Mustang

[mike united]

Just found this kit on E-bay, never seen it before.
Anyone know if its any good.

[BullittStang]

It's what you would expect from Tamiya. The only real drawback is that it's curbside.

[CamaroSSBoy346]

uh... i dont think so. I've seen a cobra r in a magizine by tamiyia, and it was box stock (thats why i see a pair of heads and the hood off the body) i've been lookin for this kit, but i'd rather the the volvo 850 estate before any mustang

[mike united]

The volvo 850 estate is also on eBay ....................

[BullittStang]

Originally posted by CamaroSSBoy346
uh... i dont think so. I've seen a cobra r in a magizine by tamiyia, and it was box stock (thats why i see a pair of heads and the hood off the body) i've been lookin for this kit, but i'd rather the the volvo 850 estate before any mustang

You're probably right. I'm probably thinkin of the Mustang GT that Tamiya released. I think that one was curbside.

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

I disagree with BullitStang on a couple of key issues. First, it's one of Tamiya's worst models. Second, it is full detail...but that's not the whole story.

The body is too wide. The front end sits too high. The engine detail is pretty bad, it's based on an earlier curbside GT convertible, and the exhuast headers are especially crude. The fuel cell (or lack thereof) is incorrect, nothing like the rectangular unit on the real car. The interior details like dash, seats are incorrect (they're for a GT, not a Cobra R which had no a/c, radio, and very basic V6 seats).

Good points? The rear seat area (no seat, open bulkhead into the trunk)is correct. The wheels are very nice. Lower the front end, and it looks very nice, but as for it being anything near a replica or of typical full-detail Tamiya quality, it is not. That said, it's the only Cobra R model, and if you are only interested in outward appearance, it's nice.

My Cobra R:

[BullittStang]

Hey I admitted my mistake...but I still think it's better than the Revell Mustang kits. The best 94-98 Mustangs are AMT's kit...IMHO

This is the Tamiya Mustang that's curbside.

[YJGWRacing]

i just want the hood off that car

[reveller]

I don't know about Tamiya's 'stang but I think Monogram's 1994 Mustang GT was very good in terms of detail and quality. The only thing I thought was bad was the door handles weren't molded the same size. I had AMT's 1995 Mustang GT and when I compared Monogram and AMT side by side, the Monogram kit wins hands down. The AMT parts were simplified and some were oversized. But that's just my opinion, you might want to get a Mustang from all the three manufactures (Tamiya, AMT and Mongram) to compare if you really like the Mustang.

reveller

[ZoomZoomMX-5]

Originally posted by BullittStang
Hey I admitted my mistake...but I still think it's better than the Revell Mustang kits. The best 94-98 Mustangs are AMT's kit...IMHO

This is the Tamiya Mustang that's curbside.

You replied while I was typing! The Revell/Monogram kits are still somewhat better than the Tamiya, especially considering their price. At least they are full detail, unlike Tamiya. You are correct that the AMT Mustang is the best Mustang kit, the kit was developed with Ford's computer design tapes so that's why it looks the best and has the most accurate detail. Most people never give AMT the proper credit for doing such a good job on the Mustang and Cobra. Their C5 Corvettes suck, while Revell's are really nice. The Revellogram Mustang and the Tamiya both have some proportion issues. Any one of them will look good when finished properly.

The Tamiya convertible represents the export version, the hardtop is modeled after the extremely rare Ford option that only a few were ever made (I've only seen one on a showroom, next to two Cobra R's). It also features optional flares that were used on export versions.

[CamaroSSBoy346]

that blue tamiyia GT, it says convertable, but it has a hard top?

[BullittStang]

In 1994, Ford offered an optional hardtop for Mustang convertibles. It's actually pretty neat, you put the hardtop on...and you wouldn't know it was a converitble unless you looked inside. The kit comes with that option.

[BullittStang]

Originally posted by reveller
I don't know about Tamiya's 'stang but I think Monogram's 1994 Mustang GT was very good in terms of detail and quality. The only thing I thought was bad was the door handles weren't molded the same size. I had AMT's 1995 Mustang GT and when I compared Monogram and AMT side by side, the Monogram kit wins hands down. The AMT parts were simplified and some were oversized. But that's just my opinion, you might want to get a Mustang from all the three manufactures (Tamiya, AMT and Mongram) to compare if you really like the Mustang.

reveller

I have to disagree. Frankly I think AMT's kit wins hand down...especially when it comes to the interior. With the AMT kit you get a full interior..even the inside the of the pillars are modeled. Also..I find the details on AMT's interiors and chassis are more pronounced an sharper than Revell's...especially with the dashboard controls and radio controls.

[reveller]

Maybe I need to get both the AMT and Monogram/Revell Mustang again t(since I no longer have the ones that I built years ago).

ZoomZoomMX-5, you are right about the C5s though. I have both AMT (50th anniversary convertible) and Revell (Z06) kits and Revell is definately better in this case.

Cheers,

reveller

[primera man]

Although it has a few problems with the kit, it still looks great and even though the engine detail is not the greatest it should look good when all done.
I got the same kit a few months ago on a sale and will get around to building it one day.
Sits rather high and needs a little lowering job