charlie8575 Posted July 5, 2015 Posted July 5, 2015 You have the Del Rio yet Charlie? I do. I'm definitely going to spring for the p/e- those decals aren't all that great. The body looks very naked without good script engraving. The rest of the model, to be fair, isn't bad at all. I'm still not 100% sure on the rear fender creases behind the wheels, but I think once it's painted and detailed, it'll look very nice. I'm planning on Colonial White/either Gunmetal or Woodsmoke Gray, with a red-and-white interior. On this board or one of the Facebook groups, someone mentioned some kind of brush-on adhesive for photo-etch and similar items, I think Micro-Mark was selling it. I'm looking into getting a bottle and trying it. Charlie Larkin
Tom Geiger Posted July 5, 2015 Posted July 5, 2015 On this board or one of the Facebook groups, someone mentioned some kind of brush-on adhesive for photo-etch and similar items, I think Micro-Mark was selling it. I'm looking into getting a bottle and trying it. Charlie- many of us are using either clear paint or Future to affix the photo etch. Until I heard these options, the thought of using super glue scared the heck outta me!
charlie8575 Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 Charlie- many of us are using either clear paint or Future to affix the photo etch. Until I heard these options, the thought of using super glue scared the heck outta me! It wasn't super glue, or either of those products, Tom. It was some sort of a brush-on adhesive, it sounded not too dissimilar to Post-It type glue, but much stronger. I'll see if I can scare the stuff up and post the information. Charlie Larkin
High octane Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 I use 5-Minute Epoxy to glue my photo etched parts and it seems to work out well for me.
Bob Ellis Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 I place the PE parts on the painted surface where I dabbed some clear nail polish. Then I clearcoat the model with PE in place.
mrknowetall Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 Micro-Scale sells a small bottle of foil adhesive for about $4.00. Sounds a little expensive, but a bottle will last a very long time. It's great for affixing PE.Micro Metal Foil Adhesive is what to look for.
Bob Ellis Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 I really can't find a '57 Ford wagon without bumper guards. This one looks like somebody removed them.
mike 51 Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) I really can't find a '57 Ford wagon without bumper guards. This one looks like somebody removed them. I don't know Bob...it's probably one of those special order rear bumper guard delete cars. God only knows why anyone would go to the bother of doing that but....just to save 1% off the price of the car,maybe? Edited July 6, 2015 by mike 51
hpiguy Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) I don't know Bob...it's probably one of those special order rear bumper guard delete cars. God only knows why anyone would go to the bother of doing that but....just to save 1% off the price of the car,maybe? When I had my Grand Prix GT there was an option to delete the rear spoiler, it took something like $15 off the price. And people selected that option more than once as I've seen the cars without them and there were no holes for it either. It can and does happen. Edited July 6, 2015 by hpiguy
mike 51 Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 When I had my Grand Prix GT there was an option to delete the rear spoiler, it took something like $15 off the price. And people selected that option more than once as I've seen the cars without them and there were no holes for it either. It can and does happen. I would assume they were deleted because it looked kinda silly to a lot of people vs. people trying to save $15. Strikes me as a totally different situation....
hpiguy Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) I would assume they were deleted because it looked kinda silly to a lot of people vs. people trying to save $15. Strikes me as a totally different situation.... If you are familiar with the late 90s GPs you'd know they look absolutely absurd with no spoiler on the back. Like I said, it happens. People try to save a few cents on weirder things. Or they just hated the look. Either way, there was an option to not have something that cost next to nothing it is my point. Edited July 6, 2015 by hpiguy
mike 51 Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) If you are familiar with the late 90s GPs you'd know they look absolutely absurd with no spoiler on the back. Like I said, it happens. People try to save a few cents on weirder things. Or they just hated the look. Either way, there was an option to not have something that cost next to nothing it is my point. Those kind of cars have never interested me and they sold very poorly where I live so I have no real exposure to them. As always though,it's ok we don't agree Edited July 6, 2015 by mike 51
mike 51 Posted July 6, 2015 Posted July 6, 2015 (edited) My last comment on this idea... $15 off a $20000+ car? I still gotta think it was the appearance of the "spoiler" not the cost. Thier focus groups and/or dealer/customer feedback probably lead to the "delete offer". Or maybe it was "all" those guys who wanted a "sleeper" to fool/impress whoever..could you delete all the "GT" appearance stuff and still get whatever made it a "GT"? Edited July 6, 2015 by mike 51
towtruck Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 yeah but most of those spoilers on the back of front wheel driver really worked. they spoiled the looks of the car ...
