slantasaurus Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 OK, I have just one kit to add to this list. 1935/36 Auburn 851 "Boattail" Speedster. The old Lindberg/ex-Pyro tooling makes me cry . It is widely considered one of the most beautiful cars ever designed and all we have is a 1950's era tooling with raised panel lines and minimal detail. I've never understood why Monogram didn't include this car in their classics line durring the 60's with all the rest of their Dusenbergs and Cord 810.
CAL Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 (edited) There are a whole bunch of missing links. Porsche 550 RSR Spyder Peugeot 908 Pangani Zonda Daimler Hemi Dart Gillet Vertigo Lancia Fulvia Jaguar E Coupe Weissman GT Coupe Lola LMP2 Coupes Daytona Prototypes V8 Supercars New TRVs to name a few Edited June 24, 2011 by CAL
Darin Bastedo Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 What part of not having enough money around to be able to kitbash dont a couple of you understand? I just recently started a full time job after 3 years of joblessness for me, and the wife still after 2 and a half have work, my job doesnt come close to fully paying the bills, I cant do one, much less 2 kits to build one. Having a new kit of the 63 would make it far easier, and not every detail of a 67 and 63 are the same! If you financial situation is truly that dire you shouldn't be spending money on a hobby. I don't mean to be blunt about it, but if $25 bucks is that hard to come by it should be used to put food on the table. If you can spend $25 bucks to build one kit though have you considered other ways to get the models than buying them? My finances are tight as I'm commuting back and forth to Maryland from Tennessee 2-3 times a month for my fiancé's Cancer treatment. A while back I needed a couple of the new Revell 57 Chevys for a project I wanted to do. so I offered to trade for them under the "wanted' section here on the forum. I got the new kits for some kits out of my stash + shipping. total cash cost was about $7.00 for two kits. If you go to swap meets often you can get what you want cheaper. I've found Both versions of the Revell 67 vette for $5.00 or less. combine that with the AMT 63 vette, which I've also found for around $5.00. and has decent body detail, and you have a full detail 1963 split window for $10.00. If there are no swap meets where you live I'm sure there are those on the board with those kits in there stash who would trade also. I hope you can straighten out your financial woes, but until then there are alternatives if you are willing to be creative.
sjordan2 Posted June 24, 2011 Posted June 24, 2011 OK, I have just one kit to add to this list. 1935/36 Auburn 851 "Boattail" Speedster. The old Lindberg/ex-Pyro tooling makes me cry . It is widely considered one of the most beautiful cars ever designed and all we have is a 1950's era tooling with raised panel lines and minimal detail. I've never understood why Monogram didn't include this car in their classics line durring the 60's with all the rest of their Dusenbergs and Cord 810. Yes, yes, yes.
Jeff Johnston Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 I love the Monogram 65 Fastback...Here is mine. I have the GT 350R version going now and plan a standard GT350 to follow. Actually the 65 Mustang is probably my all time favorite model kit.
Zoom Zoom Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 I love the Monogram 65 Fastback...Here is mine. I have the GT 350R version going now and plan a standard GT350 to follow. Actually the 65 Mustang is probably my all time favorite model kit. Gorgeous model (as everything you build). Just because a model isn't 100% accurate from the manufacturer doesn't mean that a killer model cannot be made from it. This is proof positive. Your model goes to a level that I simply cannot see the manufacturer's inaccuracies. I've seen a good number of really nice built Monogram Mustangs. Heck...I love my built Trumpeter Falcon and plan to build another HT as a race car and a stock CV. There's plenty of room to criticize many aspects of that new kit, but there's plenty right to make a good model from it. Knowing that ahead of time can prepare the builder to overcome those issues, or minimize their impact when the model as a whole looks so good.
Zoom Zoom Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Model company executive: "A man in East Bethel, Minn., needs a new-tool '63 Corvette because he can't afford to kitbash one? Let's get on that RIGHT NOW! I won't have that man needing that kit on MY watch!" :lol: Sadly, it's more like "A man who cannot afford one new kit, not to mention two to kitbash, needs a new-tool '63 Corvette before he blows an internet gasket over people w/differing priorities than his own..." I shouldn't make fun or light of that, really. Lots of people have lots of problems we never hear about. Others wear their problems on their shirtsleeves. I can understand he's frustrated. But in the big picture, when someone can't afford a new $25 kit, there's a lot more to worry about than what kit manufacturers can/cannot/will/will not make. Buying new hobby kits can take a back seat while they take care of survival. Want a new kit(s)? Sell/trade some old ones. Go to a show where builder kits are sold at a fraction of new MSRP's. Build something from the stash. And try not to get angry at folks for the wrong reasons.
