Thanks To AMT For The New Technology Old Kits

[oldcarfan]

I'm so pleased that AMT is using scanning and other methods to recreate lost tooling. I've got five of their Nova wagon and am looking forward to the 1960 and 1963 F-100s. I've been wondering what other lost tools they might be able to recreate? Any ideas? Between AMT and MPC they have a lot of history that would be nice to see back on the shelves. I'd like to see a 71 Pinto and Vega done in Craftsman style. On a slightly different tack, could the same techniques be used to back date tools? I'd love to see a base model hood to turn MPCs 70s Camaro and Firebirds into the base model editions. Maybe a straight six ending to go with it.

For that matter, I wonder how 'legal' it would be for someone to use this new technology to recreate the Johan tools. Some of their stuff had really accurate bodies.

 

[bobthehobbyguy]

It would depend on when the kits were copyrighted. Regardless any kit cloned would still have to have licensing from the particular manufacturer.

However I'm not sure that most of the subject matter woultd sell well enough to justify the cost to recreate the tooling.

[rrb124@sbcglobal.net]

Having starting building models in the late 1950's, I'm keen to watch for models of the day being available for sale. Bring them on!

[Motor City]

They can recreate any tool if the parts aren't warped.  A styrene kit can be scanned using computer technology.  Older promotional models molded in acetate (warping) plastic would be a bigger challenge, though some adjustments could be made to the CAD files.

Jo-Han models could also be done this way but would require licensing from the current owner as well as from the auto manufacturers.

 

[Bainford]

Like many here, I am quite excited about the possibilities of this technology, and so glad that Round2 is employing it. I have a couple of these kits on my 'Want List', but have not purchased one yet. Can anyone tell me if the body scripts and badges on these kits are reproduced as well, or are we left to replicate those with decals?

[disconovaman]

Yeah, most of the credit should go to Round II for taking those old molds and bringing them back to current. It's nice to see a company invest back into the brand with new or lost for so long that they're new agian molds. It's one thing to repop an existing mold but building brand new molds based on original specs is on another level. Never before have we seen this and it's exciting.

[Justin Porter]

11 hours ago, oldcarfan said:

I'm so pleased that AMT is using scanning and other methods to recreate lost tooling. I've got five of their Nova wagon and am looking forward to the 1960 and 1963 F-100s. I've been wondering what other lost tools they might be able to recreate? Any ideas? Between AMT and MPC they have a lot of history that would be nice to see back on the shelves. I'd like to see a 71 Pinto and Vega done in Craftsman style. On a slightly different tack, could the same techniques be used to back date tools? I'd love to see a base model hood to turn MPCs 70s Camaro and Firebirds into the base model editions. Maybe a straight six ending to go with it.

For that matter, I wonder how 'legal' it would be for someone to use this new technology to recreate the Johan tools. Some of their stuff had really accurate bodies.

 

I'm sorry, but as much as I appreciate what Round 2 is doing in order to bring back their own IP's, I can't fathom - in this our year of Lemmy 2023 - looking at kits as gorgeous as the Revell '71 Mustang or the ICM Benz Patent-Motorwagen or the Ebbro Citroen DS or the Tamiya McLaren Senna or the Moebius AFX Dodges and saying "I want an AMC AMX kit where the seats are molded to the floor and there's a 1/4 inch hole in the block for a plastic axle."

It beggars belief. 

[P51Mustang]

It would be nice to have mid 1970's 2nd Gen Firebirds this would require only be changing out very few parts. Even if not totally correct using available interiors but having optional flat hood, formula hood and trans am, would be great.

Also a MPC 1970 1/2 Trans Am/Formula/Firebird would be a big seller but not sure what it would take to make/create that kit.

Thanks to Steve G for sharing info on this forum.

Edited April 27, 2023 by P51Mustang

[stavanzer]

While we are on the topic of giving Thanks, I want to call out Steve Goldman in particular for all the information he has shared and continues to share with us at this site, (and the other one, too).

He does not have to do this (I believe), and Round2 could just as easily tell all of us on the Forums to just watch Chad on the Monthly Update Video, and that would be that. Instead, Steve shares small and sometimes larger Tidbits of information about soon-to-be-released kits, upcoming kits, and even future projects or 'possible' projects. He very graciously responds to many questions, and has even asked for our 'collective' help in answering questions or knowledge about kits or kit history. It is great to read what he shares, and see the photos, as well.

