1/25 Revell '29 Model A Roadster 2'n'1

[southpier]

http://americanracingminiatures.com/?product_cat=engine-kit

[Muncie]

dusting off the crystall ball with a little help from Revell's Deuce history...

full hood

28-29 chopped coupe (w/option for top insert or filled top)

Guide headlamps

Deuce grille shell

under chassis exhaust system

your favorite hot rod engine (the Buick works for me)

bomber seats

show rod grille shell?

another set of wheels

salt flat tonneau and Bonneville equipment

Just wishing and total speculation here...

[carrucha]

The '29 Ford looks awesome. Looks like Revell is once again lightening my wallet. Keep 'em coming Revell!

[horsepower]

Is the Off from Etzel's Speed Classics a 255?

Yes, it represents the champ car motors before the lay down motors started showing up

[59 Buick]

Great to see this kit, nice to see a new nailhead and looking forward to seeing what manifolds appear from the aftermarket companies (e.g. stock, dual, triple, etc.) should be easy enough to swap any othe engines in, thinking flathead from Replicas and Miniatures, the Cadillac motor (49 Mercury) or 348c.i. engine from the 58 Chevrolet

Hope to see a follow on with newly tooled coupes and sedans, etc. would be icing on the cake.

Looking forward to adding a few of these to my already bulging collection of kits.

 

I have one question

Is the rear cross member standard to allow stock style rear suspensions to be added?

Edited August 15, 2015 by 59 Buick
typos

[southpier]

i think the offerings are being made to the resin deities to cast one; kit apparently is set up for coil suspension.

[tim boyd]

A couple of factorids to help answer some of the questions above....

1. The rear crossmember on both frames (the '32 Highboy and the Z'ed Model A Frame, are molded with the frame rails (for rigidity) and they are modern, So-Cal style crossmembers in design. Someone wanting to run a Halibrand quick change can do so without alteration to the crossmembers, but if you want to run a stock transverse-style leaf spring as well, you'll need to kitbash the matching Model A crossmember into the frame. Probably a five minute operation for a moderately experienced model car builder.

2. The center crossmembers are separate and the layout is clearly configured to allow other engines to be used in future kit derivatives .

3. The rear suspension is coil over shock as detailed in my original post on the subject near the beginning of this thread (see Post #8 on page 1 of this thread for a detailed description of the kit contents). The entire rear suspension is designed to emulate the style of "over the road/long distance driving" hot rods popularized by Roy Brizio and the So-Cal shops.

4. Steve Payne...those are great ideas and I suspect you'll see several of them in future version or derivative of this tool. A good deal of whether there are future kit derivatives will depend, of course, on how well this one sells, not only at intro, but as an ongoing contributor to Revell's kit sales.

5. The kit already includes an underbody exhaust system which connects to the Limefire-style headers. This requires two separate exhaust configurations to accommodate both the Highboy and Channeled Roadster frames.

6. Thanks Bill for pointing out that V8-60 engines have been and are used in Hot Rods. I agree that this is pretty rare (in part due to the relatively low power output, even after typical hot rodding enhancements, and probably as well the small visual appearance of the engine in a Model A engine compartment, as Dell pointed out), but it DOES happen.

7. The channeled /Z'ed configuration of the second frame in the kit should lend itself to the possibility of a '26/'27 T turtledeck kitbash using one of the aftermarket bodies, with a visual result trending towards that Brizio GNRS winner pictured above (which is easily in my list of all- time favorite 1.1 scale rods); this is one of the first things I plan to try when the kit hits the market.

8. Martin and Joe: Norm is already working on additions to his catalog that will work with this kit (Revell sent him partial test shots about six weeks ago or so), IIRC Norm specifically said that he is working on additional induction options for the Nailhead, including a tri-power intake. Norm did mention that he is extremely busy right now with a backlog of customer orders (including, not too coincidentally, a number of his products that allow modelers to build Model A hot rods), so it's very challenging for him to find the time to develop new kit offerings. But he's working on it...

9. For those interested in kitbashing a '28/'29 Model A body for this kit, I photographed several 1/1 scale hot rods with this bodystyle at last fall's NSRA Street Rod Nationals North. They are posted at my Fotki site www.fotki.com/funman1712 under the "Correcting or Kitbashing Model Car Bodies" folder (at the top of the page at this link). (Sorry I can't post the exact link as I can't get the copy function to work on this board with this laptop computer).

Hope this helps....TIM

Edited February 15, 2015 by tim boyd

[Ace-Garageguy]

It's great to have an industry insider like Tim Boyd who knows what's going on with this stuff, and who takes a very pro-active part in getting the information out to us.

