1/25 Revell '70 Plymouth HEMI 'Cuda 2'n1

[Rob Hall]

Yesterday I received my kit from GMS Customs (ordered Nov 19th). Like the above comments I have a curled decal sheet, flash in the same places and the chrome plating is missing from one spray angle on the backside. Otherwise it looks like an awesome kit.

Got mine from GMS Customs yesterday also...postal box looked like it had been kicked around, kit box slightly crushed, but everything inside ok. My 3rd Cuda received in a week, from 3 different vendors.

[Mike Chernecki]

Got mine from GMS Customs yesterday also...postal box looked like it had been kicked around, kit box slightly crushed, but everything inside ok. My 3rd Cuda received in a week, from 3 different vendors.

Haha, great postal system. The box on mine had water stains, kicked in corner and one of the flaps ripped off. No damage inside though.

[oldscool]

Post deleted by original poster.

Edited December 14, 2013 by oldscool

[slantasaurus]

I forget what this part/section is called to which the oil filter mounts, but I think this is the first time it's been fully molded on a B-series Mopar big block like this:

Casey, there is a reason nobody has molded that part of the Hemi engine that way. Its totally wrong!!! I've never seen any B/RB/Hemi engine in 1/24 or 1/25 scale that has ever gotten the front of the engine right. Some are better than others and some are passable, especially once in place and you can't see most of the detail.

http://images.hotrod.com/techarticles/p148221_image_large.jpg

[Rob Hall]

As an aside for a different thread-- I don't recall if MCM or SA has ever done it, but it would be interesting to see a topic or article on what the 'best' kit 426 Hemi is (most accurate for a street Hemi)...so many have been kitted over the years in 1/25th and 1/24th scale.

Edited December 13, 2013 by Rob Hall

[tim boyd]

As an aside for a different thread-- I don't recall if MCM or SA has ever done it, but it would be interesting to see a topic or article on what the 'best' kit 426 Hemi is (most accurate for a street Hemi)...so many have been kitted over the years in 1/25th and 1/24th scale.

Hmmmm.....TB

[Casey]

Casey, there is a reason nobody has molded that part of the Hemi engine that way. Its totally wrong!!! I've never seen any B/RB/Hemi engine in 1/24 or 1/25 scale that has ever gotten the front of the engine right. Some are better than others and some are passable, especially once in place and you can't see most of the detail.

I think that area (mounting boss?) for the oil filter is close to correct on the 1/25 Revell '68-9 Charger R/T kit.

One thing I noticed when looking over the parts last night is how the rearend is laid out and located among the other parts. It appears it's an insert, which leads me to speculate/predict a future variant with an 8-3/4" rear end is all but certain. I can even see a place for the (what would be molded separately) gear carrier (chunk/pig), so sign me up for an AAR in 2016.

[VRM]

One thing I noticed when looking over the parts last night is how the rearend is laid out and located among the other parts. It appears it's an insert, which leads me to speculate/predict a future variant with an 8-3/4" rear end is all but certain. I can even see a place for the (what would be molded separately) gear carrier (chunk/pig), so sign me up for an AAR in 2016.

Casey,

I was one of the folks (with help from some guys in my club) who had input into this kit, and I think the 2 scoop hood and separate console were among the things that made it from my parts suggestions (for this release). More importantly, I made a business case that proposes mandatory parts and then optional parts for any given release. They only have so much room inside the box, so for another issue they remove the 'custom' inserts and add the 'drag' inserts (S&M hood, rear leaf, high rise manifold, roll cage), and stock insert (set of steel wheels and spoiler). Now, if you want steelies and spoiler with two scoop hood you have to get 2 kits, but you can still build something cool with the remaining parts. Notice that the engine is an 'insert' also - remove the Hemi, the shaker hood insert, custom K frame, add 340 engine, AAR hood, spoiler and exhaust. I outlined a whole plan (including a convertible, but not a Foose) for a handful of releases with 'must haves' and 'it would be nice to have'. We will see where they go. I suggested that they keep the engine mount points between this kit and the Dart or Charger the same so that engines could be swapped around. The seats are also an 'insert' - this means possibly bench seats, Gran Coupe, or even the checkerboard cloth and vinyl!

This sort of design lets them get great mileage out of a single kit design - they can add or delete various 'inserts' while still using the same basic pattern. Their goal is to have us buy as many kits as possible, and they can do it ( I think) by giving us all the parts we want, but in different boxes. They wont all fit in the same box anyway.

