Revell preview photos from Toledo NNL #31

[Chuck Most]

Agreed on the Boss 302...that would make a great kit!

Revell kits a new Mustang, I buy it. Simple as that.

Haven't missed a single hit off the '06 GT tool, and plan not to miss any of the '10's permutations, either.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

I also can't believe the truly innovative and hard-core custom guys are really happy either since they're stuck with the obligatory level and design of the chop. I'm sure they'd rather have a stock roof to do what THEY wanted to do. In the end this kit seemed marketed at a weird middle ground of builders that either lack the talent, where with all or perhaps juevos to start hacking up a $21 piece of plastic. You're going to wind up with what was mentioned on page 1 of this thread. Contest table after contest table this coming summer covered in cookie-cutter "custom" Fords...

So let me get this straight: the builders who will best appreciate Revell's new custom '48 Ford - if not the only ones who will appreciate it - lack innovation, skill, talent, and cojones, am I right? Based on what you said above, why would I be wrong?

Now here's the middle ground so conveniently left out of that false absolute: "truly innovative and hard-core" customizers likely also have the wherewithal to tweak Revell's chop to their liking - and quite possibly, with less hassle than from a purely stock roofline(!)

You check out the pics, you see what, two wheel options, fadeaway fenders or no, and four front grilles; that's sixteen combinations immediately from an incomplete look at the kit. So I'm afraid this whole notion of "cookie-cutter customs" is vaporized even from an out-of-the-box standpoint; and once builders start working their own tweaks in, forget about it. With all the impressive variations we've seen on Revell's '49 Mercury, that kit certainly doesn't support any cookie-cutter scenario.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Chuck Kourouklis

[SteveG]

I think the reason Revell isn't including stock parts (besides the fact the car can't be built stock anyway) just revolves around cost. They know the vast majority of these would be built as rods or customs anyway, even if stock parts were included. Why include a bunch of parts practically nobody's going to use?

Still, even a rodder like me could think of quite a few uses for some old stock Ford parts (mostly outside of their intended applications, just as the postwar rodders themselves did), so maybe Revell is missing the boat with a 'non-stock only' kit. I guess time will tell.

First I have to say that this has been one of the best discussions I've seen on this board for whatever that's worth. Back to subject at hand, just how do you decide which stock parts to leave out that "pratically nobody going to use"? For example below is one of the coolest post war Fords I've seen around. Other then the lowered ride height in all outward appearances it looks bone stock. I just happened to know that it is has a modern Ford V8 but if told you that it had the original flathead would that make it less cool? I don't think so...

Pesonally I'm in the include all the stock parts camp so I can decide which stock parts to use or not. I can see with the success of the Chopped Merc why Revell went this route with the chopped body only. I'll probably buy at least one anyway as it still looks like a great kit but I hope Revell will also see fit to bring at least one more version with stock body later on. That's my two cents ...

-Steve

Edited October 14, 2010 by SteveG

[oldscool]

Revell kits a new Mustang, I buy it. Simple as that.

Haven't missed a single hit off the '06 GT tool, and plan not to miss any of the '10's permutations, either.

I'm with you on that statement. I built the 2006 GT kit and it is one of the best fitting and best engineered kits I have ever built except for the ride height.

oldscool

Edited October 14, 2010 by oldscool

[Harry P.]

The problem with 2-in-1 stock-street rod kits is that one version or the other almost inevitably winds up being overly compromised...

No inherent reason for that. It's corporate decision making.

A 2-in-1 kit doesn't have to be compromised.

[Harry P.]

In a perfect world, no, it doesn't. But, fact is, we don't live in a perfect world.

Compromises in model kits are largely dictated by economics. That's the reality of the situation. And, given that, I would MUCH rather have a kit that's either purely stock or purely street rod, rather than a 2-in-1 kit that's a half-azzed mishmash of the two.

All of us want the kitmakers to come out with what we personally are interested in, that's a given.

I'm just saying that there's no reason that a 2-in-1 kit can't be done right. The fact that they usually aren't is a decision by the manufacturer based on cutting corners, based on the bottom line–not some sort of technical limitation.

Of course the kitmakers want to make the most money with the least expenditure possible; hence the compromises of many kits. That's Business 101. Everyone understands that.