I'm thinking this upcoming release has the potential to up the demand for all of Revell's existing (and excellent) '32 Ford and Model A kits. because it provides so many new build options for these old favorites. I'll certainly be looking for more Revell '32 roadsters, as I've put off building several of them because it's taken bits from so many different kits to get all the parts needed to do one. Having things like correct '40 brake backing plates, a good beam axle, finned Buick drums and a well done pinched-rear '32 frame plus a zeed Model A frame in one box changes the game.

Did I read somewhere the engine is separate from the gearbox ? If so, it's an excellent move on Revell's part too. One of the things that made the parts-pack engines so appealing to me was the ease with which different engine / trans combos could be worked out. There's a shortage of well-tooled automatics out there too, at least that don't require an entire kit to source and skillful surgery with a razor saw to liberate.

[tim boyd]

Did I read somewhere the engine is separate from the gearbox ? If so, it's an excellent move on Revell's part too. One of the things that made the parts-pack engines so appealing to me was the ease with which different engine / trans combos could be worked out. There's a shortage of well-tooled automatics out there too, at least that don't require an entire kit to source and skillful surgery with a razor saw to liberate.

Thanks Bill....in this case, the engine block and tranny case are tooled together. Excellent point about the potential for another round of models (and kti sales) for the '32 Ford series....Cheers...TIM

[Craig Irwin]

I'm sure I'll buy one, but if the driveline had been traditional I'd have bought a case.

[Greg Myers]

OR?

Edited February 15, 2015 by Greg Myers

[Greg Myers]

Yep these parts are out there . "Parts Pack" ?

Edited February 15, 2015 by Greg Myers

[Ace-Garageguy]

I really hope this kit is a big and ongoing success for Revell, because I'd love to see justification for putting together a spinoff kit with a Model A rear crossmember (which you'll probably need to do a quick-change rear end in a '32 Ford...real or model...,a well-tooled quick-change or maybe two different styles, accurate axle bells and an assortment of buggy springs and radius-rods / wishbones.

To build a truly "traditional" or "period" car, all those parts still will need to be sourced from the stash, or the aftermarket. How cool would it be to get all those goodies, a new-tool '26-'27 roadster body (NEVER done in styrene) and throw in the nice Ardun-headed flathead in a follow-on kit?

[Bernard Kron]

I really hope this kit is a big and ongoing success for Revell, because I'd love to see justification for putting together a spinoff kit ... [t]o build a truly "traditional" or "period" car...[A]ll those parts still will need to be sourced from the stash, or the aftermarket. How cool would it be to get all those goodies, a new-tool '26-'27 roadster body (NEVER done in styrene) and throw in the nice Ardun-headed flathead in a follow-on kit?

While this thread has been overwhelmingly positive, and deservedly so, the frustrating predilection Revell has to remain slightly out of step with automotive trends, especially in hot rodding subjects has to be pointed out here. Why yet another contemporary rear suspension which will hardly be noticed by the average modeler, when a modern tool of a traditional rear suspension setup would have been a signature feature of this release? Could it be a case of too much of a good thing? Perhaps it's best to hold something back for the next round. Here's hoping that the '29 Roadster is a strong and steady seller and Bill's wish becomes reality!

Edited February 15, 2015 by Bernard Kron

[Earl Marischal]

As a returning modeller without endless 'spares' boxes, this kit looks the bee's knees.

Just hope it's available in the UK or via mail order from over the Pond.

steve

[Dennis Lacy]

While this thread has been overwhelmingly positive, and deservedly so, the frustrating predilection Revell has to remain slightly out of step with automotive trends, especially in hot rodding subjects has to be pointed out here. Why yet another contemporary rear suspension which will hardly be noticed by the average modeler, when a modern tool of a traditional rear suspension setup would have been a signature feature of this release? Could it be a case of too much of a good thing? Perhaps it's best to hold something back for the next round. Here's hoping that the '29 Roadster is a strong and steady seller and Bill's wish becomes reality!

I'm not so sure Revell is out of step. While truly traditional rods with all vintage parts are what guys like you and I prefer, they're still in the minority in hot rodding as a whole. I think that the traditionally biased media we follow tends to skew our prospective that there's more of these cars being built than there really are. The way this new '29 Roadster kit is configured is, I think, more typical of what the average rodder is doing. That's to say, everything on the surface looks good ol' days (front suspension/brakes, wheels/tires, engine and upholstery) while the components that aren't readily visible (transmission, rear axle/suspension, electronics) are modern for the sake of more reliable function, driver comfort, ease of repair, familiarity and of course, cost.