Zoom Zoom Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 OK, I have just one kit to add to this list. 1935/36 Auburn 851 "Boattail" Speedster. The old Lindberg/ex-Pyro tooling makes me cry . It is widely considered one of the most beautiful cars ever designed and all we have is a 1950's era tooling with raised panel lines and minimal detail. I've never understood why Monogram didn't include this car in their classics line durring the 60's with all the rest of their Dusenbergs and Cord 810. It is too bad it was never done by Monogram, and probably never will be. Considering all those '30's era classics were tooled up in the '60's, when they were "only" 30-40 years old, and consider now that '60's cars are getting into the 50-year-old category, the market for new-tool classics has pretty much dried up. We might want something really bad, but sometimes have to realize it's not going to happen in anything other than our dreams. One of the 'Mints did a nice Auburn Speedster.
bandit1 Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 I remember the AMT 67 Camaros! They were nice kits! I had the convertible too! Man I wish I still had that one! i have one that a friend gave me!
slantasaurus Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) It is too bad it was never done by Monogram, and probably never will be. Considering all those '30's era classics were tooled up in the '60's, when they were "only" 30-40 years old, and consider now that '60's cars are getting into the 50-year-old category, the market for new-tool classics has pretty much dried up. We might want something really bad, but sometimes have to realize it's not going to happen in anything other than our dreams. One of the 'Mints did a nice Auburn Speedster. Oh trust me I know its beyond a long shot that we'll ever see a new tool Auburn but I can dream. I do have a 1/18 Ertl diecast that came out about 10 years ago and it is really nice, it's the only 1/18 I've ever bought just because I can't get one in 1/24 or 1/25. I have seen some really nice builds from the Lindberg/Pyro kit, at least the overall shape is there to start with, it just takes LOTS of work to get it to the level where it deserves to be. And remember, just because the kit is a classic car it doesn't have to be built only as a classic. The Auburn 851 makes a nice street rod too. (no actual Auburns were harmed in the building of that street rod....) Edited June 25, 2011 by slantasaurus
LOBBS Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 That particular kit isn't the original AMT annual that was referenced earlier in the thread. It's based on a tool that was created in the 1970s when AMT was owned by Lesney, the British-based former owner of Matchbox cars. The kit was originally a '68; I believe at some point in the '80s, ERTL, which bought AMT from Lesney, made some changes that enabled a '67 to be produced from the same tooling. Neither kit is anything to write home about. I believe the '67, especially, being the first Camaro and all, needs to be immortalized in modern tooling. BTW, there's currently a sealed original AMT annual up for sale on the auction place if you've got a spare $300 lying around ... I've had my eye on that one for years waiting for him to finally budge on that Buy-it-now price.
charlie8575 Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 OK, I have just one kit to add to this list. 1935/36 Auburn 851 "Boattail" Speedster. The old Lindberg/ex-Pyro tooling makes me cry . It is widely considered one of the most beautiful cars ever designed and all we have is a 1950's era tooling with raised panel lines and minimal detail. I've never understood why Monogram didn't include this car in their classics line durring the 60's with all the rest of their Dusenbergs and Cord 810. As someone younger myself (35,) I've always had a great love of the capital C Classics. These were the inspiration in so many ways for great cars of later times that they deserve to be made into models, and the Auburn is a prime example. I like a lot of the calls made here. I'm going to add the 1969-'72 Grand Prix, seeing the tool was nuked for those customs in the 1970s. I think that was one of the nicest-looking cars to come out of G.M. in the last fifty years. In the vain of personal luxury, a new 1963-'65 Riviera would be cool, too. Actually, a new first-gen Toro and F.W.D. Eldo would also be welcomed. I'd like to see a lot of the Jo-Han Mopars, Oldsmobiles and AMCs updated, too. Charlie Larkin
Guest Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 (edited) Sorry guys, I'm a little testy again, I had a paycheck bounce last pay period, and this paycheck my boss tried to pass off the last pay period's pay as this pay period's, when I worked more hours and was supposed to have a dollar a hour raise. I cant afford 1 kit for those who question me, I simply sell other kits I have, or other things I have to get suppkies, kits I want etc. I simply dont want to have to get 2 kits to build one, and there are enough diffrences between 63's and 67's to warrant a new tool. I wasnt upset, and shouild have clarified myself more, sorry guys. Edited June 25, 2011 by midnightprowler
bandit1 Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 That particular kit isn't the original AMT annual that was referenced earlier in the thread. It's based on a tool that was created in the 1970s when AMT was owned by Lesney, the British-based former owner of Matchbox cars. The kit was originally a '68; I believe at some point in the '80s, ERTL, which bought AMT from Lesney, made some changes that enabled a '67 to be produced from the same tooling. Neither kit is anything to write home about. I believe the '67, especially, being the first Camaro and all, needs to be immortalized in modern tooling. BTW, there's currently a sealed original AMT annual up for sale on the auction place if you've got a spare $300 lying around ... geez when are these idiots going to learn!
