Question : AMT '71 and '73 Mustang kits

They looked like the old crappy MPC kits I remember. Are these them or did AMT shoot there own way back when?

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB
Loading thread data ...

Something got lost in translation. Let's try again:

I saw these kits at Hobby Lobby this week. They looked like the old crappy MPC kits I remember. Are these them or did AMT shoot there own way back when?

I'm deliberating over whether they're worth it to pick up. Of course considering the other choice for this body style is nowhere in sight. ;-)

TIA

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB

IIRC (according to the conversations about these two on Hobby Heaven's MB, prior to their release), one is AMT the other MPC. Don't remember which was which. Even the Polar lights release of Blue Max funny car is the re-pop of the original. I've got the original but I'll be danged if I remeber if it is AMT or MPC

-- Chuck Ryan snipped-for-privacy@REMOVEearthlink.net Springfield OH

Reply to
Charles Ryan

IIRC both companies did their versions of those years. You'd have to buy one and do a comparison. I've got the SAE which reviews all the stang kits if you'd like me to dig it out. What didn't you like about the MPC kits? Most modelers I talk to said they thought the MPC kits were superior to the AMT offerings. Both companies molds are now owned by ERTL/racing chumpions.

fwiw the Blue Max is probably an MPC issue as they were doing a lot of drag cars at that point. hth

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

Reply to
Keeper

I'm leaning that way. Probably drop in sometime this evening.

Well I guess it started off on a sour note from the moment I opened the box. The boxart showed a '71 but the kit inside was a '73. I was (and still am) a big Mustang fan so I knew the difference; being young and dumb, the difference at the time mattered. I remember the build being less than spectacular. IIRC the wheel options were sparse, engine options inc. an incorrect Boss 429, the ass end of the car sat up too high, etc. Probably more to do with my juvenile modelling skills than the kit, so I'll give 'em another shot. I mightbe able to beat one into shape now. Besides, the choices for '71-73s is pretty thin.

Thanks for the help, I am curious to see hear what SAE's opinion was if you come across the issue. But don't tear up the house on my account. ;-)

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB

The "'71" is the original MPC kit. The '73 is the old AMT "Warren Tope" car which is set up for racing. Most details (marker lights, nameplates, etc.) that make for a Stock car are gone. The interior is set-up for racing also. I won't say it's impossible to make a factory car out of it but it'll be 'challenging'!

Bill Banaszak, MFE

Reply to
Mad Modeller

I can definitely verify the above. Between the two I'll get one '73 Mach I out of it - maybe Eleanor from "Gone in 60 Seconds" - and enough spare parts to play around.

Thanks for going thru the trouble of tracking down the info, Bill.

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB

No problem. Most reference material here at the Crapatorium is logically organized. It's just that sometimes there's a lotta crap to be moved before I can get to it! 8^) I know that never happens to most of you! 8^)

IIRC Ford kept the general body for two years and changed the front/rear end every year. Except they kept the 73 an extra year before the total body change in 74. Or was the general body of the 73 noticably different?

Both AMT and MPC did annual kits for 71 through 73 -all fastbacks. Here's what SAE has to say:

AMT #T114 1971 Sharing some parts with the '70 edition, this is otherwise an entirely new kit. New body and interior, 428 and Boss 429 engines included.

MPC #7113 1971 Still sharing the same basic chassis and powertrain options with the earlier '69-70 kits, an entirely new body and interior are featured in this kit. Almost spoiled by the inclusion of goofy Zinger-like parts.

MPC/ERTL #6429 1971 Boss 351 A minor but very inaccurate rework of the MPC '73 tool. Kit has a '73 body, bumpers, wheels and interior. The stock '73 front grille is the "custom" option for the dummied -up psuedo '71 grille. Engines are the same old 289 and 428 Cobra Jet with the exception of inaccurate "351 Cleveland" valve covers for the 428 CJ to make it look like the 351C. A really nice set of stock Boss 351 striping and markings (in silver) are included, as well as some engine and underhood markings. Only criticism of the decals is that the "Boss 351" lettering is not in the actual shadow style (then again, neither are Fred Cady's Boss 351 decals.) Major work would have to be done to this kit to turn it into an accurate '71 Boss 351.

AMT #T425 1973 Similar to previous year's annual kit with some optional parts differences and annual revisions. Featured full sets of stock Mach I graphics in both black and white.

MPC #7313 1973 Similar to previous year's kit but with body and interior revisions.

End quote. As I remember, ERTL screwed up the MPC '73 mold in the eighties. I think I've got one. And now they've re-released it. Seems a shame they can't find the right parts but now that it's racing chumpions' ball game they're happy to chuck out toys not models. hth

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

Reply to
Keeper

Wow, never saw that one! What year was this released? It wasn't the race option on the original annual was it? Drag racing right? tia,

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

Reply to
Keeper

Well, it wasn't that long ago I read it over on the HH board plus I was at a car club meeting today and saw both kits for sale. That must have helped freshen the memory. :)

Today was the auction meeting. In the bargain of the year I came home with a functional CD player for $2. I also picked up a started Duesenberg roadster kit. I'll have to use my touring car kit's instructions as the roadster's are AWOL.

