Ertl 1970 Chevelle SS454

vs.

Maisto 1972 Chevelle SS454 (undetailed)

I've had a number of requests to do an Ertl vs. Maisto comparisons on these Chevelles. I've put it off until now since I didn't think it was enough of an "apples to apples" comparison to warrant an article. Then I got a few of the Maisto cars for myself and I've detailed a few for myself and customers. I now feel I know both models quite well and feel the comparison is warranted since the 70 through 72 Chevelles are so similar in the 1:1 world.

This article focuses on comparing undetailed versions of each but let me clarify this a bit. First of all, if I really like a model, it is highly unlikely the model can avoid at least some detailing as soon as I take it from the box. I happen to have a Fathom Blue 70 SS454 that I got some time ago without a box for a real bargain and I set it aside for a future round of super detailing. The Maisto arrived a few days ago and I've been busy so it's mostly untouched too. On some cars there are detailing flaws that bug me so much I obliterate them as soon as I get the car. Each of these samples have one detail completed. The Ertl car has the required additional body color paint on the grill and the Maisto has had the wheels painted to look more correct.

Ertl jumps into the lead with a superior engine compartment. The valve covers are kind of a funky shape but most major components are there and relatively well detailed for an early Ertl mold.

The Maisto has some potential but looses points for looking wrong for a 72. The air cleaner tampo is a 71 version and the valve covers should be engine color on a 72. I really don't like the poorly molded master cylinder and washer bottle, especially since they are molded into the fender liner. The battery detail is nice and it does have plug wire although they are the wrong color. So much more could have been accomplished here.

The body shape of the Maisto is very good and the grill is very well done, it is just poorly detailed. The Ertl grill is okay but also needs more detailing to look right. The front of the Ertl looks a little too chunky, typical for early Ertl efforts. I'd love to see Ertl retool this one from scratch. Their more recent offerings are much stronger products than the older stuff.

The shape of the stripes on the Ertl are much better. The corners on the Maisto stripes are much too blunt. Either the Maisto sits too low or the Ertl sits too high, maybe a bit of both. The exhaust tips on the Maisto are better than the Ertl's totally incorrect round tips. Neither one has really strong tail lights though the Maistos are more accurately shaped. The Ertl lacks a trunk lock bezel and the proper white pinstripe around the rear bumper pad as on the 1:1's and the pads should protrude not be recessed into the bumper. The rear fender shape is good on the Ertl but the rear bumper looks out of proportion. Nice tampos and badges on both.

At first glance the Maisto seems to take the body shape points but the Ertl is nicely done. I think the Maisto's fender contours are a little over exaggerated. Though the Maisto has painted trim, I don't think it makes the Maisto better looking than the Ertl but then I'm a detailing freak so my criteria may differ from yours. The Maisto may please those who don't wish to detail their models further. The wheels are a toss up. The Ertl's are overly chunky and the Maistos really need detailing to look more correct. The rear of the Ertl sits up rather high.

Overall the scale and shape of the two cars are amazingly close. At first I was disappointed with the shape of the domed hood on the Maisto, but the Ertl's hood doesn't look perfect either. The Ertl is more closely related to the 1:1 shape however.

Again, the Ertl scores for stripe shape though the pinstripe portion of the Maisto's stripes looks more to scale. The Maisto looses ground due to the taper of the stripes and shape of the domed section. The 1:1's dome tapers a bit toward the front, but not the entire length of the dome. The wiper arms peeking out on the Maisto are a nice touch. They don't even exist on the Ertl. The Ertl has separate hood pin pieces that are nicely chromed. They are molded in and painted on the other.

The interiors are a toss up. Each has it's strong and weak points. I've noticed that the Maisto 71/72 interiors are exactly the same though I'm not sure that is incorrect. The Maistos do have some detailing on the door panels the Ertls do not include. All the Maistos I've seen are automatics with consoles. The various Ertls have a nice mix of automatics, four speeds, some with consoles some without. Ertls also have a mix of bench seats and buckets. The Maisto is lacking paint in the door jambs and other assorted semi-hidden areas.

Ertl's wheels are the right look, they are just too chunky. The Ertl (the Fathom Blue one ONLY) gets bonus points for having the correct RED "454" numerals. All other Ertl 70 Chevelles and all Maistos have the numbers either in silver or yellow(?). The proper look for the 454 emblems is bright RED. The emblem placement on the Ertl is also much more accurate. Notice how the fender contours on the Maisto seem a little overdone. The Ertl tires while also chunky, still look more correct than the Euro-style radials on the Maistos.

Here is where Maisto completely falls flat on it's face. It has no suspension components aside from a-frames, a mostly non-existent drive shaft, an abomination of an exhaust system molded to the transmission and lacks any real detail or definition the the under body pans. Neither has shocks on the rears but at least the Ertl has a proportioned axle casting, nice engine, exhaust and drive train parts nicely made and begging for detail.

In the end I'd have to say this round goes to the Ertl. Overall it is a more complete package with no huge glaring mistakes. Even though it is an older mold, it still holds up fairly well to more current offerings. BUT, what happens when these two are detailed? Does the impression of each change? Check out the companion article on that very topic.