Guest Gramps-xrds Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Revell isn't the first to issue a 2 door post 57. MPC made one yrs ago. It wasn't a 210 but a bel-air that had a flip front end. The problem w/ the new revelle/monogram 1/25 kits is the don't look 1/25 scale and probably aren't. Here's some pix of MPCs post that I never got around to finishing.
george 53 Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Bill, I think we may be TOO old school! I bought one of the "new"AMT 57's when they first came out all those years ago, and they didn't match up with the "old" AMT kits so I never got another one! Now you say the new Revell isn't to scale? I haven't seen one yet so I don't know. I guess since the manufacturers don't care about being accurate as to scale, we shouldn't care, but I do. How come the old AMT kit, and the MPC kit you mentioned are to scale with each other? I put the entire greenhouse of the MPC kit on the AMT kit, and there was virtually no difference in scale! The "new" AMT kit is larger than the old one. WHY? I REALLY feel if it IS 25th scale they shouls ALL match. I guess the manufacturers don't agree.
RodBurNeR Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 I find it exciting because it's a new kit. It's not completely like the old MPC obviously. It's nice to see a new body '57 , new decals and options too! There is a lot of hype about it...I am on a couple lists that tons of emails about that kit are flooding me with. I don't have one yet, but I am looking forward to it....even if it happens to look more 1/24 than 1/25. It's kinda the same reason I like the Revell '58 and '55 Chevies....the doors don't open on the '58 which is a PLUS in my book. To each his own I guess. Revell is doing an excellent job with new tools and options! I also think AMT/MPC is doing very well in bringing some interesting repop's and new options for those.
Guest Gramps-xrds Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Bill, I think we may be TOO old school! I bought one of the "new"AMT 57's when they first came out all those years ago, and they didn't match up with the "old" AMT kits so I never got another one! Now you say the new Revell isn't to scale? I haven't seen one yet so I don't know. I guess since the manufacturers don't care about being accurate as to scale, we shouldn't care, but I do. How come the old AMT kit, and the MPC kit you mentioned are to scale with each other? I put the entire greenhouse of the MPC kit on the AMT kit, and there was virtually no difference in scale! The "new" AMT kit is larger than the old one. WHY? I REALLY feel if it IS 25th scale they shouls ALL match. I guess the manufacturers don't agree. George I have to agree w/ you. 1/25th scale is 1/25th scale no matter how you do it. That's why they make mics and dial calipers, so things WILL be the same. I didn't notice the difference in the 2 AMT 57s (well I did but didn't pay much attention to it) so I just went in and dug both out and mic-ed them, you're right. The new one is about 4.4 scale inches wider and the wheel base is about 1.625 longer than the old ones. All I can say is those slant eyed chinamen must not be able to read a mic or caliper. I never liked or built Monogram kits just because the were 1/24th scale and everyone else was 1/25th. All the model makers of the 60s used 1/25 and could be interchanged easily. I also quit buying Revell as of late.
Steven Zimmerman Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 We can banter all day about the differances in the 57 chevies,but the comment about the slant eyed chinamen was a racist slur,and as such has no place here. I was married to a Korean woman for many years and have two grown sons that are bi racial,and I find that offensive,and would appreciate it if we refrain from such comments in the future.....Please. Steven Zimmerman aka the'Z'man
george 53 Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 Bill, I was quite happy till a few years ago, an never really cared about scale,caz ALL my 25th scale cars were the same. Then AMT bought out the Edsel kit, and it just looked small for some reason. I don't know if it actually is, but I can tell ya for sure in engine isn't 25th! It's an FE block(the heads are part of the intake) But it don't match the FE blocks I've got. Why? I guess your right, them guys must not use a Micrometer, but an Abucus!!!
Guest Gramps-xrds Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 We can banter all day about the differances in the 57 chevies,but the comment about the slant eyed chinamen was a racist slur,and as such has no place here. I was married to a Korean woman for many years and have two grown sons that are bi racial,and I find that offensive,and would appreciate it if we refrain from such comments in the future.....Please. Steven Zimmerman aka the'Z'man Steve, I apologize for making that statement. It wasn't meant as a racial slur, but to bring out the fact that since AMT moved to China for bigger profits, things have gone downhill and the cost has still gone up. Had they and a lot of other manufacturers stayed in the US, this country just might not be in the condition it's in now.
george 53 Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 PLEASE accept my deepest apologise Your right and I was wrong, I'm sorry I offended you And No, it will NOT happen again, Again, I am sorry I offended you, I was NOT meant as such. Please forgive me.
