Revell 67 Camaro

[deuces wild]

Ditto!!!...

[sak]

IF you guys don't mind me asking..I going this say this anyway...If you won a raffle..the prize was was a restored 67 camaro. However..they installed a made in china grille that looks close but not exact to the original ..would you be happy that you have a camaro or reacte in disgust that they did not restore it correctly and walk away. Food for thought..hopefully.

[tim boyd]

Here are some reference pictures of the non-RS '67 Camaro front grilles that I took at the NSRA Nats North in Kalamazoo last weekend. None of these cars are 100% stock, but the grille closeups are intended to show how the 1/1 scale car gets the proper emphasis on the two horizontal bars that do not seem to be visually emphasized on the Revell model....TIM

25 reference photos (including the rear end as well) plus about 10 more of an RS style '67 Camaro (again, not 100% stock) at this link:

http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/correcting-or-kitba/1967-camaro-ss-with/

Edited September 22, 2014 by tim boyd

[tim boyd]

Ironically, Revell's '69 Nova, which everyone seems to love, SHOULD have had more "slant-back" or undercut or whatever you want to call it on its rear panel--it has none, that panel is vertical, and looks like the '73-74 cars--but I don't recall anyone but me ever noticing that or being upset by it. I couldn't stand it and ended up grafting in the rear panel from an AMT '72 and filing the ends of the quarters to match. I gotta get that stupid model finished someday. The bodywork is finished and it's painted but for some reason I'm resisting doing the interior.

Snake...this has always bothered me about the Revell '69 Nova kit - I noticed it as soon as I opened the box on the first version of the kit.

Last week at the NSRA Nats North I took some detail shots of the '68-'72 Nova rear end for reference if I ever build the Revell kit, because this would be a "must" change for me. Also some shots of the front and rear wheel well openings. Ten rererence shots at this link: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/correcting-or-kitba/1968-72-chevy-iinova/

[turbo nova]

IF you guys don't mind me asking..I going this say this anyway...If you won a raffle..the prize was was a restored 67 camaro. However..they installed a made in china grille that looks close but not exact to the original ..would you be happy that you have a camaro or reacte in disgust that they did not restore it correctly and walk away. Food for thought..hopefully.

the grill isnt the biggest issue to me, winning one and buy'n a one are different IMO. I get what your saying and it isnt the end of the world, Ive just grown to expect a lot from revell and it seems to be hit or miss on the new kits. The tooling and molding are always nice though.

[sak]

It looks nice to me..I plan to buy one someday.

['70 Grande]

I couldn't stand it and ended up grafting in the rear panel from an AMT '72 and filing the ends of the quarters to match. I gotta get that stupid model finished someday. The bodywork is finished and it's painted but for some reason I'm resisting doing the interior.

Snake, I have all the parts ready to make this same modification to my Revell '69 Nova's body; I'd sure like to see some pics of what you did to make that '72 AMT tailight/rear bumper piece correctly fit the Revell Nova body... could you PM me a pic or two?

[Craig Irwin]

IF you guys don't mind me asking..I going this say this anyway...If you won a raffle..the prize was was a restored 67 camaro. However..they installed a made in china grille that looks close but not exact to the original ..would you be happy that you have a camaro or reacte in disgust that they did not restore it correctly and walk away. Food for thought..hopefully.

I'd take it home and order a correct grille. And put the trash where it belongs.

[Snake45]

IF you guys don't mind me asking..I going this say this anyway...If you won a raffle..the prize was was a restored 67 camaro. However..they installed a made in china grille that looks close but not exact to the original ..would you be happy that you have a camaro or reacte in disgust that they did not restore it correctly and walk away. Food for thought..hopefully.

If it looked like this kit, the grille and front fenders would have to be replaced. And I'd have to wonder if it was actually a Camaro at all, or some kind of cheap copy.

[Guest]

IF you guys don't mind me asking..I going this say this anyway...If you won a raffle..the prize was was a restored 67 camaro. However..they installed a made in china grille that looks close but not exact to the original ..would you be happy that you have a camaro or reacte in disgust that they did not restore it correctly and walk away. Food for thought..hopefully.

