Why haven't the model companies produced a '57 Bel Air convertible in 1/24 or 1/25?

[Monty]

Even though there's a small contingent in here who're tired of '57 Chevies (among others), I can't imagine a 1/24 or 1/25 '57 Bel Air ragtop kit not selling like crazy.

[Lownslow]

easier to chop a top than to put one on

[Art Anderson]

Even though there's a small contingent in here who're tired of '57 Chevies (among others), I can't imagine a 1/24 or 1/25 '57 Bel Air ragtop kit not selling like crazy.

Frankly, as both a hobbyist, and one who has both worked in a hobby shop AND owned one: Hardtops and sedans have far outsold convertibles almost since forever. Wish it were otherwise, but that has been the case for decades with model kits.

Art

[Chuck Most]

I'm in the 'tired of '57 Chevys' camp myself, but I'd think such an animal would be a very hot seller. Its kind of suprising we got a 150 Utility Sedan before the drop top, now that it crosses my mind.

[Art Anderson]

I'm in the 'tired of '57 Chevys' camp myself, but I'd think such an animal would be a very hot seller. Its kind of suprising we got a 150 Utility Sedan before the drop top, now that it crosses my mind.

I refer you to my post above! Kits of convertibles have almost never had the sales numbers of kits of closed cars, period. I rest my case (based on more than 30yrs experience in retail hobbies)

Art

[Chuck Most]

I refer you to my post above! Kits of convertibles have almost never had the sales numbers of kits of closed cars, period. I rest my case (based on more than 30yrs experience in retail hobbies)

Art

I don't disagree, but it does seem odd that a somewhat esoteric subject like a salesman's car (NASCAR possibilites notwithstanding) would be kitted before the drop top. It may be true that closed cars outsell convertibles, but Revell already had Tri-Five droptop tooling in their banks (Monogram '55), and a '57 of any sort is pretty much a surefire bet for good sales. Come to think of it, it's weird Revell started there with their new '57 kits when you'd think there'd be more demand for the Bel Air hardtop version.

I still do think a '57 Chevy convertible would sell well. As well as a closed version? Maybe not, but the simple fact it's a '57 Chevy above all else would help move more than a few of them.

[W-409]

One thing why I don't buy so much Convertible Model Kits is, that they can't be converted to Race Car so well as non-Convertibles. As well as they are not as Cool Customs etc. The subject must be very interesting if I buy Convertible cars, '57 Chevy would be very interesting.

[Luc Janssens]

I don't disagree, but it does seem odd that a somewhat esoteric subject like a salesman's car (NASCAR possibilites notwithstanding) would be kitted before the drop top. It may be true that closed cars outsell convertibles, but Revell already had Tri-Five droptop tooling in their banks (Monogram '55), and a '57 of any sort is pretty much a surefire bet for good sales. Come to think of it, it's weird Revell started there with their new '57 kits when you'd think there'd be more demand for the Bel Air hardtop version.

I still do think a '57 Chevy convertible would sell well. As well as a closed version? Maybe not, but the simple fact it's a '57 Chevy above all else would help move more than a few of them.

I have to agree with Art...

I assume....it's like in the 1:1 car world,

the sedans and hardtops are embraced by car enthusiasts, because they're cheap and easy to work with, I assume there are more customized versions, then that there are "restored to factory specs" examples out there, I bet everyone here knows some guy who's tinkering with one, they're like big scale model kits, lots of aftermarket parts available and you can even drive it, how much better does it get?

A convertible as nice a car it is, is rare due to fewer produced and even fewer who survived the tin worm, so much more expensive and also the structure and weight of a convertible always compromises a good performance/drag setup.

So IMHO a convertible kit, if released will sell to a small contingent of car modelers, and after a few dozen or so years will bring top dollar on ebay, due to is rarity.

Again I'm assuming here, you guys have to remember I'm looking at this from a distance.

[1930fordpickup]

Art could not have given a better answer ,

It is always about the sales numbers now and in the future with kits .

That being said ,then why do we still not have a fox body notch but have a convertible ?

Maybe this is the kit that proved the point .LOL

[MachinistMark]

ive been asking this question for years.

it would sell like crazy why cause a 57 convertible is not like any other convertible.

the 57 chevy is what springs to mind for most people when the think classic car.

