1/25 '53 Chevy Panel Revell

[Mark]

The '53/'54 always had the "do it yourself" opening doors (also the sedan's trunk lid, and delivery rear door). Revell did the '55, '56, and '57 Chevies (including the '57 Nomad) with separate parts, but the '53/'54 kits were done later. Revell also did a Porsche 911 kit with the "do it yourself" doors. Later variations on that kit include the parts but don't mention the feature; it was tough for younger modelers to do.

[Craig Irwin]

The headlights and taillights are "Frenched", a custom touch that is out of place on a gasser, and a royal pain if you want to build a stocker. I realy wish Revell would have retooled them.

[kingiguana]

Yes, frenched lights don't fit a gasser. But the headlights should still have reflectors. You can see the front tires through them. Also, as with most of Revell's older kits, the box art always exceeded the contents of said box. They were always full of flash and mold lines even years ago. And with age it gets worse and worse with every re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-issue. I have a 56 chevy (the old one with opening doors ) that a friend wanted me to paint the body for a slot car. the thing has so much flash, if it were a real car the flash would be fins anywhere from 4 inches to 12 inches or more wide/thick. I told him use it as a demo derby car and go get the newer 56 Delray kit. Plus that 56 is so warped its beyond acceptable. Its one of the Hot Rod series cars. I wonder how many people bought these things and gave up on the hobby after trying to build one of these ?

Edited December 29, 2013 by kingiguana

[Longbox55]

I don't think the truck would be the right choice for frame or suspension..this is a car-based sedan delivery, so the '51 Chevy car kits are the right choice.

I wasn't quite clear in my post. I meant that the past issues of the Sedan Delivery has a pretty much stock frame and suspension, rather than meaning that the '50 pickup kit has a stock suspension/frame for it. The engine and trans could be used with some alteration, but would only be accurate for a '53/stick shift. The '53 automatic and '54 manual and automatic would be a different engine. The AMT '53 Corvette would be a better choice there, for '54 you would want to swap the rocker cover for the AMT '60 Chevy.

Yes, frenched lights don't fit a gasser. But the headlights should still have reflectors. You can see the front tires through them. Also, as with most of Revell's older kits, the box art always exceeded the contents of said box. They were always full of flash and mold lines even years ago. And with age it gets worse and worse with every re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-issue. I have a 56 chevy (the old one with opening doors ) that a friend wanted me to paint the body for a slot car. the thing has so much flash, if it were a real car the flash would be fins anywhere from 4 inches to 12 inches or more wide/thick. I told him use it as a demo derby car and go get the newer 56 Delray kit. Plus that 56 is so warped its beyond acceptable. Its one of the Hot Rod series cars. I wonder how many people bought these things and gave up on the hobby after trying to build one of these ?

Tell me about it. I've had 2 of those kits, the white one from the Hot Rod series, and an older issue from the mid '70s. Both are warped to no end.

[ChrisBcritter]

The headlights on those 53/54 chevies have clear headlight lenses, but no buckets. They all come with inner door panels and hinges and retainers. A modeler is expected to scribe the doors open. Back in the day I believe some of the kits came with the doors as separate items. I believe I had a couple of the cars and one had the doors molded shut, and the other had them opened. Also the tail lights in these things also have no bezels or real detail.

The headlights and taillights actually are extended from the body a bit; the headlights can be trimmed back and chrome bezels added. The taillights will work for a '53 if you cut them back almost even with the end of the fender, then use the lights from the Monogram '53. For a '54 you'd need to trim the back of the lenses about 3/32" to countersink them, then trim the edge of the opening a bit from the bottom up, leaving a lip flaring out at the top. A little Bare-Metal will finish the job.

Now let's talk about reshaping the top of the windshield... Honestly, sometimes I think Revell was in a real hurry when they engineered this kit.