There's a huge difference in a $35,000 dollar car and a $25 model car. But, if it was free, I would take it. On both counts. The more I see, the less likely it will be that I'll buy one of these kits. I may do like I did with the terrible '69 Nova and get one, correct it as best as I can and be done with it. Maybe get an RS grille and some AMT tail lights and do the best I can. It's definitely not a kit that I want more than one of now. I enjoy hacking up bodies. But, only by choice, not requirement.

[Snake45]

Here are some reference pictures of the non-RS '67 Camaro front grilles that I took at the NSRA Nats North in Kalamazoo last weekend. None of these cars are 100% stock, but the grille closeups are intended to show how the 1/1 scale car gets the proper emphasis on the two horizontal bars that do not seem to be visually emphasized on the Revell model....TIM

25 reference photos (including the rear end as well) plus about 10 more of an RS style '67 Camaro (again, not 100% stock) at this link:

http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/correcting-or-kitba/1967-camaro-ss-with/

Tim, the real problem with the Revell grille isn't the missing or understated two bars. It's that the ends of the thing aren't shaped correctly. They have the grille symmetrical top to bottom--you could install it either way and it would look the same. And that is NOT what any first-gen Camaro grille looks like.

I'll build the Revell Camaro, but it will be with either a Modelhaus '67 SS/RS grille, or an AMT grille. Or aftermarket, if someone comes up with something acceptable.

[Snake45]

Snake, I have all the parts ready to make this same modification to my Revell '69 Nova's body; I'd sure like to see some pics of what you did to make that '72 AMT tailight/rear bumper piece correctly fit the Revell Nova body... could you PM me a pic or two?

PM sent. Hope it helps.

[Guest]

Snake, I have all the parts ready to make this same modification to my Revell '69 Nova's body; I'd sure like to see some pics of what you did to make that '72 AMT tailight/rear bumper piece correctly fit the Revell Nova body... could you PM me a pic or two?

Not Snake. But, when I corrected my Nova, I just slanted the rear of the quarters the way they needed to be, reworked the bottom of the quarters to get the bumper to fit (another issue with the Nova. The real car doesn't have reliefs for the bumper to fit into) and shaved the rear of the chassis off. You would actually be better off to to separate the tail light panel from the bumper and snag one from an AMT kit to replace it with (another issue). Then, you have to correct the too square fender well openings which is a pain also. I ground off the front flares and each end of the rears and rebuilt them with putty. I still didn't get the rear fender well openings 100% right. But, I plan on fixing that when I repaint it. I also plan to replace the tail light panel with an AMT unit.

[Robberbaron]

Yikes! That picture pretty much says it all - thanks for posting that, James. When any new kit comes out, I always like to hear input from people who have either owned and/or worked on 1:1 versions of the subject. Someone who's had their hands on a 1:1 is usually the best judge of a kit's accuracy, and I can see now why you instantly spotted this problem. Looking now at the back 3/4 view pictures on the side of the Revell box, it's very noticeable there, too.

I think adding the top/bottom trim bars to the grille would be an easy fix for them to make, but correcting the angle of the tail panel would be much more involved. If the Nova kit is any indication, they'll just leave it be. BTW, that error on the Nova REALLY annoyed me - I've probably stared at the back ends of 10,000 of those Novas over the years growing up, and could sketch out the profile by memory and get that feature correct - it is a key element of the design on those cars. I remember buying the SS kit, opening the box, and saying "That ain't right!"

It's harder for me to spot the issue with the shape of the quarters, but I will take your word for it, since you obviously have the best reference material right there in person.

So this brings me back to the question I pondered in a previous post: what's going on with Revell's review process on so many of their new tools? Both the grille and tail panel problems on this kit are instantly noticeable as soon as you compare the kit parts to pics of a 1:1 example (which is what most modelers will do when they're building a kit - get good reference material). Shouldn't stuff like this be getting caught and corrected at some point, certainly after the first test shots?

