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

[tim boyd]

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!

Bill....great to hear from you and I would love to see you tackle this kit and take what is a pretty respectable first effort (in my POV) from Revell and make it 100% correct.

Just want to say that in my comparisons with the MPC, JoHan, and Danbury Mint 'cudas, as well as a series of 1/1 scale 'cuda photos I shot for this purpose, I have come to the same conclusion as you about the Revell body having the edge over the MPC and JoHan bodies. I always considered the MPC body to be the Gold Standard for '70 'cudas, but in comparing it to the Revell and JoHan bodies, and - this is the most important step - against the 1/1 scale photos, turns out that the MPC body is laughingly wrong in several areas. My take is that none of the three model bodies is correct in all areas, but if I was doing a 100% accurate build now, I'd start with the Revell body now, rather than the MPC. That was a real surprise to me.

A number of people (including myself) have commented to Revell on the roof drip rail moldings, it would seem to me that this would be a fairly easy fix on future issues, and it is a fairly easy fix now for anyone who is so inclined and has the skills. One other change that no one has commented on so far: I'd like to see the "racetrack" moldings for the rear tailamp blackout cove engraved in the body, which would help in masking off this area for the blackout treatment, and in trimming the BMFoil that should go on the molding.

Best regards...TIM

[Ron Hamilton]

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!

Exactly!!!!! BTW, welcome back, and will I see you next Saturday????

[cruz]

I am already working on a vinyl roof for this baby. The kit might have some little faults here and there but I think it will look great once completed!

[cruz]

I will be trashing the cheesy tires and use these meaty ones!

[Hawk312]

I will be trashing the cheesy tires and use these meaty ones!

Oohhhhh nice! Where did you get those tires? They look like the chief`s.

[cruz]

Oohhhhh nice! Where did you get those tires? They look like the chief`s.

http://www.fireballmodels.info/

[Hawk312]

http://www.fireballmodels.info/

Very nice! I thought I recognized those tires,

Looking forward to seeing what you can do with this kit Marcos!

[Guest]

Bill....great to hear from you and I would love to see you tackle this kit and take what is a pretty respectable first effort (in my POV) from Revell

Tim, imo, this is not a first effort from Revell, this is a third time at bat with 2 strikes and 2 fouls, lol.

[tim boyd]

I'll be releasing a Mod decal sheet that has all 3 patterns. The art should be done this week,so hopefully Cartograf will be done in early Feb.

That's a great series of links....thanks! And looking forward to your ModTop decals...TIM

Tim, imo, this is not a first effort from Revell, this is a third time at bat with 2 strikes and 2 fouls, lol.

Correcto, of course, I meant the first effort for a truly correct 'cuda kit! TB

[tim boyd]

http://www.fireballmodels.info/

Note that this seller is also selling Goodyear RWL tire decals...G6015 is the closest he has to the factory correct F6015 lettering...I just ordered several sets. Thanks for the link Marcos. TIM

UPDATE...he's just added F60-15 Goodyear Polyglas GT RWL tires to do with the 'cuda kit. I ordered those too....TIM

Edited December 17, 2013 by tim boyd

[Jantrix]

So, I took the small block from my sons Duster build and popped it into the engine bay of this Cuda. It looks ................. kinda lost in there. It looks very small, scale wise. Is there another option for a small block?

[Casey]

So, I took the small block from my sons Duster build and popped it into the engine bay of this Cuda. It looks ................. kinda lost in there. It looks very small, scale wise. Is there another option for a small block?

Not really, unless you want to use one of the MPC small block Mopars, or the AMT version ('41 Plymouth/Petty Sportsman), though I would recommend neither. I always felt the AMT '71 340 Duster's engine was slightly undersized, and the transmission is definitely too small and a bit on the funky side, which is why I'm anxiously awaiting a 1/25 AAR from Revell. The need for an accurate 1/25 scale LA-series Mopar small block is immense.

Maybe a Ross Gibson engine?