Also look at the '72 Olds - they could redo the grille (they were not aware it was wrong for the 442), revise the tail lights and have a '71 '442 for little investment. Add some different colour stripes, and you have a whole new release that can be parts swapped with the '72. And with the lack of '72s on Ebay it is pretty obvious they are nothing close to market saturation.

I sent a similar letter or email to AMT about their Duster in 2011 or so - suggesting they do a Demon by adding Demon body, grille, etc, and also by adding the correct interior that would still be compatible with the Duster. The Duster is advertised as a '71, but I think it has '72 door panels. Doing a Duster based Demon with correct '71 doors and 'custom' (in addition to stock '71) 72 seats would allow us to bash two kits and make a Duster from one year, and a Demon from the other - especially if they made the trunk lid with crease a separate part. Add '70 door panels and seats and you have a whole new Duster also!

I'm very curious to see what the Demon looks like.

[Rob Hall]

It's going to be fun to see where Revell goes with this kit next...lots of potential for variations..

[VRM]

It's going to be fun to see where Revell goes with this kit next...lots of potential for variations..

They have plans, but some of it may depend on how well the kit(s) sell.

[FASTBACK340]

As an aside for a different thread-- I don't recall if MCM or SA has ever done it, but it would be interesting to see a topic or article on what the 'best' kit 426 Hemi is (most accurate for a street Hemi)...so many have been kitted over the years in 1/25th and 1/24th scale.

As I'm reading Rob's post I'm thinking of Tim Boyd doing a comparison, and I see he posts next!

[FASTBACK340]

Casey, great comparison between the new & old.....

[gtx6970]

Moving on to the body shell, the first flaw become obvious, and it was mentioned by Chuck K and others previously- the wheel lips. They are way too prominent, and I'm not sure why. When viewed straight on from the side they look fine:

This the main reason for my personal dis-apointment in this release. Although I have 3 of them now . From here out I'll wait and see if anything is rectified in the future to correct it before I buy any more

So glad I didn't sell off my original MPC issues.

IMO, I have my doubts this release will do any damage to the value of said MPC issue

[Rob Hall]

Interesting how different the side marker lights are between the two...but it does look like in 1:1 the '72-74 Cudas have different side marker lights than the '70-71..

[1972coronet]

Interesting how different the side marker lights are between the two...but it does look like in 1:1 the '72-74 Cudas have different side marker lights than the '70-71..

Chrysler went to "universal" (read : generic) side marker lamps in 1972 on all its models except the C-Bodies (Monaco-Polara , Fury , New Yorker , Imperial) and its pickups (I could be wrong ; although later iterations of the "D/W" Series eventually went to the "universal" side markers in the 1980's or so .

[Guest]

Thanx for the photos and comparison Casey! The only thing that really bugs me is the inner fenders molded to the interior floor pan. I really don't understand the thinking behind that. Seems that Revell thinks it's a good idea for some reason. If I get this kit, I'll have to hack those off and glue them to the body the way they should be. Revell has become famous for exaggerated fender lips and openings shaped wrong. So, that doesn't surprise me. As usual, it's going to take some tweaking to get it right. But, it sure is a lot closer than past releases.

There's a big difference in the shape of the rear windows between these two bodies. Which one is correct? Looks like the AMT rear window is closer to the actual car.

[iBorg]

I finally got my hand on this kit. I have a collection of Cudas that includes MPC annual and Motown Missiles, Johan Sox and Martin kits and now the Revell offering. Each seems to have pluses. The MPC may be the best body. It is the only current option for a later vintage Cuda. The remainder of the kit suffers MPC's traditional lackluster details of their 1070's annuals. The Johan kit is a very good pro stock (drag race only) car with a good body, engine and interior parts (but the interior bucket is useless due to is soft, almost non-existent detail). The Johan chassis is toy like with the exception of the Dana 60. The Revell kit has a body that looks funky in several dimensions. The sides are too tall. There's some body line issues and the front end looks too heavy. What the Revell kit does offer is a very nice engine, wonderful interior and a very nice chassis.

The logical thing would be to mix and match the parts of the Revell kit to update either the MPC or Johan kit, but that's not easy. The interior bucket is much too deep to swap in either the MPC or Johan body without significant work. The chassis should be fairly easy to adapt but it will take time and skill to make it fit. The Revell kit offers a lot of possibilities and challenges. Unfortunately we still don't have a great Plymouth Barracuda.

