AMT 66 Nova Pro Street quality VS. other AMT kit quality

[Quick GMC]

This kit drove me up the wall. With all the time I spent trying to clean up these parts, I had enough when I went to put the engine in and get everything all wrapped up. The headers hit. Turns out I positioned them wrong. I took them off, carefully re-positioned, etc. got everything all together, now the hoot won't fit because the engine is too far back, but the headers hit the engine mounts so it won't go forward. I'm done, it's in a box, and it's the nicest incomplete model I have.

Anyway, I'm wondering if this is an accurate representation of AMT's typical kit quality. I have only tried to build this one. I have an AMT Shoebox Ford I have plans for, but not if it's going to be like this.

I know, as a model builder, I should expect some work. I have two jobs and a kid on the way and my time is becoming scarce, I'd rather spend it building quality kits that require a little less prep time.

[Eric N.]

I know what your gitting at. AMT is hit or mis. I built that kit a long time ago. I don't remember having any probs. w/the headers.

A nice AMT kit to build is the 1967 Mercury Comet. #31761. And the 1971 Charger looks nice-I haven't built it.

The 1968 Firebird & The 1970 Camaro are good to build-The only prob. on the camaro is the bottom of the front windshild

needs to be filled down so the int. tub fits flush. I'm sure others will have more to add to this. Good luck!

Eric

[Art Anderson]

Quality? As it refers to what? Frankly, when that '66 Nova kit hit the shelves in 1987, it was the hit of the decade, and actually very nicely done. It is, of course, rather a transitional design--somewhere between the old, tried and true molded chassis pan, and a modern kit with everything but the bolts and nuts as separate parts, but it does build up very nicely.

Art

[mnwildpunk]

Truth be told my revell models and monogram have always been kits that fit well and I don't have to fiddle near as much with where as some AMT kit take a little fiddling but end up much nicer. Word to the wise never buy a amt 1957 corvette gasser flipnose what your dealing with on the nova would be childs play compared to the vette my suggestion is take a lil break and then take another look at it and good luck

[Edsel-Dan]

The 68 Firebird is Revell!!

(AMT did Not offer a Stock one!)

I started the Stock issue of this kit Wayback when New!! (1987)

I did not stall due to fit issues, but Choosing a Color to paint it!!

She sits in the box in Primer flat White!!!!

[Quick GMC]

Quality? As it refers to what? Frankly, when that '66 Nova kit hit the shelves in 1987, it was the hit of the decade, and actually very nicely done. It is, of course, rather a transitional design--somewhere between the old, tried and true molded chassis pan, and a modern kit with everything but the bolts and nuts as separate parts, but it does build up very nicely.

Art

compared to Revell kits I guess. The molding on this kit was globby. The body was excellent, I must say, but the rest took a lot of work.

I have no doubt this builds into a very nice piece when you put the time into it, but like I said, my time is becoming less and less, and I would rather stick to something that doesn't require as much work to get to that point. I do like that they have everything separated into individual pieces though, which revell seems to be doing more of.

[Eric N.]

My bad-The 68 Firebird is Revell.

Eric

[Art Anderson]

compared to Revell kits I guess. The molding on this kit was globby. The body was excellent, I must say, but the rest took a lot of work.

I have no doubt this builds into a very nice piece when you put the time into it, but like I said, my time is becoming less and less, and I would rather stick to something that doesn't require as much work to get to that point. I do like that they have everything separated into individual pieces though, which revell seems to be doing more of.

Bear in mind, AMT/Ertl tooled that '66 Nova back in the mid-1980's. If you take a Monogram (now Revell) kit tooled in that same time frame, it was done in very much the very same way. FWIW, AMT, Revell and Monogram back then were all three using the very same tool & die shop(s) in Windsor, Ontario (Canada).

Art

[ZTony8]

You're just experiencing the long time variable AMT quality.You want top quality parts fit?Build a Tamiya kit.Then you'll be spoiled.

[Blown03SVT]

You want a shake and bake kit, buy the Japanese kits. RM and AMT have some good kits if they are not warped. Some of the really old kits are a bear such as the 57 flip nose Vette and the Malco 33 Willys. As a model builder things take time. Test fit, be creative in problem solving and be patient! If you get frustrated, walk away and pick it up when you regain composure. If it were easy everyone would do it and what fun would that be.

[Quick GMC]

You're just experiencing the long time variable AMT quality.You want top quality parts fit?Build a Tamiya kit.Then you'll be spoiled.

I build Tamiya kits. If they made the same subjects as the American companies, I'd be in heaven.

I haven't had a Revell kit yet that was this frustrating.