Thank You, Steve G. for all you have done and are continuing to do as an conduit between us and the Model Company we invest so much Time, Energy, & Money in, as customers. 

 

[SfanGoch]

20 minutes ago, Justin Porter said:

I'm sorry, but as much as I appreciate what Round 2 is doing in order to bring back their own IP's, I can't fathom - in this our year of Lemmy 2023 - looking at kits as gorgeous as the Revell '71 Mustang or the ICM Benz Patent-Motorwagen or the Ebbro Citroen DS or the Tamiya McLaren Senna or the Moebius AFX Dodges and saying "I want an AMC AMX kit where the seats are molded to the floor and there's a 1/4 inch hole in the block for a plastic axle."

Only if your tastes lie within those particular automotive categories.

Since the bodies can be laser scanned to create new toolings, there's nothing to preclude utilizing chassis and suspension, engines and modified interiors from more modern kits which are compatible, such as cloning a '66 Buick Skylark GS and using the appropriate mold inserts from the '66, '67 Olds 442 kits or the '66/67 Chevelles, all of which use the identical GM A-body platforms. If I can do that by scavenging parts for my original, unmolested Skylark GS, it'd be a piece of cake for R2. It would increase the number of other '64-'67 GM A-body models which could be cloned and updated.

New updated AMX/Javelin kits wouldn't be bad. Stateside, they'd sell better than Benz Patent-Motorwagens or a Citroen DS.

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, SfanGoch said:

Since the bodies can be laser scanned to create new toolings, there's nothing to preclude utilizing chassis and suspension, engines and modified interiors from more modern kits which are compatible, such as cloning a '66 Buick Skylark GS and using the appropriate mold inserts from the '66, '67 Olds 442 kits or the '66/67 Chevelles, all of which use the identical GM A-body platforms. If I can do that by scavenging parts for my original, unmolested Skylark GS, it'd be a piece of cake for R2. It would increase the number of other '64-'67 GM A-body models which could be cloned and updated.

Yup yup yup. And this is the kind of thinking that could bring the models of older vehicles up to today's expectations cost-effectively.

Of course, where no decent pre-tooled chassis donors exist, you'd still have to do fresh tooling...more expensive (though intelligent utilization of current tech to design and cut tooling could save a large percentage of the cost of doing it the old way)...but I'd stand in line for hours in the rain listening to 100-decibel rap to get a few full-detail, accurate-engine-and-chassis AMX kits.  

[Justin Porter]

2 hours ago, SfanGoch said:

Only if your tastes lie within those particular automotive categories.

Since the bodies can be laser scanned to create new toolings, there's nothing to preclude utilizing chassis and suspension, engines and modified interiors from more modern kits which are compatible, such as cloning a '66 Buick Skylark GS and using the appropriate mold inserts from the '66, '67 Olds 442 kits or the '66/67 Chevelles, all of which use the identical GM A-body platforms. If I can do that by scavenging parts for my original, unmolested Skylark GS, it'd be a piece of cake for R2. It would increase the number of other '64-'67 GM A-body models which could be cloned and updated.

New updated AMX/Javelin kits wouldn't be bad. Stateside, they'd sell better than Benz Patent-Motorwagens or a Citroen DS.

The question isn't one of subject matter, and frankly you seem to ignore that the very first kit I mentioned was the upcoming Revell '71 Mustang and the last kit I mentioned was the Moebius AFX Dodge. 

The question is why are builders of classic American cars so willing to settle for poor kits just because "it's something" when it can be ably demonstrated that the technology and the industry exists to NOT produce kits of that nature. Heck, AMT's own excellent 2021 Dodge Charger kit is evidence that AMT THEMSELVES could tool a well detailed and accurate kit to modern levels of engraving and detail. I love the 1968 AMX. I feel it's a genuinely handsome car and I would love to build a genuinely nice model of one. I can't get into the headspace where I would be asking a current company to - instead of tooling a 100% modern kit - deliberately ape tooling that predates cable television.

[Ace-Garageguy]

23 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

...I can't get into the headspace where I would be asking a current company to - instead of tooling a 100% modern kit - deliberately ape tooling that predates cable television.

