Chuck Most Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) '68 and '69 were pretty much identical, and IIRC the only noticable difference with the '67's were slightly different hood side badges and narrower bump trim where applicable. So you can pretty much cover three model years with the '69 variant. No need to wait on a stepside bed... just rob one from an AMT '53 F-100. It would be the same bed for a '68, just with different side steps. The side steps would be easy enough to make. Tom mentioned modifying the rails, but I don't think you'd need to do that- again IIRC the bed rails didn't change until mid '76, but that was an entirely different bed design, the type used until 1991. Edited June 28, 2015 by Chuck Most Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatz4u Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Want a nicely detailed small block engine? AMT 67 Mustang GT. I'm getting one ready for the 69 Shorty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk11 Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Hope these help. If I had found this site earlier... I was hoping post #203 would be a hint for reference material.... mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Van Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 So Dave, you're saying we can't expect to see the parts shown on the box to be in the box, because,by gosh, there was a "misunderstanding". I guess I "misunderstood" why there's pictures and writing on the box ..too? Well that's clear enough... Your customer service attendant tells me you folks will happily sell me the bumper I already paid for though. No thanks, I'm not in the habit of paying for something twice. Man I wish I had these problems........ All I have on my plate is a Father in ICU since 6/19/15 asking me to pull the plug on him..... Sorry about the major bumper issue....... GET A LIFE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveM Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I was hoping post #203 would be a hint for reference material.... mike DOH! Sorry 'bout that. I missed that one when I was looking back for links. I was probably too busy drooling over the model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Geiger Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 I don't know if it's been mentioned but Model Cars Magazine has a good article on these pickups in the latest (#194 - Apri 2015) issue. Four color pages including some screen shots of the CAD model. Article by Len Carsner with photos by Dave Metzner, Sean Svendsen, Chuck Most and Bill Coulter for an all-star team! This is also the Truck Issue! 62 pages of good reading! They really did a nice job on this issue, well worth crawling out of your hole to go buy a copy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my80malibu Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Surely you don't mean a 73-79 F100/150? I can say those would sell even better than the current releases. But the cash cow would be the 66-77 first gen Bronco. Why have we had to wait for so long? 57 thru 60 Ford F-100 would sell very good, especially with a Larger/ wrap around, rear window version. Moebius could, and most likely will, tool up a series of Chevy trucks done the way these Ford's have been done. Hopefully it wont take as long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petetrucker07 Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Boy, that would be nice. A 67 to 72 Chevy pick up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my80malibu Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Boy, that would be nice. A 67 to 72 Chevy pick up. Yes especially the 67 coil sprung rear section could be used for other Chevy projects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Most Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) I did find a minor snafu in the instructions to look out for- the instructions show the rear cab mount crossmember being installed with the flange facing to the rear. It should face to the front, like so... So, if it doesn't seem to want to fit, and you somehow don't notice the pins on the floor (and the corresponding holes in the crossmember) are different sizes, there's your problem. It's shown being installed backwards in the sheets for both kits. And yes, I informed Moebius of this BEFORE I climbed to the rooftop of the internet and shouted about it. As an aside, you can mount it to the frame instead of to the floor (as the instructions suggest). The instructions also have you install the radiator to the inside of the engine bay, but you can add it to the chassis if you'd rather do it that way. Edited June 29, 2015 by Chuck Most Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodent Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 These look like really nice kits, but I can't swallow the $40 that the LHS wants for the Ranger. (Flame suit in place.) I will probably grab one online at some point. Looking forward to more from this tool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my80malibu Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) $40 that's way to expensive. My LHS had them for $35 but knocked off 10%. At a local swapmeet on Saturday, a vendor was selling both versions currently out for $25 each. Edited June 29, 2015 by my80malibu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Just bought the '71 at my LHS and I can honestly say that it's the worst molded kit I've ever held in my hands. How a model kit with texture akin to lacquer burn has become acceptable is beyond me. If Moebius is going to mold kits this rough, they should at least throw a sheet of 400 sandpaper in the box. I don't think molding a kit with a smooth surface is too much to ask. The rough surfaces and inaccuracies has made my first Moebius kit purchase a big disappointment. You also said the Ford F350 kit from Meng was "un-buildable" , least with this kit, you give an exmaple why its un-buildable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingiguana Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 $28.95 at my LHS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk11 Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 You also said the Ford F350 kit from Meng was "un-buildable" , least with this kit, you give an exmaple why its un-buildable Or more accurately, why he thinks it's unbuildable... mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 (edited) Too bad you didn't find the MCM forum earlier, all this has been brought up at least once. I'll admit that I hadn't read every post. So, I went back and caught up. When the texture was mentioned, it was stated that it wasn't an issue. B.S. as is the one about a coat of primer taking care of it. The hood and especially the body on my kit is rough. It will take several coats of primer to bury the texture enough to keep from sanding back through to it. NO kit should be molded with a textured finish. Things that haven't been mentioned (although I may have missed some of them) are the radiator with no detail molded in. It's just flat. The timing chain cover with very little detail. Looks like something AMT molded back in '73 The water pump that looks like it came from a kit AMT molded back in '73 The intake and carburetor that looks like AMT molded back in '73. Best to snag the 390 engine from an AMT '66 Fairlane. The front inner wheel wells that are three scale inches too low. The wheel well braces that are only a scale inch thick and don't meet the firewall. The dash with no pad or defroster vents molded in. The door panels that flare out at the top. The seat back that's a scale 3 1/4 inches too short. The roof that's too flat. The door window frames that