[69NovaYenko]

I think that area (mounting boss?) for the oil filter is close to correct on the 1/25 Revell '68-9 Charger R/T kit.

One thing I noticed when looking over the parts last night is how the rearend is laid out and located among the other parts. It appears it's an insert, which leads me to speculate/predict a future variant with an 8-3/4" rear end is all but certain. I can even see a place for the (what would be molded separately) gear carrier (chunk/pig), so sign me up for an AAR in 2016.

Casey I trust we dont have to wait until 2016 before we seeing a `70 Cuda AAR spin-off from Revell. I hoping to see something like mid-2015 timeline.

Edited December 15, 2013 by 69NovaYenko

[1972coronet]

The backlight shape does look more accurately-executed on the MPC (et al.) body . Not that the Revell version is all together *bad* ; and in a completed state , its more-square-ish backlight shape probably diminishes .

Looking forward to seeing what my more skilled plastic fanatics devise as far as 'correcting' the rear wheel arches and their trim ...

[Jantrix]

There must be a flaw in their box loading machine, because the kit I bought today also had the decals bent against the side.

[Jantrix]

I received my kit today, and while my decal sheet was curled up the side of the box, it was curled up the end a bit:

No folds nor permanent damage, so not a big concern at this point.

[MrObsessive]

It's been a while since I made a comment such as this, so here's my 2¢. I received my kit the other day, and I have to say that I'm VERY WELL PLEASED with the Revell body! While there are a few nits (wheel arches, dubious character line flaw), I have to say that I give the Revell body a bit more of an edge over the Johan, and MPC bodies, of which I have both.

One area that will need fixing if I ever get around to building this, is the drip rail moulding on the roof. One of the major things I notice in rooflines of cars that are being translated into models---------does the roofline portray the right "attitude" in the kit? In other words, are the sharp angles where they're supposed to be, or have they been "rounded" which to my eyes changes the attitude of the roofline?

The 'Cuda to my sight doesn't have the sharp square upper corners in the rear quarter window trim like the 1:1, instead has been rounded off. This to me changes the appearance or attitude of the roofline which is a 'Cuda signature separate from the Challenger among other things. The MPC and Johan bodies do get this detail correct, but then the backlites of those two bodies are a bit too "rounded", especially at the sides when I compare photos I have of the 1:1 (which is a LOT).

I guess it comes down to what looks correct to any one individual and everyone can argue the point as to which one is correct. This is just one man's opinion-------------I only know that this is 100% better than the junky kit that Revell tried to foist on us back in 2007.

I've already got plans to what I want to do with mine when the opportunity presents itself.............been awhile since I got back into building! A lot has happened over this past year, but that's an issue for another thread!

Anyway, I look forward to seeing what everyone does with this kit...............a lot of possibilities here!

Edited December 15, 2013 by MrObsessive

[FASTBACK340]

I've already got plans to what I want to do with mine when the opportunity presents itself.............been awhile since I got back into building! A lot has happened over this past year, but that's an issue for another thread!

I always listen when Bill gives an evaluation on a kit, and it's been too long since we've heard from you!

While the subject of this post is appreciated, I'm more concerned about Bill. How have YOU been and we hope all is well.

[gtx6970]

I now have 3 of these kits , none have chrome issues , none had decal issues .

[MrObsessive]

Any ideas on accomplishing a mod top for this?

http://www.mooresmopars.com/modmaterial.html

Rob, I do have an idea on how to make this but it's a bit convoluted and requires some computer "geekery".

You can save the image of whatever floral pattern you'd like, then you can "tile" the image on to your desktop. Of course, you'll need to shrink the image to whatever suits you for 1:25. After you've tiled the image, do a screenshot of the desktop, save in whatever folder you'd like, then have the screenshot printed on decal paper.

After you've printed the decal paper, I would cut a template or pattern using wide masking tape, then tranfer the template on to your decal paper and cut accordingly. It might take a few tries, but it's the low budget way to accomplish this as opposed to having someone do this for you.

As I said, it's a bit convoluted, and it would take some 'puter skills to make this work. I did this on the '55 Ford Burtex trunk mat pattern------a model that I never was able to finish.

Hope this helps!