Short Track Forums > Bench Racing-general Model Car discussion topics
The old MPC Super Stocker chassis, etc.
sentsat71:
Opinions/Thoughts?
Ideas?
For a 40+ year old designed model chassis/frame, etc. what are any thoughts on these old kit chassis as used straight out of the box?
As for a generic chassis?
Outside of building shocks for the front suspension, would there be anything else that any of you would do to that chassis?
How "easy" would it be to drop an engine in from another kit?
For that kit era, how would any of you rate this chassis?
Just curious........
Lefturns75:
Back in early 1974, those kits were great but that's about all we had. Our only other options were the MPC Nascar kits and those horrible AMT Modified Stockers. For it's time it was about the most up to date short track car you could get in kit form although not that authentic. With some care and a little detailing they will make a nice stocker right out of the box today. The cars offered in the series as replicas of the Dick Trickle Mustang and the Don Gregory Jegs Camaro are nothing but look-a-likes. The construction of the real cars was nothing like what was in the kit. You could make them look something like those cars with the decals but that's as far as it went.
I think the Chassis is meant to look like a GM A body chassis but the front and rear sections have been changed. I never saw anything that looked like the front suspension on those kits but the rear was pretty much what was being used at the time. You had an option to use coils or leafs and the chassis was designed like the Nascar Kits in two pieces to adjust the wheel base on each car. I never really saw that as an issue, they usually fit together pretty well and usually you could use just about any body from any kit to build a car. The completed chassis reminds me of a Bemco Chassis in some ways but it is really pretty generic.
I won't go into what all I would change, different modelers have different skill sets and desires. If you are not worried about the model having authentic suspension and roll cage design to the car you want to model, it makes a good base to start from. Engines are an easy swap, they will take almost any engine you choose. And as I mentioned, Bodies are an easy swap also. I have seen many with a number of different kit bodies fitted.
If you want to build a 70's dirt/pavement stocker I would choose this kit chassis over the later AMT Nascar chassis just because it is more of what was used during the time. I will admit, 90% of the the people that look at it don't know the difference and the AMT stuff is easier and cheaper to find but that is up to the builder. With a little work and time, these kits look pretty nice right out of the box. It has it's flaws but for it's age it is really not a bad kit, just don't expect todays detail or accuracy. If you have one of these kits, build it and I think you will enjoy it.
Brian Conn:
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM ---Opinions/Thoughts?
--- End quote ---
I picked up an AMT/ERTL Pontiac GTO Super Stocker re-issued kit from Tom Birky earlier this year minus the body...not knowing the entire history of the original MPC and AMT/ERTL kits, I am assuming that the re-issue is the same as the original.
My opinion of this kit is that it indeed represents the 70's quite well as far as the level of car ...either a pavement or dirt Late Model as Lefturns 75 pointed out.
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM ---As for a generic chassis?
--- End quote ---
I'm pretty picky when it comes to the authentic appearance of stock cars...with that being said the frame is non descript....I doesn't represent anything G.M or any other manufacture. In this case , I find that to be quite acceptable.
I do recall seeing a few manufactured stock car frames from that era that were the full perimeter frame style with the Late Model style rear frame section that we are more familiar with. This particular frame has 2 different wheel bases that it can be set at. The shorter one , according to the digital caliper, comes in at 108 mm. or the same wheel base as the Camaros from the 70's and G.M metric frame cars from the late 70's thru '88 (Monte, Regal, Cutlass, etc.) you could lump any of the Mustangs '73 and older into that as well....Same with the Mopars (Barracuda, Duster, Dart etc. etc.)
The longer wheelbase according to the caliper comes in at 112mm to accommodate the longer wheelbase cars....too many to mention...but the Monogram NASCAR bodies fit perfect.
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM --- Ideas?
--- End quote ---
Me personally there are a few pieces that I would like to make molds of and cast for future builds as they are not available anywhere after market. I'd like to do a build from around '73 - '75 using this kit...either using an early 60's Falcon body (hint,hint Gator) or possibly a Mustang or Maverick .
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM --- For a 40+ year old designed model chassis/frame, etc. what are any thoughts on these old kit chassis as used straight out of the box?
--- End quote ---
Just keep it in the era it represents....use the body it comes with and you will be fine. Stay away from any body styles of the last 35-40 years.
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM ---Outside of building shocks for the front suspension, would there be anything else that any of you would do to that chassis?
--- End quote ---
I took a look at the front shocks...they look good to me...course they are still on the sprew tree so I don't know what they may look like attached to anything...HOWEVER...the front lower control arms leave some to be desired. To some builders its not an issue as they are not visible unless you pick the car up and look at the bottom side, while others would want to swap them out for something else. The front lower control arms look almost like a Ford strut style without the strut. I have a few examples using the most popular various kit front lower control arms and this frame to demonstrate how a swap could be done.
I don't have a picture available, but the Ford strut type lower control arm from any NASCAR fits, but the strut comes up short so a cross member would have to be made to attach the struts to.
This is from an 80's Revell/ Monogram G.M NASCAR kit. All you would have to do is fab up some brackets to mount the rear part of the lower control arm to and attach them to the frame.
This is from an 90's Revell/ Monogram NASCAR kit. (Lumina and Monte Carlo)....no brackets needed, just get everything aligned the way you want it and call it good.