mike 51 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 (edited) In the YEAR 2000? In order to save maybe 1 hour of gross wages (if you made any less you wouldn't have qualified for a loan in the 1st place) ? I don't think I knew any adults making less than $20/hr back then (let alone now)...but we all have different experiences in life. Edited July 7, 2015 by mike 51
mike 51 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 I hadn't noticed the MONOGRAM labeling until you mentioned it in your video... nice review.
thatz4u Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Here's my video review of the kit. Very nice detailed review, thanks for posting it
unclescott58 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 (edited) Another great review Chris (hpiguy). I like your reviews. You seem to look at models the same way as I do. I'm not a ship builder at all. But, I've even watched some of your reviews on those, and enjoyed them. Keep giving us these great reviews. Thanks. Scott Edited July 7, 2015 by unclescott58
charlie8575 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 When I had my Grand Prix GT there was an option to delete the rear spoiler, it took something like $15 off the price. And people selected that option more than once as I've seen the cars without them and there were no holes for it either. It can and does happen. Actually, it was about a $200 credit, and I like the spoiler-less look on those Grand Prixs. It shows the curves of the design instead of hiding them. Charlie Larkin
charlie8575 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Micro-Scale sells a small bottle of foil adhesive for about $4.00. Sounds a little expensive, but a bottle will last a very long time. It's great for affixing PE. Micro Metal Foil Adhesive is what to look for. That's it! This wasn't the stuff I saw, but it's very, very similar to the foil adhesive. Thanks for jogging my brain, Don. Charlie Larkin
Sledsel Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 I do. I'm definitely going to spring for the p/e- those decals aren't all that great. The body looks very naked without good script engraving. The rest of the model, to be fair, isn't bad at all. I'm still not 100% sure on the rear fender creases behind the wheels, but I think once it's painted and detailed, it'll look very nice. I'm planning on Colonial White/either Gunmetal or Woodsmoke Gray, with a red-and-white interior. On this board or one of the Facebook groups, someone mentioned some kind of brush-on adhesive for photo-etch and similar items, I think Micro-Mark was selling it. I'm looking into getting a bottle and trying it. Charlie Larkin PM me, I'll mail you the bumper to test. If it fits, send me the other. I am still on the fence on this kit.
hpiguy Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 (edited) Thanks Mike, Al and Scott, I appreciate it. Edited July 7, 2015 by hpiguy
mikemodeler Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Okay I'm begining to understand this tread now. It's not about News & Review of Revell's '57 Ford Del Rio Ranch Wagon. It's a pissing match on who's right and who wrong about how models could or should be designed and engineered. And what idiots people are, especially at Revell if mistakes are made. Or what an idiot the other person on this tread is for not agreeing with my opinion. Or what an idiot I am for accepting or liking the kit, with all of its mistakes. This is getting very tiring to me. Again I'm just delighted Revell has offered us a '57 Ford Del Rio model kit. I'm like, WOW! Isn't this great! A '57 Ford Del Rio Ranch Wagon! I'd like to see and know more about the kit itself. Not how did they screw this up again?! The bickering a lot of guys get into over new Revell kits drive me nuts. I've like their recent '90 Mustang LX, '70 Cuda, and '67 Camaro. Are they perfect? I thought they were until you guys told me they were not. And how stupid I am for not noticing and putting up with such inferior products. I love to going to the web site that shows model box art and instructions. So many times when I look at the old instructions now, I think about how a good number modelers on these threads here, would be upset with these kits if they were introduced today. Just the other day I was noticing the only engine that came in AMT's original '64 Ford Fairlane kit was a 427 cu. in. V-8 with dual 4-barrel carbs. Neat kit. But, if your wanted to build the stock version, you had to use that engine. This is not correct engine for a stock '64 Fairlanr Sports Coupe. If I bought the kit back when was a kid, first I would have not known it was wrong. And second I would have thought it was cool even if I did. As an adult I might make a comment to my car and model building friends about it. But, I still would be delighted with the kit. As I'm still happy with my AMT '67 Falcon with the wrong factory exhaust set up. My AMT '66 Buick Wildcat with the incorrect '65 interior. My MPC Bonneville with the incorrect tri-power set up. And many more. Are they wrong? Yes. But, over all, they do a great job of representing the cars they are ment to be. Kits from companies like Palmer back in the day were so off, even as a kid I didn't like them. But I don't see the new Revell kits being in the same class as Palmer kits. Over all I'm happy with Revell's new releases. And am tired of hearing, "how can Revell have screwed up this one. Again!" Scott I agree with this 100% Scott and think many others do as well. It is unfortunate that mistakes are made in the manufacturing of kits and one would hope they didn't but the reality is they do. I will buy one of these kits mostly because I like the looks of the kit, and whatever flaws it has, I will accept.
FordRodnKustom Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Here's my video review of the kit. Excellent review. Thanks. I'll be in for few.
Recommended Posts