'70 Chevelle kit - Revell vs. AMT

[Snake45]

I was taking another look at the Revell snapper vs AMT vs Monogram bodies last night, with a Classic Metalwork diecast thrown in as well.

The Revell snapper definitely has the most accurate body sides.

I can kinda see what Ron is talking about about "the greenhouse is too short." Didn't get a chance to lay a caliper on anything yet but it looks like the roof area might be just a hair short front-to-back and a hair short in height, almost like it's chopped just a bit. It might be that the window openings are on the small size, and opening them up a bit might help. (Not gonna do that, as the body I'm working with is already painted.) These problems are so subtle--to my eye, anyway--that I wouldn't have noticed them if Ron hadn't mentioned it. It's not going to keep me from finishing this build.

The cowl induction dome on the Revell snapper hood is definitely too small--too short, possible a little too narrow as well.

I didn't get to investigate it closely, but it looks like the AMT hood might fit the Revell snapper body, if you want to do a full-detail build (or just can't live with the small dome). If it's not a direct drop-in, I'm virtually certain it could be made to work with little work.

I'm starting to think we could use an all-new full-detail '70 Chevelle kit in 1/25. If they could set it up so that '71 and '72 adaptations could be added later, so much the better. But honestly, I just don't see it happening.

[Snake45]

On 3/8/2018 at 10:38 AM, Bob Ellis said:

I carefully sand them smooth to replicate the real car.

 

On your recommendation, I tried this last night on a glue-bomb AMT '72 body I'm working on. (It's painted and the paint won't come off, so it has to be 100% sanded anyway.) To my amazement, it wasn't really that difficult, and it looks like it might have worked, though I won't know for sure until I get paint or at least primer on, which could be a while. I was even able to save the fender SS emblems, though I might end up sanding those off anyway as they're not really that good. Thanks for the idea! 

[Bob Ellis]

13 hours ago, Snake45 said:

On your recommendation, I tried this last night on a glue-bomb AMT '72 body I'm working on. (It's painted and the paint won't come off, so it has to be 100% sanded anyway.) To my amazement, it wasn't really that difficult, and it looks like it might have worked, though I won't know for sure until I get paint or at least primer on, which could be a while. I was even able to save the fender SS emblems, though I might end up sanding those off anyway as they're not really that good. Thanks for the idea! 

emblems were replaced with model car garage items

[garagepunk66]

On 3/8/2018 at 5:51 PM, Snake45 said:

Don't forget you'd have to chop that chassis four scale inches. Not a big deal if you know it going in--don't discover it after you've got the chassis built and detailed! 

Yes, I forgot about the difference in wheelbase. The Revell 72 Cutlass  chassis would probably be a better choice, with the Monte Carlo engine and rear axle.  On another note, does anyone offer reproductions of the Red Alert decals? I think there is a slump buster box art build in my future....

 

Edited March 12, 2018 by garagepunk66

[Snake45]

On 4/21/2015 at 6:55 AM, JS23U said:

I sold my Revell snapper because I think the roof looks too round, kind of a bubble top

I'd rather accept the fender bulges than a bubbly roof.

After reading your comment, I took a good look at mine. 

I see what you're talking about. It is just a little rounder than it probably should be. 

But it doesn't jump out at me, like certain kits' flat roofs I could name. I wouldn't have noticed it if you hadn't mentioned it. And it's certainly not a deal-breaker for me. 

I've built the Monogram 1/24, and an AMT '72 (basically the same body as the '70), and am finishing up the Revell snapper as well as a Classic Metal Works, and I still think the Revell snapper has the best overall body shape. 

[Ron Hamilton]

I have built both kits, as well as the 1/24 Monogram. and each of them has its advantages. The roof is just too round and the side rear window is also too rounded and a little short. However,  the average modeler does not want to do wholesale modifications on the side sculpture on the AMT kit. I am currently doing a Red Alert car, using the 70 AMT kit,  and I am doing a lot of work to the body to make it as accurate as possible. It is stalled for now, as I want to build a more accurate engine. I built the Revell in a couple of hours as a slump buster, and really enjoyed it other than the peel and stick decals. I only wish it was a full detail kit with an engine.  I would fix the roof in a minute on that one. I may just disassemble the one I have, open it up, and fix the roof. I have engines and chassis that would work.