[niteowl7710]

So let me get this straight: the builders who will best appreciate Revell's new custom '48 Ford - if not the only ones who will appreciate it - lack innovation, skill, talent, and cojones, am I right? Based on what you said above, why would I be wrong

Why are you taking it like a personal affront to you? Beyond the walls of MCM in the sales environment of hobby shops, Hobby Lobby, K-Mart, Michael's, etc this kit is going to appeal to people who normally wouldn't be chopping a top. I get that, that's a good thing for Revell's new release budget. But at the same time (to me) it's also being marketed to that same crowd. Being it's a lot easier to drop a roof than it is to raise it, I stand by my opinion that the "pre-chop" is less appealing to a hard-core modeler. Or are the custom guys suddenly gonna start build box stock from now on because there are 16 combination to choose from? It is however very appealing to an average skills, middle of the road guy. Someone who isn't on a message board, or club.

All I'm saying is I think it would appeal to a broader market if you through in one of the limited edition boxes with a stock version behind a wild custom version...or just the wild custom version with a stock picture on the side. I'm just even willing to for-go stock all together, only a custom, just give me a kit with a stock roof on it. From looking at Google & Yahoo Images for every 1 custom chopped '48 there are at least a half dozen really sharp looking UN-chopped cars.

I would prefer to build one stock, one hot rod/custom. But even without a stock variant, I still would have bought a custom only stock roof kit. Nothing about a pre-chopped kit appeals to ME.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Oh, come on, James. Honestly now, how many ways are there to take "lacking the talent" or "juevos" (sic)? The real question has far less to do with how I'm taking things than it does with how you're dealing them.

Nowhere did I even begin to suggest that hardcore custom builders were suddenly gonna change habits because Revell offers (likely a great deal more than) 16 combinations right in one box. That was to refute your contention of "cookie-cutter customs", and allow that maybe, just maybe, there are some serious custom modelers out there who don't exactly see it your way - a point that still awaits a legitimate response.

Your anecdotes about what you find online are all well and good (I'll even stipulate to their accuracy) - but if you're going to bring up anecdotes, then I get to as well. And the first thing to go through MY mind was all those historic customs I've seen in The Rodder's Journal, the ones making inroads at Pebble Beach, the ones that just happen to have many of the goodies Revell is supplying in this kit.

You question the model's appeal to people on message boards. Does it totally escape you that there's been some very enthusiastic response to it in this thread alone?

To each his own, you can say it has no appeal to YOU till you're blue in the face. Others have done that, and there's nothing to add, really; as always, I'm writing more for the people silently reading along, and I've got no interest in changing anyone's mind.

But your language gives every impression of slyly impugning the building credentials of anyone interested in this kit - and if that's the case, you're gonna get called on it.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Chuck Kourouklis

[niteowl7710]

I offered my opinion. It's just that a)mine, b)opinion. I don't need you to agree with it, or change your mind to my point of view to have my day go in a normal way...just so ya know.

So to be crystal clear here...my words and MY definitions of them. So you can stop assuming you know what I meant.

1)Yes juevos (there's no sic, it's spelled right, and is being used in the correct context of it's slang meaning)...I know that I am very fortunate in my circumstances to have held my job through the recession, and therefore could buy one, two or a case of custom Fords if I wanted to...but for the average person who is a casual builder trying to stumble through the economy, or worse yet living on some form of fixed income, $20-22 is a lot of coin to lay out to chop something up in the hopes that it comes out right.

2)where with all - Not every person has (or can afford these days) all the tools needed to make a chopped roof conversion properly.

3)talent - whether YOU like it or not, there are people out there that can't do things in this hobby. I used to support my plastic kit addiction by painting people's bodies for them. There are just some people no matter how hard they try can't get a good paint job...or in this case properly chop the top of a car. Again these are casual builders who don't come to MCM (or SA) or have any other support group to improve their skills. They have a skills set they slowly improve on over the years, but quantum leaps ain't coming.

4)innovation - this is actually your term, as I never used it, but what the hey...to me innovation and creativity are synonyms. For some people (and I will be the first to raise my hand here) the ability to look a lump of stock plastic and then transform it into something...well that ain't coming either. I am constantly staggered by work around here that gets me with a "huh, never woulda thought of that". I respect, and yes envy, people who can see something in their mind's eye and make it happen seemingly effortlessly.

