'53 Hudson Hornet is coming....

[sjordan2]

And what have we all learned from this little exercise? A few things...

1. We've learned that yes, there were errors in the Hudson.

2. We've learned that the people who had the "nerve" to speak up and point out the errors are responsible for the fact that Moebius will now correct those errors as best they can.

3. We've learned that Moebius cares about its products and its customers. Posting the photos of the Hornet publicly and taking comments and criticisms to heart–actually acting on those comments–tells us a lot about the kind of people who are involved in the project, and what it tells us is all good.

4. The most important lesson, IMO: The people who pointed out those errors are not enemies of the hobby (as some have suggested) and were not bashing anyone. They were just being observant and honest in regards to what they saw in the Hornet.. not giving opinions of the people involved. And their opinions, comments and suggestions regarding the model are ultimately going to result in a better kit for all of us.

What you said.

[lordairgtar]

I just read all 15 pages of the bloviating going on here. Wow. As a car show artist, I've drawn Hudsons. I've sat for a couple of hours staring at one with pencil in hand. Really cool cars. I'm buying the kit when it comes out, maybe several.

[Dave Ambrose]

And what have we all learned from this little exercise? A few things...

1. We've learned that yes, there were errors in the Hudson.

2. We've learned that the people who had the "nerve" to speak up and point out the errors are responsible for the fact that Moebius will now correct those errors as best they can.

3. We've learned that Moebius cares about its products and its customers. Posting the photos of the Hornet publicly and taking comments and criticisms to heart–actually acting on those comments–tells us a lot about the kind of people who are involved in the project, and what it tells us is all good.

4. The most important lesson, IMO: The people who pointed out those errors are not enemies of the hobby (as some have suggested) and were not bashing anyone. They were just being observant and honest in regards to what they saw in the Hornet.. not giving opinions of the people involved. And their opinions, comments and suggestions regarding the model are ultimately going to result in a better kit for all of us.

Three cheers for Moebius. This is a 21st Century business model. I have to believe that Moebius will prosper because of it.

...and I'll take three.

Edited December 29, 2010 by Dave Ambrose

[Fisher61]

I know I will buy one when it becomes available, just because of the subject! I'm sure it's not 100%, but it doesn't look to be totally out of whack like a Monogram 1/24 '56 Belair hardtop kit! And it's hard for me to make a judgment without seeing one painted and foiled!

[Danno]

Even though they think they won, I'm still buying a half-dozen or so. So there!

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Well I dunno what that "winning" thing is about. I saw a few problems off the bat and more as they were pointed out, but I woulda still bought a few.

I'm just glad that Metzner and company are showing the maturity and coolness of head so absent in this thread - especially among those who hurl their monkey-scat at all those nasty "rivet counters".

Bottom line: a better model is coming, and that's absolutely a notable, laudable credit to Moebius. My thanks to 'em, and I'm looking forward even more eagerly to mine.

[highway]

And what have we all learned from this little exercise? A few things...

1. We've learned that yes, there were errors in the Hudson.

2. We've learned that the people who had the "nerve" to speak up and point out the errors are responsible for the fact that Moebius will now correct those errors as best they can.

3. We've learned that Moebius cares about its products and its customers. Posting the photos of the Hornet publicly and taking comments and criticisms to heart–actually acting on those comments–tells us a lot about the kind of people who are involved in the project, and what it tells us is all good.

4. The most important lesson, IMO: The people who pointed out those errors are not enemies of the hobby (as some have suggested) and were not bashing anyone. They were just being observant and honest in regards to what they saw in the Hornet.. not giving opinions of the people involved. And their opinions, comments and suggestions regarding the model are ultimately going to result in a better kit for all of us.

