The Diecast Zone · Model Car Club Since 1994

Diecast Collector Forums

Eight forums, every scale, and thirty years of shop talk — new arrivals, restorations, reviews, and the finds you won’t see posted anywhere else, with the full archive back to 2002 restored and searchable. Free to Register.

8Forums
195,000+Topics
1,276,000+Posts
10,000+Members

[pics] re: Jaguar 1...
 
Notifications
Clear all

[Closed] [pics] re: Jaguar 1963 E-type discussion below

14 Posts
3 Users
0 Reactions
15 Views
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  

[pics] re: Jaguar 1963 E-type discussion below

Here are few pictures of #14 I took a month ago in the Blackhawk museum. Hopefully these pictures help with your research.

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available



   
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  

if (15) was painited the same way as (14), Amalgam got the roundels wrong...

The roundels are not even painted white, they are only outlined with the thin dark blue strip. Covering the vents with a decal makes no sense to me. This a shame for such an expensive and supposedly accurate model.



   
(@Paul Normand)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Great pictures, thank you.



   
(@Paul Normand)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Chav, I have contacted Amalgam asking them about the door roundels and the roundel on the boot lid.

As and when I receive a reply, I will post the answer.



   
(@franklemire)
Famed Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3006
 

Thanks for the photos.......

But this just goes to show how difficult it can be to get the details correct in a vintage race car.

Here is a photo taken in the pits before the actual race

photo no longer available

Look closely and you can see that the roundel and numerals on the rear deck were not 'split' at the vent but rather 'wrapped' up the face of the vent. A keen eye will also pick up that rear roundel on the 'restored' car extends all the way to the rear licence plate while the actual race car does not - a result of incorrect installation.

The restored car is also missing the rear 'mud flaps' and the 'bug deflector' on the hood.

This is the problem that manufacturers have with 'race car' collectors like me. My interest is not in a generic car. My interest is in getting a specific car from a specific race. It is why, among other things, that I label all of my cars on display with their chassis numbers and the race they were running.

Manufacturers tend to use 'museum' cars for their templates but the guys that restore the cars don't always restore them to a specific date and time. The result can be a very good looking, but ultimately inaccurate, model.

It is why guys like me end up being more interested in grainy half century old photos than great photos like yours.



   
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  

Frank, completely understand your points and agree with you. Thanks for pointing ...

the restoration differences.
The sad thing is that the model manufacturers in this particular case did not copy accurately neither the race nor the restored museum version.



   
(@franklemire)
Famed Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3006
 

And that is really puzzling..........

Paragon doing incomplete livery makes no sense at all when you consider that their livery for this model consists of 'water-slide' decals. The labor and material price to get it correct is literally just a penny or two.

If anyone is interested in converting one of the #15 models in to a more accurate replica just send me an e-mail and I can hook you up with a 'kit'. Legacy Motors has them right now at a great price and with a bit of effort you can have one that looks like mine

photo no longer available



   
(@franklemire)
Famed Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3006
 

Sadly all they can say is 'My Bad'.........

The model is either correct or it is not.

While it is at least theoretically possible that after the shunt they put a new roundel on the back - why, I don't know - but I doubt they would have had someone remove the stripes from the face of the upper vent.



   
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  

Looks great Frank! There are FOUR more details the Paragon got wrong...

1) missing black rubber seal between the hard top and the body
2) missing small white window vents in the lower front corners of the driver and passenger side windows
3) missing 2 circular vents on each side of the rear window, neither Paragon or Amalgam made them. It took me awhile to find a proof they existed on the racing version...
4) there are only 2 wipers (not 3 as modeled on the Paragon version) and they are black not silver. Amalgam got that right, so did the little Spark.

Frank, I am sure you can fabricate all of them them for better accuracy.

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

photo no longer available

I am sticking to 1/24, so I am not interested in anything 1/18 unless is an outstanding model. SMTS has made a resin model of #15 in 1/24 but it is hard to find, and the only one I've seen for sale was broken and too expensive for its condition.



   
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  


   
(@franklemire)
Famed Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3006
 

There are errors and then there are errors...........

Some omissions I'll forgive at this price point - like the gasket missing between the body and the hood and holes in the glass.

Some of the missing pieces like the rear mud flaps and the bug deflector I'll chalk up to Paragon deciding on a common platform for the base car - likewise the three wipers and the wipers being silver instead of black. Those errors and omissions I expect at this price point.

Incomplete livery - livery the wrong color - stuff like that is inexcusable at any price.



   
(@Dan Muldowney)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Hey Frank, would you e-mail me, please?

Muldodb at gmail dot com

I just took the plunge on this one. Couldn't beat Legacy's price!



   
(@franklemire)
Famed Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3006
 

Is this getting a bit closer?

photo no longer available



   
Chav
 Chav
(@chav)
Illustrious Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 3493
Topic starter  

Looks great Frank.



   
Share: