Revell '50 Oldsmobile Club Coupe 2'n1

[mikemodeler]

You guys are griping about the fact that Revell brought out a kit of something that has never been done! Maybe you would just as well not see any new stuff! I remember guys having a fit because there were not any new kits. Maybe you would like a repeat of those years! Gary B.

So true Gary! I am happy that we are getting models that have been on wish lists for years, sure hope Revell has more great news next month when they announce their 2013 releases!

[Chuck Kourouklis]

**edit** - well, now that all the antecedents have been removed, this post as originally written is missing some context and it kinda sticks out.

Suffice it to say that people continue to take kit critiques personally, and they continue to respond with personal attacks. For about the 48,752nd time, we saw the false dichotomy between real builders and those with a critical eye - surely, those nasty wags are too busy complaining to get anything built.

Riiight.If Bill Geary is such a critic, SIGN ME RIGHT UP for that "inaction".

Conversely, if you don't have a gallery of projects up for everyone to see, your impressions of a kit are instantly divested of any credibility. This makes about as much sense as demanding to see a Director's Guild membership card from anyone who claims Jaws 3D stank compared to the original film.

Actually, it makes even LESS sense, because noticing a model's deviations from the 1:1 is a far more objective exercise than watching a movie.

They're big boys over at Revell, folks. Anybody noticed how they haven't quit manufacturing new kits yet?

Edited September 19, 2012 by Chuck Kourouklis

[Agent G]

Olaf glonzo blarney quantum glockenspiel?

Ya das ist ein glockenspiel.

Nicht mehr fingerpokken und mitten grabben meine freunde.

G

Edited September 14, 2012 by Agent G

[jbwelda]

its still a totally kool model and i know i will be getting more than one. Revell ought to be congratulated for sinking money into anything in these times, truth be told.

[Chuck Most]

What I have to ask is this- who, besides the folks actually working on this kit for Revell and perhaps Tom Coolidge, has even seen this kit in person? I can see the box art model as well as anyone else, but is that the finalized kit on the box art, or the first, fifth, or umpteenth prototype revision? We all know these things go through a few rough drafts before they actually hit the shelves- how close is that built up on the box going to be to the actual product in the end? I don't know, you don't know, only a handful of people at this point know.

I'd agree with Mr. Kourouklis that the main thing to be concerned with is the accuracy of the car as the factory-stock coupe. But, again, I won't say anything until I have my greasy little paws on at least one example. And I WILL be buying a few of these, rest assured.

[Terry Jessee]

Don't want to offend anybody here, but I am pretty much astounded at some of the negative comments in this thread.

We haven't even seen the kit yet!!!

This is a kit that some of us have wanted for decades. It is a kit topic that was originally planned as long ago as the early 1960's (according to some people who were involved, it was approved as a kit and ready to go into development, then the company falsely heard that another model company was doing the same topic, and they cancelled the kit), and then again in the late 1990's (the RC/AMT-Ertl chapter).

Now we are actually getting the kit - in less than a month - and it will undoubtedly have the outstanding attention to detail that we are seeing in many of the new kits coming from Revell these days.

So....let's all take a deep breath, chill just a bit, and wait to see what is actually in the box when it comes out. Then if there are things to vent about or criticize, so be it (although my view is that you really can't effectively critique a new kit until you've built and completed it).

And yes, I think you can pretty easily conjecture that there will be future spinoffs of this kit with additional parts that are a bit more focused in their subject matter. Revell quizzed me on my ideas on one such variant several years ago when the kit was under consideration, though I do not know if that specific variant is in development or under consideration.

Guys, keep in mind, the team at Revell (and the other kit sources as well, I suspect), do read these Forums from time to time. I think our posts here should be informed and encourage them to continue to do the great work they are doing, and expand it even further - not discourage them by venting negative opinions before we've even opened the box top on their new products.

Again, this comment is not directed at anyone in particular, rather it is just my overall view of the topic....TIM

Yeah, it is kind of peculiar. Is it a '50 Olds? Did Revell do it? I'm in. Want it perfect?--make it so. Everything else is just air.

Terry

[Terry Jessee]

By the way, here's another variant. Think this might be a 98, but the photo caption I found said 88. So?