Taking your average garage rodder and his wallet into account, a new quick change axle assembly is over $3000. A third of that price tag will completely cover a 8"/9" or Dana axle including the entire rear suspension. Even without a fancy quick change, early Ford "banjo" axles are a total shot in the dark when trying to find a good one. You're lucky to find 2 or 3 in 10 that aren't destroyed internally from moisture damage or lack of maintenance. Early ford 3-speed transmissions are getting really hard to come by. A reusable good set of gears (if you can find them) is gonna run a minimum of $500 and if your lucky enough to come up with somebodies stashed NOS parts, minimum of $1000. In the end you still have an old 3-speed that may not live very well behind a "built" engine. Then there's guys who just don't want to be bothered with shifting gears. Small block Chevy's and Ford's are pretty inexpensive to buy or build. Start getting into vintage "traditional" engines and the price can double or triple in the blink of an eye. It's safe to say that after dropping big money on wicked vintage engine the budget may not be there for the rest of an expensive vintage driveline. Another thing to keep in mind is that a good number of the people building traditionally styled cars today are just trend followers and are the same guys who were building billet covered "high tech" cars 10 years ago. They aren't concerned with getting every detail correct and auto transmissions and late-model axles with coil-overs are what they know.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Dennis Lacy

[LDO]

It's also a case of not being able to please all of the people all of the time. I could post about how Revell is making a huge mistake by not offering it exactly the way I want it, but with all this kit offers, it's hard to complain.

I can already imagine kitbashing one with AMT's '29 Tudor sedan.

I can also imagine people using the Trade forum to swap more parts to and from this kit. Someone in this thread mentioned the lack of a traditional engine. If he means flathead, I'd be happy to send one in trade for that nailhead.

This kit blows away the old "2 in 1" kits from the 1960s. Great building options, plus 50 years of molding tech advancement.

[mrknowetall]

I'm not so sure Revell is out of step. While truly traditional rods with all vintage parts are what guys like you and I prefer, they're still in the minority in hot rodding as a whole. I think that the traditionally biased media we follow tends to skew our prospective that there's more of these cars being built than there really are. The way this new '29 Roadster kit is configured is, I think, more typical of what the average rodder is doing. That's to say, everything on the surface looks good ol' days (front suspension/brakes, wheels/tires, engine and upholstery) while the components that aren't readily visible (transmission, rear axle/suspension, electronics) are modern for the sake of more reliable function, driver comfort, ease of repair, familiarity and of course, cost.

Taking your average garage rodder and his wallet into account, a new quick change axle assembly is over $3000. A third of that price tag will completely cover a 8"/9" or Dana axle including the entire rear suspension. Even without a fancy quick change, early Ford "banjo" axles are a total shot in the dark when trying to find a good one. You're lucky to find 2 or 3 in 10 that aren't destroyed internally from moisture damage or lack of maintenance. Early ford 3-speed transmissions are getting really hard to come by. A reusable good set of gears (if you can find them) is gonna run a minimum of $500 and if your lucky enough to come up with somebodies stashed NOS parts, minimum of $1000. In the end you still have an old 3-speed that may not live very well behind a "built" engine. Then there's guys who just don't want to be bothered with shifting gears. Small block Chevy's and Ford's are pretty inexpensive to buy or build. Start getting into vintage "traditional" engines and the price can double or triple in the blink of an eye. It's safe to say that after dropping big money on wicked vintage engine the budget may not be there for the rest of an expensive vintage driveline. Another thing to keep in mind is that a good number of the people building traditionally styled cars today are just trend followers and are the same guys who were building billet covered "high tech" cars 10 years ago. They aren't concerned with getting every detail correct and auto transmissions and late-model axles with coil-overs are what they know.

Exactly my thoughts, and thanks for explaining the painful monetary realities of building a truly vintage hot rod build. However, I'd have liked to seen a traditional rear suspension on Revell's upcoming '29 roadster, but on the other hand, it's certainly no deal breaker for me if it's not in the kit. As Tim Boyd said in an earlier post, if I want that look badly enough, I'll do it myself. Although I'm sure I won't.

Edited February 16, 2015 by mrknowetall

[Bernard Kron]

I'm not so sure Revell is out of step. While truly traditional rods with all vintage parts are what guys like you and I prefer, they're still in the minority in hot rodding as a whole. I think that the traditionally biased media we follow tends to skew our perspective that there's more of these cars being built than there really are. The way this new '29 Roadster kit is configured is, I think, more typical of what the average rodder is doing. That's to say, everything on the surface looks good ol' days (front suspension/brakes, wheels/tires, engine and upholstery) while the components that aren't readily visible (transmission, rear axle/suspension, electronics) are modern for the sake of more reliable function, driver comfort, ease of repair, familiarity and of course, cost.

