1/25 Monogram Slingster Dragster

[Ace-Garageguy]

Whatever the boxing, I sure wish everything in it had been rendered correctly by the kit designers. It would be an absolute goldmine of parts for building period diggers, and would make several terrific builds right out-of-the-box...but alas...any old geezer who misspent his youth at drag strips should instantly recognize there's something very off about the way these things look built up.

It's still a pretty good source of some stuff, but when they went to all the trouble to cut entire new tools, it sure seems like it would have made sense to get it right.

[Oldcarfan27]

"This kit isn't that old and already 3 different box arts"

Um, isn't this kit about 60 years old - not exactly "NEW"

[styromaniac]

Um, it's the new tool "Slingster"....not the old tool "Sizzler". 

[Spex84]

 I'm putting the slicks from my Slingster kit under a '26 full-fendered Tudor.

 

[Greg Myers]

and I'll bet those skinny suckers will fit 

[oldcarfan]

I really like this kit for nostalgic reasons but I never bought one because it was in that weird 'Fit The Box' scale. I love that they retooled it into 1/25 so it can be used with regular kits. Now if they will begin retooling all those other early kits and maybe continue retooling all the old parts and extras like they did with the '60 Chevy truck's go-kart.

[Ace-Garageguy]

11 minutes ago, oldcarfan said:

...I love that they retooled it into 1/25 so it can be used with regular kits. Now if they will begin retooling all those other early kits and maybe continue retooling all the old parts and extras like they did with the '60 Chevy truck's go-kart.

The only problem is all the oopsies they made with the so-called "scaling". Many parts are just ridiculously UNDER-scale, and it's hard for me to comprehend that arithmetic-challenged kit designers got the project to market with nobody catching it.

Of course, mentioning that people aren't doing the jobs they're PAID FOR is a sure way to ignite the old "good enough" firestorm.

Edited January 26, 2019 by Ace-Garageguy

[Snake45]

I've been looking for something better/different/more interesting to do with the Bantam body, and I ran across this page: 

https://www.tbucketplans.com/american-austin-bantam-coupe/

Several interesting ideas here! I've got a glue bomb Revell Buttera T-tub with what looks like a complete, savable chassis...it might be getting a new body in the future....

[Ace-Garageguy]

30 minutes ago, Snake45 said:

I've been looking for something better/different/more interesting to do with the Bantam body, and I ran across this page: ...

Lotta good stuff on that page. I've been getting around to checking the width of the Slingster Bantam firewall against the old Revell parts-pack Bantam roadster body (which represents a f'glass repop, but should have the right dimensions).

[Casey]

On 12/11/2013 at 5:21 PM, cdansie said:

 

On 1/25/2019 at 1:09 PM, Ace-Garageguy said:

And not one mentions the underscale slicks, QC rear end, or the tiny little Zippy-the-Pinhead blower scoop. 

Not sure if that was intended or not. I guess whoever designed this kit had to wrestle with the dilemma of making the Slingster true to the Sizzler, only scaled down a tad, or being similar, yet 'corrected' in certain areas. As Steve Goldman stated a few pages back, I think the Slingster was a case of the former, inaccuracies be damned.

The scoops for both look remarkably similar, despite the small scle difference between the two. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, Casey said:

 

Not sure if that was intended or not. I guess whoever designed this kit had to wrestle with the dilemma of making the Slingster true to the Sizzler, only scaled down a tad, or being similar, yet 'corrected' in certain areas. As Steve Goldman stated a few pages back, I think the Slingster was a case of the former, inaccuracies be damned.

The scoops for both look remarkably similar, despite the small scle difference between the two. 

Well, the way I see it, there's probably not a soul on the planet who would have complained if the re-tool designers had done the thing in correct-scale, and had taken a few hours to check 1:1 dimensions on real parts (which is all it would have taken to get it right). The average modeler would have never noticed the difference, as long as the thing looked pretty much like the earlier version...but the serious modelers (to whom scale-accuracy and period-correctness matter...and I'm certainly not the only one) would have had a fabulous kit to build as-is, or to pick parts from.

As it is, I'll never buy another one. Had it been right, I honestly would have bought multiples, as the sources for really good vintage dragster parts (like the old Revell parts-packs) are drying up, or becoming silly expensive.