Zoom Zoom Posted March 16, 2009 Posted March 16, 2009 All I can say is those slant eyed chinamen must not be able to read a mic or caliper. I have a Chinese niece. Your statement is about as ignorant, racist, and stupid as any I've seen on these forums.
Tommy Kortman Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Personally, I cant wait to get a couple. For me; my Pop had a 57 Chevy 150. In fact, this was the first car (1/1) that I ever worked on. I have always loved the 55 & 57 Chevys. Couple that with the nice pieces that Revell has brought out lately, and I am anticipating this one being just as nice. What I can't under stand is how we can sit here and complain about the lack of new tooling, then when a new tool does show up you immediately start to here a bunch of negative guff about it. Some people can never be happy. For my part, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck... Personally I like to leave the rivet counting for the other modeling forms. Rivet counters belong right up there with the pen light Nazis. Remember... IT'S JUST A FREAKING HOBBY...Enjoy it.
Ron Hamilton Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Because it's a much better kit, that's why. I had one of the original MPC flip nosed '57's and I was thoroughly disgusted with it. The roof was too low (It's profile was closer to a 2 door hardtop than a 2 door post sedan). It's obvious that Revell has sweated the details in this kit. While it is not perfect, it is an excellent source of raw material for the subject matter.
tuffone20 Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I know I'm going to pick up a few of them as soon as I can!
Jon Cole Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Shouldn't you wait at least until you actually have the kit in question in your hands, to complain about the scale? You post a 'scale' issue with the kit, and suddenly it starts to be taken as "fact". What's more disappointing for me, is the price. At over $20. it appears the new toolings are going to stay on the store shelves, unless it will be my next build. I used to buy kits even though I knew I wasn't going to build it right away, now I'm afraid that may no longer be the case, at least as far as new tooling is concerned. Unless the subject is a 'holy grail' then sadly I just cannot afford it.
Eshaver Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Mr. Synder, I have to agree with you here . The point you made concerning the "over " twenty dollars was right on the money, no pun intended just fact. Same goes for the 1964 Fairlane too. Lok , if Revell thinks they can make a decent return at 25,00+ THEN GO FER IT KIDS! Im going to simply build what i already have or buy scratch builing supplies and , Revell, oh well........... Ed Shaver
noname Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I'm curious and a bit confused here. Which one is not to scale, the new Black Widow or the new Amt 57 Chevy? And what is the new Amt 57 Chevy? I wasn't aware of one.
Guest Gramps-xrds Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Shouldn't you wait at least until you actually have the kit in question in your hands, to complain about the scale? You post a 'scale' issue with the kit, and suddenly it starts to be taken as "fact". Don't get me wrong. I think that new tooling is great and I'd like to see more of it. My concern is scale issues that revell/monogram has. All of the past kits they have issued saying 1/25 scale actually aren't. their closer to 1/24. I'm just assuming this one will be the same. It makes a big difference to me when you have 2 different scales in a dio or mix them in a display. I'm by no means a rivet counter but, the difference is very obvious at least to me. I don't expect everything to be perfectly proportioned on a model. (although it would be nice) Therefor I can't see me payin $20+ for something that will never be built like the 59 chevy & cadillac I have stuck under the bench.
Guest Gramps-xrds Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 (edited) Roger I agree w/ you 100%. Although revell did make a 37 ford that was nice. A freind got me one but, I'm afraid it's totally useless to me because of the scale issue. I didn't have the hart to tell him that. Matthew, the new AMT 57 is the one w/ more detail and an opening trunk and it is a bit bigger than the original 57. Edited March 17, 2009 by Gramps-xrds
Guest promodmerc Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 For dirt track builders the Black Widow is Godsend. There is a lot les trim to remove from the body. Dirt track & most race cars had the trim removed. Revell knew what they were doing. Us dirt track/short track builders are not complaining at all. Be it scale or price.
MrObsessive Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 The new AMT '57 Chevy IS a bit bigger than the old '60's repop. I tried to fit the new chassis under the old one and it won't fit unless you do some major massaging. There's something about the shape of the new AMT '57 that's not quite right to me either.................it lies somewhere in the shape of the wheelwells in relation to the rest of the car. They almost appear elongated to me-------that's probably what kept me from building it among other things. Maybe a swap from the old body wheelwells to the new one is in order?