To that group of people this kit will be extremely appealing. Look it's all done for you. You don't even need a parts box, this kit has so many spare parts you can START one with it. Revell is (and this is what I said the first time) MARKETING this kit to those people. Very smartly I might add.

You see I never said that if something isn't marketed directly to you, you're some sort of moron for being interested in it. Quite the contrary, this kit would draw in the custom guys no matter who the target audience was once they started hearing about the parts (the fact it's a kit that's never been done before, eg in coupe form) and they could sell it in a plain gray box to them. Beyond that my posts were what I would have like to have seen Revell do with this kit to have it appeal to me, and that's it.

Prime example to me is Revell's Tuner kits. I don't normally build import cars, and certainly don't build TUNER import cars, but I was still interested in those kits ANYWAY because they are 2n1s (in some case 4n1s with all the variations of aero kits and spoilers) and allow me to build stock (or mostly) stock version of 2 Honda Civics, an Acura & Subaru. Bonus that the dashboard is set-up correctly (eg, U.S., not RHD) and I don't have to shell out 3x as much to Tamiya.

So in closing - If you want to go buy this kit...good..go get it, hell buy the two I would have got if they did it in a way that appealed to me, so those kits have a good home. I don't have anything against anyone who likes this kit, this subject matter, I simply stated an opinion about the marketing strategy. I never slyly impugned anyone's anything here, least of all yours.

Edited October 14, 2010 by niteowl7710

[Chuck Kourouklis]

...So to be crystal clear here...my words and MY definitions of them. So you can stop assuming you know what I meant.

1)Yes juevos (there's no sic, it's spelled right, and is being used in the correct context of it's slang meaning)...I know that I am very fortunate in my circumstances to have held my job through the recession, and therefore could buy one, two or a case of custom Fords if I wanted to...but for the average person who is a casual builder trying to stumble through the economy, or worse yet living on some form of fixed income, $20-22 is a lot of coin to lay out to chop something up in the hopes that it comes out right.

2)where with all - Not every person has (or can afford these days) all the tools needed to make a chopped roof conversion properly.

3)talent - whether YOU like it or not, there are people out there that can't do things in this hobby. I used to support my plastic kit addiction by painting people's bodies for them. There are just some people no matter how hard they try can't get a good paint job...or in this case properly chop the top of a car. Again these are casual builders who don't come to MCM (or SA) or have any other support group to improve their skills. They have a skills set they slowly improve on over the years, but quantum leaps ain't coming.

4)innovation - this is actually your term, as I never used it, but what the hey...to me innovation and creativity are synonyms. For some people (and I will be the first to raise my hand here) the ability to look a lump of stock plastic and then transform it into something...well that ain't coming either. I am constantly staggered by work around here that gets me with a "huh, never woulda thought of that". I respect, and yes envy, people who can see something in their mind's eye and make it happen seemingly effortlessly.

To that group of people this kit will be extremely appealing. Look it's all done for you. You don't even need a parts box, this kit has so many spare parts you can START one with it. Revell is (and this is what I said the first time) MARKETING this kit to those people. Very smartly I might add...

...So in closing - If you want to go buy this kit...good..go get it, hell buy the two I would have got if they did it in a way that appealed to me, so those kits have a good home. I don't have anything against anyone who likes this kit, this subject matter, I simply stated an opinion about the marketing strategy. I never slyly impugned anyone's anything here, least of all yours.

First, James, it looks like I have to cede your point on “juevos”. The “J”-spelling is at least legitimate enough to bring up a ton of references to the predominant “H”-spelling in an online search, and on those grounds, I stand corrected.

As far as the rest of point 1, point 2, and point 3 go, um, yeah – when did I offer the first hint of a disagreement with those? My dispute wasn't with those premises, but with the notion that they somehow led to the conclusion that serious custom guys weren't going to be happy with this kit (and I see that you were modifying your approach on this point before another poster came and crushed it flat).

Regarding assumptions, we only have what you say to go on. And as it’s now been demonstrated conclusively in this thread, I’ve mentioned repeatedly that it’s not about MY reaction, but about what you said in the first place:

"I also can't believe the truly innovative and hard-core custom guys are really happy either since they're stuck with the obligatory level and design of the chop…" (emphasis is mine, and yes – technically, you did not use the exact word “innovation”.)