Terry

[Guest]

I am so pumped for this and the 57 Ford.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Terry, for a man who was called a "rivet-counter" for having the temerity, the audacity to point out that the fender arches on Revell's '62 Impala weren't 100% - from pictures, no less - you've got an equanimity on the subject I genuinely admire. I, on the other hand, have no patience for that kind of sandbox hysteria among supposed adults.

And here's the thing: Revell's Impala was certainly no Trumpeter Falcon, its options and engineering were beautifully conceived, and in most respects it was a big improvement over the AMT bubble top. I have a couple myself, and I love 'em. But that fender arch problem made it onto the shelves, and it's just as visible in your hands as it is in the pictures, isn't it?

You don't have to crave some mythical perfect kit to see that. You don't need to have a gallery of finished models posted online either. You DON'T always need the kit physically in front of you, and actually, you don't even particularly need to be a modeler to observe such things. All you need is a functioning pair of eyes.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Chuck Kourouklis

[Ace-Garageguy]

...........and actually, you don't even particularly need to be a modeler to observe such things. All you need is a functioning pair of eyes.

......connected to a functioning brain.

[Rob Hall]

Speaking of '50 Olds bodystyles, I stumbled across this on a GM forum....don't know if it's a phantom or not, but pretty neat..

[Chuck Kourouklis]

......connected to a functioning brain.

Yeah, well. I'm trying to use some restraint...

[Chuck Most]

Rob... it is said that a handful of those were built for Oldsmobile's own use, but they were never made available to the general public. There is some dispute to that story, and most of the Olds experts say that the ones you'll see at car shows nowadays are all home-made conversions. But there does seem to be some scattered bits of evidence that Olds made a little over a half-dozen of them.

You'll notice the car in the photo you posted has the Olds one-piece glass and trim. Some people insist that the Olds-built vehicles had the standard Chevrolet delivery body with the two-piece split windshield and no quarter panel trim. Either way, nobody can seem to produce a period photograph of one of these animals to prove or disprove that either way.

And yes, I am planning on trying out an Olds SD once this kit hits the shelves.

[Danno]

"Everything Olds is new again!"

Mine are getting closer and closer to my bench.

[Paul Dutram]

Am I right that this would be the only 303ci Olds engine, other than the Beatnik Bandit?

What's the engine color on this model? The 1950 Oldsmobile brochure shows a yellow-orange color, but I always thought these engines were metallic green.

[Casey]

See anything new?

Old:

New:

[tooltas]

i see j2 speed parts and custom wheels

[crazyjim]

Is that what's over there on the right side? I can't tell what it/they are.

[David G.]

Also looks like the trunk insert (?) and roll bar sprue is gone.

David G.

[Rob Hall]

Also looks like the trunk insert (?) and roll bar sprue is gone.

David G.

I think that was a back seat area insert for the racing version. So are we seeing trees for two different releases--i.e. the initial stock & race version, and a 2nd stock & street machine/custom version? Or a change in plans? Hmm....

Edited September 23, 2012 by Rob Hall

[Casey]

It's hard to tell from the two large images I found if the Panamerica version is sans rear seat or not, but I think we can safely assume a modified reissue in NASCAR dress will be forthcoming, so the rear seat panel and rollbar will eventually be used. Maybe the Panamerica version used a roll bar, too?

I didn't notice it before, but the wheels appear to be die-cast style, with halves which glue together before inserting them into the tires.

[Chuck Most]

I didn't notice it before, but the wheels appear to be die-cast style, with halves which glue together before inserting them into the tires.

I fail to see any significant downside to that.

Edited September 23, 2012 by Michigan Madman

[tooltas]

on rigth side i see a Jtwo sixpack setup and some kind of custom hupcaps

[Craig Irwin]

1950 NASCAR rules required a full interior, back seat and all, and I don't think roll bars were yet required.

[horsepower]

on rigth side i see a Jtwo sixpack setup and some kind of custom hupcaps

It's a J2 3x2 setup, the carbs appear to be two parters, with an upper & a lower part, & the manifold & possibly the valve covers for the high lift cams? (we can always hope), this should be a popular engine, as there were a lot of "oldies" that used the Olds engines, I have plans for one to go into an early sixties Super-Modified racecar, with the 4x2 manifold & carbs borrowed from the Revell Cadillac parts pack engine.