This is from an 80's - 90's AMT NASCAR G.M kit ......no brackets needed, just get everything aligned the way you want it....same as above...for what ever reason these two(this one and above) sit closer to this frame than the 80's Revell/ Monogram.
70's era Camaro stock stub frame......to make these work a builder is going to have to split the Camaro cross member in two as the Camaro piece is narrower than the Super Stocker cross member. Add some brackets to the rear part of the lower control arms and you are good to go.
Here's how those same lower control arms look attached to a stock stub Camaro frame.
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM ---How "easy" would it be to drop an engine in from another kit?
--- End quote ---
Pretty easy...even the transmission mount is located such as to be pretty much universal unless you sit the engine wwaayy back. The kit engine is a big block and the way the firewall is designed and located , I cant think of anything that wouldn't fit.
Heres a small block Ford Cleveland....I have it sat back about 2" to 3" in 1:1 scale from the center part of the ball joints in the upper control arms.
Here's a full dress fat block 427 Ford. My 180's didn't match up to the hole in the fire wall and I didn't want to bend them so I didn't include the fire wall in this picture....no engine set back, mounted in stock location.
--- Quote from: sentsat71 on October 03, 2018, 08:10:27 AM ---For that kit era, how would any of you rate this chassis?
Just curious........
--- End quote ---
On a scale of 1 to 10 I would give it an 8 ....personally I would have rated it higher if it weren't for the front upper and lower control arms looking the way they do.......I don't know, maybe tubular upper control arms like you would find in a NASCAR kit.
sentsat71:
Lefturns75; I really appreciate your comments! That's the type of info I was looking for. When looking at the built chassis from one of the original issued kits ('70 Chevelle) the 1st thing i noticed was the lack of shocks up front.
Brian; Thanks for you input as well. as well as the pics......
Oh, one complaint though.....You beat me to that kit you got from Tom Birky......LOL
However, I have 3 Monte Carlo and 2 GTO bodied kits that I picked up 10 years of so ago from a LHS in ABQ.....but, IMO, that is not enough.....but will do for now, as I only have 3 "donor" kits for bodies, a recently bought '70 Chevelle, '69 & '72 Chevelle kits to raid for bodies and now, maybe engines as well. Plans are to build one of the Monte Carlo kits with that body.....Also have the body of an AMT '66 Nova "lined up"......as well as at least one of the chrome trees, that gives me the front and rear bumpers. Now just have to figure out where I put the hood for the Nova body, as I know someone sent be one....this Nova body and related parts, except the hood, were from a parts bin from the Albuquerque Model Car Club, as they had 2 large bins for parts that members would drop in at times. (It's also where I found a complete kit of the Beverly Hillbillies truck)
David. Funny you should mention the idea of having a body or not on this chassis, as what prompted me asking these questions, is that the bodyless chassis of the only one I built is sitting on a shelf just to the left of my computer desk. The body to this one was sent to FRW for him to mold it, for his line. Somewhere in there is when he started having his health issues, so I don't know if he ever got it molded and resin poured or not. It is why I worked on getting a "stock" '70 Chevelle kit in order to replace that body,. Found one, will just have to drag that kit out and start on the changes to get it to fit.
One last note....
Know I had 2 other Super Stocker kits back in the '70's as I still have an extra "floater" tire that has not been used, with another one going to a reworked '71 MPC Mustang (kit that did NOT use the interior tub for the racing (Trans Am type) option. It's also where I used the front hoop from the Suiper Stocker kit. Plus the wheels and tires from that kit were used. Know one was the Trickle Mustang kit, as the A&W Root Beer decals were used elsewhere......Am guessing that the other one MIGHT have been the Camaro.......Except for the items mentioned, the rest of those 2 kits and boxes were tossed most likely during my 1st move from my 1st apartment. A lot of unbuilt kits met their demise that way.
Think ONE of the reasons for not building those 2 Super Stocker kits was the hassle of working with the 180^ header exhausts, especially the pipes from where the headers came together, then trying to get the body over them.....Another reason was getting burned out with building model cars and trying to get back into model railroading. Was then introduced to plaster craft, which back in the mid to late '70's was a big deal, as there were some stores that catered to primarily just that.
And now, another hobby still "trumps" my getting back to the build table....
But oh, the ideas that never seem to get any further......(heavy sigh................)
Again, I really appreciate all the comments.....!!
THANKS!!
Bluesman Mark:
A bit late to the party here, (but I just joined up a few weeks ago). but I can offer some info on these gorgeous kit chassis.
There used to be a Fotki account that had an entire Ed Howe chassis catalog from the 70s. I had it bookmarked because several of the photos in it showed that this MPC kit chassis was an almost exact copy, (& I'm talking 95-98%), of at least one of the chassis Ed offered back then. Sadly, whoever had that Fotki account no longer does. Some of the chassis he offered differed in some details, such as the front hoop & bar setups, but Ed did offer a chassis that looked identical to the MPC one, including the A frames, control arms, etc.
That adjustable wheelbase? Though Ed didn't have that, (of course), he did offer his chassis in different wheelbases for different cars, & the way MPC designed that one replicates that perfectly once assembled.
I just happen to be working on the Model King reissue of the Monte Carlo in fact, & it's going together just like it did 40+ years ago, when I built a plethora of those kits.
Ok, I tried to post the pics of my WIP, but they're way too big. How do I resize them for this forum?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version