[gtx6970]

How much of a difference can there be in a hardtop versus convertible version, other than the missing roof ?

I think hardtop NON out of the box build possibilities far out weigh the roofless version .

[Harry P.]

How much of a difference can there be in a hardtop versus convertible version, other than the missing roof ?

The rear seat and rear inner panels are different on a convertible.

When they tooled up a new '57, they missed the boat. Offering a "2 in 1" kit with options for the convertible or coupe interior, plus a separate hard top and convertible boot and/or uptop would have been a sales winner, IMO

[Casey]

If convertibles don't sell very well, then why did Revell produce the '72 Olds as a convertible??

Licensing with Hurst, possibly? It's probably easier to change the tooling from a droptop to a hardtop rather than vice-versa, too.

I think a '56 or '57 Chevy convertible would be a good seller. Maybe the '55 they did produce didn't do very well. I would buy a '57 Chevy convertible IF it came with an uptop.

Don't forget Revell's (well, it might've been a Monogram release actually) first "modern" 1/25 Tri-Five Chevy was a '55 Bel Air convertible in 1995 or so, and it's a current release under the Monogram "Car Show" label, so if it wasn't a good seller, I doubt they would've reissued it for a third go 'round.

I'm not touching the "no uptop, no sale" subject.

[moparmagiclives]

As has been said, what would sell more? A kit that everyone could find something in it they like ( hard top, custom, race, street, razor saw convert with some aftermarket parts), or a stock, parade car convertible? Plus a convertible gives you no choice but to put as much work into the interior as you have on the exterior. That would detour me on a few different kits. Or maybe they just have had enough with the tri fives as everyone else lol.

[Art Anderson]

Licensing with Hurst, possibly? It's probably easier to change the tooling from a droptop to a hardtop rather than vice-versa, too.

Don't forget Revell's (well, it might've been a Monogram release actually) first "modern" 1/25 Tri-Five Chevy was a '55 Bel Air convertible in 1995 or so, and it's a current release under the Monogram "Car Show" label, so if it wasn't a good seller, I doubt they would've reissued it for a third go 'round.

I'm not touching the "no uptop, no sale" subject.

never said it didn't sell well enough, but just that as a rule, over the years, model kits of convertibles never did sell nearly as well as their hardtop counterparts. Of course, there have been exceptions, especially where a convertible had another reason to catch the modeler's eye. Indy pace car convertibles do come to mind there, as an example, as do cars made famous in movies or on television. Of course, some cars, never built as anything but a convertible, do well as model kits (1952-62 Corvettes, 1955-57 Thunderbirds come to mind there).

but, all one has to do is to look at the relative values of old kits--often times the hardtop version of a particular car will command more money than the convertible.

But, this is NOT to say that convertible model kits don't make sense, just that in terms of a broader market appeal, hardtops and 2dr sedans, even some station wagons, actually sell better over time.

Art

[Art Anderson]

I don't disagree, but it does seem odd that a somewhat esoteric subject like a salesman's car (NASCAR possibilites notwithstanding) would be kitted before the drop top. It may be true that closed cars outsell convertibles, but Revell already had Tri-Five droptop tooling in their banks (Monogram '55), and a '57 of any sort is pretty much a surefire bet for good sales. Come to think of it, it's weird Revell started there with their new '57 kits when you'd think there'd be more demand for the Bel Air hardtop version.

I still do think a '57 Chevy convertible would sell well. As well as a closed version? Maybe not, but the simple fact it's a '57 Chevy above all else would help move more than a few of them.

Of course, that '57 Chevy "salesman's car" found a niche of fame as a Nascar racer, and later, on the drag strips!

Art

[Junkman]

It's because the model kit industry is run by a bunch of gutless goutbags who still live in the 80s and haven't got a bloody clue of bugger all when it comes to automotive subjects, that's why.

[Rob Hall]

It is odd..since other Chevy convertibles of that era have been kitted ('55, 59, 60, 61, etc). I like convertible kits, esp. since they show off the interior well in the finished kit..

[Greg Myers]

I think we need one of these :

[Harry P.]

It's because the model kit industry is run by a bunch of gutless goutbags who still live in the 80s and haven't got a bloody clue of bugger all when it comes to automotive subjects, that's why.