charlie8575 Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Sorry guys, I'm a little testy again, I had a paycheck bounce last pay period, and this paycheck my boss tried to pass off the last pay period's pay as this pay period's, when I worked more hours and was supposed to have a dollar a hour raise. I cant afford 1 kit for those who question me, I simply sell other kits I have, or other things I have to get suppkies, kits I want etc. I simply dont want to have to get 2 kits to build one, and there are enough diffrences between 63's and 67's to warrant a new tool. I wasnt upset, and shouild have clarified myself more, sorry guys. Apology accepted, Lee. And believe me, I understand where you're coming from after most of the last five years of part-time and under-employment. It would be nice to see a new complete '63 Vette coupe, I agree. Perhaps it'll happen someday. As to your paycheck bouncing- if it continues to be a problem, check to see if Minnesota allows some kind of action about that; that might be construed as employment under false pretenses. A one-time goof is one thing, but if it becomes a consistent issue, it will need to be dealt with. Charlie Larkin
Jeff Johnston Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 Gorgeous model (as everything you build). Just because a model isn't 100% accurate from the manufacturer doesn't mean that a killer model cannot be made from it. This is proof positive. Your model goes to a level that I simply cannot see the manufacturer's inaccuracies. I've seen a good number of really nice built Monogram Mustangs. Heck...I love my built Trumpeter Falcon and plan to build another HT as a race car and a stock CV. There's plenty of room to criticize many aspects of that new kit, but there's plenty right to make a good model from it. Knowing that ahead of time can prepare the builder to overcome those issues, or minimize their impact when the model as a whole looks so good. Thank you very much for the kind words Bob. I like your perspective on the Falcon too. That's on my short list of "to do's"
jeffs396 Posted June 25, 2011 Posted June 25, 2011 It's probably too specialized to sell in significant enough numbers to warrant a new tool, but, I'd LOVE to see an all-new kit of the De Tomaso Pantera ... simply a beautiful sports car that has never been done proper justice in styrene. I would imagine it'd prove popular with Motley Crue fans who've been wanting to build Vince Neill crash dioramas for all these years ... X2!!!
Jeff Johnston Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 I sure would like to see a nicely done Pantera kit. I know they are out there but I mean a new one with an engine. It's a pipe dream and it'll never happen, but I we can wish.
MrObsessive Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 Jeff, that is purely GORGEOUS!! I too like the '65-'66 Mustangs/Shelby GT-350's! Where did you get the double redline tires?? Or did you make those?
jeffs396 Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 The Pantera kits that were reboxed and sold by Testors ... were those the ones made by Gunze Sangyo? I have one here, not sure how to identify it's origins though...no brand markings on the sprues, at least none that I can encode This kit was a previously motorized one though, in it's originally issued version...
Dan Rosenello Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 I didn't. That was the first on my list and they weren't Cragars,they were Hurst mags. No , in fact , the '65 GT 350 had Cragar mags on it.They where called Cragar GTs . while they looked similar to the Hurst wheel, they were Cragars.
jeffs396 Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 I have one here, not sure how to identify it's origins though...no brand markings on the sprues, at least none that I can encode This kit was a previously motorized one though, in it's originally issued version... Here's a few pics...anyone recognize the logo???
Drake69 Posted June 26, 2011 Posted June 26, 2011 All these kits are good (put me down for a "70 Cuda!!!!), but I'd rather see "add-ons" produced enmasse that bring most of the model kits back to "factory levels". STEELIES (yes, I mentioned it in a thread earlier) and DOG DISHES should be mandatory on all kits that had them relative to when the factory rolled them off the assembly line back in the day, followed by an extra set of mags, Cragars, etc... . I mean, it makes sense since most people of that day couldn't afford Cragar SS (or other fancy-type) wheel options and had to "resort" to steelies, which helps to keep their "cool-factor" in today's modelling world. Lesser engine options, like not always having 440's or 426-hemi's in your engine bay, would also give diversity into customizing your kits, much like the extra "modding-kits" offered by Revell for their current lineup of cars back in the day. Just my $.20, taking inflation into account....
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