[Straightliner59]

On 3/8/2018 at 2:01 AM, garagepunk66 said:

Has anyone tried fitting the AMT new-tool 70 Monte Carlo guts to the Revell Snapper body?

 

Here's mine. There's a thread in "On The Workbench". It hasn't been updated, in months.

[Can-Con]

I bet the chassis from the soon to be released Revell '68 Chevelle will be an excellent chassis and engine donor for both the Revell snap kit and the AMT kits. 

BTW, here's a few shots of my AMT kit. Lots of filling and sanding on the sides to get it right [ish].

I added a vinyl top and the chrome strips and photoetch emblems to convert it to a Malibu.

[Snake45]

44 minutes ago, Can-Con said:

I bet the chassis from the soon to be released Revell '68 Chevelle will be an excellent chassis and engine donor for both the Revell snap kit and the AMT kits. 

BTW, here's a few shots of my AMT kit. Lots of filling and sanding on the sides to get it right [ish].

I added a vinyl top and the chrome strips and photoetch emblems to convert it to a Malibu.

 

 

VERY nice--possibly the best build of this kit I've ever seen! Well done!

I see you fixed the incorrect fender bulges front and rear. I recently tried the same thing on a glue bomb body. Where you used putty to blend them in, I just sanded them off completely. As I've often said, there are many paths to the top of the mountain. 

And BTW, since my last post in this thread, I actually finished up a Revell snapper. I'm still not seeing the huge problem with the roof that Ron does (I can see it a little, but not much), but I might have to eat my words about the cowl bulge being undersized on the Revell. I had to look at many, many pics of real ones to get my stripes laid out, and I now think that Revell might have actually gotten that bulge right, and that the AMT and Monogram kits have it way oversized. 

[tim boyd]

Out of the box, my vote is solidly behind the Revell snapper as the most authentic body (thought not perfect).. I address the issues of all these kits (including the MPC '71/'72) in my book, and yes, as some of you mention, I also conclude that an all-new tooling of a full detail 1970 Chevelle SS454 LS6 kit is must.  Personally I'd like to see what Moebius would do with this, but since the guts (engine/chassis/suspension) of the new Revell 1968 Chevelle are also correct for a 1970, the new Revell Germany would be the obvious choice for such a kit.  This presumes that they will do further North-American-specific kits - still an open question at this point.   TIM 

PS -  for those of you that want to work with the Revell snapper, an article on detailing this kit is scheduled for a future issue of a different publication......TB 

 

Edited September 30, 2018 by tim boyd

[Straightliner59]

On 9/30/2018 at 10:48 AM, Snake45 said:

VERY nice--possibly the best build of this kit I've ever seen! Well done!

I see you fixed the incorrect fender bulges front and rear. I recently tried the same thing on a glue bomb body. Where you used putty to blend them in, I just sanded them off completely. As I've often said, there are many paths to the top of the mountain. 

And BTW, since my last post in this thread, I actually finished up a Revell snapper. I'm still not seeing the huge problem with the roof that Ron does (I can see it a little, but not much), but I might have to eat my words about the cowl bulge being undersized on the Revell. I had to look at many, many pics of real ones to get my stripes laid out, and I now think that Revell might have actually gotten that bulge right, and that the AMT and Monogram kits have it way oversized. 

I think you're right about the cowl induction bulge. When I was trying to decide which one to use on mine, I ultimately chose to keep the Revell snapper hood. I will likely try the '68's chassis, before I go further, with mine.

Edited October 12, 2018 by Straightliner59

[Casey]

On 9/30/2018 at 10:58 AM, Can-Con said:

I bet the chassis from the soon to be released Revell '68 Chevelle will be an excellent chassis and engine donor for both the Revell snap kit and the AMT kits. 

I'd probably take that bet, considering how more recent Revell kits have been less crisp and bar-raising design wise. 

Also, there have been some very good 1/25 scale GM A-body offerings from Revell for almost two decades now litke the '65 Chevelle, '66 Chevelle wagon and El Camino, '67 Chevelle, and '72 Olds Cutlass. 

