Round 2 2026

[phirewtiter]

Just picked up the Python Mustang for a little more than I really wanted to pay. Probably will be reissued soon.😋

[Ragtop Man]

At risk of repetition - the Bobby Issac Torino absolutely nailed the look of a Bud-Moore-Massage '72 Fastback body. Super well done.

That said, the chassis is as generic as Wal-Mart asprin, and needs some love (see articles from the late Bill Coulter) to bring it up to speed for a semblance of accuracy. 

Sure would love to see a proper 3D 351 Cleveland one of these days, gets a little spendy blowing up Revell B351s. 

[Edsel-Dan]

Yes, I did mean the Former "Polar Lights" 64 GTO and 65 Coronet Convertibiles

 

[horsepower]

On 11/13/2025 at 7:41 PM, Robberbaron said:

 

I agree with Steve's assessment.  When I was a kid these 1:1 Monzas were everywhere, and the MPC kits/promos always seemed spot-on to me.

Been a while since I looked at my AMT "Original Art" reissue, but I seem to recall thinking the belt line/side window shape didn't seem quite right.  As Steve noted, the AMT chassis is better, with separate drivetrain/exhaust detail from what I recall.

The best Monza recipe might be to bash the AMT dirty bits with an MPC body.  The MPC Monza promos can still be scored quite cheap from what I have seen.

IMHO, the "original" AMT corporation was hitting its low point in the mid-seventies.  As a general rule, most AMT annuals from this era have body proportion problems vs. their MPC counterparts, which are usually pretty accurate.  Similar examples are the Camaros, Pinto coupes, and the Novas.  (The roof shape in the just-reissued AMT 1976 Nova Pro Street is all wrong vs. the MPC 1979 Nova, which gets it right.)

I built one of these in the first release and it was definitely something I didn't do at all, in fact I think this is the only one I did this way. The strange way? I did it as a box art copy but it never did seem to do anything exciting for me but after picking up a different Monza that was intended as a NASCAR Super Speedway build I was pretty amped when I saw this one was making another appearance I had a serious brain storm, but I have to make sure I give my wife pre storm notice as she was just sure I was having some kind of stroke😋. But when I told her my big idea it must have been a good one because she gave it a better review than her usual oh, that sounds cute, remark with a with all of those things stuffed under that little Monza it should be a real attention getter. But back to my thoughts I've been looking at one of the Grand Sport Corvette kits that Revell bagged from Accurate Miniatures and I saw it with the trick small block the Weber cross ram induction and the tricked out IRS I have almost convinced myself that stuffing all the go-fast things under the Monza body should make a good mountain racer or at least something that would wake up the teeny bopper GTA group so here I go again!!

[ChrisBcritter]

Regarding the '72 Torino, what is the connection (if any) between this kit and the Jo-Han kit? Did AMT/MPC copy it or did they get the Jo-Han molds?

Edited November 21 by ChrisBcritter

[Rob Hall]

1 minute ago, ChrisBcritter said:

Regarding the '72 Torino, what is the connection with this kit and the Jo-Han kit? Did AMT/MPC copy it or did they get the Jo-Han molds?

None that I'm aware of...it was an MPC stock car kit that came out in the same era as the Jo-Han promo based stock car kit. 

[Proximitas]

I owned an actual Monza Mirage. It was my very first car. The wide body panels had been torn off by someone prior to my owning it. I never could find a replacement set.

Sadly, I got t-boned by a speeding driver broke my hand in the accident, but the car was toasted as the body had been completely sprung.

Oh, how I miss that car.

I built the MPC Monza Pro Street kit as a Mirage - scratch building my own body kit. I sure wish they would reissue these kits.

[Motor City]

1977 Monza Mirage

[Mark]

On 11/21/2025 at 3:40 PM, ChrisBcritter said:

Regarding the '72 Torino, what is the connection (if any) between this kit and the Jo-Han kit? Did AMT/MPC copy it or did they get the Jo-Han molds?

The old CAR MODEL magazine did mention a connection as I recall; that Jo-Han allowed MPC to use information they had already gathered, and to possibly use the wooden "masters" Jo-Han had created for the body and related parts.  MPC's body was strictly NASCAR trim as they weren't concerned with doing a promo as Jo-Han had done.

