Did this Aurora '34 Ford Coupe Double kit die in the "train wreck" too ?

[Greg Myers]

Probably lost this one too. These were both "double" kits, two complete cars in each box.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Greg Myers

[High octane]

Oh well Greg, they're just two kits of many that have passed by us over the years.

[jbwelda]

I can't really mourn the loss of that second one though; just look at the box art and how distorted that "street rod" is. If I recall correctly from my childhood, when I had both of these kits, that box art is accurate enough to give you an idea what you're getting into.

Now that 34 Ford, that's a different deal. I remember really liking that kit back then and its skyhigh on ebay most times.

jb

[Jantrix]

Would it be possible for a company like Round 2 to reverse engineer from a surviving kit? I've heard they are doing some of that restoring old custom parts.

[JTalmage]

The box art on the 2nd kit cracks me up!! lol

[Brett Barrow]

From what little I've seen of it, the street rod version of their 22 T is a near copy to AMT's Double T. Except that their MEL has "Corvette" valve covers! It was the '60's! Who cared?!?

On the 34 Ford they gave you equally spaced headers for the Pontiac (which has the middle two exhaust ports close together like a SBC - it was the '60's! Who cared?!?)

I like the idea of what they were attempting with the 34 street rod, but I'd would much rather see a newly tooled 34 than this.

Not my photos, found through Google search:

Edited June 18, 2014 by Brett Barrow

[Modelmartin]

The box art on the 2nd kit cracks me up!! lol

I love the Amish gentleman with his transport in the background!

From what little I've seen of it, the street rod version of their 22 T is a near copy to AMT's Double T. Except that their MEL has "Corvette" valve covers! It was the '60's! Who cared?!?

They were attempting to copy the AMT hot rod T! I built one a few years ago from a gluebomb. That thing is hilarious. It sits up like a swamp buggy. The blower is not connected to the crank or anything else. It has a generator mounted on top connected to the crank by belt and the blower is mounted behind it and not touching anything but the intake manifold! I went with the 3-2 option in the kit. Those crazy rings on the headers serve what purpose? Heat sinks? It was fun to build it and to see the astonished looks on people's faces when they see it.

The funny things is that the stock T is actually very nice. I think it is better detailed and more accurate than the AMT actually. The AMT is good for sure but the Aurora just tops it.

[Harry P.]

That thing is hilarious. It sits up like a swamp buggy.

Going by the box art illustration alone, it looks pretty much like the body is in more or less stock position on the hot rod version.

[Mike Kucaba]

It's only desirable because you can't readily by it at a reasonable price. Why are we stuck on the past?

[Brett Barrow]

I love the Amish gentleman with his transport in the background!

They were attempting to copy the AMT hot rod T! I built one a few years ago from a gluebomb. That thing is hilarious. It sits up like a swamp buggy. The blower is not connected to the crank or anything else. It has a generator mounted on top connected to the crank by belt and the blower is mounted behind it and not touching anything but the intake manifold! I went with the 3-2 option in the kit. Those crazy rings on the headers serve what purpose? Heat sinks? It was fun to build it and to see the astonished looks on people's faces when they see it.

The funny things is that the stock T is actually very nice. I think it is better detailed and more accurate than the AMT actually. The AMT is good for sure but the Aurora just tops it.

I've never seen the rod built up. The stock T does look rather nice from the pictures I've seen -

http://members.home.nl/ahazelaar/22t-roadster.htm

If anybody's into stock T's (I'm not so I don't know much about the differences) the rest of this site might be worth a look.

http://members.home.nl/ahazelaar/model-t.htm

Tim Boyd's new Hot Rod V-8 article in SA has a picture of the instruction sheet for the MEL engine in the Aurora kit, it looks like a hot mess. (the Aurora engine, not Tim's article!). They'd have you mount the Latham supercharger backwards!

Edited June 18, 2014 by Brett Barrow

[Greg Myers]

Why are we stuck on the past? good question.

[Greg Myers]

There has never been a set of instructions for building your own Tee Bucket. In the beginning they were few and far between. so just about anything goes.

[Greg Myers]

Lets look at some of the early Tee Bucket kits. as far as ride height and goofy stuff.

