Upcoming Round 2 Announcements - MPC Shelby Daytona and "Mach Won" Funny Car

[Luc Janssens]

On 9/15/2023 at 4:58 AM, Mercuryman54 said:

Here’s an original Mach Won that I combined with the Revell 69 Super Cobra Jet Mustang. Body and trim from the Mach Won, pretty much everything else from the Revell kit. 

The windshield also from the Revell kit?  Great looking model BTW!

[mk11]

On 9/14/2023 at 9:04 PM, Mercuryman54 said:

Here is the difference between the AMT and MPC 69 Mustang grilles in the MPC Mustang. 

Have you got a wip thread going on the ragtop?

[Mark]

On 9/15/2023 at 5:12 PM, tim boyd said:

OK guys, but what about the original Revell 1969 Mustang/1970 Mustang Grande "annual" kits? 

Personally, I'm not a fan of either of these in terms of being good kits overall, nor their scale authenticity, but they do replicate body styles not seen in the AMT/MPC/modern da Revell kits....TB 

The original annual versions aren't easy to find now.  I don't think those set the world on fire sales-wise back then, as (for model builders) the fastback was the thing...the convertible and coupe didn't matter for too many people.  I had a '70 kit, got a great trade offer that involved it so I let it go, bought another to replace it only to find that it really didn't do anything for me.  So the second one went down the road too.

I don't know what alterations were made to it to create the funny car body, as I never had one of those.  But if Atlantis has the tooling for that Mustang, it will of course be for the funny car version.  If indeed they have it, I'm betting we will see it once Atlantis cuts a licensing deal with Ford.

[mikos]

On 9/16/2023 at 4:32 PM, Mark said:

The original annual versions aren't easy to find now.  I don't think those set the world on fire sales-wise back then, as (for model builders) the fastback was the thing...the convertible and coupe didn't matter for too many people.  I had a '70 kit, got a great trade offer that involved it so I let it go, bought another to replace it only to find that it really didn't do anything for me.  So the second one went down the road too.

I don't know what alterations were made to it to create the funny car body, as I never had one of those.  But if Atlantis has the tooling for that Mustang, it will of course be for the funny car version.  If indeed they have it, I'm betting we will see it once Atlantis cuts a licensing deal with Ford.

Here’s a pic I found online.  It looks like it could be restored back to stock if Revell finds the stock chassis, interior, windshield frame and fills in the cut out near the hood area.  The front end looks more rounded than the stock version so maybe they would have to revise that as well.  Having the Grande/convertible body style available again would be great.

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by mikos

[mk11]

Final assembly...

Longnose '69

Mach Won '70

[tim boyd]

One thing we noted in comparing the Longnose to the Mach Won...the Longnose kit never came with a clear shot window unit....I was a bit surprised when I figured that out.  

Guys, rest assured that Steve and the Round 2 team are well aware of the potential for future spinoffs here.  But as always, best thing you can do to assure that happens one day is to buy the current Round 2 "clone" offerings....speaking of which, how many of you have grabbed that sleeper of a kit '68 Coronet R/T convertible kit////just sayin'...

Best to you all....TB  

[1972coronet]

12 minutes ago, tim boyd said:

how many of you have grabbed that sleeper of a kit '68 Coronet R/T convertible kit

I've grabbed a few of those bad boys (and the Nova Wagon - both editions, and the Sodbuster , and the '65 GTO, the '68 GTO... and more on the horizon). Thus far I've only built one of the 'nets ; I can't wait for the hardtop iteration ! 

[vamach1]

9 hours ago, mikos said:

Here’s a pic I found online.  It looks like it could be restored back to stock if Revell finds the stock chassis, interior, windshield frame and fills in the cut out near the hood area.  The front end looks more rounded than the stock version so maybe they would have to revise that as well.  Having the Grande/convertible body style available again would be great.

 

It looks like there are very few parts in common with the 69/70 coupe/convertible kits.  Aside from the roof and engine block everything else looks to be funny car specific.

