LDO Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I have always thought the hatchback looked better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whale392 Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 The Hatch has a smoothness to it that helps the overall design of the car flow. It just looks goofy with a trunk, and is either a love-or-hate style of Fox. Personally, I like all of the styles it was offered in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lownslow Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I have always thought the hatchback looked better. Same here, ill get one to support revell but for now i got my sights set on the jeep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southpier Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 i'm getting another Rat Roaster just for the wheels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry P. Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 I have always thought the hatchback looked better. Me too. But none of the ones from that era look like a Mustang. More like a junior Fairmont. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whale392 Posted May 28, 2013 Share Posted May 28, 2013 (edited) Considering the Fairmont, Mercury Zephyr, and the Mustang twins (Mustang/Capri) were all designed at the same time and ride on the same chassis (the Fox platform), the resemblences are definately there! Yes, the Fairmont and Zephyr made it out one year before the Mustang did. Have you ever seen a Hatch without the spoiler of some sort? Goofy and truncated is the only way to describe it. The Mustang has never had its own unique chassis; it has always been a dirivative of some other chassis. 1964.5-73 was based on the Falcon Chassis, the MustangII was based off the Pinto, the FOX was based off the Fairmont, the SNs were based on the Fox, the s197s were based off the DEW98 (Lincoln)...................................... Edited May 28, 2013 by whale392 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maindrian Pace Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I do have a dog in the fight, and I still don't have a kit. I doubt that Revell will change the roof, because that would mean all new glass as well. I'll just buy one and do a model of my daily driver. With all of the black window trim painted, they don't look that bad, and very good next to older Mustang kits that are much more out of proportion. -MJS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Hall Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I'm not expecting Revell to make any changes..it is what it is. I've owned 2 Fox era Mustangs--a GT and an LX, so it's a subject I like and know. I'd been looking forward to this kit for 20+ years, so I'm dissapointed in how it was botched. I have two of the kits, will probably build them eventually. Maybe a reputable resin caster will come out w/ a corrected body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I dont except Revelll to re do the body either, I am going to still buy one, and build as a DPS unit, and go from there if I am going to buy more, but I dont see a point, as the only reason I am getting one is to do the SSP version Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDO Posted May 30, 2013 Author Share Posted May 30, 2013 Aw come on, guys. Revell has corrected other kits that had mistakes. I'd just wait and see what they do, before writing them off. They hold a pretty high standard these days. I'll bet they correct it. ...let's turn that frown upside-down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Aw come on, guys. Revell has corrected other kits that had mistakes. I'd just wait and see what they do, before writing them off. They hold a pretty high standard these days. I'll bet they correct it. ...let's turn that frown upside-down Lee, is their a chance, yes, but I think its a small one, but the 69 Charger I think is a lot more popular then the Mustang, and I not trying to take anything away for the Mustang, but its not as iconic as the 69 Charger was, and one other thing to remember, I believe Revell was forced into redoing the body per the licensing, so the had no choice, so if Ford is not forcing the Revells hand if you will, they may not, but again, we shall see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danno Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Lee, is their a chance, yes, but I think its a small one, but the 69 Charger I think is a lot more popular then the Mustang, and I not trying to take anything away for the Mustang, but its not as iconic as the 69 Charger was, and one other thing to remember, I believe Revell was forced into redoing the body per the licensing, so the had no choice, so if Ford is not forcing the Revells hand if you will, they may not, but again, we shall see What do you care, Jonathan? You routinely trash Revell any way, and the Mustang 5.0 LX isn't Japanese. Why are you getting yourself so worked up? Chill, dude. Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.................................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 What do you care, Jonathan? You routinely trash Revell any way, and the Mustang 5.0 LX isn't Japanese. Why are you getting yourself so worked up? Chill, dude. Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.................................... Oh please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDO Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 (edited) This reminds me of something I heard in the Army: "We can "what if?" This thing all day long". Revell either will or won't fix the kit. I'd like to think they will. They've hit a lot of home runs since the '59 Cadillac. I don't think they like having their reputation tarnished. It represents lost sales for a subject that people have been requesting for a long time. I don't buy any arguments about the Charger have more appeal, either. A whole different generation remembers Fox Mustangs as the muscle car to have when they were in high school. It's also the car they can afford to buy and customize now, unlike early muscle cars. I believe it has just as much appeal sitting as the Charger on the hobby shop shelf, just to a different demographic. Edited May 31, 2013 by LDO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austin T Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 different demographic. Thank you so much for pointing this out. I think everyone else has missed this when talking about the charger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry P. Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I think a '68-'69 Charger is a far more iconic car than a Fox "Mustang" any day. Just my opinion, yours may vary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalbert Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I like Mustangs. In particular, I like Fox Mustangs. I also need like 5 T-5's for various other projects and this one is rumored to be the best one ever. I will buy this kit. I will build it. And I will have fun. Will it be an exact replica of a Mustang? No. Will it look more like a Mustang coupe than any other car on my shelf? Yes. There are really three ways this can go. People can choose to buy this kit. People can choose to not buy this kit. People can choose to wait and see if Revell retools the body and then buy this kit. There is no wrong path. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I like Mustangs. In particular, I like Fox Mustangs. I also need like 5 T-5's for various other projects and this one is rumored to be the best one ever. I will buy this kit. I will build it. And I will have fun. Will it be an exact replica of a Mustang? No. Will it look more like a Mustang coupe than any other car on my shelf? Yes. There are really three ways this can go. People can choose to buy this kit. People can choose to not buy this kit. People can choose to wait and see if Revell retools the body and then buy this kit. There is no wrong path. I am still going to get this kit, I want to say I will get one in June something, I just can not remember if I am getting one from our local plastic pusher or not. And if Revell does retool the body, I will buy one of the correct body kits as well, and maybe a few more, I am anxious to get my hands on the lightbar from the kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eshaver Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Actually, I had high hopes for getting the kit . I was going to do a little changing around an build a car I had once . I had an 87 briefly. Yeah, it was a clapped out , starting to rust ,. piece of junk begging to find a junk yard . Still.............. at the price of current kits , I have to make choices based upon what photos are posted here ................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Repstock Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 Might as well weigh in. As has been stated millions of times before, there is no perfect model. Sometimes the errors bother me, sometimes they don't. Speaking only for myself, the chopped top kills it for me. I wouldn't mind at all sanding off and moving the keyhole, but the top is just too much. But if you think this is bad... Look at a '74 or '75 JoHan Cutlass front end and compare it to the real thing. The shape of the front end changed after '73, and JoHan just squished '74 or '75 grilles into the wrong front end. The Mustang is better than that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I'm just sitting on the sidelines in this battle. I don't know or care. But my question is "How does this new kit hold up against the Morgan Auto Detail resin offering pictured above?" The body is a 1979. I don't have it, just swiped the photo from their website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest G Holding Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I think a '68-'69 Charger is a far more iconic car than a Fox "Mustang" any day. Just my opinion, yours may vary. Yep the charger is more ICONIC .....But I see far more fox bodys at the track and magazines....I used to read 5.0 Mustang monthly, never saw "charger monthly" The fox is todays tri five chebbie...sorry, but sales talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evilbenny Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 I was in school when the 5.0 was king of the street and I even had one. I have been waiting in excitement for this kit to come out and was dissappointed when I saw the photos of what was produced by Revell. I will probably buy one or two because it is the only reasonable option for me to get a 5.0 coupe, but if Revell decides to fix the body they can count me in for multiple copy's. I was truly surprised with the body of this kit. I was expecting the quality of the body to be at the same level of the recent 57 Ford and the Olds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted May 31, 2013 Share Posted May 31, 2013 When the original Fox body cars came out, we just had to have that 1979 Capri RS with a V8. It was just the coolest thing we ever saw! Within a few weeks we knew it wasn't such a good idea. The factory had forgotten to install some of the accessories like the dash switch for the rear window defroster and all the leads to that console mounted warning system. It wasn't that long before we started having trouble. The engine had a coolant leak somewhere on the top end that the dealer couldn't find. The rear was replaced under warranty after I insisted to the dealer rep that it shouldn't be howling. The auto trans slipped on a regular basis but never when being demonstrated at the dealership. The TRX tires all wore out and needed to be replaced at a huge cost within two years. Once I noticed the crack developing at the top of the A pillar, I decided enough was enough. It was traded in for a Nissan before the 3 year payments were done. It had less than 30,000 miles on it. The sad part was that we traded in my wife's 1974 Mustang II Coupe on this car. She had gotten the Mustang from a friend of hers when it was a year old. She never ever had an issue with it. It was a V6 car and was nice to drive. It had 60,000 miles on it when traded. To add insult to injury, the dealer sold this to someone a few blocks from our house. We saw it regularly long after the Capri was gone. So I just can't get up any enthusiasm for a Fox Mustang. It's kinda like my experience with Southern Comfort. I once got super drunk on it as a teenager. To this day the mere scent of it makes me cringe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDO Posted May 31, 2013 Author Share Posted May 31, 2013 One bad apple. Also- please don't take this thread to Cuba. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.