SEARCH SCALEAUTOMAG.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

The Overlord-Foose FD-100 Pickup

689 views
12 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
The Overlord-Foose FD-100 Pickup
Posted by mrmike on Sunday, August 27, 2017 7:08 AM

I stopped at Hobby Lobby Friday to look for some paint for myself and some moss for the wife's planting project and I just had to look at the model kits while I was there.  I picked up the Foose Ford FD-100 Pickup (aka The Overlord) with a 40% off coupon on my phone.  I had read and heard a lot of rave reviews about this kit and had to tear into it when I got home.  The second baggie I pulled out of the box turned my excitement into disappointment-a baggie with two metal axles.  In my mind, all I could see was an old AMT kit as I pulled the instructions from the box.  

The instructions showed one metal axle for the rear axle which is fine, but one for the front suspension!  ACK!!!  I now see having to fill the holes in the oil pan, the notches in the frame, and replacing the metal axle with two short pieces of styrene rod to locate the front wheels.  I don't recall seeing or hearing anything about a front metal axle on this kit anywhere and now it makes me wonder where Revell is going with this type of kit molding.  Is it to make the kit for young modelers to play with after building it?

I am a long time modeler with a good skill set and I can overcome these disappointing "flaws" (my terminology) in what has been deemed a really good kit.  But, I wonder?  Is this where Revell is going with creating new model kits?  Is this the future of our hobby?  I know I should be posing these questions at Revell on their website, but I am also looking for some feedback from actual builders here on this forum.

This kit has been classified as a Skill Level 4 by Revell's new rating system, which in my mind just makes it more difficult for a new builder to pick up a kit.  Let's just muck up the rating system and confuse everyone!  When Revell started with the metal axle pins in their kits some time ago, I wondered to myself, is this the future or just something different to mount the wheels.  After ten years of new model kits, I find this and now my wondering has turned to concern.  Is this the future of model kits?  

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    August, 2010
Posted by carnut5767 on Tuesday, August 29, 2017 7:44 PM

You seem to be over-reacting to a minor engineering element.  There is indeed a metal axle for the front suspension but it hides nicely behind the waterpump, hugging along the bottom suspension crossmember.  When the kit is complete you will have to look hard to see it, especially if you paint the small area that runs on each side of the engine as it exits behind the waterpump the same color as the crossmember.  Since you consider yourself a modeler with a good skill set I imagine you can overcome this "flaw" in short order.  It's a nice kit of a great subject and I have no idea why they rated it a Skill Level 4.  Probably because guys that are not 70 and used to building kits of the 60's with those metal axles might have some trouble figuring out how what to do with those pesky axles.  Hmm

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posted by mrmike on Wednesday, August 30, 2017 3:50 PM

It's like this, I grew up building the model kits of the Sixties that came with two metal axles and four screws and if there is an advancement in kit fidelity, then it is the ability to do away with those metal axles.  Am I over-reacting?  No.  To me, having a metal axle in the front suspension is taking a step back in time to when you build and then play with your model.  I probably can understand this if that is the intended use of a second metal axle.  I don't care what anybody says about that axle, if I or anyone else looks into the engine compartment and sees an axle running though the frame and engine, then it is there and visable.  There is no way of hiding it with paint as it will stand out.  If Revell had stuck to using the axle pins, then it wouldn't be an issue and I wouldn't have posted this.  It would look more realistic if axle pins were used instead of long metal axles.    

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    March, 2006
  • From: Spring, Tx
Posted by modelcarjr on Thursday, August 31, 2017 8:03 PM

Wait until you try to mount the cab! In my opinion this kit was a real disappointment! Thumbs Down

If you cannot have a good time, what kinda time can you have? JR

Next on the bench:  Another 1970 Hemi 'Cuda, 1958 Chevy Impala, 1987 Buick GNX, 1950 Chevy Pick-up, Indy Reynard, 1965 Corvette, probably not in this order.

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posted by mrmike on Saturday, September 02, 2017 8:28 AM

I will have to watch for that when I build my kit!

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    August, 2010
Posted by carnut5767 on Monday, September 11, 2017 11:54 AM

For the record, the Foose Caddy Eldorod also has metal axles so if the axles freak you out be forewarned.  Also for the record, before totally condemning these kits for having that dreaded metal axle you might build one of these kits first to see how "hidden" these axles are.  They are inside the confines of a crossmember and behind the water pump.  If you dont see them why worry about it?  I am in the process of building both kits now and see no problem whatsoever, in fact they add strength.  Someone mentioned the cab fit on the truck-  it tends to be a tight fit on the back edges.  A small amount of filing on the lower fender area where the cab and the fenders meet, and notching a little out will easily take care of the fitment.  I just dont see the point of ratting out a manufacturer for small things like this a Skill Two modeler can take care of in 5 seconds.  Life aint perfect, people.

 

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posted by mrmike on Monday, September 11, 2017 2:18 PM

carnut5767, I think you missed the point of my posting.  I think Revell is taking a step backwards for including two metal axles in this new tool kit.  Kit fidelity has been compromised!  I know I can fix this to my satisfaction, but what about the future?  I would rather have the front wheels operate independantly of each other like on a 1:1 vehicle.  