are too round at the top rear. The bottom of the bed behind the wheel well is too rounded and missing the trim. Trucks with the wide rocker trim has it there too. The rearend that doesn't even resemble a nine inch. That's what I've found so far by comparing the kit to actual vehicles and a photo. I'm sure it's good enough for people who aren't that familiar with the truck. But, I'm pretty familiar with it. Edited July 13, 2015 by plowboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatz4u Posted June 29, 2015 Share Posted June 29, 2015 Modelers can fix anything...... Be thankful it is not a 1:1, that would be expensive to repair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hpiguy Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) I have a video review of the 71 model up on my page. The 69 will be coming. As always, when I post my reviews, remember the following before griping. I pay for ALL my kits, none are given to me to promote, I don't even get discounts. I do these videos for fun only. I probably have mistakes, likely misspoken on something at some point, as I am not perfect and am not a Ford pickup expert by any means. Edited June 30, 2015 by hpiguy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Cole Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I'll admit that I hadn't read every post. So, I went back and caught up. When the texture was mentioned, it was stated that it wasn't an issue. B.S. as is the one about a coat of primer taking care of it. The hood and especially the body on my kit is rough. It will take several coats of primer to bury the texture enough to keep from sanding back through to it. NO kit should be molded with a textured finish. Things that haven't been mentioned (although I may have missed some of them) are the radiator with no detail molded in. It's just flat. The timing chain cover with very little detail. The water pump that looks like it came from a Yugo. The intake and carburetor that looks like Trumpeter molded it on a bad day. Best to snag the 390 engine from an AMT '66 Fairlane. The front inner wheel wells that are three scale inches too low. The wheel well braces that are only a scale inch thick and don't meet the firewall. The dash with no pad or defroster vents molded in. The door panels that flare out at the top. The seat back that's a scale 3 1/4 inches too short. The roof that's too flat. The door window frames that are too round at the top rear. The bottom of the bed behind the wheel well is too rounded and missing the trim. Trucks with the wide rocker trim has it there too. The rearend that doesn't even resemble a nine inch. That's what I've found so far by comparing the kit to actual vehicles and a photo. I'm sure it's good enough for people who aren't that familiar with the truck. But, I'm pretty familiar with it. Mine won't start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikemodeler Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 I'll admit that I hadn't read every post. So, I went back and caught up. When the texture was mentioned, it was stated that it wasn't an issue. B.S. as is the one about a coat of primer taking care of it. The hood and especially the body on my kit is rough. It will take several coats of primer to bury the texture enough to keep from sanding back through to it. NO kit should be molded with a textured finish. Things that haven't been mentioned (although I may have missed some of them) are the radiator with no detail molded in. It's just flat. The timing chain cover with very little detail. The water pump that looks like it came from a Yugo. The intake and carburetor that looks like Trumpeter molded it on a bad day. Best to snag the 390 engine from an AMT '66 Fairlane. The front inner wheel wells that are three scale inches too low. The wheel well braces that are only a scale inch thick and don't meet the firewall. The dash with no pad or defroster vents molded in. The door panels that flare out at the top. The seat back that's a scale 3 1/4 inches too short. The roof that's too flat. The door window frames that are too round at the top rear. The bottom of the bed behind the wheel well is too rounded and missing the trim. Trucks with the wide rocker trim has it there too. The rearend that doesn't even resemble a nine inch. That's what I've found so far by comparing the kit to actual vehicles and a photo. I'm sure it's good enough for people who aren't that familiar with the truck. But, I'm pretty familiar with it. Wow, that is a pretty long list. I think you missed the missing bumper from the '69 F100 that had Mike51 in an uproar. I won't let the perceived "issues" keep me from building these trucks, I build for myself and they will look good on my shelf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk11 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) ...what I've found so far... Well, that's a pretty exhaustive list but, yes, you did miss a couple of things ... Having a 1:1 driver of my own gives me an easy reference but even that didn't make me want to go into histrionics over corrections I may need to do. Buildups of both test shots and the final kits prove this can be turned out as a striking model. I understand there's room for legitimate discussion of pros and cons here but I hope this can be done without all the shrieking, caterwauling and drama queening that has characterized threads of this nature... or do we roll our eyes and say 'good luck with that' mike Edited June 30, 2015 by mk11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCI-FI Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Just bought the '71 at my LHS and I can honestly say that it's [...] The rough surfaces and inaccuracies has made my first Moebius kit purchase a big disappointment. Y'know, I appreciate honest reviews of kits I'm considering. Good and bad, warts and all. I don't need cheerleaders. But I don't need trolls, either. The new "scuffed" finish has been discussed ad nauseum in these forums, and that it doesn't harm the painted finish a bit. Edited June 30, 2015 by SCI-FI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Most Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 These look like really nice kits, but I can't swallow the $40 that the LHS wants for the Ranger. (Flame suit in place.) I will probably grab one online at some point. Looking forward to more from this tool! I sure hope he's throwing in a romantic dinner for that price... I have yet to see any locally for over thirty bucks, high 20's/low 30's seems to be the average asking price. I'd check definitely check around online if I were you. Unless you buy from a place that charges a pretty penny for S&H you should be able to nab one for way less than 40. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petetrucker07 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 My LHS just got it in. They have it for 33.99. I had already ordered two online. I may go buy it just to stash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinfan5 Posted June 30, 2015 Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) I sure hope he's throwing in a romantic dinner for that price... I have yet to see any locally for over thirty bucks, high 20's/low 30's seems to be the average asking price. I'd check definitely check around online if I were you. Unless you buy from a place that charges a pretty penny for S&H you should be able to nab one for way less than 40. One of the LHS here has the 69 $35.95 , the owner asked if I was interested in it, and it took everything to not say, not for that price I realized I got the two mixed up when I made my reply Edited June 30, 2015 by martinfan5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.