Bill Banaszak, MFE

Reply to
Mad-Modeller

The big problem that RC/Ertl has it that they let everybody go who knew squat. The Chinese know nothing about American cars except what they may have seen in the past several years. They may have the tooling and not know it or they may not or it could even be in a job shop somewhere in Detroit like the '34 Ford truck. As much as that tooling has been on trucks moving around the country and now overseas it doesn't surprise me that they can't find stuff. Heck, I'm still looking for stuff I put 'somewhere so it'll be safe' the last time I moved. ;]

Bill Banaszak, MFE

Reply to
Mad-Modeller

I've got an 'under construction' report of the 1988 issue of the MPC 1971 Boss on my website:

formatting link
Perhaps it is of some use to you guys. I've learned many more details of the kit in the various Mustang threads that you started, and I will try to update the page accordingly. If there are mistakes on the current version of the page, please let me know!

Rob de Bie My models:

formatting link
Me 163B site:
formatting link

Reply to
Rob de Bie

Nice review. The version I first built back in the late 70s/early 80s was the Street Machine release showing a white car with blue stripes, as you mention.

The engine options in the MPC kit are a disaster. Off of memory these are the possibilities I recall in the '71-73 model years.

250 six - standard base engine on all Mustangs except Mach I

302-2v - base engine on the Mach I (in '69-70, base engine was 351-2V). No

4V 302s offered in '71-73.

351-2V - Either a Windsor or a Cleveland (after 1969). Ford used both interchangeably in the Mustang and made no effort to differentiate between the two - they both used the same engine code of H (IIRC). 2V Windsors were engine options into 1973. I have read and heard that in 1973 if you wanted your Ram Air to be functional you had to choose a 351-2V engine. Otherwise, the scoop inlets were blocked off by two little honeycomb panels.

351-4V - In '69 all 351-4Vs were Windsors rated around 290hp. I owned one of these cars after I graduated high school. The engine had been reworked by Holman-Moody :-). Fast mutha. Let's just say I was not surprised when the future of Ford SVT engines of the 351 variety were based on the Windsor years later.

351-4V - In 1970-71 all 351-4Vs were Clevelands at around 300hp. M engine codes. Quench style combustion chambers, big honking ports. I also have some experience with one of these in a '69 body. Scary fast.

351-4V CJ - Introduced in 1970 and carried into '73, these were Cleveland engines with 4 bolt mains, lower compression cylinder heads with 4V ports and 2V combustion chambers. I'm thinking the engine code was Q. In 1973, this engine was as good as it got for Mustangs at around 250hp at the rear wheels.

351-4V HO - The Boss engine, 335hp R Code engine. Mechanical cam, all other

351s had hydraulic bumpsticks. Everyone knows the '71 story, but the engine soldiered on into 1972 in a detuned version (275hp net) that was offered as an engine option supposedly for any Mustang model. I can only verify that you could get it in '72 Mach Is because I knew a guy that owned one and saw the car and the documentation with my own eyes. Also saw this engine - apparently factory installed - in a '72 Torino GT. Frankly, I've seen more '71 Boss cars than I have '72 HOs.

429-4V CJ/SCJ. Based on the canted valve engine first intro'd on '68 TBirds. Supposedly a general Mustang engine option I think I read that most of the

1800 or so built were in fastbacks or Mach Is. 429s take the place of the 428 CJs and SCJs of the 68-70 model years. Don't get hung up on the CJ and Boss mythology. Like the 351s, just about any 429 was fast or at the very least had the potential. We owned a '70 LTD with a 429-4V Premium Fuel (non CJ) engine when I was a kid. My mother never knew about it (until recently), but my brother had a lot of fun when he turned 16 smoking the tires off that big beast in the high school parking lot. Rated at 370HP, we sold the car years later to a friend with a '71 fastback. That engine, well - we'll just say the engine lived up to its potential. Wicked fast. ;-)

All of that is off of memory so I probably screwed something up there, but dems da choices for '71-73. So looking into the MPC box and seeing 289s with Cleveland-looking valve covers and a 428 with 429 Boss valve covers is enough to make a Mustang fan sick enough to conclude that the '71-73 Mustang is a prime candidate for a 2004 new mold update. Especially when it looks like the 1/18th diecast guys are getting treated better than the plastic guys when it comes to Mustangs.

Hood vents or louvers are a no-go in '71-73, not to be found on either the Ram Air hood or the standard "flat" hood. There was no need for them.

The fuel cap is as far as I can recall was strictly a '71 option. If you build the car as a '73 you need the twist on style you describe in your review.