Ever own a business? Or be responsible for running one at a profit? I have.

New tooling for, for instance, a "modern" undercarriage, interior, and engine in an AMX, would be expensive...numbers bandied about being in the $200K range (probably more now). The corporate bean counters have to look at that, plus other expenses related to bringing the whole thing to market, and evaluate it in light of what they see as the number of potential buyers.

EDIT: Don't forget the $700/hr lawyers who'll have to sort out the legal licensing issues, and then the license fees themselves.

And when much of today's business activity is involved more with CYA than actively pursuing an unknown market, it's not surprising they might go with what they perceive as the "safe" route and just replicate old kits that already exist.

There's also the perception that "serious modelers" can make something full-detail from a '60s level kit, but that an accurate rendition of all the greasy guts would be wasted on the majority of a market segment that increasingly doesn't know how to check its own oil, or what makes a car go, and would be just as happy riding with their girlfriend as driving.

If it was up to ME to decide which way to jump, I'd have some serious thinking to do...even though I'd personally love to see tons of new "modern" kits of vintage subjects. It's obvious it's possible to be a tiny manufacturer and bring out newly-tooled kits, but it takes a certain can-do mindset AND the technical staff to make it happen...and those are pretty thin on the ground these days.

EDIT 2: Read above. I already mentioned there are small companies that seem to be able to do it, like Salvinos. They probably CAN do it because they're not held back by overly cautious middle management, and just get the dammed job done with a minimum competent crew.

 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Ace-Garageguy

[Justin Porter]

16 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Ever own a business? Or be responsible for running one at a profit? I have.

New tooling for, for instance, a "modern" undercarriage, interior, and engine in an AMX, would be expensive...numbers bandied about being in the $200K range (probably more now). The corporate bean counters have to look at that, plus other expenses related to bringing the whole thing to market, and evaluate it in light of what they see as the number of potential buyers.

And when much of today's business activity is involved more with CYA than actively pursuing an unknown market, it's not surprising they might go with what they perceive as the "safe" route and just replicate what already exists.

There's also the perception that "serious modelers" can make something full-detail from a '60s level kit, but that an accurate rendition of all the greasy guts would be wasted on the majority of a market segment that increasingly doesn't know how to check its own oil, or what makes a car go, and would be just as happy riding with their girlfriend as driving.

If it was up to ME to decide which way to jump, I'd have some serious thinking to do...even though I'd personally love to see tons of new "modern" kits of vintage subjects. It's obvious it's possible to be a tiny manufacturer and bring out newly-tooled kits, but it takes a certain can-do mindset AND the technical staff to make it happen...and those are pretty thin on the ground these days.

 

Moebius has been able to make business cases for newly tooled Plymouth Belvederes and Hudson Hornets. Revell has been able to make business cases for newly tooled '71 Mustangs and Jaguar E-Types. Salvinos JR was able to make a business case for a newly tooled Whelen Tour Modified. Round 2 themselves have made the business cases for modern Ford Broncos and Dodge Chargers. That's before getting into the surfeit of tooling represented by companies outside of the US like Belkits, NuNu, DM Modelkits, ICM, Tamiya, Aoshima, Hasegawa, and Ebbro. 

I do understand entirely why the Craftsman Plus kits exist. They're a relatively inexpensive way for Round 2 to generate fresh product for customers who are asking specifically for reissues of classic kits. It's filling a very specific niche that Round 2 is particularly suited to filling. These kits genuinely have achieved something successful in the marketplace and I am not at all opposed to their existence OR to the customers who want them. 

It's the wailing for skirting potential copyright law to generate a kit based on a kit that isn't at all a piece of Round 2's history to generate a specific kit that I simply cannot understand. At the end of all that hoop jumping, in an age when globally there is so much brand new tooling on the shelves of such high quality, why go through all this trouble to revive something that wasn't that good in the first place? 

[Can-Con]

OK, here's the big question ,,,

IF,, just IF, you scan the body of an old JoHan Javelin AMX and ignore the inside of the body, just smooth it over on the inside and create the rest of the kit in cad. ,,

IF that JoHan body is as exact as everyone claims it is to the real car, who owns the copyright? JoHan, who doesn't really exist any longer and directly copied the design under license or Chrysler Corp or whoever owns the rights to AMC and the design of the real cars now?