...Another thing to keep in mind is that a good number of the people building traditionally styled cars today are just trend followers and are the same guys who were building billet covered "high tech" cars 10 years ago. They aren't concerned with getting every detail correct and auto transmissions and late-model axles with coil-overs are what they know.

Very well put, Dennis. Today, virtually everything about period-perfect hot rods, if you insist on the real thing, is unobtainium and, as you document, will drive costs to areas only the John Mumfords of this world can afford. The 2013 AMBR winner proves that - a V8-60 Ardun...really? But that's where model cars come in, they put unobtainium within reach. So that's why I'm surprised that Revell continues to choose the more "realistic" approach rather than opting for the "fantasy" element. I just don't see a marketing benefit in an accurate representation of a contemporary street rod rear end. The Nailhead is the stuff of TRJ-based fantasies already (a sort of Traditional Rodding holy grail motor), as is the '29 Roadster itself. It's no mystery why this body was Brookville's choice for their first metal-bodied reproduction effort many years ago. It was simple to reproduce and desirable. The only reason I can think of for their decision to go with a modern Dana setup, other than it's a cultural issue at Revell to document contemporary rodding whenever they can, is that, like the flathead that had to wait for release #3 in the Deuce series, there's no advantage to doing everything in one go, especially if your contemplating a series of releases over time. Here's hoping...

Also, a thought about quick-change rear ends. From their inception, these were always expensive, and while they solved a very real technical issue, allowing rapid and convenient change-out of rear end ratios, they were only of benefit in competition applications, and even then only if frequent final gearing modifications were necessary. Even in the earliest days of using them on the street they were jewelry, as they are today. A good example of the "fantasy" side. The modeler with an inclination towards a more real world application might have wished for something like an Olds rear end for his Old-school representation. But, in that case, he'd want a small block Chevy with stock valve covers, too...

[Ace-Garageguy]

there's no advantage to doing everything in one go, especially if your contemplating a series of releases over time. Here's hoping...

There's also the very real possibility it was a long-term strategic marketing decision to not include the QC and buggy spring rear end bits in the first offering. Get the sales this one generates, and when it starts to slow down a bit, hopefully after thoroughly replenishing the tooling $$ coffers, introduce a more-old-goody-containing follow-on. I'll buy multiples of this one anyway...assuming the first one I open looks right to my jaundiced old hypercritical eyes.

While I agree with Bernard that, in principle, a quick-change rear IS jewelry if the car isn't actually raced, from my own perspective inside the 1:1 hot rod industry, the QC rear end is hardly a rare piece...even on mid-$ cars that ARE intended to be street driven. We recently finished a period-perfect but relatively inexpensive A-V8 (flathead) full-fender car...authentic down to the kinda not-great black enamel paint job...and it got a Halibrand rear end under it. The man who commissioned it died shortly before completion, sadly, but his wife, past 70, routinely drives the thing (!!). The only real concession to modernity was a 5-speed OD gearbox for highway cruising and a split master cylinder for safety.

We've got another traditional car just about to go to paint...again, NOT a hyper-expensive build. A mildly-chopped fenderless '32 sedan 2-dr, it runs a Chevy smallblock equipped with 3 Strombergs and rams-horn exhaust manifolds. Again built to be driven, it has a 5-speed OD manual trans, but peeking out from under the rear of the car is another Halibrand. The car simply wouldn't look right without it.

The most period-correct car we're currently doing (and the most expensive, by far) IS all pre-'49 genuine "unobtanium". The car will use a Columbia 2-speed rear...but that's already available in one of Revell's '40 Fords.

[southpier]

anyone know if the Columbia 2 speed is available aftermarket?

[Bernard Kron]

anyone know if the Columbia 2 speed is available aftermarket?

TJ's Custom Casting, they serve the Jalopy and Dirt Car modeling community, mainly: http://stores.tjscustomcastings.com/columbia-2-speed-axle/ I've bought stuff from them. Prompt service and high quality castings.

Edited February 16, 2015 by Bernard Kron

[tim boyd]

Well, I'm glad you guys jumped in on the discussion about the rear axle layout on this kit.

