Revell Ford Escort Rally MkII Review

[porschenut]

Ford Escort Rally MkII
PROS
-Full engine
-Correct(ish) colour guide and decals
-Roll cage and seats look acurate according to my refference
-Rims are also accurate
-Suspension is very detailed, however can be a bit hard to assemble.
-Seperate Exhaust system
-Comes with seatbelt fittings, but no material. (I used masking tape)
-Body has fair detailing

CONS
-The tires are a joke, no tread marking, and have a huge rib on them, also on one side it says "Dunlop" and on the otherside "Good Year", making these tires worthless for a major superdetail project
-The glass parts in the kit are very thick, and should be replaced
-The entire kit is covered in awful mould lines that take a long time and lots of primer to be certainly rid of them

CONCLUSION:
This is a good cheap kit of this car, and can be upgraded with some photoetch which i didnt use, but the detailing is fairly good anyway. If you are a fan of 80's rally cars, then this is a must-have. Its food value for money, at about half the price of a tamiya kit.
Overall I'd Give it 8/10

[freakray]

Rally cars of that generation often ran complete slicks on dry tarmac events - your comment of the tires being a joke for not having a tread pattern is misleading.

[Technoman]

I think there are some 'stance' issues with this car as well that really need to be sorted out for a good full detail project.

[porschenut]

Originally Posted by freakray

Rally cars of that generation often ran complete slicks on dry tarmac events - your comment of the tires being a joke for not having a tread pattern is misleading.

These tyres have a different marking on each side, and so not match my reference even for the tarmac.
Euan (if you want you can prove me wrong...)

[malscar]

Tyre names can be sanded off with wet and dry. Fairly easy. The reason the tyres have both names is Esci used the tyres in their Zakspeed Escort ETCC car which ran Goodyears.

Same with mould lines, just sand them off. I agree the glass is very thick and other than the front windscreen are easy to replace. Tail lights too small (see attached photo). Rollcage is accurate for mid '70s, not late '70s as it requires front half and new rear legs. Rear wheel arches are not the correct forest type. They should not go any higher than the panel crease. Seats you will need to check depending on the car as supplied ones are not accurate. It appears Revell may have modified the rear suspension as the Esci version's stance is fairly accurate for a 'forest' spec car standing still. Most photos show them under power and they did squat a lot.

Remember that this kit was made by Esci in the late '70s/early '80s. It got a lot of use before Esci disappeared. Revell are using those old moulds now, so flash etc is expected. It is not a shake and bake kit.

The attached photo is one I built 20 years ago form the Esci kit. A bit rough as it was only my 2nd car kit.


Mal

[generationx]

The suspension, especially the rear, is completely wrong for a Group 4 Escort - it should have a 4/5/6-linked rear axle, depending on the year and event. The front track is far too narrow but is easily fixed by spacing out the wheels on the hubs.
Agreed the rear arches are completely wrong for gravel but pretty good for a tarmac-spec car, other than that the body shape is fairly good according to my references (i've owned 3 Mk 2 road-cars, and been to untold rallies, rally shows etc!).
It's a very good basic kit and the only option we have until Renaissance (finally) bring out their resin version, there's plenty of after-market decal options, and Eduard/Reji do a comprehensive p/e sheet which I've yet to try - still working on that '88 C9...