An entirely consistent inference to be drawn from this statement is that those who are happy with the kit aren’t truly innovative and hard-core - and that's irrespective of any marketing considerations. Couple this with notions of lacking the talent and manhood to do a chop, toss in a reference to "cookie-cutter 'customs'", and that language begins to indicate a certain attitude very strongly. You may have since shown that's not what you meant, but that’s the way it definitely looked at first; and if my interpretation were so far off base, I doubt we would have seen this:

WRONG!!!

Wrong, wrong, wrong!!!

...Please do me the courtesy of not assuming that just because I look forward to this kit for the reasons cited above that I don't have the talent to chop a top or do other customizing.

Thank you Chuck!!!!!

You're welcome, Mark. I had a number of builders in mind as I wrote that, but you were foremost among them.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Chuck Kourouklis

[Chuck Most]

I'm with you on that statement. I built the 2006 GT kit and it is one of the best fitting and best engineered kits I have ever built except for the ride height.

oldscool

That, and to me at least, the headlamps seem just a titch undersized, but that's easier to look past. It's even easier to look past once you fix the ride height/clunky truck tires issues which also plauge those particular kits. The '10 looks pretty good, but I'm sure that even if it has it's flaws and issues, they won't be too tough to work out, just as with the current 'Stang kits.

[Chuck Most]

First I have to say that this has been one of the best discussions I've seen on this board for whatever that's worth. Back to subject at hand, just how do you decide which stock parts to leave out that "pratically nobody going to use"? For example below is one of the coolest post war Fords I've seen around. Other then the lowered ride height in all outward appearances it looks bone stock. I just happened to know that it is has a modern Ford V8 but if told you that it had the original flathead would that make it less cool? I don't think so...

Good point, Steve- even a 'stock only' kit can be built into a 'resto rod' style with just a bit of tweaking. (And just for the record, no, that car not having a Flattie doesn't hinder its coolness in any way, shape, or form! )

Still- for this particular kit, which by virtue of its chopped top cannot be built 'stock' in the first place, I guess I wouldn't really see the point in including the stock parts. If a guy is building a rod, and he's going to the extent of chopping the top, sure, he might keep the Flathead, but it's surely going to have some speed parts slapped on, and he might keep the stock wheels, maybe even the hubcaps, but the stock pinky-thin tires will probably be shown the door, as well. And a lowered suspension is pretty much mandatory if you are chopping the top, so... there goes the stock suspension setup. If the '48 kit had a stock height top- absolutely, I'd love to see all the stock parts included! In fact, I'd be rather disappointed NOT to find them. But as it stands, the content of the new '48 kit's parts, looked at from the context it is marketed as a custom, seems satisfactory enough.

[Kris Morgan]

The Mustang looks great and, was a natural for them, The 48 is a bit of a surprise. A good one though, I'm diggin it.

[Harry P.]

Being the guy who makes product decisions for a model company has to be one of the biggest no-win jobs on the planet ...

No, being a moderator here is the biggest no-win job on the planet...

[Chuck Kourouklis]

I appreciate your fairness, Ken -

but honestly, I'm having great difficulty recalling the last time y'all custom/rodder guys were so bound and determined to open your flies all over the parade for a given factory stock release, as we rep-stockers have incessantly been over kits like Revell's '32 Fords and this upcoming '48.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Heh. One of the reasons I can kinda take or leave a stock '48 coupe - especially after a fine stock woody and a fine stock convertible - is that the '40 is really my be-all-end-all of this particular decade, and I'm so delighted with my stock standard kit.

Hmmmm, easy question to answer. which one stayed in production the longest? I believe it was the street rod variant, as I've seen a lot more of those for sale at hobby shops than I have the stock only one.

I'm also pretty confident that when I finally get to it, it'll be the only one on any contest table I take it to...

Chuck, from your logical & gracious comments about this subject on the forum over the past year or so, (as in both this thread & the 32 Ford thread(s) you've participated in), please don't lump yourself in with those that have whizzed, (& I don't mean rainbows), on the parades of us custom/rod builders!

