Scale,scale,SCALE!!!!!!

[george 53]

Guys at the dmmc Friday One of our members bought in some cases of the new Challenger, and 68 Mustang and it's variants. I got me the 68 Mustang. Now I just happened to have an original 68 AMT Mustang. Soooo, I did a comparo.Believe it or not ,ONE of these rascals is NOT to scale! When I tried to install the AMT Tailight panel into the Revell Mustang, it wa too narrow.Just by a hair mind you, but still too loose just the same.The wheelbases were off too. and the new kit is just as long as the old kit is WITHOUT the front facia! So who's right? When I first put my Revell 69 Mustang Cobra Jet next to my old MPC 69 annual(not a repop)The size difference jumped out at me like a Chene Avenue mugger! THEN i find out, that the Old MPC kit was poped in !/27th scale! Or 26th. Anyway all these years I thought it was the proper scale, and if Revell hadn't bought out the Cobra Jet Mustang, I'd never known it wasn't the right scale! So ANYWAYS, Other than using a scale ruler, What's the TRUE scale of these things? 25th? 25th anna 32nd? 25th anna16th? I remember when the 66 Fairlane kit came out, everyboby said it was off too. It looked pretty darn close to the AMT annual to ME! I did see what the fuss about the window glass was comin from, but I don't get all worked up about junk like this. I just fix it,if it bothers me enough!(Like the Nova) But It DID pique my curiosity, an got me ta wonderin, WHAT IS the true scale of our beloved little cars???? I mean like on the 1:1 Mustangs, the taillight panels interchange, if BOTH Mustangs are TRUE 1/25th scale, should the basic panel fit just as well on BOTH cars? I ain't gomma loose no sleep over this,But it did get me ta thinkin,Ohhhhh,My head!!!!!

[Harry P.]

Don't take the scale on the box literally.

Some kit makers take scale fidelity seriously, and others not so much...

[george 53]

Ya know Harry,I let ALOT of nice kits go by,because of my mis-guided scale bigotry! I didn't start buying 24th scale cars/kits till about 20 yrs ago, and those were Danbury/Franklin Mint models. I do buy 24th scale models, but I just don't build'em! Scale bigotry rears it's UGLY head yet AGAIN!!!! Now that I see what your talkin about, I'm just gonna be happy with if it LOOKS GOOD to scale, I'm buyin it!

Edited February 23, 2009 by george 53

[Modelmartin]

Rubber rulers have always been a problem for the kit manufacturers. The Monogram Mercedes 540K is about 1/22 scale! I remember trying to stretch a Vega body for a funny car in the 70s. The AMT was 1/4 inch wider than the MPC! Then there is the Revell Henry J which has a wheelbase 7 scale inches too short so it would fit their generic and awful gasser chassis.

I have never been much of a scale bigot myself. If it looks good and it's in the neighborhood I am fine with it. I try not to display my Monogram and Jo-han 540Ks together, though!!

[Zoom Zoom]

The Monogram Mercedes 540K is about 1/22 scale! I try not to display my Monogram and Jo-han 540Ks together, though!!

I remember you saying that before...today I was looking at my Monogram 540K coupe (trying to find research...not easy), comparing it's details w/someone's Johan 500K on another forum. And after you mentioned the scale, I compared the Monogram 540K to the Italeri 540K that I recently built...they're the same basic size; length, width, wheelbase.

Perhaps the 500K Johan did was shorter than a 540K? The bodystyle looks like it's based on a shorter wheelbase. Johan's kit was 1/25 scale, so it would look smaller by a good bit. I don't have a Johan 500K (yet). It's always looked a bit on the small size to me, but then again, many classic kits have been in 1/24 scale so the comparison isn't always clear.

After comparing Monogram/Italeri 540's, I'm not convinced the Monogram is 1/22...if it is, so is the Italeri. But at least the two 540K's I have are the same size. I was concerned after reading your remarks that the Monogram kit would be a good bit bigger than the Italeri.