[Daddyfink]

On 9/18/2023 at 8:07 AM, mikos said:

Here’s a pic I found online.  It looks like it could be restored back to stock if Revell finds the stock chassis, interior, windshield frame and fills in the cut out near the hood area.  The front end looks more rounded than the stock version so maybe they would have to revise that as well.  Having the Grande/convertible body style available again would be great.

 

I have one and they are way too modified to bring back to a stock Mustang of any sort. If they really used the Stock Grande mold, they really ruined it pretty good. 

 

[Mercuryman54]

On 9/16/2023 at 6:01 PM, mk11 said:

Have you got a wip thread going on the ragtop?

Not as of now! It's been on the back burner for awhile.

[Mercuryman54]

On 9/16/2023 at 1:33 AM, Luc Janssens said:

The windshield also from the Revell kit?  Great looking model BTW!

Yes! surprisingly it went together without much trimming and fuss.

[mikos]

On 9/18/2023 at 5:22 PM, 1972coronet said:

I've grabbed a few of those bad boys (and the Nova Wagon - both editions, and the Sodbuster , and the '65 GTO, the '68 GTO... and more on the horizon). Thus far I've only built one of the 'nets ; I can't wait for the hardtop iteration ! 

Beautiful build!

[Chris in Berwyn]

On 9/18/2023 at 6:06 PM, tim boyd said:

One thing we noted in comparing the Longnose to the Mach Won...the Longnose kit never came with a clear shot window unit....I was a bit surprised when I figured that out.  

  

The lack of windows in the Long Nose is bizarre - but it rings a bell. I still have the body from that kit when I built it as a boy, and I seem to recall it has a clear acetate windshield - so I guess my 12 year old or so self felt it needed a windshield and made one!  I would double check, but it is in storage right now.  

[mikos]

I know I’m probably in the minority about this, but I think Revell should have done a convertible or a Grande version of the ‘71 Mustang they did.  It seems whenever they come out with something, it’s either a straight reissue or a new tool copy of what Round2 is doing.  Although their new tool ‘71 Mustang fastback is a great kit and I plan to get one, a different body style would have been great too.  I already have the Round2 version and no matter how much better the new tool Revell version may be, it’s hard to justify getting another fastback ‘71-‘73 Mustang kit.

I wish Revell was into cloning their old kits like Round2. They could bring back the ‘69 Grande/conv Mustang kit and maybe a few others.  They don’t seem to be interested in that though, just reissues that copy the Round2 offerings.

Edited September 22, 2023 by mikos

[vamach1]

46 minutes ago, mikos said:

I know I’m probably in the minority about this, but I think Revell should have done a convertible or a Grande version of the ‘71 Mustang they did.  It seems whenever they come out with something, it’s either a straight reissue or a new tool copy of what Round2 is doing.  Although their new tool ‘71 Mustang fastback is a great kit and I plan to get one, a different body style would have been great too.  I already have the Round2 version and no matter how much better the new tool Revell version may be, it’s hard to justify getting another fastback ‘71-‘73 Mustang kit.

I wish Revell was into cloning their old kits like Round2. They could bring back the ‘69 Grande/conv Mustang kit and maybe a few others.  They don’t seem to be interested in that though, just reissues that copy the Round2 offerings.