Don't be shy, Christian. Tell us how you really feel!

[High octane]

I've seen SO many '57 chevy kits over the last 50 years that I'm really surprised that a model company hasn't tried to sell '57 Chevy T-shirts also.

[Junkman]

Don't be shy, Christian. Tell us how you really feel!

Oh, and:

Sleep well, model kit industry! Or shall I say good riddance?

[Art Anderson]

From their introduction by GM in 1949, until 1960's styling made it much more difficult for many makes of cars, hardtops were little more than steel roofs welded onto convertible bodies. In fact, if you look at any 1950's hardtop body shells with all the interior stripped out, you can see the convertible top lockdown points in the windshield header in the inside, as well as mounting points for the convertible top mechanisms. For that reason alone, almost any model car body tooling for a hardtop can be made to work with a few new mold "slides" to do the convertible version, along with new interior side panels and rear seat.

Those iconic 1960's Annual Series hardtops tended to all have convertible interior tubs, at least for several years--that made it easier to offer the hardtop and convertible--and back then, did the kids we once were really notice it that much? Probably not. But at least, it took only the upper slide core of most model car kit tooling to change out a hardtop to a convertible--and occasionally the two side slide cores as well.

I based my comments on my 30 some years associated with, or working full time in, the retail hobby shop business. Back in the 1960's, every July, the hobby shop worked my way through college in, participated in the downtown sidewalk sale days. Now, we always put out a lot of stock on folding tables at those sale events, and that included unsold "last year's" model car kits--and guess what? The majority of those were the convertible versions.

I would guess that the lower sales of convertible kits generally happened due to the fact that most of the cars you saw customized back then tended to be hardtops or 2dr sedans of some sort or other (yes, there have been iconic convertible customs, but those were pretty much outnumbered by closed body styles), but I submit that if one really looks through pics of customs, MOST are closed body styles. In addition, convertibles are pretty rare on the dragstrips, due to their greater weight (chassis X-members, heavier body structures and so on), which made them less than competitive. Of course, NASCAR, for a few years in the very late 50's ran a convertible class, but even that went away pretty quickly, without much weeping over its demise.

As for weight, a sedan delivery tended to be among the lightest weight version of most makes of cars--I learned that when researching my 58 Chevy sedan delivery some 20 years ago. It was lighter than even the bare-bones basic 2dr Utility sedan by perhaps a hundred pounds or so. As for why virtually no steel bodied station wagons in model kit form (other than Chevy Nomads), I cannot answer that, except to say that those mean tooling that cannot really be made to modify easily into any other body styles (absent say, an El Camino or Ranchero).

But the bottom line seems to be thus: A model company wants and needs to see that any new tooling has some "legs" to it. That means that either a particular new kit subject has to stand on its own two feet all by its lonesome, or when possible, additional variants can be added to it without requiring all new tooling. If planned from the get-go, many American car subjects (and even a few foreign cars as well) can be engineered up front to allow for future "modified releases" requiring minimal investments in new tooling. If one studies any model car kit body shell, looks at whatever mold parting lines there are, one can begin to understand what is possible to change by simply making new sliding mold sections, called in the trade, "Slide Cores". If a particular model company (and Revell Monogram has a long tradition of this, particularly from Monogram's history) of always planning at least one major variant of most model car kit tools they ever did. But not every model kit maker has done that, and for that matter, neither did Monogram always, nor did Revell when they were a free-standing company, outside of their '57 Chevy lineup from nearly 50 years ago.

In all this, I'm just laying out the whys and wherefores as I've seen them over the years, they are not just opinions, but based on actual retail sales experiences. So, please don't shoot me. I am but a messenger here!

Art

[Art Anderson]

The rear seat and rear inner panels are different on a convertible.

When they tooled up a new '57, they missed the boat. Offering a "2 in 1" kit with options for the convertible or coupe interior, plus a separate hard top and convertible boot and/or uptop would have been a sales winner, IMO

Gee, Harry!

AMT did that with the '65 Pontiac GTO, and a perusal of comments even to this day of that kit would show that the concept you suggest would not be the way to go!

Art

[Ace-Garageguy]

I guess I'm not understanding the gripe, as converting a hardtop '57 Chevy to a convertible must surely rank as one of the easier hacks.