fseva Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 OK - I was told that if I read this forum, I'll discover whether or not a kit is worth the money, before I buy one... So, I'm going to give it a try... I have not yet purchased the 67 Chevelle Pro Street by AMT/R2 - is it worth the money? Why?
Snake45 Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Not a bad Pro Street, but the body isn't as accurate in shape as the Revell kit. I gather from the other thread that you're a chassis guy, so you might like it. I'm more of a body accuracy guy, so I prefer the Revell kit. But I'll eventually use this chassis under something.
DaveM Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Much newer tool than the Cougar. I think it was in the late eighties or early nineties. AMT and Revell did Chevelles at almost the exact same time. Then they both did Pro Sreets. The Revell Pro Street version had a custom rear fascia with funny taillights, so that kind if messed up the look. I don't think the AMT got so carried away with the custom stuff. I built the stock AMT '67 Chevelle and it was a pretty nice kit. Nothing about the body bothered me too much. Both companies were tooling up some pretty nice stuff back in those days.
DaveM Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Actually I just googled and found an unboxing video on Youtube. I haven't watched much of it, but you can look at the sprues and see what parts are there.
hjracing Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Actually I just googled and found an unboxing video on Youtube. I haven't watched much of it, but you can look at the sprues and see what parts are there. Great review Dave!
fseva Posted March 8, 2015 Author Posted March 8, 2015 Not a bad Pro Street, but the body isn't as accurate in shape as the Revell kit. I gather from the other thread that you're a chassis guy, so you might like it. I'm more of a body accuracy guy, so I prefer the Revell kit. But I'll eventually use this chassis under something. No, I'm not a chassis-guy... I only said something about the Cougar's chassis because it was so unusual. I'm also not a body accuracy type of modeler, since I never had much interest in the nitty gritty of cars. I attempted to build both of the Revell kits and they turned out to be undisplayable, mainly because they both had the same problems with the bumpers, which were just a little too narrow for the corresponding areas. That's also kind of why I'm looking into the AMT release, because I still don't have a Chevelle from the period in my display case. I purchased the SS396 version from A/K Model Cars and am looking forward to building that one.
fseva Posted March 8, 2015 Author Posted March 8, 2015 Much newer tool than the Cougar. I think it was in the late eighties or early nineties. AMT and Revell did Chevelles at almost the exact same time. Then they both did Pro Sreets. The Revell Pro Street version had a custom rear fascia with funny taillights, so that kind if messed up the look. I don't think the AMT got so carried away with the custom stuff. I built the stock AMT '67 Chevelle and it was a pretty nice kit. Nothing about the body bothered me too much. Both companies were tooling up some pretty nice stuff back in those days. I found both of the Revell's rear and front bumpers a little too narrow and messed them both up trying hold the body closer together to match the bumpers. Glad to hear your recommendation about the AMT release... thanks!
fseva Posted March 8, 2015 Author Posted March 8, 2015 (edited) Actually I just googled and found an unboxing video on Youtube. I haven't watched much of it, but you can look at the sprues and see what parts are there. Thanks for sharing! I think this will wind up being one of my next purchases, as I'm really hooked on 65-70 muscle cars. Edited March 8, 2015 by fseva
Snake45 Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 I built both when they were first issued, what, 20-25 years ago? I remember the Revell as a completely pain-free build, and the only glitch with the AMT was that there was no positive location for the grille/front bumper. And that was a VERY minor glitch/inconvenience.
fseva Posted March 9, 2015 Author Posted March 9, 2015 I remember the Revell as a completely pain-free build, Wow - I wonder what went wrong? I built the Pro Street version twice, and the positioning of both bumpers was impossible to obtain... without a specialized 3-handed clamp of some kind. Neither one of them is on display because they got so gooped up with glue, I was embarrassed to display them!
Snake45 Posted March 9, 2015 Posted March 9, 2015 Wow - I wonder what went wrong? I built the Pro Street version twice, and the positioning of both bumpers was impossible to obtain... without a specialized 3-handed clamp of some kind. Neither one of them is on display because they got so gooped up with glue, I was embarrassed to display them! I've never built the PS version, just the stocker. I've managed to accumulate several copies of the PS kit but so far haven't built one. If/when I do, I'll be using a stock rearend setup because I don't care for Revell's "custom" treatment of that end at all.
Sledsel Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Wow - I wonder what went wrong? I built the Pro Street version twice, and the positioning of both bumpers was impossible to obtain... without a specialized 3-handed clamp of some kind. Neither one of them is on display because they got so gooped up with glue, I was embarrassed to display them! I have run into this in the past, that is why i do a lot of test fitting and I have added tabs inside the fenders of a few as mounting points. I know the Revell 64 Fairlane had nothing to mount the bumper to.
fseva Posted April 5, 2015 Author Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Well, I bought this kit and it was surprisingly good - hardly any flash and no partially worn parts; chrome is nice and shiny with no flash. 2 of the drag tires are marked with white Goodyear logo, which is very nice. There are 2 other drag tires that have tread but no lettering. The 2 front tires are hollow and I didn't think they looked all that good with such wide tires in the rear. For those hobbyists who weren't around when this kit was first released, you should know that there is a weakness here, namely a lack of 3-dimensional detail. For example, the interior door panels are very plain and the handles are only slightly higher than the surrounding plastic - they look more like outlines. The dashboard looks very nice but there is no decal to represent the large horizontal speedometer. There is no option to convert the back seat into an actual passenger area. All you get is a flat, plain panel with a Chevy bowtie engraved on it, which keeps you from seeing into the trunk, and a roll cage. There is no console - you just get the shifter which is installed on the transmission tunnel. The engine is also somewhat simplified. The real eyecatcher is the tall intake that will stick outside the hood (the hatch is nice and deeply etched for easy removal), and you have the option of topping it all off with dual air cleaners, dual velocity stacks, or a snorkel, which I didn't care for that much, so, I'm leaving it off and letting the other stuff do its magic. Edited April 5, 2015 by fseva
nitro norman Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I've always liked this kit. With a little work, you can make something really special with it. By the way, the chassis fits great under the AMT 55 Chevy, if you want to build a Pro Street 55.
freakshow12 Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I have built both as well, currently working with the revell kit. Stretched the rear wheel openings 3 scale inches to make the tires fit better
Snake45 Posted April 6, 2015 Posted April 6, 2015 I've always liked this kit. With a little work, you can make something really special with it. By the way, the chassis fits great under the AMT 55 Chevy, if you want to build a Pro Street 55. Yeah, that would work, as the GM '64-'67 A bodies had the same 115" wheelbase as the '55-'57 Chevs. Needless to say, the chassis will work under any 1/25 '64-'67 intermediate--GTO, 4-4-2, whatever. And all it would take to fit it under any '68-'72 GM A body would be to chop 3 scale inches out of it (112" wheelbase).
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now