Let me preface my comments by stating I have owned two Mustang 72 Sprint convertibles, a 73 Mustang convertible, and two 72 Mach1s.  One of the resin casters (now out of business) made a coupe version for the AMT/MPC kit.  A member on this board makes a coupe body (made to order) for the Revell Boss 351 Kit.  I do not remember any resin castings for a convertible.  If you watch auctions, go to car shows and look at values of 71-73 Mustangs and what has been featured in movies it’s mostly the Sportsroofs and perhaps you may see some old tv shows with a 71-73 convertible but I would be hard pressed to tell you a movie or tv show that had a Grande and honestly I cannot say I have sever seen one cross the auction block of one of the major auctions except maybe a drag racing car.  Yes Round2 took a last ditch effort at making some changes to the 50 year old molds and finally added some good decals and cool box art but the contents were all too familiar and disappointing.  I’m sure the folks at Revell took many things into account when they decided what would sell based on popularity would not change and the sales would justify the investment in the all new tooling.  Even if I had ever owned a 72 Mustang coupe I would not be disappointed a kit was not made as I know it would be for selfish reasons.  It would not be hard for Round2 to modify the old molds to do a coupe or Grande version but do not count on it ever happening.  The fact that the sportsroof in 1971 could have been bought from Ford as a Boss 351, 302 or 351 or 429 Mach1, 351 Shelby Europa (Europe only)  and in 1972 a R code Sportroofs, 302 or 351 Mach1, Olympic Sprint with a 302 or 351, or a standard sportsroof with a 302, 351 R code or 351 Q code is a testament to the variety of the “fastback” models available to car buyers.  While some of these engines were also available in limited number in the convertible body style, the coupes were marketed as more of a basic model with the Grande not really being that different from the base coupe with things like a deluxe interior, more sound deadener and a vinyl roof.  I’m sure the movie producers of Diamonds are Forever and Gone in 60 seconds and some later movies did not think if only have used a coupe instead of a Sportsroof Mustang they could have made them more popular.  Selling cars and movies is about what grabs more peoples attention and not necessarily what is actually more popular to the actual car buying consumer.  The coupes outsold sportroofs and convertibles every year by multiples but I think they understood that Eleanor or the 007 Mach1 would generate more interest in movie goers that could watch a cool movie with cool cars for a few dollars.  Further proof of my “theory” is I have never seen a single diecast model in any scale of a 71-73 Mustang coupe.  I have somewhere around 100 Sportroofs diecasts and maybe ten 1/64 convertibles so it’s not just me thinking the demand would be too low to make a new mold (diecast or model kit) of a coupe with the expense of doing so being a pretty risky proposition without any past history to support undertaking the investment.  Now having said all that would I buy a resin coupe to make a GT351 Mexican coupe or 72 Grande R code 351 - I would not rule it out but I know I would be one of a very select few that would buy the Revell kit and the resin body.  I still have one of the older resin coupe bodies I bought about ten years ago but honestly I just lost interest in the AMT/MPC kits fixing all the inaccuracies and the toylike nature of them (e.g. metal axles) is all the more apparent when compared to the outstanding Revell Boss 351.

[Justin Porter]

12 hours ago, mikos said:

I know I’m probably in the minority about this, but I think Revell should have done a convertible or a Grande version of the ‘71 Mustang they did.  It seems whenever they come out with something, it’s either a straight reissue or a new tool copy of what Round2 is doing.  Although their new tool ‘71 Mustang fastback is a great kit and I plan to get one, a different body style would have been great too.  I already have the Round2 version and no matter how much better the new tool Revell version may be, it’s hard to justify getting another fastback ‘71-‘73 Mustang kit.

I wish Revell was into cloning their old kits like Round2. They could bring back the ‘69 Grande/conv Mustang kit and maybe a few others.  They don’t seem to be interested in that though, just reissues that copy the Round2 offerings.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. As Rex explains in his post, the BULK of AMT/MPC kits are just flat obsolete. Without significant work, they simply don't build into convincing, accurate, realistic miniatures of 1/1 scale cars. Are you really willing to sit there and say that the MPC '69 Camaro is a good reason to not have the Revell? To say that the AMT '64 Impala is somehow better than Revell's? That we should all be stuck with the horror show of the "Old Pro" until the end of time instead of Revell's lovely Nova? 

In the military kit world, kits get superseded all the time. Kit technology and design improves and popular subjects get the "latest and greatest" treatment first in order to actually recoup the investment in new tech and processes. That's how it's SUPPOSED to be. Only in automotive modeling - and most specifically only in American domestic classic automotive modeling - do you have kit companies clinging desperately to sixty year old tooling and builders willing to stump up and say "It's absolutely good enough."