[Snake45]

1 hour ago, Casey said:

I'd probably take that bet, considering how more recent Revell kits have been less crisp and bar-raising design wise. 

Also, there have been some very good 1/25 scale GM A-body offerings from Revell for almost two decades now litke the '65 Chevelle, '66 Chevelle wagon and El Camino, '67 Chevelle, and '72 Olds Cutlass. 

Four of those chassis would have to be shortened to be used under a '70 Chevelle. But the one from an AMT '69 4-4-2 would work fine. 

[Casey]

On 10/12/2018 at 11:41 AM, Snake45 said:

Four of those chassis would have to be shortened to be used under a '70 Chevelle. But the one from an AMT '69 4-4-2 would work fine. 

Yes, that would be a slight problem.  The MPC/AMT '69 Cutlass kit would be the one to use.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Casey

[Rob Hall]

3 minutes ago, Casey said:

Yes, that would be a slight problem.  I think the 116" wheelbase of the '66 Chevelle Wagon would be very close to the 115" '70 Chevelle's wheelbase, but I guess we'll see in a few months how nice the chassis and floorpan is in the Revell '68 Chevelle SS. The MPC/AMT '69 Cutlass kit is a good choice, too, though.

Actually, the '64-67 Chevelles had a 115" wheelbase..'68-72 Chevelle 2drs had a 112" wheelbase ('68-72 4drs and wagons had a 116" wheelbase).

Edited October 14, 2018 by Rob Hall

[Rodent]

For you rivet counters, a BOP transmission crossmember is different than a Chevrolet transmission crossmember. Otherwise, the 442 kit chassis is awesome.

[crowe-t]

On 9/30/2018 at 11:58 AM, Can-Con said:

I bet the chassis from the soon to be released Revell '68 Chevelle will be an excellent chassis and engine donor for both the Revell snap kit and the AMT kits. 

BTW, here's a few shots of my AMT kit. Lots of filling and sanding on the sides to get it right [ish].

I added a vinyl top and the chrome strips and photoetch emblems to convert it to a Malibu.

Excellent job on the sides!  It's a beautiful build!

[Casey]

On 9/30/2018 at 10:58 AM, Can-Con said:

I bet the chassis from the soon to be released Revell '68 Chevelle will be an excellent chassis and engine donor for both the Revell snap kit

Someone with both kits on hand must've test fit the frame and floorpan parts from the Revell '68 Chevelle inside the Revell SnapTite '70 Chevelle SS 454 body with the interior in place....

[Snake45]

I finally finished and posted my Revell snapper '70 Chevelle, but due to all the "My 2018 Build" threads, it got buried out of sight almost immediately. 

 

[Casey]

Comparison pics of both the Revell 1/25 SnapTite (lime green) and 1/24 Monogram (blue) '70 Chevelle SS 454 kit bodies.

What really stood out to me in the below image was how much 'flatter' the roof's arch is on the 1/24 body. The rear quarter window opening looks closer to the real car's opening to my eyes, and that subtle 'kink' at the door and quarter window transition is present at the top edge...but not the bottom:

Real car, for comparison:

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

Wow. There's all kinds of issues all over both of those if you really study 'em. At this point, I think overall the blue metallic one comes closest to getting the initial impression of the real car, but it could use a very slight top chop, and a few other minor corrections to be dead-on...like the shape of the quarter window, and the slope of the rear of the roof.

[Chuck Kourouklis]

Yeah, Iike the snapper well enough, but I've never much cared for its daylight openings on the sides.

On 9/30/2018 at 8:58 AM, Can-Con said:

 

 

 

Had to pile my appreciation on with everyone else's. VERY sharp, Steve!

[cruz]

I just finished the AMT version. Old and tired mold but with a little patience it can yield a pretty cool looking model. Loved the pad printed Polyglas GTs.....

[cruz]

I think it sits a little low but it's not hard to modify this if need be....

[Ace-Garageguy]

^^^ That compares very favorably in many areas with the 1:1 shot just above. And we usually have at least one 1:1 in one of the shops I work. Your stance looks pretty much dead-on to me, for the way most of them are set up now, anyway.