The hood (Std and Ram Air both) had trim pieces on the leading edge that screwed on with acorn nuts. This allowed for interchanging between a chrome piece for chrome bumper cars and a painted piece for the new rubber bumpers. The Ram Air Scoops are cast pieces similar to the rear quarter panel extensions. They screw into the hood in a similar manner.

You are again correct in that they should have continued the fender-door panel line across the rocker panels - that is how the real ones attach. That is true for 69-70 as well.

As you caught the MPC trunk decal is off. Fortunately, the plastic you're supposed to apply it to looks pretty good. Unlike the tail end of the AMT '73 Mustang. The AMT folks really messed up their attempt.

Those sport style wheel covers can also be donated to a '70 Mustang if you're getting tired of seeing too many Magnum equipped Pony cars on your shelf. The 70 versions of this wheel cover are something of a reverse "negative" from the '71s. In '70, what is black on the '71 version is chrome, and the centers are a dull grey instead of shiny like on the '71s. The '71s look a lot nicer, I had them on my '73 Mach I because there was something about the factory slotted aluminum mags I didn't like at the time.

Last thing, the '71 stripe kit (without Boss or Mach I lettering) was an option on Mustangs all the way into 1973 (except '73 Mach Is of course). You could option them on sportsroofs, convertibles and hardtops. Supposedly, Ford debuted a '71 hardtop or Grande with these new stripes ahead of the all new Mach I and Boss models triggering complaints from within the Ford racing camp that the new competition models had been robbed of some of their thunder.

When I was a kid I used to commit this stuff to memory like there was going to be a test on it some day. Seems like a long time ago.

I just got to the bottom of your review and see you've linked up to some sites and included a lot of details on the '71-73 years. I'll have to check them out when I do my '73 build up. THX.

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

It's a short list, but they were all fun:

'73 Mach I w/302-2V. Fun car and fun time to be a 16 year old. '69 Mach I w/351-4V. Holman_moody massaged - smokin! '69 Boss 302 w/351 CJ brought up to Boss 351 standards. Teeth rattling. '70 Boss 302 w/ Boss 302. Mechanical cam symphony.

Reply to
WmB

I had a '70 Grandé, VIN OTO4M111453, with that engine. Sucker went like a scalded rabbit, especially after I added a Torquer intake manifold, Holley 650, and Hooker headers. The car was a real 'sleeper' since I left it bone stock on the outside, including the vinyl roof.

I bought it new through the AAFES vendor in Mannheim, Germany and kept it till '78 when I got transferred from Hawaii to Japan. People told me it was too big for the roads there so I got rid of it. Big mistake - when I got there I found out some guys were driving big full-sized station wagons around with no problem at all. :(

The worst thing about it was that the car was built in Antwerp and was actually a (now rare) T5, not a Mustang. I wonder what it would be worth if I still had it today.....

Reply to
Al Superczynski

Probably a zillion dollars! If only we could have kept all the cars of our youth.

What did they charge servicemen for shipping their vehicles to new assignments? tia,

The Keeper (of too much crap!)

Reply to
Keeper

One of the fastest and most overlooked Mustangs is a '70 Mach I with a

351-4V Premium Fuel "M" motor. Really as your Grande proved any body style will do, the engine doesn't know the difference. The good thing with the Mach I was some of its std equipment (comp suspension and steering) shortened the list a little on the options you needed to check off to close the gap with the Boss cars. Checking off the 351-4V option was a very good first step.

After that a '71 Mach I with the same motor is no slouch. It is so close to a '71 Boss 351 in most respects, it is one of the reasons the Boss 351 cars were shunned by collectors for many years. That and the love-hate relatiosnhip with the '71-'73 body. I had a line on a nice Boss 351 in the mid 80s for $4000. That seemed like a lot of money at the time, but looking back it would have returned the investment in full within 5 years - and that ain't shabby. Some guys made out a little worse (read on).

It would fetch quite a few model kits I would imagine. Here's a heartbreaker - The owner of the gym where I worked out a few years ago caught me one day in the parking lot when I was pulling off in my Boss. He told me the sad tale of when he was about 22 he had picked up a '68 GT-500KR off a used car lot on the cheap in the mid 70s. He had it for about a year when a guy offered to trade him heads up for what he said was a pretty nice '71-'72 Vette. He said the idea of studding around town and out at the clubs in a Vette looked too good to him at the time, so he made the trade. He had a really sick look on his face when he asked me what a '68 Shelby was fetching these days.

All I could tell him was - "Oh... about eight of those '71 Vettes". ;-)

Ah to be young and dumb again.

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB

E-4s with over four years service and all E-5s and above were entitled to ship one POV at government expense to/from overseas locations where POVs were authorized. I'm pretty sure that it's the same now.

Reply to
Al Superczynski

My Grande had those suspension and steering upgrades since it was built to European specs.

Reply to
Al Superczynski

Well I better quit before I cheer you up any more. ;-)

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

Reply to
WmB

Not to worry - I'll always have the memories. ;)

Reply to
Al Superczynski

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.