There were some loose ties between these companies in that period.  AMT was in the closing stages of selling Jo-Han kits in AMT packaging.  The last of these were in '74, and included the pro stock Maverick, Dodge Challenger funny car, and the '72 Torino NASCAR kit.  MPC cribbed the design of their 1/16 scale '63 Corvette kit off of Monogram's 1/8 scale '65 (again, supposedly with permission).  A couple of MPC's 1/25 scale snap kits ('40 Ford coupe, '50 Mercury, Willys panel) are simplified versions of AMT kits.  If you have the MPC snap Mercury, look at the chassis.  You can see the seam in the engine's oil pan, and trunk mat detail on the top of the chassis even though the snap Merc doesn't have the opening trunk that AMT's kit does.

[espo]

On 11/27/2025 at 7:19 AM, Motor City said:

1977 Monza Mirage

These were such a ticky tacky add on tape and plastic side panels they were almost sale proof on the showroom floor when new. 

[Sledsel]

On 11/21/2025 at 3:40 PM, ChrisBcritter said:

Regarding the '72 Torino, what is the connection (if any) between this kit and the Jo-Han kit? Did AMT/MPC copy it or did they get the Jo-Han molds?

When it comes to the two kits the Johan is superior. The chassis on the Johan is wonderful and other than the Dana rear end it is correct.

 

Edited 16 hours ago by Sledsel

[Mark]

But that's a stock Torino frame, which the race cars didn't use.  The front stub, at least, would be different (probably a fabricated '65 Galaxie piece).  The Dana rear axle isn't right either; should be a Ford 9" unit.  Jo-Han's Dana 60 isn't 100% correct either, having a 8-3/4" Mopar gear carrier ("chunk").  The cover and housing are great, just needs work up front.  And it's incorrect for the S/C Rambler kit too.

[Mark C.]

56 minutes ago, Mark said:

But that's a stock Torino frame, which the race cars didn't use.  The front stub, at least, would be different (probably a fabricated '65 Galaxie piece).  The Dana rear axle isn't right either; should be a Ford 9" unit.  Jo-Han's Dana 60 isn't 100% correct either, having a 8-3/4" Mopar gear carrier ("chunk").  The cover and housing are great, just needs work up front.  And it's incorrect for the S/C Rambler kit too.

Makes one wonder whether JoHan had planned to do a full detail kit for a stock Torino that was cancelled for some reason…

[oldcarfan]

I'll definitely want a Taurus, and a Monza for sure. I had the Taurus kit back in the day and turned it into a two door coupe. Now I'd like to do one all lowered and with a tuner vibe. The only thing I really remember about the build is that it was pretty straightforward, but the ride height was way too high. 

[CapSat 6]

7 hours ago, Mark C. said:

Makes one wonder whether JoHan had planned to do a full detail kit for a stock Torino that was cancelled for some reason…

I wonder about this one too. The stock ‘72 Torino (through ‘76) did use a full frame. The ‘67-‘69 Fairlane and ‘70-‘71 Torino were unibody, and famously used the Galaxie front stub in NASCAR. I think around 1972 when the Torino hit, the rule in NASCAR was that each model / body style had to use the same chassis format as that particular model/body (but not necessarily stock components)- so - coil springs and full frame for the ‘72 Tornio. I think the Jo Han kit chassis is correct for a ‘72 Tornio/ Mercury. 

I think the rules were more loose as far as the actual components, or at least that is what I read, so it was possible that a given team could have opted for a Dana instead of a Ford 9” rear, for instance, or even a Chrysler transmission instead of a Ford, if that is what the builder preferred. That could explain the Dana in the kit. Whichever car Jo Han looked at might have run a Dana. 

I think right in ‘72, the rules were in flux a bit, but eventually, everybody settled on using the same components for their cars, due to cost, known reliability, and availability (I think Richard Petty once described it as the whole aftermarket going “Chevy Chevy Chevy”, as far as engine parts, which hobbled the Chrysler teams, as good aftermarket engine parts were more expensive and harder to get- although not being able to get good new engine blocks from Chrysler, and the lack of a new body style with decent aero eventually put the final nails into the coffin of their racing efforts). I think the same body/ same chassis rule went away some time around 1976- when they went to the “standard” chassis they used through the late ‘70’s and ‘80’s. 

I always thought that the chassis in the Jo Han ‘72 Torino, Dana aside, was correct for that car (but not for earlier Ford intermediates)- that the Jo Han chassis represented more or less a FoMoCo ‘72-‘76 chassis.