DiecastXchange Forum banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
923 Posts
As I promised yesterday, I'm doing reviews of the models I bought recently. I'll start off with the Ford.



PAINT
The metallic grey paint is applied completely on the metal parts of the model - there are no unpainted areas. However there are numerous roughly painted areas. In addition the paint itself has a slightly abrasive texture, almost like worn down sandpaper.
5/8



EXTERIOR
The model's proportions are correct and the model is to scale. It tips the scales at 690 grams and the parts fit together reasonably well but the panel gaps are rather large, especially around the doors.

None of the air intakes on the hood or on the side behind the doors are genuinely perforated but the perforation is simulated by black paint. The front grille and air dam aren't perforated either but the effect is simulated by moulding the mesh effect. All of the lights are made from separate pieces rather than cheaper, less attractive stickers. The front bumper and trunk are made entirely from plastic but it is difficult to tell them from the metal painted sections of the model.

5/8

INTERIOR

The detail is reasonably good on the interior but it is still flawed. The glass roof is very well simulated and although the interior colours are correct, they are painted rather than applied by differently coloured pieces of plastic. The Ford logo is moulded in to the sill of the door rather than applied by a cheap decal sticker. There is much 3D detail representing the instruments as the use of stickers is kept to a minimum. The pedals are separate from each other and they are correctly shaped. The seats are made from two separate pieces of hard rubber but the separation between them is as clear as day but the seatbelts are nicely simulated with the central buckle. The spare wheel in the trunk is actually a proper wheel and tyre, not a cheap half tyre as done by other budget manufacturers.

5/8



WHEELS & BRAKES
The tyres are correctly branded (BF Goodrich) and the tread is accurate. The wheels are well simulated too with wheel nuts and the Mustang emblem present on them. The brake discs aren't properly drilled but moulded indentations simulate the holes. Brake calipers are present too and they have reasonable detail. As with other Beanstalk Group models, the brake discs rotate with the wheels while the calipers remain fixed in place.
5/6

ENGINE & UNDERCARRIAGE DETAIL

The hood raises (and stays up) revealing the engine bay which is on the plain side but this is accurate. The engine is a separate piece from the chassis and it is quite detailed with the correct markings and colours. There is some wiring too. The undercarriage detail is very good as well. Much of the engine and gearbox can be seen from beneath and the exhausts and tailpipes are separate from the chassis. The exhausts are not completely hollow but there is black paint in them to simulate the effect. In addition, the suspension functions.
6/8

COMEPETION
Only the BG makes the Mustang GT Concept in 1/18 scale so there is no competition.
6/6

DESIRABILITY
The model's quality is very good for a budget model but it isn't particularly rare.
4/6

OVERALL
In all honesty the model is a bit of a step down from the BG's Ford GT Concept but that was an exceptionally good model, so the BG Mustang GT Concept is very good for a budget model. It will go nicely in a collection of Ford or muscle car models.

Total Score - 36/50

Thanks to Diecast Muscle for the use of their pictures

© 2003 www.DiecastXchange.com All rights reserved
 
G

·
Great review!! :jk:

Everytime I see this model, I feel someone just stabbed me from the back. Along with the Convert, I now have 2 project cars to tool around with.
 
G

·
Great review, I was high on this model, and kinda backed off due to some of the earlier model discussions.

Glad to know it recieved a good score.


thanks for the review. :mrgreen:
 
G

·
Thanks for the review!!! :sm:

I have a question, If anyone has the convertible version, do the screens behind the seats lift up? :?
Yes.

Sorry. I don't have a picture of the screens in action.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
923 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
...this model doesn't sound 2 bad, is 36/50 a good score 4 a budget model??
Indeed it is, RW. By the model rating system that we developed, a budget model that scores 36/50 would get this rating:

35-39
- Good quality and accuracy.
- The best budget models will score here.
- Only minor faults (possibly one major fault) will be present in budget models that score here.
- This should be the absolute minimum score for a mid-priced model such as a Kyosho/AUTOart.

You can check the model rating system by clicking HERE
 
G

·
...this model doesn't sound 2 bad, is 36/50 a good score 4 a budget model??
Indeed it is, RW. By the model rating system that we developed, a budget model that scores 36/50 would get this rating:

35-39
- Good quality and accuracy.
- The best budget models will score here.
- Only minor faults (possibly one major fault) will be present in budget models that score here.
- This should be the absolute minimum score for a mid-priced model such as a Kyosho/AUTOart.

You can check the model rating system by clicking HERE
maybe I shouold get one then, or should I wait for the AUTOart 03 mach 1?
 
G

·
Good review Darren. I feel a bit let down by this model after the expectations set up by the GT. Let's hope BG moves forward on their next effort.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top