Telling a lie...

[Jairus]

I always thought that kit looked a little like a Yugo .... but that's just me I suppose.

[James W]

I worked with an artist who did CNC machine work from designs submitted by the manufacturer of electronic products. He would get CAD data and use it to create machine code to cut three dementional parts.

There was an incredible amount of work that had to go into changing the information to translate digital data into three dementional objects. It is a matter of interpretation.

He was working with 1:1 all the time. Now imagine that the object you are making is a fraction of the size of the original. The slightest change in dimension is multiplied by 25. This can lead to gross errors that can barely be measured or quantified but are sure obvious in the end product.

Also the complexity of making a model involves hundreds of people in diverse disciplines, time lines, financing. The molds themselves are rarely designed and cut by the same people. The perfect model has never been made, don't hold your breath.

By the time an error has been identified the snow ball could be at the bottom of the hill. If production time and shipping are already in place, and financing is dependant on a sell date, the product could be forced out the door just to save the project.

I don't want to make excuses. I'm just a realist. If a model company dose not have all their ducks in a row at the right point in time, then the product is a flop. That makes the next flock of ducks look more intimidating.

[Ramaniac]

My dad had a 69 Mustang with the V-6. It had shoulder belts that attached with thin, flimsy, wire up on the headliner on top of the door. We were forbidden to use them. Our black interior was vinyl and had a plastic curve to the seat in the rear seat. It did not have the pony interior.

He had to park the car with the back end up hill so the gas would not leak out. Sooo, if you are doing a Ford Green, put a brown streak right under the gas cap.

That Mustang was cool, but it was God's little mechanical joke. Every oil change required a can of STP (remember that honey like stuff!!) or it would chatter like crazy.

[Ron Hamilton]

  Zoom Zoom said:

I agree, and I am by no means making excuses for the companies that get 'em wrong, but I'm wondering if perhaps the reason this seems to happen so often these days is that model companies don't have the same access to factory blueprints that they did back when they were making kits of cars like the '70 Mustang when they were new.

Just a theory ...

I don't want to seem too cynical :wink: but I don't think that's the problem; blueprints are/were someone's drawing and photographs tell you exactly how something looks (a good photographer knows how to put scale props into a photo for measurements). Regardless, I think what we see is someone's interpretation of what something looks like, and nobody critiqued/corrected the details properly somewhere along the line due to whatever reason (such as slowing down the project). Could be the kit designer drew it wrong, could be the first modelmaker/pattern maker got it wrong, could be the tooling department took some liberties and along the way that weren't fixed, whatever the case may be.

I can easily see that the '70 Mustang headlight should have nothing above it visually but the chrome surround strip, yet the model has what looks to be nearly 1/16" of bezel above the lamp not including the grille's surround trim. That surround trim and the resulting chrome strip on the leading edge of the hood look roughly 1/16" too high (making the entire grille too tall by the same amount), the character line wrapping from the side of the body shouldn't go uphill to meet the surround trim above the two corner vents; they should be parallel to the ground and the character line above it should also be parallel to the ground-yet someone made it go uphill. Someone took artistic license with the design of the model, and it shows. Perhaps it was the same person who made the '69 Mustang grille too tall, and the resulting centering of the inner lamp is higher than the center of the main headlamp, giving that car the "droopy eyes" look that pretty much ruins it for me.

I do remember when two companies made the same car, the '94 Mustang. AMT claimed to make their kit from factory blueprints (or "tapes") provided by Ford. Monogram made theirs their traditional way. To my eyes AMT did a much better job of making the car look "right". Both kits need a bit of tweaking, but AMT seemed to do a better job of making that car accurate looking, Monogram's has some issues. Historically AMT/MPC/Johan seemed to do a better job of proportion than Monogram. Monogram's Fox-era Mustangs have all had proportion issues, especially prior to the '99 Cobra.