[Justin Porter]

Regardless of the ownership of the Johan IP that is the design of their kit, you would still have to contract with Stellantis for licensing permission to produce material in the likeness of one of their designs, in this case the AMC Javelin.

Properly modified from the original, that is to say with new surface detailing and re-engineered to accept separate wipers, door handles, and so forth, you could likely make the legal case that the resulting work - that is to say the new CAD design for the re-imagined body - is inherently transformative and therefore constitutes new intellectual property and thus does not require payment of licensure to the holders of the Johan IP for use of their original work (that is, their 1970's design for a 1/25th scale model in the likeness of an AMC Javelin AMX and the resulting physical model body) BUT you would need to enter into that project with a copyright lawyer already on retainer in the event the current holder of the Johan IP decided to get litigious.

And given that Okey Spaulding is desperately trying to reinforce the idea that he is Johan and that Johan is in some way still a viable enterprise, I wouldn't be shocked at all if he jumped at the chance to wring a couple thousand out of anyone who tried this method. Ultimately, it would be far smarter and safer to just ignore the Johan kit and tool new.

[bobthehobbyguy]

2 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

New tooling for, for instance, a "modern" undercarriage, interior, and engine in an AMX, would be expensive...numbers bandied about being in the $200K range (probably more now). The corporate bean counters have to look at that, plus other expenses related to bringing the whole thing to market, and evaluate it in light of what they see as the number of potential buyers

Exactly.

 

1 hour ago, Justin Porter said:

Moebius has been able to make business cases for newly tooled Plymouth Belvederes and Hudson Hornets. Revell has been able to make business cases for newly tooled '71 Mustangs and Jaguar E-Types. Salvinos JR was able to make a business case for a newly tooled Whelen Tour Modified. Round 2 themselves have made the business cases for modern Ford Broncos and Dodge Chargers. That's before getting into the surfeit of tooling represented by companies outside of the US like Belkits, NuNu, DM Modelkits, ICM, Tamiya, Aoshima, Hasegawa, and Ebbro. 

 

True but the Hudsons could support factory stock, stock cars,and drag  racing.

The new Revell Mustang can no doubt support multiple versions

 

 

1 hour ago, Justin Porter said:

It's the wailing for skirting potential copyright law to generate a kit based on a kit that isn't at all a piece of Round 2's history to generate a specific kit that I simply cannot understand. At the end of all that hoop jumping, in an age when globally there is so much brand new tooling on the shelves of such high quality, why go through all this trouble to revive something that wasn't that good in the first place? 

I agree about the copyright issues. The positive with the Johan kits was the accuracy of the bodies. However I just don't see the sales warranting the  cost of retooling those kits.  Too many people attribute that those kits would sell well because of the auction prices  on eBay. Those prices are because of a limited supply and people who are willing to pay the price to get one.

Want a Javelin create a proposal showing how multiple variants can be made and show that the sales would justify the cost of creating an all new kit. Just saying you want one won't make it happen. Taking the time to generate a well thought proposal will be a step in the right direction.

[Luc Janssens]

3 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Yup yup yup. And this is the kind of thinking that could bring the models of older vehicles up to today's expectations cost-effectively.

Of course, where no decent pre-tooled chassis donors exist, you'd still have to do fresh tooling...more expensive (though intelligent utilization of current tech to design and cut tooling could save a large percentage of the cost of doing it the old way)...but I'd stand in line for hours in the rain listening to 100-decibel rap to get a few full-detail, accurate-engine-and-chassis AMX kits.  

Guys, IMHO the Kats at Round2 are just beginning to scratch the surface with this new technology, taking small step at the time and watching how the market reacts. I believe in the future, insert swapping will be a thing of the past, cuz it's not like they can't scan and if necessary improve the modern kits or part thereof too. Just saying, lay back, enjoy the ride and, yeah ...start saving  ?

[SteveG]

6 hours ago, stavanzer said:

While we are on the topic of giving Thanks, I want to call out Steve Goldman in particular for all the information he has shared and continues to share with us at this site, (and the other one, too).