The proportions of the pinhead scoop (that's apparently supposed to represent a very common, easily-referenced Hilborn unit) just don't work at all perched on top of the close-to-scale blower...well, not if you're used to seeing the real ones for decades, anyway.

[Snake45]

38 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

The proportions of the pinhead scoop (that's apparently supposed to represent a very common, easily-referenced Hilborn unit) just don't work at all perched on top of the close-to-scale blower...well, not if you're used to seeing the real ones for decades, anyway.

I think if you got TWO of them, and perched them atop the carbs on a cross-ram manifold on an open-hood street rod, they'd look just about right. I could swear I've seen pics of such a setup at least once or twice. 

[Ace-Garageguy]

40 minutes ago, Snake45 said:

I think if you got TWO of them, and perched them atop the carbs on a cross-ram manifold on an open-hood street rod, they'd look just about right. I could swear I've seen pics of such a setup at least once or twice. 

There were in fact some cast-aluminum smaller fakey-Hilborn-looking scoops made, typically mounted on carbs, just as you say.

[Spex84]

You guys just gave me a reason to buy another Slingster...last August I picked up some random parts and they included some blowers with the droopy side-draft weber manifolds. (AMT Bonneville, maybe?)

I was thinking I could turn it into something like the engine below, but I'd need another small Hilborn scoop:

 

[Sledsel]

I bought one of these just for something different than my normal builds. And to be more unique, I think I am going to use a Y-block mill

 

[Dennis Lacy]

Yeah, the Slingster scoop is small but then so is this Hilborn piece also perched atop a 2-port injector on a 6-71 blower. Like the model kit, it's barely big/long enough to fit.

Edited January 27, 2019 by Dennis Lacy

[Ace-Garageguy]

10 hours ago, Dennis Lacy said:

Yeah, the Slingster scoop is small but then so is this Hilborn piece also perched atop a 2-port injector on a 6-71 blower. Like the model kit, it's barely big/long enough to fit.

Yes, I'm aware of the smaller 2-hole scoops, and maybe I'm wrong about the dimensions being off.

I've been wrong before, and there's every likelihood I'll be wrong at least once more before I die.  

But I still say something looked so off when I mocked up the engine from this kit, I just put it back in the box and wrote it off.

Mayhaps I need to pull it out and have another look.

[Dennis Lacy]

13 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Yes, I'm aware of the smaller 2-hole scoops, and maybe I'm wrong about the dimensions being off.

I've been wrong before, and there's every likelihood I'll be wrong at least once more before I die.  

But I still say something looked so off when I mocked up the engine from this kit, I just put it back in the box and wrote it off.

Mayhaps I need to pull it out and have another look.

Oh, the engines definitely have plenty wrong. Neither one of them is scaled correctly. They're both narrow and the Chrysler is a touch short. The SBC intakes don't fit other engines because of this and the valve cover mounting surfaces on the heads are on the wrong angle. 

But, here they both are re purposed and kit bashed a little bit. They get the job done.

 

[unclescott58]

I'm still happy with the one I built. I don't know what's exactly right or not on this kit. I'm no expert on drag cars of that period. Or any other for that matter. I just liked the way it looked when I finished mine. I like the nostalgic feel of both this kit and AMT's old Double Dragster kit. Add the old Monogram Long John Streamline Dragster, and my dragster drag racing fantasies are pretty much taken care of. 

Bring back Revell's early 70's Jungle Jim Camaro, and Monogram's Mean Maverick, your got all of my funny car drag racing fantasies taken care of too. Though I am looking for the Revell Jungle Jim Monza too. Not for car. But, for the figures of Jungle Jim and Jungle Pam (mainly Pam). 

[Daddyfink]

I just wanted it for the vintage factor and the fact that I did not have a Sizzler in the collection. But I do now.

And it is ok for the nostalgia type kit. I have tons of aftermarket stuff and this is not exactly a kit I was planning on harvesting for parts. This is just a quickie, not really caring for extreme detail or accuracy type of builds, kind of a model and it will be built as such. 

So yes, I will say "Good Enough" and that is my choice. 

Your mileage may vary! 

 

[Casey]

I didn't recall these being "that" bad, but the Ollie's price sticker don't lie...

[iBorg]

When Ollies had these they had several other really nice kits. I think they got these as part of the Hobbico disaster.

[Snake45]

I never saw these at my Ollie's, but that explains why I was able to score one for just $15 (still a good price) from a vendor at the local toy show couple years ago.