I didn't want to use the hood scoop. I trimmed the hole perfectly,

It's not a HORRIBLE kit, it definitely has it's issues. The frustration lies mostly with the fact that I had it all painted and done, and the final assembly killed it. Some major parts didn't fit like I thought they would, so it just killed any enthusiasm I had. I have no interest in finishing it.

With that being said, sometime down the road I may do this kit again, but I'll know exactly what I'm up against.

Back to my main point, I'm curious if this kit is a good representation of what you can typically expect with AMT, or is this one of the more finicky kits?

[Longbox55]

Truth be told my revell models and monogram have always been kits that fit well and I don't have to fiddle near as much with where as some AMT kit take a little fiddling but end up much nicer. Word to the wise never buy a amt 1957 corvette gasser flipnose what your dealing with on the nova would be childs play compared to the vette my suggestion is take a lil break and then take another look at it and good luck

I'll go you one better, the old opening doors Revell '56 Chevy. I have yet to see one that the body wasn't warped in 3 different directions.

[Steven Zimmerman]

I'm not knocking your modeling skills, but if you painted it without test fitting everything first, maybe you should re think your technique. My son Charles built this kit in the middle 90's when he was about 14, all 'Dad' did was advice on paint - his 2nd or 3rd model, still got it tucked away for posterity...14 years old, 3rd model and he had no problems, just sayin.......

[Quick GMC]

I'm not knocking your modeling skills, but if you painted it without test fitting everything first, maybe you should re think your technique. My son Charles built this kit in the middle 90's when he was about 14, all 'Dad' did was advice on paint - his 2nd or 3rd model, still got it tucked away for posterity...14 years old, 3rd model and he had no problems, just sayin.......

That's why I'm so frustrated, I did test fit pretty much everything, but not with the headers glued on. I'm not blaming the model, I obviously should have done more test work. I'm more wondering if this is consistent with AMT, because they make some nice subjects.

[Art Anderson]

A lot might depend on whether the "headers" were part of the original tooling, or if they were parts done well after the kit was first tooled and produced. I built mine from the very first production run, when the kit arrived in the hobby shop I owned back in 1987. I had no problems other than the stock aircleaner wanting to interfere with the fit of the hood, that was taken care of by simply trimming down the top of the "lump" 4bbl carb (considering that the carburetor was pretty much hidden by the stock aircleaner, that worked very well. I'm not altogether sure now, 26 years later, that I assembled the thing correctly or not, so it is possible that the problem might have been mine, given that I never had any customer mention having the same problem back then (I sold all 4 cases -- 48 kits in all -- within two business days).

There can be, and it has happened with just about every model car kit manufacturer, problems with fitting parts that were added to the kit well after the fact, especially if those newer parts were not part of even the original engineering and mockup stage of the design and development. But at least at the time it was released, the '66 Nova kit was hailed as a breath of new, fresh air from AMT/Ertl, and was very well received at that time.

Art

[sak]

If I remember correctly..it takes abit of work to get the interior to sit right. I insist that the tops of the tops if the door panels are even. I can't remember what caused it to not sit right. I had to file down the edge of the dashboard and the top of the firewall to make it fit I think. The back window trim is halfass and the side drip molding just ends at the back when it should curve around the back of the quarter glass. But to your question..the newer amt stuff is good. I built the monte carlo and olds cutlass and they are awesome. Working on the duster a lil bit here and there and other than a few minor things..looks pretty good. Always when building a kit with seperate door panels...glue them together first thing. With small drops of super glue and put it in the body to see how it fits.

[sak]

If I remember correctly..it takes abit of work to get the interior to sit right. I insist that the tops of the tops if the door panels are even. I can't remember what caused it to not sit right. I had to file down the edge of the dashboard and the top of the firewall to make it fit I think. The back window trim is halfass and the side drip molding just ends at the back when it should curve around the back of the quarter glass. But to your question..the newer amt stuff is good. I built the monte carlo and olds cutlass and they are awesome. Working on the duster a lil bit here and there and other than a few minor things..looks pretty good. Always when building a kit with seperate door panels...glue them together first thing. With small drops of super glue and put it in the body to see how it fits.

[mnwildpunk]

He brought up a good point about a kit the AMT 71 duster is a very good looking kit it is my best looking model to date but it takes some filing of the body so the side glass will fit in it. Oh the dash was molded to thick so you have to sand down the the locating tabs to make it fit in the slots. Also being like the third kit I ever decaled all the decals are a lil fiddly.

[Tom Geiger]

To answer the original question, there is no definitive answer. Just like all manufacturers, AMT kits have been developed by different owners with different philosophies, and different and evolving technologies over the last 50 years. And kits sold under the AMT banner may have come from other sources such as rival MPC or even Johan. So basically it's best to ask the board here about a specific kit.

Kits do have issues. And the folks here will guide you through the known issues and fixes. That's the difference between model building and assembling puzzles.