It really is a shame, because it looks like most other elements on this kit were very nicely done. So it looks like a similar situation to the 5.0 LX kit: a nicely detailed new tool of an iconic car, that they botched by not getting down the BASICS of the car's shape.

[bisc63]

Snake, the comments on the Revell Nova are ripped right outta my mind! I was So disappointed in that kit, and glad I kept my stash of AMT Novas. The lower body line always goofy and overdone, too. AMT really was good at nuances of shape on compound curves, and Revell's recent offerings seem slab-sided and toyish in comparison. The 62 Impala was another let-down for me, with the same "flattened" front and rear ends. AMT did it better.

I've heard some try to explain away these faults (and other Revell kits' as well) as being due to the diecast origins of the kits, now being molded in styrene. Doesn't make sense to me that one material can be held to a different standard of quality than the other; either it's an accurate scale representation or it's not. (Looks a little off in plastic, but was a NICE diecast model... WTF?)

[Snake45]

That picture brings up another problem. The top edge of the rear quarters (fenders) from about the end of the roof to the tail panel isn't right. This photo clearly shows that that line should be almost straight, but the kit line is continuously curved. This is something else that didn't pop right out at me, but now that I see it, I can't un-see it. Dunno if it can be improved or not--will probably involve sanding down the whole surface of the trunk a bit to match.

This body isn't as bad as the 2nd version of the '70 AAR Cuda, but wow it's getting worse the more I look at it.

[unclescott58]

Boy, you guys are just looking for problems. I have to quit looking at this tread before I begin to believe you too much, and start disliking this kit. The I've got looks pretty good. As noted, I've just started working on it. And despite the flaws you guys keep pointing out, it still looks like it will build into a decent looking '67 Camaro to me.

I do need to quit reading this thread. It's become no fun. Like Revell' latest '70 'Cuda it may not be perfect. So are a lot of the models I've built over the years. But, if they do a pretty good representation of the real car. In others words if the average person can not tell there is anything wrong. I'm pretty happy with it. This is my last comment on this subject. I'm not going to let you guys ruin any more of my fun. On to other things.

Scott

[Harry P.]

I've been reading through this thread, and it always comes down to the same thing: the people who can see and identify a kit's flaws are called "rivet counters" or whatever by the people who either A, don't see the flaws, or B, see the flaws but don't care.

Either way is fine! If you are the "rivet counter" type, or someone who expects a scale model to be accurate, that's absolutely fine, and a completely realistic expectation.

And those of you who don't care about accuracy, or are willing to overlook obvious flaws in a kit and are perfectly happy with a model that sort of looks like the subject, that's fine, too!

We all have our own expectations.

What I'm really tired of seeing, though, is the "I don't care about the kit's flaws" group always jumping on anyone who does care.

This (and most other "review" threads) is about the kit, its pros and cons, whether it's accurate or not, possible problems with assembly, etc. Pointing out a kits obvious flaws is a legitimate, even necessary, part of any "review" thread.

So there really is no point in posting things like "I don't care about the mistakes in the kit" or "Stop complaining, there will never be a perfect kit," etc. in a thread where the kit's accuracy is being discussed. We're not talking about your preferences or expectations, we're talking about the model's accuracy (or lack of).

If you don't care about a kit's accuracy, great! Build it and have fun. But don't bash the people who DO care and who DO have higher expectations and who DO expect the manufacturer to get it right. I mean seriously... if you don't care about the flaws in the kit, why are you even commenting on them in the first place?

[jbwelda]

>Pointing out a kits obvious flaws is a legitimate, even necessary, part of any "review" thread.

you should probably work for Revell. that's what was needed at some point: a critical evaluation of what they had there, before giving the go ahead for production. and maybe it did happen, and maybe the execs said, aw what kid is gonna care about that. f it, run it!

at that point any delay or rework is $ off the bottom line and if you have to fix such complicated things as the entire back fenders and trunk panels you almost might as well start over again. so the evaluation should have happened at the DRAWING stage.