[Brett Barrow]

Maybe they rode 'em high pre-war, but I can't say I've ever seen one that high post war. Definitely not once the Grabowski "Kookie T" came to prominence in the late 50's.

Both photos from 1947.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Brett Barrow

[Ace-Garageguy]

I lusted mightily after the Aurora double '34 kit. Then I got a couple, and was sorely disappointed to find that it's just another one that has horrible, inaccurate proportions. I'm still debating whether to build one box-stock for "nostalgia", or do a hack and whack and make a good model.

I don't know why it has seemed to be almost impossible to build a correctly-scaled '34 Ford.

[Chuck Most]

The stock Aurora '34 is about as ill-proportioned as any other '33/34 Ford kit out there, but that street rod version...!

I've wanted the kit just so I can build that version. I could have gotten one that was built, lightly kitbashed and missing a few small parts for $20 a couple of years back, but passed on it because I didn't recognize it as the Aurora version when I saw it.

[Brett Barrow]

I lusted mightily after the Aurora double '34 kit. Then I got a couple, and was sorely disappointed to find that it's just another one that has horrible, inaccurate proportions. I'm still debating whether to build one box-stock for "nostalgia", or do a hack and whack and make a good model.

I don't know why it has seemed to be almost impossible to build a correctly-scaled '34 Ford.

Must be cursed. John Mueller owned a 34 and his even his attempt at fixing up the AMT 34 in the 90s still fell short. So much for the theory of having access to a 1:1! Still, it wasn't his design from the start, and I think he was the third designer to work on the tooling.

Revell's snapper is the best by a mile.

[robertw]

From what I've read it was not one of the molds lost in the train wreck but that's not to say it wasn't damaged or messed up so much that Monogram decided to just scrap it.

As to the question as to why we appear to be stuck in the past. Most of us modellers are old farts and remember these kits with fondness, whether they deserve our kind thoughts or not.

[62rebel]

we're stuck in the past because Mr Peabody didn't build a "Way Forward" machine.

[Ace-Garageguy]

Must be cursed. John Mueller owned a 34 and his even his attempt at fixing up the AMT 34 in the 90s still fell short. So much for the theory of having access to a 1:1! Still, it wasn't his design from the start, and I think he was the third designer to work on the tooling.

Revell's snapper is the best by a mile.

Yes, but Revell's snapper hood is STILL a couple of scale INCHES too short. I too have access to 1:1 '34 Fords. Measuring must be much harder than it seems

[Mike Kucaba]

""Measuring must be much harder than it seems"

For accuracy I always use one of those folding rulers

[Dave Darby]

Not likely it was damaged in the train wreck as much as it duplicated Monogram existing 34 Ford  (which was probably the best made) and was scrapped with most of the other tools. https://culttvman.com/main/aurora-faq-6-what-is-the-story-about-the-aurora-train-wreck/

[Daddyfink]

Quite honestly, it is not something I would buy and I would rather see new tool money go towards better kits. 

[Mike999]

Another vote for leaving these in the past. And on eBay.  Several years ago I bought a big lot of model junk. It included a Double '34 box full of mixed parts from at least 2 of the kits, including a couple of perfect frames.  But no bodies!  Sold the box and parts on eBay.

I still have a near-complete '22 T.  It was the Young Model Builders Club version, which was stock-only, no rod parts.  It's missing  a piece of the frame and some other parts. It does look a little more "refined" than the AMT, at least to my eyes.  One nice touch: Aurora included the luggage rack that fit on the running board. 

You can see the luggage rack in Anthony Hazelaar's build-up of the Aurora:

 

[Mr. Metallic]

I don't know why it has seemed to be almost impossible to build a correctly-scaled '34 Ford.

I know it's not the typically favored 1/25 scale, but I thought the Revell 1/16 34 3window and Phaeton were hailed as pretty accurate models, so much so that people often wish out load that Revell would scale them down to 1/25 kits. I've got a 3window and am inching ever closer to actually building it. Still crossing my fingers that Revell gives us an all new 1/25 33/34 after they are done reviving the 29/30 A tooling mess.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Mr. Metallic