[niteowl7710]

2 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. As Rex explains in his post, the BULK of AMT/MPC kits are just flat obsolete. Without significant work, they simply don't build into convincing, accurate, realistic miniatures of 1/1 scale cars. Are you really willing to sit there and say that the MPC '69 Camaro is a good reason to not have the Revell? To say that the AMT '64 Impala is somehow better than Revell's? That we should all be stuck with the horror show of the "Old Pro" until the end of time instead of Revell's lovely Nova? 

In the military kit world, kits get superseded all the time. Kit technology and design improves and popular subjects get the "latest and greatest" treatment first in order to actually recoup the investment in new tech and processes. That's how it's SUPPOSED to be. Only in automotive modeling - and most specifically only in American domestic classic automotive modeling - do you have kit companies clinging desperately to sixty year old tooling and builders willing to stump up and say "It's absolutely good enough."

I read this last night at work and had logged back in this morning to say nearly exactly THIS. I understand how nostalgia tickles certain people's wallets. But at the same time this irrational insistence that because it was done once it never needs to be addressed again is one of the biggest factors that have stunted the growth of car modeling. The other being decades of artificial price ceilings which killed who knows how many projects over time. 

The thing you hear from military builders who are dabbling in car modeling is - Why do you guys tolerate all this old junk for? 

[Mr mopar]

Just off Face book round 2 is doing John Wick '70 Chevelle. 

[Luc Janssens]

3 hours ago, Mr mopar said:

Just off Face book round 2 is doing John Wick '70 Chevelle. 

Good thing, brings modeling to a different public

Anyway, more hope for a sixty-nine Mustang now?!

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Luc Janssens

[mikos]

10 hours ago, Justin Porter said:

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. As Rex explains in his post, the BULK of AMT/MPC kits are just flat obsolete. Without significant work, they simply don't build into convincing, accurate, realistic miniatures of 1/1 scale cars. Are you really willing to sit there and say that the MPC '69 Camaro is a good reason to not have the Revell? To say that the AMT '64 Impala is somehow better than Revell's? That we should all be stuck with the horror show of the "Old Pro" until the end of time instead of Revell's lovely Nova? 

In the military kit world, kits get superseded all the time. Kit technology and design improves and popular subjects get the "latest and greatest" treatment first in order to actually recoup the investment in new tech and processes. That's how it's SUPPOSED to be. Only in automotive modeling - and most specifically only in American domestic classic automotive modeling - do you have kit companies clinging desperately to sixty year old tooling and builders willing to stump up and say "It's absolutely good enough."

Whether you think I’m wrong or not, there’s no reason to throw Round2 under the bus.   Round2 has been bringing out some fantastic older reisues, thought never to be seen again, and you slam them for doing that because they represent older technology.  When all is said and done, those kits look pretty good when built and you’re never going to see those wire axles or simplistic suspension set ups when being displayed on the shelf unless you turn them upside down.  As displayed, these kits have a scale fidelity and a look when sitting on their wheels that the modern tooling versions just don’t have.  Now, the recent Revell ‘71 Mustang is an exception to the rule and it does looks very good and it reminds me of the excellent ‘69 Camaro they did decades ago.  However, if we look at some of their other modern tooling efforts like the  ‘71 Olds 442, all I see is a too straight inaccurate upper window line shape, elongated stretched out front wheel well and some other things with the body side profile shape that I don’t like compared to the ancient Johan version.  The Johan version looked better and more realistic to my eyes.   However, at least with the Revell version, you have a more detailed suspension and engine bay compartment which is a lot more important than a dead nuts accurate body, I guess.

I’m extremely grateful that Round2 has chosen to clone and reissue some of their older tooling again.  The 63 Nova wagon, the ‘68 GT0,  ‘68 Coronet Super Bee convertible, ‘65 GTO Hardtop, and others.  And, I think their swift sales would agree with me.  You just can’t match the factory blueprints for accuracy in body shape when these models were originally made.  Revell seems to be hit or miss and they’ve had some major misses.  Remember the “notchback” Mustang LX Fox body?  I was eagerly anticipating getting multiples of that kit when it was first announced.  Unfortunately, after seeing the review pics online and elsewhere, the custom “chopped top” look turned me away and I never bought a single one.  How can they screw up a major body proportion on such a popular car like that?