He does not have to do this (I believe), and Round2 could just as easily tell all of us on the Forums to just watch Chad on the Monthly Update Video, and that would be that. Instead, Steve shares small and sometimes larger Tidbits of information about soon-to-be-released kits, upcoming kits, and even future projects or 'possible' projects. He very graciously responds to many questions, and has even asked for our 'collective' help in answering questions or knowledge about kits or kit history. It is great to read what he shares, and see the photos, as well.

Thank You, Steve G. for all you have done and are continuing to do as an conduit between us and the Model Company we invest so much Time, Energy, & Money in, as customers. 

 

Thanks for all the kind words and the support.   Nothing in my job description requires me to participate in in any social media.  I do it because I want to. Somethings I'm free to discuss, and what I can't talk about I don't. 

There is wealth of knowledge here and in the other groups that I participate in.   I appreciate all the comments and even the constructive criticisms.  Some have led to specific product changes.  I try to use it all for the greater good.  None of what I'm doing is easy but at this point in my life I can't think of another job I'd rather be doing. 

-Steve

[SteveG]

55 minutes ago, Can-Con said:

OK, here's the big question ,,,

IF,, just IF, you scan the body of an old JoHan Javelin AMX and ignore the inside of the body, just smooth it over on the inside and create the rest of the kit in cad. ,,

IF that JoHan body is as exact as everyone claims it is to the real car, who owns the copyright? JoHan, who doesn't really exist any longer and directly copied the design under license or Chrysler Corp or whoever owns the rights to AMC and the design of the real cars now?

Here's my take on how this breaks down, Round2, Moebius, Revell Etc. own the copyrights to all their printed materials. Box art, decals, instruction sheets and related advertising.  The car designs all belong to the full-size manufactures and those likenesses are licensed through their agents.   There are numerous car and truck subjects that have been covered by multiple kit makers over the years.   As long as they are not an exact copy of existing product as I understand things it would not be a problem.  So, in theory we could scan an any existing body or even a full kit and go from there as long as we have a licensing agreement on the chosen subject matter.

-Steve

[GMP440]

 

Answering the original question of this topic;  I think what's next would be the AMT 67 Galaxie, AMT 74-76 Firbirds,  Streaker AWB Olds F-85, 67-69 Chevy c/10 truck and the 72-73 Dodge Adventurer.  These would be my guesses on long lost tooling subjects that very likely would come back.

Edited April 28, 2023 by GMP440

[wrenchr]

R2 is finding their niche, they are making some full detail kits and the cloning program is producing some cool stuff that the vintage stuff sells for hundreds a piece at times and making those kits attainable to the masses.     

[SfanGoch]

On 4/27/2023 at 1:36 PM, Justin Porter said:

The question isn't one of subject matter, and frankly you seem to ignore that the very first kit I mentioned was the upcoming Revell '71 Mustang and the last kit I mentioned was the Moebius AFX Dodge. 

Actually, it is a question of subject matter. R2 knows what its core customer base wants and is catering to it.

I didn't ignore anything. This thread is about AMT. Neither the Revell nor the Moebius kits are relevant to the discussion. They will do what they will do and so will AMT/R2.

[Motor City]

Most people building kits want something that is relatively easy and goes together well.  It is mostly hard-core builders on this board who are concerned with the minute details such as an accurate engine, trans and differential.  Whether or not an axle goes through the engine block is of little to no concern for the average model car builder.  After all, once it’s completed, it sits on a shelf with the hood usually closed.  There are a lot of people like me who have promos and kits and care more about body and interior accuracy than the rest of the details.  There’s nothing wrong with either viewpoint, but the target audience for highly detailed kits is not the same as that for a kid or adult just wanting to buy a kit for the subject matter or just to have something fun to do.

Since we don’t know the cost of developing an all-new tool versus making minor improvements or corrections to multiple existing tools, Round2 will see how well sales pan out to justify their investment in this strategy.  I think it is working out well for them and consumers.  Many kits have come back on the market that we thought would never come back.  Round2 will cover both markets with improved old kits and new ones like the Charger and Bronco.   If someone doesn’t like this, they are able to buy kits from other model companies.

[ChrisBcritter]

With the AMX, why bother scanning a Jo-Han kit when they could scan an original 1/20 MPC '69 AMX and reduce the scans to 1/25? Plus it had a full-detail chassis to begin with.