Wasnt there talk about 72 road runner ? they were gonna retooled? what happen with the ideal ?

[robo37]

Wasnt there talk about  72 road runner ? they were gonna retooled? what happen with the  ideal ?

[Mark]

People here were talking about it, but none of them make the decisions.

[gtx6970]

I was told many years ago by someone who was in the know. The tooling for the MPC 1971 Roadrunner was heavily damaged.

And was zero chance this kit was coming  back unless they start from scratch.

If I were a betting man...the '72 variant is in same boat 

 

 

I have both kits in the stash so I have no skin in the game if it does.....or doesn't .

[stavanzer]

Look Here, Rob.

This is the thread you mentioned.

 

[sak]

I built this one recently , and I can say that it is crude and has a few inacuracies. It can look good, but it would be nice if they fix a few of the issues if they reproduce it.

[1972coronet]

The 1972 Road Runner was an updated 1971 Road Runner & GTX (the latter being , IIRC, a mid-year issue), then ad seq. through the 1974 GTX.

I seem to remember that the '71  body was modified for the Richard Petty edition from c.1972. 

It was later - 1987 - "returned" to "stock" and reissued with then-contemporary custom rims ( Weld Wheels ? ) , which took the place of the originals' Cragar S/S rims .

Apparently, the tooling - at least the body - was damaged in c.1995 , on the heels of an announced   reissue of the c.1972 Petty car.

Be really nice if Round2 was to work their magic in a similar manner as the '68 Coronets and '71 Demon 340 - 100% new tooling. 

Edited Saturday at 04:27 PM by 1972coronet
AMENDMENT

[CapSat 6]

Man…I am really conflicted whenever this comes up. 

I owned two ‘71 Plymouth Satellites in my lifetime. I really love those cars. 
 
The MPC kit is a mixed bag. The originals, and the 1980’s repop have their issues. The grille/ front bumper looks sort of flat and bent down. It doesn’t look quite right. The Revell kit’s front bumper looks much more detailed, but looks a little tall, and it’s hurt by having no separate grille, so that one misses the mark, too. 

The MPC kit has no lower grille detail. It does have a license plate there, but there is no detail behind or around it. They kind of faked that area for the promos and kits. 

The a pillars are always weak in the MPC kits, and the front window opening is prone to distortion. More often than not, these kits are found with windshield areas that are at least slightly bent. The hood never really fit right on any of the MPC ‘71 Plymouths kits. 

The interior is sort of shallow in those kits. The chassis and engine are basic, and the front inner fenders are the wrong shape. The side mirrors are pretty wrong in that kit. 

IF Round 2 is going to bring this one back, they would be very wise to stay away from mostly copying the original MPC kit. This sort of worked with the ‘68 Coronet and ‘71 Demon kits. I think the results would be worse copying this one. 

Round 2 could take the approach of doing a simplified kit like the Coronet and Demon, and that still might be cost effective. If they want to copy the old MPC kit, then they should tweak the design of the front end (grille, front bumper and lower grille), work on the hood fit, strengthen or otherwise beef up the front window opening, do better Rallye wheels, and work on the appearance of the inner front fenders and firewall. They could do a platform interior, enabling variants like GTX and ‘72 Road Runner. 

I don’t love the Revell kit, but it does stick the landing a little better than the old MPC kit does. I was REALLY hoping for a newly-tooled ‘72 rear bumper for the recent Dom Toretto special.

I was SOOOO hoping that AMT’s ‘71 Charger kit was going to eventually lead to new ‘71 Plymouths. Since Revell’s very ok kit has been available almost constantly for the past 20 or so years, I’m not sure this will be at the top of Round 2’s list, but who ever knows? Round 2 did hit us with a ‘68 GTO, while Revell still has had theirs in their catalog (albeit as a ‘69). 

Dont get me wrong- I don’t like having to trash either of these kits, but I don’t want to see the same mistakes get made with any new ones. Round 2 does seem to have the eye for detail they need when they do this kind of thing, so I do have faith if they ever take up this cause. I’m just mentioning it now to go on record, and put it in the right ears, hopefully. 

 

[CapSat 6]

1 hour ago, 1972coronet said:

It was later - 1987 - "returned" to "stock" and reissued with then-contemporary custom rims ( Weld Wheels ? ) , which took the place of the originals' Cragar S/S rims .

Gotti wheels? Nice ones. The Cragars in those kits (as far as I know: same ones MPC used in a lot of their ‘70’s kits) were some of the best. The Gottis were very nice, but more than 1/2 of the time, the chrome in those ‘80’s ‘71 Road Runners were total garbage. Sometimes it would be faking off in the shrink wrap. 