Well said Harry, and in my opinion, point #3 has got to be the highest on my list. I, for one, am just happy that Moebius is not only giving car modelers subjects they want, but us truck modelers as well. I'm not saying the Hudson isn't a good subject, I plan on picking up a few of these when they hit the shelves, but I can guarantee I'll have all the new Lonestar truck kits I want on my shelf first. As for all the nonsense I read in this thread, I just don't see the point. It is nice we have knowledgable people here who did see somethings were not quite right, and moreover Dave and the others at Moebius are going to try their best to give us as correct of a model as they can. I believe I read in all the nonsense they, unlike the Lonestar truck, did not have a 1:1 to crawl all over and through, and could also explain why we truck modelers aren't having all the nonsense in the Lonestar's test shot thread like has been going on here. I've crawled over a Lonestar or two myself (what do you expect from a truck driver ) and Moebius hit the Lonestar out of the park! The only thing I could even say bad about the Lonestar is it would have been nice to see a rough treaded tire for the drive axles, but I can also see from the company's point of view that it is cheaper to have one mold for all tires instead of two separate molds, one for the steer axle tires and another for the rough tread drive tires, and having a steer type tire like the Lonestar has for all the tires is correct, too, since the 1:1 steer axle tires are considered an "all position" tire anyway.

I'm just looking forward to both the Hudson and the Lonestar, sorry but the 300 just isn't my thing, and I already have plans for three of the Hornets, two of them will be done as these.

I just have one added thought, and also another reason why I feel that point #3 is the highest on my list, Moebius not only cares about their products and customers, they will listen to their customers as well! I know many years I heard modelers in the former club in was in that focused on 50s subjects how much they wanted a Hudson, and Moebius is finally listening. Same goes for the scale truckers, I for one have been waiting for a modern truck, Moebius is answering the call. The fact that they seem to be in business for modelers can mean nothing but good things for us to come. Who knows, maybe the pickup crowd will finally get a modern pickup like a new Ford Super Duty or Dodge Ram Diesel dually, or maybe even a Honda Ridgeline? Maybe a 74-76 Firebird/Trans Am for the muscle car crowd? Maybe an E350 ambulance or moving van for the light commerical builder? Maybe a Freightliner Classic XL, Freightliner Coronado, Kenworth W900L, Peterbilt 389, or the newest Kenworth T600 for us truck builders? The possiblities are endless, and I'm sure if we show enough support for a subject, Moebius seems to me the company that will listen!

[sjordan2]

Just saw the box art on eBay, at a listing for a "Pre-Sale Swap meet." $24.99 plus $8.49 shipping.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Moebius-1953-Hudson-Hornet-Pre-Sale-Model-Car-Swap-Meet_W0QQitemZ220716670202QQcategoryZ2585QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp4340.m8QQ_trkparmsZalgo%3DMW%26its%3DC%26itu%3DUCC%26otn%3D5%26ps%3D63%26clkid%3D6178524051682218534

[Dave Metzner]

Most current schedule information is that we are making significant changes to the tooling and that we need to approve the final test shot by 2/25/11 then we can expect shipment from the Orient around 3/20/11.

IF we get that done and everything clear customs without any snags........then you should start seeing kits on shelves around the end of April.....

Stay tuned!

Dave

[Harry P.]

Most current schedule information is that we are making significant changes to the tooling and that we need to approve the final test shot by 2/25/11...

Dave

Dave, all I can say is thank you to everyone involved! You guys actually care enough about your work to take input from the "unwashed masses" to heart, and that speaks volumes about Moebius and all involved. I think I speak for all of us when I say that you guys truly "get it."

People, remember this! Remember the fact that the guys at Moebius actually asked for our input, took our comments seriously and acted on those comments. When the Hudson, Chrysler and Lonestar kits hit the shelves, show Moebius that we appreciate their efforts! I know I will.

[Dr. Cranky]

Not only will I remember, Harry, but I will reward them personally by buying a multitude of their kits!!!

[Harry P.]

Not only will I remember, Harry, but I will reward them personally by buying a multitude of their kits!!!

