What's in the box, Revell 66 Chevelle.

[bob terry]

Pics of the trees in the latest release. I have a fine camera, but I suck at taking pics. Also, a side by side with the Lindberg 66. I understand the Revell is 1/24th and the Lindberg 1/25th. I am by no means an expert, but the differences between the two seem huge. That said, The Revell I built a few years back looks ok in It's own display case. I think now though my Revell 66's are parts fodder.

['70 Grande]

Wow! For one of those to be 1/24 and the other 1/25, the size-difference in every aspect of those two bodies seems huge... almost like one of them is in 1/20-scale compared to the other in 1/25!?!?!?

[Oldcarfan27]

2 intakes, 2 sets of seats, 2 hood scoops, 2 transmissions. Only one set of wheels.

Sigh at what could have been. 

[Plowboy]

I'll still get one just for nostalgia's sake. To me, it's an easy, simple, no stress build. I need that every once in a while. I'm going to wait for the price to go down in a few weeks before I buy one though.

I built the Lindberg many years ago and it has several issues. To me, it seems under scale like a 1/26. It would interesting to see how it compares size wise to the Revell '67. 

[bob terry]

Ya know, after looking at the pics again I also was wondering how Lindberg compared to the Revell and AMT 67. Think I'll check.

[bob terry]

I lined up the Revell 67, Lindberg 66 and AMT 67. I think Ployboy is right about Lindberg being slightly underscale. The Revell is 1/24th, Lindberg and AMT 1/25th. Still, these 3 are close.

[bisc63]

I think Plowboy is on to something, and his statement brought back a memory of an early review of the Lindberg kit from the now-defunct other magazine in which I believe the reviewer speculated that the kit seemed a little small for scale. As I've noted in another thread, I took some measurements of a friend's '66 and did the math to see how the Monogram kit scaled, and overall it does a very fair job of staying right at 1/24. There are issues here and there, nits to pick, I reckon. One thing that's a bit off is the tail light area(s); the lights are just a little too small, and don't quite sweep around as much as they should. The tail lamp extensions are a bit "pinched", also. The Lindberg kit looks much better to me across the rear. One thing that makes the Lindberg kit look even smaller is a problem shared by most of the Lindberg cars of that generation ( i.e.: '61 Impalas, '67 Olds 442) and that is a shallow body side height. They all need about 1-1/2 or 2mm of additional "meat" spliced in along their length. It really causes the interior tubs to look even more shallow. Don't get me wrong, I have multiples of each, and have built and seen them built quite nicely. Most people don't notice until you point it out to them.

Another "oops" from Monogram's Chevelle  is the curvature of the trunk lid at the tulip panel: it is curved the exact opposite of how it should be.

Edited June 5, 2022 by bisc63
typo

[bisc63]

BTW Bob, thank you for taking time to post the pictures of the sprues AND for the comparison shots. It's much appreciated.

[stavanzer]

Thanks for the Photos.

[Plowboy]

23 hours ago, bisc63 said:

The Lindberg kit looks much better to me across the rear. 

I have to disagree on that one Rusty. To me, the rear is pretty wonky looking. Especially around the tail lights. It's like they're too big for the body.

 

[bisc63]

Could be they are actually 1/25 and the body's a bit scrawny?!  I can see what you mean, but I think the part that's not quite right about the rear of the Lindberg is the chrome moldings are a little bulky for the scale. It's even more noticeable before paint, as you can see in the pics above. It makes the rear panel seem crowded. The lights still look way better to me, the Revell/Monogram's are just dinky looking, and their Chevelle letters are almost invisible. Out of the box, your blue car here  looks better from the rear than any build of the Monogram kit. I think filing the moldings to about 2/3 to 1/2 their thickness would help a bunch. Now you got me wanting to transplant the Lindberg lights to the R/M body.

[Plowboy]

This is the Lindberg taillights in the Monogram tail panel in the Revell '67. Confused yet?

 

[bisc63]

They do look better there. Looking at the pics above, one thing I hadn't noticed before, is how much the Lindberg kit more suddenly and drastically tapers the taillight extensions inward, which does take away some of the overall width and strong horizontal line of the real car. The best solution so far is the Lindberg lights in the R/M body.