Edited Saturday at 06:07 PM by CapSat 6
Dang autocorrect…

[Ragtop Man]

If R2 announced a 'clone' RR, that would be big news. I'm sure they are well aware of the original kit's limitations, and would take appropriate steps to ensure multiple releases.

The RM RR is nice, but 1/24. I'm not a scale bigot, but the opportunity to bash goes down substantially.

The idea that a body could be used with the GN basic tool and a few extras to make a clone #43 is pretty yuuge.

In fact, mebbe cut a deal with Salvino to contract mold Satellite RR bodies for their GN kits, perhaps with a cost-sharing deal? 

[mikos]

I’d rather see R2 clone the original MPC kit, warts and all, rather than having no kit of the RR available in 1/25.  Also, if they worked with Salvino to give us a Petty #43, it would be 1/24th scale.  Yeah, I’m kind of a scale snob. lol!

Edited yesterday at 01:13 AM by mikos

[tim boyd]

Interesting discussion on the flaws of the MPC Road Runner.  While I don't disagree with the accuracy critiques, I still think the original annual kit and the 1987 reissue could turn out a very passable scale replica, as seen here with both 1971s and a 1972 annual kit...TB

[1972coronet]

7 hours ago, CapSat 6 said:

I don’t love the Revell kit, but it does stick the landing a little better than the old MPC kit does. I was REALLY hoping for a newly-tooled ‘72 rear bumper for the recent Dom Toretto special.

IF that F&F issue would've included a '72 rear bumper / taillamps , I'd have snagged quite a few of them.

The c.1995 'GTX' revamp includes lots of great upgrades / corrections : under-hood details which were / are missing from the original ; very nice Six Barrel induction and Air Grabber; and a Tuff-Grip steering wheel. I'm going to bash the c.1983 R.R. with the '71 GTX for a 6 Bbl. / T-Flite 'Runner.  

[1972coronet]

The tail lamps on the '71 MPC kits lack the correct backup lamp provision ; the Monogram et alia kit has it right... except that they're moulded-in .

[CapSat 6]

I’ll clarify what I said above a little bit…

This subject could get the retro treatment much like the Coronet and Demon…but…

…I think Round 2 would have to go a little farther with enhancing the front inner fenders and firewall. Also, the hood fit and windshield area would have to be addressed. 

The Coronet and Demon definitely benefitted from the body corrections that Round 2 baked in. Both are superior to the originals. I would imagine that at the least, Round 2 would do the same with a new ‘71 Plymouth body, so my gripes about the bumper, grilles and side mirrors would likely be addressed like prior efforts. 

Eventually getting GTX and ‘72 Road Runner variants, and several interior options would add great value, too. 

[CapSat 6]

1 hour ago, tim boyd said:

Interesting discussion on the flaws of the MPC Road Runner.  While I don't disagree with the accuracy critiques, I still think the original annual kit and the 1987 reissue could turn out a very passable scale replica, as seen here with both 1971s and a 1972 annual kit...TB

These really do build up decently as they are- I didn’t mean to make them sound terrible. You crushed these builds, Tim! 

[sak]

The thing that bothered me the most, even more that the other issues that were mentioned, was the location of the front turn indicators. They should be equidistant from the bumper and wheel arch. Its very close to the bumper on the MPCs. 

[niteowl7710]

6 hours ago, mikos said:

I’d rather see R2 clone the original MPC kit, warts and all, rather than having no kit of the RR available in 1/25.  Also, if they worked with Salvino to give us a Petty #43, it would be 1/24th scale.  Yeah, I’m kind of a scale snob. lol!

SJR wouldn't allow anyone within 500 nautical miles of their tooling, but their 70s era kits that they tooled themselves (Olds 432, Monte Carlo, Roadrunner) are 1/25. The logic was Monogram reset the standard to 1/24 from the 80s forward, so the current 202x cars are also 1/24, but the original 60s/70s NASCAR kits are 1/25 and so theirs are too. If you're interested in that era of NASCAR, but haven't gotten any of their kits, you've been snobbish for no reason.

Edited yesterday at 07:34 AM by niteowl7710

[CapSat 6]

8 hours ago, sak said:

The thing that bothered me the most, even more that the other issues that were mentioned, was the location of the front turn indicators. They should be equidistant from the bumper and wheel arch. Its very close to the bumper on the MPCs. 

Let’s add this to the list of corrections! Also, on the MPC bodies, they were engraved as sunken in, while on the real cars, they were level with the fender surface. On real cars, they bolted in from the inside, with the trims being body color pot metal, and a large plastic housing for the lens assembly. 

Decals for the ‘71 units (black outlines for the trims and amber or red for the lenses) could be a good solution. For the ‘72’s, small cast clear pieces could be used. There is at least one aftermarket vendor offering the corporate ‘72-up turn signal lenses, so small pieces could work for the ‘72 variant.