I have no doubt we'll be seeing a few "rusty and crusty" Hudsons coming out of Cranky's workshop!

[Chuck Most]

I have no doubt we'll be seeing a few "rusty and crusty" Hudsons coming out of Cranky's workshop!

Let's hope so!

[Eshaver]

I'll probably buy a couple just to have a couple of Hudsons , one a convertable . Now I'll have to decide on which service station to put one of the Hudsons into........ Ed Shaver

[Dr. Cranky]

Needless to say anticipation and anxiety are building!

[george 53]

I know I'm the OFF one here., But IF i buy that ugly lookin thing it'll ONLY BE ONE! THAT is a HIDIOUS lookin thing. I don't care about it's historical sugnifacance, it's just plain UGLY! My freind in grade school,Trygve Hansin,'s Dad had one . It was a JUNK ! we painted it blue with HOUSE PAINT!!! Why Moebius would even THINK to pop that car is WAYYYYY beyond me. It'll ONLY interest older guys like us, who REMEMBER these hideous cars. I my self, am waiting for the 55 Chrysler. Now THAT'S a pretty car, and I have fond memories of them. It's a wonder to me, WHERE was a poll taken to mold this thing??? I never saw or heard of one, so HOW did they come to the conclusion to mold it?

PERSONALLY think that even if EVERYBODY here bought a CASE of them ,they won't sell well. Too many KIDS don't even know what a Packard is. Just my opinion.

[JIMMY NELSON]

I know I'm the OFF one here., But IF i buy that ugly lookin thing it'll ONLY BE ONE! THAT is a HIDIOUS lookin thing. I don't care about it's historical sugnifacance, it's just plain UGLY! My freind in grade school,Trygve Hansin,'s Dad had one . It was a JUNK ! we painted it blue with HOUSE PAINT!!! Why Moebius would even THINK to pop that car is WAYYYYY beyond me. It'll ONLY interest older guys like us, who REMEMBER these hideous cars. I my self, am waiting for the 55 Chrysler. Now THAT'S a pretty car, and I have fond memories of them. It's a wonder to me, WHERE was a poll taken to mold this thing??? I never saw or heard of one, so HOW did they come to the conclusion to mold it?

PERSONALLY think that even if EVERYBODY here bought a CASE of them ,they won't sell well. Too many KIDS don't even know what a Packard is. Just my opinion.

I am confused because people say I can not spell right, but other people spell words wrong and use CAPITALS when they do not need to. Why do everybody make fun of me but say nothing when other people spell things wrong all the time not picking on you George but this is just an example.

I saw the movie Cars and want to built Doc Hudson like in the movie. I think kids will buy lots of this model just like old people.

[Art Anderson]

I know I'm the OFF one here., But IF i buy that ugly lookin thing it'll ONLY BE ONE! THAT is a HIDIOUS lookin thing. I don't care about it's historical sugnifacance, it's just plain UGLY! My freind in grade school,Trygve Hansin,'s Dad had one . It was a JUNK ! we painted it blue with HOUSE PAINT!!! Why Moebius would even THINK to pop that car is WAYYYYY beyond me. It'll ONLY interest older guys like us, who REMEMBER these hideous cars. I my self, am waiting for the 55 Chrysler. Now THAT'S a pretty car, and I have fond memories of them. It's a wonder to me, WHERE was a poll taken to mold this thing??? I never saw or heard of one, so HOW did they come to the conclusion to mold it?

PERSONALLY think that even if EVERYBODY here bought a CASE of them ,they won't sell well. Too many KIDS don't even know what a Packard is. Just my opinion.

Oh well, you can always tell some people, but you just can't tell 'em much, I guess.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Yup. And to each they's own, I guess - for my money, the '48 Tucker, '49 Merc, and the step-down Hudsons are far and away the baddest-looking from that particular era.

I'da been decently stoked with the kit as originally presented. Now that it'll be refined, I can't wait.

[Harry P.]