Thanks, Mark, but I'm the first to admit that while I try to stick to a rational framework, I'm often deliberately short of graciousness. As for lumping myself in, I'm just mostly a factory stock builder. What can I say? Just hope it's clear that I prize consistency over sticking to the party line.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Oh, and for the record, yes: 5.0 and Boss variants of the new Mustang tool should be seen as mandatory updates by Revell.

[Modelmartin]

Just listen to all of you guys arguing about your "kits". REAL model builders with huevos don't need no stinking kits! We scratchbuild everything! We smelt our own brass and roll out the sheets. We draw our own wire and tap the rubber trees in our backyard and vulcanise our own tires!!

KITS!! HA!

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Just listen to all of you guys arguing about your "kits". REAL model builders with huevos don't need no stinking kits! We scratchbuild everything! We smelt our own brass and roll out the sheets. We draw our own wire and tap the rubber trees in our backyard and vulcanise our own tires!!

KITS!! HA!

Dude. This is my favorite post, like, EVER, here.

Where do I get some of that stuff?

[LoneWolf15]

I'm generally not a custom kinda guy .... That being said , I fell in love with the Revell Merc kit . I'm happy to see the chopped ' 48 Ford myself , gotta be honest , it's screaming pro street to me ! I know that there will be several in the never ending stash before all is said and done .

As for the Revell ' 40 Ford , with a little bit of an extention , the Revell pro street Willys frame fits right under it . You can fit an awful lot of motor in it after that !

Someone mentioned a ' 57 Nomad , I'd like to see Revell release a ' 55 and a ' 57 Nomad , long over due ! Yes , AMT still has their's with the ' 55 , but I'd still love to see a new tooling from Revell on both of these .

The Black Widow , yeah , a bit of model simplification .... That is until you graft the running gear and motor from one of the ' 32 coupe's to it ! Now you're running on high octane !

Sorry to interupt , the street rod faction and the factory faction can now go back to boxing each others ears ! Praise the Lord and pass the plate , we have new kits coming out with more on the horizon ! Ya'll should be celebrating , not pokin' each other with pointed sticks !

Donn Yost

[2002p51]

I can't recall there being so much as a peep out of the street rod guys when Revell released its '40 Standard Coupe as a stock-only kit ... in fact, IIRC, the rod guys (myself included) were pretty tickled to have it to bash with the earlier 2-in-1 ProModeler kit or the street-rod-only convertible kit.

Exactly right. I jumped all over that '40 Standard and didn't build it stock.

Stock engine? No way, how about an Ardun with 8 Strombergs?

The stock suspension was easy to lower.

If the new '48 Ford had a stock height roof, I'd be all over it too, probably would buy several. But with that bad chop, I'll pass.

[SteveG]

Exactly right. I jumped all over that '40 Standard and didn't build it stock.

Stock engine? No way, how about an Ardun with 8 Strombergs?

The stock suspension was easy to lower.

If the new '48 Ford had a stock height roof, I'd be all over it too, probably would buy several. But with that bad chop, I'll pass.

Now that's what I'm talking about !!! Nice work Drew .... picture a '48 Ford Coupe done just like that. Let's hope the chop top version sells well enough to get Revell to do a stock roof height version too. Has anyone else mentioned doing a 2Dr sedan version yet? I guess that's two more versions we need !

-Steve

[oldscool]

Wow! This one has generated more discussion than the Chi Town Hustler kit. I for one can't wait for this kit to come out. I don't see anything wrong with the chop. But then, I don't see anything wrong with the chop on the 49 Merc either. In the real customizing world each builder has a different style and a different idea of how a chop should look so IMHO it's not a bad chop, it's just a particular style of chop. Mines going to get a SOHC 427 if I can make it fit.

oldscool

[Chuck Most]

I think the reason the street rod guys didn't throw a conniption fit when the '40 Standard coupe was released was twofold-

1. Most of them had enough parts already in their stash to convert one into a hot rod. (Hey... all 1:1 '40 Fords started stock too, right? )

2. Given Revel-o-gram's track record at the time, many assumed they'd release a rod version later on (which they did with the Goodguys version).

Edited October 15, 2010 by Chuck Most

[tim boyd]

Dude. This is my favorite post, like, EVER, here.

Where do I get some of that stuff?

Chuck....you've got to meet Andy. He's one of a kind (and I say that in the very best way). He was one of six people at the first-ever NNL; his originality impressed me then and still does so today! TIM