I can see the purpose for having modern tooling on many of the classic kits that are out there.  However, there’s no reason to reinvent the wheel if cloning can give us some subjects at a faster and less expensive rate.  You seemed to have cherry picked the best kit from Revell and compare it to worst from Round2. The MPC ‘69 Camaro may be a dud, but that’s because it has been massaged and altered into a complete mess over the last 50 years.  The original ‘69 by AMT, particularly the ‘69 Pace Car issue (both promo and kit) was very well done.  The body is just as good as the modern Revell kit even though the latter has more detail.   The recent Revell 1981 Z28 reissue is a mess.  The wheel well shape is completely wrong, but it’s not a new tool.   I’ll wait for the MPC Camaro “ProStreet” reissue that is coming out with in a few months.  Sure, that kit has it own set of problems, but at least I don’t have to totally modify the shape of the wheel wells to make it look fairly accurate.  I’d rather shorten the rear bumper width than having to reform the wheel well shapes.   The Revell Nova is the same way.  The wheel well shape just doesn’t look right.  They’re too flat and square.  I’ll take the AMT “Old Pro” Nova and work with that.  Even though less detailed, the less major body modifications I have to do to make it look accurate, the better it is for me.

Again, I wish Revell would’ve given us a different body style in the new Mustang kit.  Just something a little different than the same fastback models we already have. The MPC and AMT fastback Mustangs, although very simple in nature and not quite as detailed, are really not that bad.  They can build into fairly good replicas with some effort.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by mikos

[mikos]

6 hours ago, Mr mopar said:

Just off Face book round 2 is doing John Wick '70 Chevelle. 

Unless it’s a new tool, which I highly doubt, that’s the same kit that has been reissued over the last 30 years.  It’s based on the old AMT ‘72 Chevelle which was backdated to the ‘70 back in the early ‘90’s.

[vamach1]

16 hours ago, mikos said:

Unless it’s a new tool, which I highly doubt, that’s the same kit that has been reissued over the last 30 years.  It’s based on the old AMT ‘72 Chevelle which was backdated to the ‘70 back in the early ‘90’s.

You’re probably right on that one.  At least there is a tv/movie connection unlike the Fonz Dreamride Monkeemobile that I do not recall ever seeing in the Happy Days tv show.  ?

[Daddyfink]

On 9/22/2023 at 8:16 AM, Mr mopar said:

Just off Face book round 2 is doing John Wick '70 Chevelle. 

Great, you can park it next to the same old tired, and recycled,  Jack Reacher Chevelle kit. 

 

[mikos]

On 9/23/2023 at 6:58 AM, vamach1 said:

You’re probably right on that one.  At least there is a tv/movie connection unlike the Fonz Dreamride Monkeemobile that I do not recall ever seeing in the Happy Days tv show.  ?

Just as bad, the MPC ‘72 Grand Prix Sweat Hogs “Dream Machine”.  I never understood that kit reissue even back in the day.  I don’t recall any of the Welcome Back Kotter clan ever driving a ‘72 Grand Prix in the series, not even Travolta.  And even worse, you couldn’t even make the “Super Fly” edition out of it because they butchered up the top.

If they kept it as the “Super Fly”, they would’ve had a lucrative reissue on their hands.   However, with cloning technology, they can do a straight stock configuration reissue.

Edited September 24, 2023 by mikos

[bobthehobbyguy]

Would hazard a guess that doing t h e Happy Days version of the Monkee Mobile was cashing in on the popularity of the Fonz and Happy Days.

As far as the Superfly to Welcome Back Kotter if the Licensing for the Superfly was long gone then it was an opportunity to get another version out of the tooling.