I cannot believe they would get something so obvious as that rear panel so wrong, and once the fender curvature was pointed out, I cannot unsee that either. and its not like there isn't a bleedin Camaro behind every other service station (note: "service station") out there in middle America and they are hard to find or something.

jb

[Harry P.]

I cannot believe they would get something so obvious as that rear panel so wrong, and once the fender curvature was pointed out, I cannot unsee that either. and its not like there isn't a bleedin Camaro behind every other service station (note: "service station") out there in middle America and they are hard to find or something.

Exactly. How these obvious mistakes keep on making it through to production is beyond me.

[my80malibu]

Absolutely the kit has flaws.They can be fixed. We just are curious if,and when they will be fixed.

The seats,dash,grille,all need some quick work. I own two of these, and would like some more.

[blubaja]

Boy, you guys are just looking for problems.

Gee, you would think a company would have someone do that BEFORE selling something.

[blubaja]

I've been reading through this thread, and it always comes down to the same thing: the people who can see and identify a kit's flaws are called "rivet counters" or whatever by the people who either A, don't see the flaws, or B, see the flaws but don't care.

Either way is fine! If you are the "rivet counter" type, or someone who expects a scale model to be accurate, that's absolutely fine, and a completely realistic expectation.

And those of you who don't care about accuracy, or are willing to overlook obvious flaws in a kit and are perfectly happy with a model that sort of looks like the subject, that's fine, too!

We all have our own expectations.

What I'm really tired of seeing, though, is the "I don't care about the kit's flaws" group always jumping on anyone who does care.

This (and most other "review" threads) is about the kit, its pros and cons, whether it's accurate or not, possible problems with assembly, etc. Pointing out a kits obvious flaws is a legitimate, even necessary, part of any "review" thread.

So there really is no point in posting things like "I don't care about the mistakes in the kit" or "Stop complaining, there will never be a perfect kit," etc. in a thread where the kit's accuracy is being discussed. We're not talking about your preferences or expectations, we're talking about the model's accuracy (or lack of).

If you don't care about a kit's accuracy, great! Build it and have fun. But don't bash the people who DO care and who DO have higher expectations and who DO expect the manufacturer to get it right. I mean seriously... if you don't care about the flaws in the kit, why are you even commenting on them in the first place?

Excellently said Harry.

Don't forget, those types that are against these reviews also take personal offense to them also. Come on guys, if you're on Revell's payroll just man up already. Otherwise stop it with the bs attitude.

[blubaja]

>Pointing out a kits obvious flaws is a legitimate, even necessary, part of any "review" thread.

you should probably work for Revell. that's what was needed at some point: a critical evaluation of what they had there, before giving the go ahead for production. and maybe it did happen, and maybe the execs said, aw what kid is gonna care about that. f it, run it!

at that point any delay or rework is $ off the bottom line and if you have to fix such complicated things as the entire back fenders and trunk panels you almost might as well start over again. so the evaluation should have happened at the DRAWING stage.

I cannot believe they would get something so obvious as that rear panel so wrong, and once the fender curvature was pointed out, I cannot unsee that either. and its not like there isn't a bleedin Camaro behind every other service station (note: "service station") out there in middle America and they are hard to find or something.

jb

This is probably the 5th or so kit that has such blatant errors, it really seems that no one there cares. I don't know how many times I've said it. And if these posts get read by any corporate person, that show us you give an S and fix things.

[turbo nova]

Call me what ever you like but the fact is I have dedicated most of my life to muscle/race cars from going to school for it, to eventually having my own place that does nothing except hi performance and resto-mod work, when I see the effort and money Revell put into these kits it baffles me that no one there shares my passion for these cars. I like revell kits, the molding and detail have become very,very good but when the shape of a vehicle is just off in many ways its more of a disappointment than anything else, yes I can fix the flaws but I cant understand why they are there to begin with. It just stinks buy'n multiples of kits only to find out when I open them they have glaring flaws that are not hidden and not easy fix's to those that know the cars well.

Thank you to Revell for advancing the hobby but I dont mind waiting a little longer if thats what it takes to iron out these issues. I also dont mind the long flat box's on the ROG rebox's, boiling parts isnt fun.