A couple of additional factoids on this - first, the kit was originally conceptualized, from what I've learned, with a lot of input from Roger Harney, Revell's late Vice President of Engineering. Roger was a car guy through and through and knew his hot rods. Second, the actual kit itself was designed by a highly experienced engineer who worked at AMT during the glory days there, and built and drives his own 1/1 scale hot rod - a very sharp '34 Five Window Coupe. Third, another person from the outside who did much of the research for Revell on the body dimensions and who provided a detailed, part by part kit proposal to Revell, had pushed for a transverse leaf rear spring/Halbrand QC setup, so I am presuming that the choice was discussed at Revell when the kit was conceptualized. So the content of the kit and tool was closely considered by several people who fully understand the 1/1 scale hot rod world. When you actually buy and build this kit - along with the derivatives that will hopefully come along sooner than later, I think this will become even more evident.

Second, while the transverse leaf rear and quick change is almost considered a "must" for a full-on "traditional" hot rod, it is not the defacto choice of many building actual street rods/hot rods these days. I no longer live ten miles from Roy Brizio's shop, but if I did, I suspect that when I visited his shop I'd still see cars being built there running coil overs instead of transverse leaf rear suspensions, simply because coil overs are a more adjustable and modern solution for chassis design. If you are running your hot rod cross country on a regular basis, or if you are used to the handling capabilities of today's sports cars, you are going to want to have this more modern rear suspension. Personally, if I ever decide to have a 1/1 scale rod built, it will probably be built by Roy, and I am sure mine will be running coil overs in back - although perhaps with a modern QC rear axle (like the Washington Blue, Tennessee-plated "Deuuuce" photo Greg posted on the prior page).

Bottom line here - it might be jumping to conclusions to assume that Revell made a "mistake" by choosing the rear end configuration that they did, or that they were "out of touch" with the latest in hot rod design when they tooled up the kit. From what I can tell (acknowledging that you all will form your own opinions after you get the kit in hand and build it yourselves), every single bit of the design was well thought out. No one is going to agree 100% with the content of any model kit - that's one of the reasons we do kitbashing - but I think you will find out that this kit (and the follow-ups I hope materialize sooner than later) will be batting at a very high average - at least as high as Revell's '32 Street Rod series when it first appeared in 1996, and perhaps even a little higher.

TIM

Edited February 16, 2015 by tim boyd

[southpier]

TJ's Custom Casting....

thanks for the link & recommendation

[Bernard Kron]

As always, thanks for the additional insights, Tim.

I don't think including a modern rear suspension in this kit is a "mistake" in the sense that I don't think it will have a perceptible negative impact on initial sales. You'll notice a lot of qualifiers in that last sentence. That's because the kit's potential as a parts kit is somewhat hampered by having a rear suspension that, as I said above, from a marketing perspective is essentially "invisible".

The more I hear about the gestation of this kit the more I think I was on to something when I said that perhaps "it's a cultural issue at Revell to document contemporary rodding whenever they can...". The fact that a leaf spring rear suspension was proposed and then decided against could be seen to indicate something like that. Certainly it seemed to be the case in the 90's with the original Deuce series with its bagged rear suspension, tubular axle, wide front tires and disc brakes (not to mention the cassette player and air conditioning outlets in the Highboy's dashboard ).

Perhaps it would be more correct to say that Revell prefers to document well-established trends rather than emerging or newly-established trends. I certainly don't consider the Traditional Rodding trend an emerging trend but, as Dennis pointed out, it's still a small minority of the street rodding world.

I recently attended an informal "car show" in the parking lot of the mall that serves as home for the Blackhawk Museum. It was the Sunday after the NNL West. It's called "Coffee & Cars" and, as I understand it, it occurs the first Sunday of every month. There were literally hundreds of cars on display. All of Silicon Valley's automotive world seemed to be there and there were Lambos, Ferraris and Porsches by the dozens. There were only a few rods to be seen and virtually all of them dated from the Hi-Tech and "billet" era. Most owners were struggling to "update" them by, ironically, backdating them. So far they seemed to have spent their money on tires and wheels, and, budget allowing, a repaint. Tweed and sculpted leather and aluminum were still to be seen in abundance in the interiors. I mention this because trends overlap and change comes slowly and not without cost. So it's not the case that one trend instantly replaces another, that for example Traditional Rodding is the "current" trend to the exclusion of modern mechanicals and styling elements. Like you, if I were to build a street rod today I would run it with coil-overs and, most likely, I would run disc brakes as well (although I might hide them if my budget permitted). But I do think that model cars allow for a bit of "fantasy" as well, and in this sense I will miss a traditional rear suspension in this kit - but not too much because I'm well practiced at making the conversion.

I made my "slightly out of step" crack to encourage some lively discussion and I guess I succeeded...

Edited February 16, 2015 by Bernard Kron