|
Post by Ellis Kendrick on Nov 2, 2006 21:49:20 GMT -6
Could some well-informed modeler out there in CC2 Land tell me what the structural differences are between the recently re-released MPC Tiger Shark and the original car Craft Dream Rod?
|
|
|
Post by rickg on Nov 2, 2006 23:40:00 GMT -6
Hi Ellis, as far as I know, there aren't any Structural differences, Only Cosmetic.
|
|
|
Post by RatRod on Nov 3, 2006 0:53:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by MM on Nov 3, 2006 3:34:53 GMT -6
cosmetic changes are not exactly what really expects you. I have both kits and here are only a few things that will cost you more than a few hours of bodywork. Look at the pics in the links in Ricks posting above, click on the pics to enlarge and you can see what I mean: the Car Craft has "open" fenders - front and rear - the tiger has them closed and this way a quite different beltline. The hood is different -> scoop, (longer softer ?). the tiger has body panels low between the doors I think the CC frontpanel is designed with softer lines - also the rearpanel. and of course nearly all the body datail parts are different. These kits are like brothers, they have obviously the "same parents" - but they are not twins. Markus
|
|
|
Post by crazylegs on Nov 4, 2006 2:49:30 GMT -6
l also have both kits and was going to cast the dream rod since we now have a donor kit but really didn't get a very good response which l was surprised because l was only going to charge for materials and postage only (about $12.00)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2006 4:39:45 GMT -6
I musta missed that post, If that situation changes, count me in.
|
|
|
Post by theflame on Nov 4, 2006 6:29:00 GMT -6
yeah, me too Krazy. I'll admit, if you mentioned it on the old CC, I probably didnt see it - I didnt check that as often. How many 'in's' do you need to consider making them?
|
|
|
Post by mrmetallic on Nov 4, 2006 7:19:14 GMT -6
l also have both kits and was going to cast the dream rod since we now have a donor kit but really didn't get a very good response which l was surprised because l was only going to charge for materials and postage only (about $12.00) Don't give up man. Maybe try the poll feature here to gauge the response.
|
|
|
Post by A.J. on Nov 4, 2006 10:53:17 GMT -6
I'm wondering if anyone out there knows whether the Tiger Shark was modified from the Dream Rod in kit form? I had always realized that they were from different companies (MPC and AMT respectfully) but never checked to see if they were the same castings of the common parts. Looks like I have something to do today after all. I have both kits and will check it but does anyone know off hand?
A.J.
Joe, you may want to run that post again about the casting. I don't need one but there are some guys here that were interested aside from in this string. I think they all posted in the other string. I remember seeing it. I think you had it in the same string that you talked about casting that really cool engine.
|
|
|
Post by detroithammer on Nov 4, 2006 11:24:19 GMT -6
Let me try this first [/img]<a href="http://photobucket.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h28/detroithammer/dreamtiger8.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a>
|
|
|
Post by Paul B. Canney on Nov 4, 2006 12:41:58 GMT -6
First, Fred Ertl bought AMT, then he bought (saved!) MPC. So the two companies became one huge repository
Fred was the bomb! I think he single handedly saved this hobby
So both were actually MPC tools, so while MPC faded away, the tooling (now AMT) is MPC
I'm wondering if anyone out there knows whether the Tiger Shark was modified from the Dream Rod in kit form? I had always realized that they were from different companies (MPC and AMT respectfully) but never checked to see if they were the same castings of the common parts. Looks like I have something to do today after all. I have both kits and will check it but does anyone know off hand? A.J. Joe, you may want to run that post again about the casting. I don't need one but there are some guys here that were interested aside from in this string. I think they all posted in the other string. I remember seeing it. I think you had it in the same string that you talked about casting that really cool engine.
|
|
|
Post by Paul B. Canney on Nov 4, 2006 12:44:42 GMT -6
you're gettin there. you don't need the <img src stuff here though [img]http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h28/detroithammer/dreamtiger8.jpg[/img] Let me try this first [/img]<a href=" photobucket.com/" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt="Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting"></a>[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Ellis Kendrick on Nov 4, 2006 14:13:36 GMT -6
Hey, Joe! (aka. Krazylegs) Sorry I haven't let you know that I wanted a Dream Rod Resin cast. I couldn't remember who posted that offer but Paul C. sent me your way. YES, YES, YES, I definitely want one. Can't beat $12.00 American! What would you think the shipping would be back here to the states. My zipcode here in Missouri is 64068. I hope ths gets to you. Ellis Kendrick
|
|
|
Post by A.J. on Nov 4, 2006 15:00:08 GMT -6
Well, I understand that AMT owns MPC now but that's not quite what I was driving at. I was more thinking that since the Dream Rod was a mid to late 60s kit and the Tiger Shark was a late 60s kit that MPC must have purchased those molds from AMT in that time frame if it is in fact the same kit. There would have definitely been some major retooling as they were very different rods. Who is Fred by the way Paul? I'm a little lost in that part of the history of these model companies. I haven't read any of the books. First, Fred Ertl bought AMT, then he bought (saved!) MPC. So the two companies became one huge repository
Fred was the bomb! I think he single handedly saved this hobby
So both were actually MPC tools, so while MPC faded away, the tooling (now AMT) is MPC
I'm wondering if anyone out there knows whether the Tiger Shark was modified from the Dream Rod in kit form? I had always realized that they were from different companies (MPC and AMT respectfully) but never checked to see if they were the same castings of the common parts. Looks like I have something to do today after all. I have both kits and will check it but does anyone know off hand? A.J. Joe, you may want to run that post again about the casting. I don't need one but there are some guys here that were interested aside from in this string. I think they all posted in the other string. I remember seeing it. I think you had it in the same string that you talked about casting that really cool engine.
|
|
|
Post by Starry Eyes on Nov 5, 2006 20:22:17 GMT -6
Hey Joe - I have both original kits in kit form .. if you have any specific questions let me know ..
Chuck D.
|
|
|
Post by Paul B. Canney on Nov 5, 2006 20:31:02 GMT -6
yeah, I got one, which is uglier, the 'Bad dream Rod' or the Tiger Shark?
The dream rod was excellent execution of too much asymetrical styling. Sometimes too much is too much.
The Tiger Shark toned down the over outrageousness, but the front pontoons don't make sense with the rest of the car.
It's better as a model than in reality.
Hey Joe - I have both original kits in kit form .. if you have any specific questions let me know .. Chuck D.
|
|
|
Post by gwangiboy on Nov 6, 2006 14:19:03 GMT -6
Just by going over the original box art, I thought the styling of the Tiger Shark looked a lot better ... but I think the Hot Wheels Python tops them both because it simplified the style even further.
Still looks like a fun kit to build ... I'll get around to mine one of these days!
|
|