James Flowers Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 I have to agree on the scale issue . I am always disappointed when a new kit says what scale it is and it is not. I like to kit bash parts to other older kits. That becomes a problem when it is not the scale as stated. That causes all sorts of problems with fitting parts to another kit. I see no reason that they can not be made to the scale as stated.
george 53 Posted March 17, 2009 Posted March 17, 2009 Well, I don't feel I'm a rivet counter, but when you put a 24th kit up to it's 25th counterpart, there IS a difference in their sizes. If it's 25th then say so, if it's NOT well, then say so too! I wasn't aware there's a scale BETWEEN 24th and 25th that's being produced. If it's to scale THEN WHY don't some 25th pieces fit OTHER 25th scale pieces? The Edsel engine just being an example. I ONLY buy 24th for parts, and I DON'T build 24th UNLESS I can't absolutely find it in 25th. An exeption was Monograms 69 GSX. But now that I've gotten my 2 25th scale GSX's from Steve, over at STAR MODELS, they'll get built before the Mono kit. If you place all your models on the shelf, the size difference between the two scales is VERY noticable. I'll put a 24th engine in a 25th car, just to make the motor the "STAR" of the engine compartment. Or use tires from a Mono kit, But all in all I do like to stick with 25th scale, caz it's what I grew up with, and until recently, they were all true to scale. But WHAT'S happened lately? Don't the manufacturers care anymore about scale fidelity? Is "Close enough" the NEW scale? Why do my kits from the early 60's have interchangeable parts with my newer kits that match up,( till around 2000) but the newer kit's that have come out in the last coupla years may be a scale 2/3/4 inches off? Did rulers change when I wasn't lookin, or what? A Mill is still a mill isn't it, or an inch is STILL an INCH! Why the sudden change? Or is it like it doesn't make a difference anymore? It sure seems like it.
Tommy Kortman Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) Don't the manufacturers care anymore about scale fidelity? Is "Close enough" the NEW scale? Why do my kits from the early 60's have interchangeable parts with my newer kits that match up,( till around 2000) but the newer kit's that have come out in the last couple years may be a scale 2/3/4 inches off? Did rulers change when I wasn't lookin, or what? A Mill is still a mill isn't it, or an inch is STILL an INCH! Why the sudden change? Or is it like it doesn't make a difference anymore? It sure seems like it. Well George the answer might just be economics. If the manufacturers can shrink a kit to save even 1% less styrene; when that gets multiplied over the entire run of a model, that could add up to a substantial savings. In these times everybody is looking for anything to save cost. Look at everything we buy. You know that you've noticed things at the grocery store just don't seem to look the same size they used to. Hell, Coca Cola even changed the style of the twist off cap on a bottle of soda just to save a couple of grams of plastic. Containers are thinner...It's all cost savings. There is another possibility for fudging the scale. I am not sure why Revell or any other manufacturer would do this, but I read Mr. Tamiya's book a few months ago and in it he revealed that he will opt for artistic license over scale fidelity because sometimes the model just doesn't look right if he follows the micrometer to the decimal point. To me Tamiya has always been pretty high in the quality and engineering rankings. To a lot of people they are the "Gold Std" of model making, so the guy must know what he's talking about. Like I said though, Tamiya's approach might not have a darn thing to do with this instance, but it's just a thought. Edited March 18, 2009 by Tommy Kortman
Rob Hall Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 (edited) I've never quite understood the scale debate; I have plenty of 1:25th and 1:24th kits in my collection, it's not really a big deal to me, though I generally prefer domestic subjects in 1:25th and imports in 1:24th, as that is what I'm used to, I suppose. I wouldn't even compare this new Revell '57 with the old MPC '57, the old MPC tool is pretty weak..can't be built remotely stock, which the Revell can. Edited March 18, 2009 by Rob Hall
59 Impala Posted March 18, 2009 Posted March 18, 2009 I matched up the bodies of Revell's new 57 to AMT's old 57 and they match up perfectly. The Revell model looks pretty good. This new issue beats the old Revell 57's hands down. The old issues were junk in my oppinion. I have one of the 57 Nomads that I started to build years ago and got so frustrated with it I put it back in the box and put it on the shelf. Granted, it is detailed, but the parts look terrible and have to be reworked just to look right, example: the exhaust pipes fitting the manafolds look terrible hanging down underneath and have to be reworked to fit right. The body on the old kit looks out of proportion on the sides. I just wish that they made a 210 2dr sedan or at least put a rear seat in this 150. I still like the kit though. Kudos to Revell for this kit. Dan
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now