I don't know what specific research Moebius used to help them decide to bring the Hudson to market, but from all I've ever heard and read on forums regarding a Hudson kit, I'd say this subject is VERY much wanted by a large number of modelers.

And as far as whether or not it's "ugly," well, that's strictly a personal opinion. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think it's a pretty cool looking car.

[Chuck Most]

Years ago, that 'other mag' used to run a list of kits modelers wanted to see produced with it's kit of the year results. If I recall, there was ALWAYS a Hudson on that list, year after year. Don't tell me this kit is unwanted!

Then again, a Dodge Caravan made it to that list, too...

[Harry P.]

The fact that a Hudson has never been kitted before in 1/24 or 1/25 scale would suggest to me that there are a lot of people who are going to jump on this one when it comes out. Aside from maybe a Tucker, this choice of subject matter seems like a no-brainer to me. What amazes me is not that Moebius chose a Hudson kit to produce, but that nobody has ever done one before!

[Chuck Most]

Wasn't AMT considering a Hudson kit years ago, but opted to pull the plug later on?

Yeah Mark- I built that Caravan kit when I was 14, back when it was new. I wondered even then who'd want to model a minivan!

[camaroman]

.... I wondered even then who'd want to model a minivan!

Nuts like me!!!

I have the Chevy Astro waiting patiently in the stash...

I have only logged over a half million miles in 3 Astros (88,95,04)

since '94....

The current '04 has almost 260k on the clock...

sort of a strange love thing I guess!!!

Edited January 21, 2011 by camaroman

[charlie8575]

I know I'm the OFF one here., But IF i buy that ugly lookin thing it'll ONLY BE ONE! THAT is a HIDIOUS lookin thing. I don't care about it's historical sugnifacance, it's just plain UGLY! My freind in grade school,Trygve Hansin,'s Dad had one . It was a JUNK ! we painted it blue with HOUSE PAINT!!! Why Moebius would even THINK to pop that car is WAYYYYY beyond me. It'll ONLY interest older guys like us, who REMEMBER these hideous cars. I my self, am waiting for the 55 Chrysler. Now THAT'S a pretty car, and I have fond memories of them. It's a wonder to me, WHERE was a poll taken to mold this thing??? I never saw or heard of one, so HOW did they come to the conclusion to mold it?

PERSONALLY think that even if EVERYBODY here bought a CASE of them ,they won't sell well. Too many KIDS don't even know what a Packard is. Just my opinion.

Well, George, as someone who, at 35, might be a kid by some definitions....

I've always had a very strong interest in Hudsons since high school. Before then, I just thought they were neat old cars. Then I found out more about the innovations they made- how they actually tried to truly build a better car; often the case with the independents. I was sold that these were a superior car, even by today's standards in many respects.

Then, I found out about the Jet- and how it probably is the one single biggest factor aside from lack of a V8 that put Hudson out of business. By then, I was in college. Sure, I knew about the Jet previously, but the article in Collectible Automobile really brought things into focus for me. Later, when I changed my major from education to a self-designed general studies degree, the Jet became the topic of my Capstone Project- it was the perfect storm of poor market timing, bad managerial decisions and management interfering with the engineering staff, ruining what might actually have been a very competitive, well-executed small car.

Then I joined the Hudson-Essex-Terreplane Club as a result of my research for my project, and learned even more about Hudsons in general, and Step-Downs in particular. I became thoroughly hooked.

Sounds like your friend's Hudson was pretty well beat when he had it, I wonder if that's clouding your thoughts?

While it's true that everyone's tastes are different, I certainly wouldn't call them unattractive. I like the bathtub (Hudson, 1949-'51 Nash, 1948-'50 Packards, 1949-'51 Mercury) cars as a group, and most cars of that vintage as a rule. I think they're certainly better-looking than most of the under-designed schlock being foisted upon the automotive public now.

I for one can't wait

Charlie Larkin