well aware that Revell added the molded in brackets on the Model A Hot Rod frame as an assist experienced builders assemble their model correctly, not as a representation of the real thing having the rear end solidly mounted to the frame. (They used the same approach on their Foose FD-100 kit)  Many more experienced builders (including myself) cut away those mounting brackets during assembly.   

Regarding the lack of a panhard bar - may 1/1 scale hot rod builders use a "triangulated" approach to rear suspension geometry, where the front bars are mounted to the frame in a position closer together, leading out to the rear axle where they are mounted farther apart.  This "triangulation" approach prevents the side to side motion.  Some builders add a panhard bar in addition, but not all.  

As for the Phantom Vickie, my point remains unaltered.  

Others are, of course, welcome this differently that I do. 

I think it's probably best on my end to not comment any further; don't to create a controversy about this.  Best....TB    

Any photos of the Phantom Vicky setup? I’m a little unclear what you guys are talking about. And my Phantom Vicky which I build about 20 years ago, is buried and inaccessible at this present time. Making it hard to pull out and look at. 

[Justin Porter]

51 minutes ago, unclescott58 said:

Any photos of the Phantom Vicky setup? I’m a little unclear what you guys are talking about. And my Phantom Vicky which I build about 20 years ago, is buried and inaccessible at this present time. Making it hard to pull out and look at. 

http://images32.fotki.com/v1088/photos/5/504634/4411891/DSCF6440-vi.jpg

Found this picture of a build-up online and you can see the rear suspension with its SN-95 Mustang rear axle and stamped lower trailing arms. It's a novel design and certainly a counterpoint to radius rods and coilovers, but the SN-95 Mustangs also have fairly obvious stamped upper trailing arms and the kit has neither representation of these arms OR of a crossmember to which they would attach. 

[Plowboy]

1 hour ago, unclescott58 said:

Any photos of the Phantom Vicky setup? I’m a little unclear what you guys are talking about. And my Phantom Vicky which I build about 20 years ago, is buried and inaccessible at this present time. Making it hard to pull out and look at. 

[unclescott58]

2 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

http://images32.fotki.com/v1088/photos/5/504634/4411891/DSCF6440-vi.jpg

Found this picture of a build-up online and you can see the rear suspension with its SN-95 Mustang rear axle and stamped lower trailing arms. It's a novel design and certainly a counterpoint to radius rods and coilovers, but the SN-95 Mustangs also have fairly obvious stamped upper trailing arms and the kit has neither representation of these arms OR of a crossmember to which they would attach. 

This is the setup on AMT’s Phantom Vicky? 

[keyser]

2 hours ago, unclescott58 said:

This is the setup on AMT’s Phantom Vicky? 

Credit to builder. Nice build. 
Instructions in here somewhere, you probably have seen them. https://www.round2corp.com/amtmki/

 

[Plowboy]

Here's a closeup of the Phantom Vickie chassis. There is a cross member to mount upper control arms to if one wants to add them.

[carnut]

My club is doing a 32 Ford Challenge Build and I’m using the Phantom Vicky frame and suspension in my build. I took notice of the flaw in the rear suspension and I decided to make my own upper suspension arms (or whatever they are called). They are just stamped steel anyway. I just took some Evergreen and faked it in, I figured that after paint and all it will look the part.

Thanks for pointing this out, hope this helps everyone.

Cheers

[stavanzer]

Nice Clear Photos!

Thanks!

[Dave Darby]

A late member of Kustom Kemps In Miniature built this Revell Deuce roadster body bashed with the Phantom Vickie kit. I owned it for years, but circumstances forced me to let it go about 5 years ago. I'm very temped to build another one.

 

[Plowboy]

I'm not a fan of the stock '32 Vickie body. But, I think it or the sedan would look cool on that chassis. Hmmmmm.

[HomerS]

I missed seeing this one mentioned.....

AMT-1334

1/25 1964 Mercury Comet Caliente Craftsman Plus Series

$35.99

TBA

[GMP440]

8 hours ago, HomerS said:

I missed seeing this one mentioned.....

AMT-1334

1/25 1964 Mercury Comet Caliente Craftsman Plus Series

$35.99

TBA

That one was announced about a two months ago.  That's the same kit that Dave Burkett aka The Model King helped get out about 8 years ago.

[Mark]

More like 15 years ago.  Time is like TP: the less you have of it, the faster it comes off of the roll...

[Luc Janssens]

1 hour ago, Mark said:

More like 15 years ago.  Time is like TP: the less you have of it, the faster it comes off of the roll...

It goes full throttle, one of my late friends said a month before he passed. 

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by Luc Janssens

[GMP440]

2 hours ago, Mark said:

More like 15 years ago.  Time is like TP: the less you have of it, the faster it comes off of the roll...

You're right.  Just saw the date on the box.  Model King 64 Comet was released in 2005.