And let's not forget the pending AAR Barracuda from Revell/Monogram. The test shot looked awful. They blew it in regards to the B pillar and rear fender. If they don't fix those issues, they're going to get blasted again for a second time on that poor model. There is no excuse when it can be fixed! How it got to that point is beyond me, there must have been some pattern or model along the way, at least I would hope...or were they pinching pennies and skipping steps and hoping that it would be okay??

Back to the subject at hand (since this thread has been thoroughly hijacked from it's roots :wink: ); how many of Monogram's excellent '59 Cadillacs have been built with properly-painted headlight bezels? The kit was designed w/part of the body-color headlight bezel on the chrome tree instead of being part of the body. It would be tricky to mask/spray body color behind the headlight surround. But it can be done. The boxart illustration of the CV shows it painted, but the boxart model has them chrome. 99% of the ones I've seen built are also chrome. Bugs me to no end

Speaking of the '59 Cadillac, I went to the trouble of cutting a portion of the headlamp trim away, just to get that body color headlight bucket.

I have been so irritated with some of the "new kit tool's propotions", so I have been working on some vintage restorations.

Right now, one of the projects I'm working on is a MPC '69 Coronet R/T, depicting as a 440 Magmum w/ track pack.

The body work is done (cleaned up and added body separation lines), now I have to decide on a color (red, turquoise, or bronze), the drivetrain(probably a 440 Magmum/4-speed) due to the hood and interior bucket, and wheel combination (more than likely, dog dishes, Magmum 500's or the "Phantom" aluminum wheels).

I'm going to use a AMT GTX chassis and running gear, so that I can use the kit's interior tub..

...and yes, I removed the mould lines, and detailed the seats. I'm not going to add head rests to it, but I plan to use some elements from the "Last Detail" and "Fred Cady" Coronet decal set, and some "Model Car Garage" Photoetch from various Dodges, as appropriate. I may even put a vinyl roof on it.

The photos were taken before I worked on it. I'll take some photos when I get it up on wheels.

I'm also going to do a '66 Fairlane GT from the annual kit, with the innards from the new kit, similar to my '67, probably in "Emberglow", with a Beige Interior. I am having a hard time with the "newly tooled body" on that one. A '66 Cyclone GT and an "old tool" '67 Cyclone GT is coming down the pike.

Edited November 14, 2008 by Ron Hamilton

[evilone]

  Jairus said:

From now on I expect each and every 1970 Mustang posted on this forum to have the headlight rings correctly painted!

8)

well now if i do fix one up i sure wont post it here

dude its only art bro no need to get bent over it

yha its a missrepresentation but hay what the heck atleast its close

now stand assured i wont post up a 70 stang that i might be fixing up as i post this

[Clay]

  evilone said:

well now if i do fix one up i sure wont post it here

dude its only art bro no need to get bent over it

yha its a missrepresentation but hay what the heck atleast its close

now stand assured i wont post up a 70 stang that i might be fixing up as i post this

Remember Kevin, alot of these guys are alot older than you and me, so they know what the car is suppose to look like. They are just that anal retentave to notice a mis-shaped roof or the wrong year roof on a different year car. Myself, I don't really care what color things have to be, I will do it the way I want to. If its not "correct" then oh well. I am glad I dont know that much about cars, cause my military nature of wanting everything done right the first time would bug the bejesus out of me.

[evilone]

  Clay said:

Remember Kevin, alot of these guys are alot older than you and me, so they know what the car is suppose to look like. They are just that anal retentave to notice a mis-shaped roof or the wrong year roof on a different year car. Myself, I don't really care what color things have to be, I will do it the way I want to. If its not "correct" then oh well. I am glad I dont know that much about cars, cause my military nature of wanting everything done right the first time would bug the bejesus out of me.

true but at least we have these kits and about 5 mins of google searching will show you an appropriate coloration of it

they dont need to get all mad about someone blacking out a grill instead of making it a dark gray dude make it the color you want it and get over it i hate seeing people gitting all mad about this or that eventually the modeling companies will get fed up with this stuff and stop making kits then we will all be screwed

i am still not going to post up a 70 stang because i will be flamed for not making the grill "Dark Gray"