I tend to shy away from kits (particularly older AMT kits) that have the dreaded hole in the engine block/oil pan feature.  It is more work to fix this feature!  What if I or some other modeler wanted to use that engine in a street rod or hot rod where the entire engine is exposed?  You got to cover up the hole in the engine block or oil pan with styrene or sprue.  It's just more work just to get it looking correct!

I think this direction that Revell is taking is going to make what could be a great model into a toy.  Just build it and then play with it.  Just my two cents! My 2 Cents   

  

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    August, 2010
Posted by carnut5767 on Monday, September 11, 2017 4:01 PM

I see what you are saying but dont agree with you at all.  You are comparing the old AMT and other kits of a bygone era to this one and there are loads of differences.  You dont have a metal axle going through an engine block so your reference to that is erroneous.  And you seem to base your entire argument on a comparison to those old kits.  If you cant see the axle when its built why worry about it?  The Foose Caddy and F100 are hardly "toys."  I seriously doubt you have taken the time to partially assemble either of these kits to see how they really go together or you would not be making such an argument.  (unless you just like to argue for no reason)  I have lambasted Revell and other manufacturers many times for doing dumb things so I dont forgive lots of things but your invalid argument against these two kits for having a metal axle seems ludicrous at best.  To sum it up, dont compare these kits to an AMT kit made in 1960.

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posted by mrmike on Monday, September 11, 2017 4:48 PM

I didn't ask for you to agree with me.  I was looking for opinions and to create a discussion and now you bash me for having my own opinion.  I will no longer continue this discussion with you.  You seem to be looking for an argument and I will not give you one.    

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    April, 2017
Posted by aliasT.W. on Wednesday, September 13, 2017 6:17 PM

Mr.Mike I was equally shocked to see Revell revert back to the whole metal axle thing.My first look at this was opening the '68 mustang from a while back.I agree, and as in chess, any step back is a wasted move. Bill.

 

  • Member since
    August, 2010
Posted by carnut5767 on Wednesday, September 13, 2017 9:10 PM

Let's see now.  You created a post supposedly for "discussion" and "opinions" and when you get some discussion and opinion that opposes your way of thinking you get all bent and take your ball and go home.  I used some common sense reasoning, having actually built this kit and working on the Foose Caddy now, to try to explain that these axles are hidden.  Other than the fact that you happened to notice a metal axle, I dont see that we need to discuss this silly thread either.  I will enjoy my great Foose kits with their metal axles and maybe you can find someone who will take that horrible kit off your hands.  Happy trails, pardner.

  • Member since
    August, 2005
  • From: Nashua, New Hampshire
Posted by mrmike on Thursday, September 14, 2017 8:23 AM

aliasT.W.

Mr.Mike I was equally shocked to see Revell revert back to the whole metal axle thing.My first look at this was opening the '68 mustang from a while back.I agree, and as in chess, any step back is a wasted move. Bill.

 

 

Bill, it does seem like Revell taking a step back by going this route.  I have built the diecast Bullitt Mustang years ago and have the plastic '68 Mustang GT in the stash and I have noticed the gap between the engine compartment and front fenders and the screw holes in the chassis.  I can understand some of the issues when converting a diecast kit to a plastic kit.  I hope Revell doesn't continue down this path with the metal axles, but it is what it is.  I can't control Revell's decisions, but I hope that they can do better in the future.  

carnut5767, I'm still here and haven't "taken my ball and gone home" nor would I find "somebody to take that horrible kit off my hands".  I will build it, but minus at least one metal axle.  I guess kit fidelity doesn't matter to some people, but kit fidelity is the reason why I started this thread and if the topic seems silly to you, then don't bother replying to it.  Enjoy building your Foose Caddy!    

 

 

"That's Spenser with an 'S' like the poet." Robert Urich Spenser For Hire 1985 

On my bench-1962 Ford Thunderbird Sports Roadster; 1968 Dodge Charger R/T

Classic Plastic Model Club 

They call me MrMike!

  • Member since
    February, 2016
Posted by Plowboy on Thursday, September 14, 2017 9:17 AM

I don't own either kit yet. So, I can't give an opinion of them. But, what I've noticed so far concerning these kits is that Revell pretty much nailed the look of both of them as far as accurately depicting the full scale versions. Does that mean they spent more time making sure they looked right and less time on the details of the chassis? Who knows? But, if they did, I'll gladly accept the trade off. I'll take an accurate looking model with less detail over an inaccurate model with more detail any day. Most of my favorite models have metal axles and when they're setting on the shelf, you can't even tell it.

Something else to consider is that all kit companies are facing a shrinking market. Every year or even month, there are people who pass away or get out of the hobby. So, they're facing an uphill battle. This may be what they have to do to stay in business longer. As always, the best way to let a kit company know your feelings about a model is with your wallet. 

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

FREE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER
SUBSCRIBER-ONLY CONTENT