[kingiguana]

As for the headlights, I painted up a barn find 53/43 sedan for a friend as a slot car body. I used baremetal and made some headlight bezels. And with the taillights I painted them red and white and used some silver as the trim that separates the taillight from the back up lights. Since its was done as a rust bucket I guess it didn't matter since it wasn't going to be sitting on a shelf or a contest table.

[62rebel]

Revell supposedly addressed the issue of the windshield top edge LAST issue, but I didn't buy one to see. if they've recreated the original sponsor decal sheet they USED to include in this kit (and most of their others IIRC) i'll buy it to get one.

this kit was the third or fourth model car I built as a kid. Christmas present from my cousin Paul. I would love to do the box-art car for nostalgia's sake.

here's "cutting edge" kit design for you: this kit and the related sedan have...

SEPARATE DOOR HANDLES.

the tri-five series had all kinds of trick details, if you recall: door panels that had upholstery on one side and "bare metal" detail on the other; raising quarter windows; choices of trim level for side chrome, etc....

and the best representation of a small block in any kit at the time.

[Daddyfink]

What a bummer to open this kit and find out the wheels on the box art build were not inside. The graphics were sooooo...late '80s.

Those wheels look like modified rims out of the Max Rat Chevelle! Look at the "lug nuts"

And the hokey graphics also match the funky ones on the Max Rat

[Luc Janssens]

Pulled this kit after reading this tread, a 98 or so ltd edition, took the body out and oh man, it needs a total panel line makeover with a BMF panel scriber, that bad, best to take out the dremel and turn this kit into a abandoned roadside vehicle.

Anyway this kit is one of the reasons, I never understood why a couple years into the merger, the Revell brand was chosen over the Monogram name, when the company went from Revell-Monogram to Revell.

[1972coronet]

Anyway this kit is one of the reasons, I never understood why a couple years into the merger, the Revell brand was chosen over the Monogram name, when the company went from Revell-Monogram to Revell.

I heard that ! I still remember the 1988 "merger" of Monogram and Revell . I got into an argument with a friend over the origins of the 1988 Motorcraft Pro Stock Thunderbird ; I asserted that its origins are of Monogram tooling , whereas he saw the "Revell" name on the box and summarily dismissed it as "junk" . He just couldn't see beyond the name ; he was jaded by Revell's garbage kits from our youths in the 1970's ; his disdain was justified . On the other hand , I saw a cool then-new 1988 Thunderbird body as a Pro Stock and said , Yes !

[von Zipper]

Thanks for the nice comments on the 2 dr. sedan I built !

(Being a scale snob) It is the only choice for a 1/25 scale '53/'54 Chevy in plastic.

I had a few of the older issued sedan delivery kits with opening doors back then but glued the doors shut-It was my only defense.

But I'll be the first to say those kits are poorly done at best. The yellow sedan delivery pictured above had panel lines were so shallow-even after scribing them, after primer, paint and clear the panel lines were gone. The Model King 2 dr. body was molded in white but was almost see thru-maybe opaque would be the right word ?

Even though those kits are rough as a cob of corn-I'm glad their still around.

[Edsel-Dan]

Translucent would be correct.

Opaque means Solid color. Not see-through

I have a coupe Parts kits of these.

Not sure what to do with them, as they never had a

full stock option.

[mnwildpunk]

Idk this kit has a warm place in my heart. It was the first kit I took my time on and sort of got me hooked on the hobby. Granted it is not a show stopper but I always find it a fun build. Does this release have the high in the sky front end or the 90s lower front end? Even though it is basic I like the 348-409 with dual carbs

Edited February 6, 2014 by mnwildpunk

['70 Grande]

Kit comes with both front-suspension set-ups, (raised leaf-springs with straight front axle for building a gasser and factory-stock front suspension).

[A.R.C.]

I had the Red, White and Blue panel back in the 70`s as well. Without a doubt its theee worst model I`ve ever tried to build. I built the blown 409 and put it into a 63 Vette along with the slicks and sacrificed the rest to the firecracker gods.