[Rob Hall]

Not really, unless you want to use one of the MPC small block Mopars, or the AMT version ('41 Plymouth/Petty Sportsman), though I would recommend neither. I always felt the AMT '71 340 Duster's engine was slightly undersized, and the transmission is definitely too small and a bit on the funky side, which is why I'm anxiously awaiting a 1/25 AAR from Revell. The need for an accurate 1/25 scale LA-series Mopar small block is immense.

Maybe a Ross Gibson engine?

The MPC ones--at least in the Duster and Dart Sport kits--seems too small also. The eBay seller 'puggypugpower2011' has resin 340 and 360 engines for sale, curious about them..

[cotto]

I am already working on a vinyl roof for this baby. The kit might have some little faults here and there but I think it will look great once completed!

That roof looks perfect, what did you use? Tape or something?

[cruz]

That roof looks perfect, what did you use? Tape or something?

Thanks Jay. I don't like using tape on my vinyl tops, I'd rather create the texture with paint as I did here. This is Testor's Gloss Black airbrushed at 35 PSI and thinning the paint lightly. Why gloss? It creates a heavier orange peel which is what I was going for. I will sand it a bit once dry and finish up with a slightly duller coat of black, it's still a little too shiny.

[1972coronet]

The MPC ones--at least in the Duster and Dart Sport kits--seems too small also. The eBay seller 'puggypugpower2011' has resin 340 and 360 engines for sale, curious about them..

Those engines look more like a 3.9 litre ("Chopped 318 V8") engine ! Just an awful engine all-around . I must admit , however , that I have seen one example of that 'generic' MoPar LA-Series engine in an MPC 1977 Road Runner , whose builder turned into a respectible piece !

If it's any consolation , the AMT 340 from their 1971 Duster does look small inside the carniverous boillerroom of 1970-1974 E-Bodies and 1971-1974 B-Bodies . Same's true in "1:1" scale .

[Jantrix]

Someone from the Cuda build off suggested the small block from the Revell 1/24 Dodge Intrepid stock car. Anyone know anything about this kit, is it a Mopar engine? Even with the scale difference, this might be just the ticket for my build.

[oldscool]

How about the engine from the 1/24 Challenger T/A? I don't think it would look too small. Besides, a 340 six pack with two scoop hood would make an interesting Cuda.

[Jantrix]

Yep, that might work.

[slantasaurus]

Someone from the Cuda build off suggested the small block from the Revell 1/24 Dodge Intrepid stock car. Anyone know anything about this kit, is it a Mopar engine? Even with the scale difference, this might be just the ticket for my build.

LMFAO !!! The engine in the Nascar kits is a Chevy with valve covers that say Dodge. The only engine that would come close would be in the older version of Monogram's 70 Challenger T/A.

[Jantrix]

LMFAO !!! The engine in the Nascar kits is a Chevy with valve covers that say Dodge. The only engine that would come close would be in the older version of Monogram's 70 Challenger T/A.

I was afraid of that. Thanks for setting that straight Ron.

[Brett Barrow]

There does seem to be a lot of room in the 1:1...

[Rob Hall]

There does seem to be a lot of room in the 1:1...

Yes..the E-body was considerably wider than the A-body..almost as wide as the B-body, I think...

[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.

I don't care for the way the inner fenders are molded to the floorpan, either, as it reminds me of the die-cast style 1/25 '70 T/A-R/T and '68 Mustang kits. Maybe that's the design style in which Revell is headed, though. I can see how molding them the way they did make positive location at final assembly time much easier, and they did hide the locating pins and holes up underneath the fender tops, so you really can't see them once everything's assembled. I think it's an improvement over the grooved framerails and a slot under the inner fenders locating method, too, so I would say it's a small improvement.

As for the rear window, the Revell kit's looks more accurate to me. The long sections between the corners is straighter compared to the same areas on the AMT promo's body, and the corner radii are smaller on the Revell body, too. I only have two large clear shots of 1:1 rear windows, but I give the nod to the Revell kit's rear window.

Looking at the drip rail area on the 1:1, it doesn't appear to stand away from the roof panel very much, so maybe a subtle drip rail was the best compromise:

[Rob Hall]

That green on green car is gorgeous...is that a painted green roof--doesn't look like a vinyl top...