StevenGuthmiller
-
Posts
14,061 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by StevenGuthmiller
-
-
4 hours ago, Rodent said:
But it would be in Modeler's Hades. You could have all the MPC 67 GTOs you wanted, but there would be no Revell '66 GTOs to rob parts from.
Or, you could say that my model builders hades would be nothing but models of cars produced after about 1977, or all foreign cars! 😮
I’d rather build airplanes. 😁
Steve
-
6 hours ago, ncbuckeye67 said:
I was referring to the shallow interior detail, and crappy promo type chassis (like the 67 GTO)
I understand, but that's not much of a consideration for me anymore.
I wasn't much of a fan of these types of interiors and chassis in years past, and I still can't say that I am, but the most important thing to me now is subject matter, so if there are aspects of the model that I don't like, I'll change them.
It not only corrects the issues, but it insures that your model will be something completely unique.
My last 1964 Pontiac Bonneville project, although an AMT kit and not an MPC, illustrates this concept.
These old annual kits were all lacking in basically the same areas, but I've begun to understand that it's not only possible to overcome these problems, but it can be a lot of fun as well.
Researching and finding existing modern kit parts to substitute, modifying existing parts, and scratch building others, is a great way to hone your building skills, and if you have an open mind and some determination, you can make something from one of these old sub-par kits that rivals any highly detailed modern kit without spending gobs of money on aftermarket stuff.
I'm having way more fun doing these kinds of builds now than I ever did building basically out of box, and as I said, when it's finally finished, it's truly unique, even though still a factory stock model.
This is model car heaven for me!
Steve
-
My dad had one, but I don’t remember much about it, except that it was maroon.
He bought it after giving me his turquoise 1975 Honda CB 360, which I will confess that I felt was kind of a wimpy little toy at the time, but realize today that it was a really fun and great little machine.
I wish I still had it.
Sold it to a family friend in 1985 for $350.00 when I bought my first brand new bike.
an ‘85 Yamaha Virago 1000.
Steve
-
I think I actually lived one of my worst nightmares at the last show that I attended.
The show was held in a vacant store in an old half empty strip mall.
In the hallway, right outside of the store was a large jungle Jim style playground where there was a single woman with several small, extremely loud and obnoxious children playing.As the afternoon progressed, I happened to be just hanging out in the hallway, stretching my legs when this woman decided that it would be a good Idea to keep these little monsters occupied by taking them into the little toy car and airplane show to run around like a bunch of tiny lunatics!
With 3 models representing probably 3 years of toil sitting on the tables, I quickly started feeling a tightness in my chest!
I had never thought of myself as a child hater, but that day I was seriously contemplating where would be a good place to dispose of the bodies!!
Luckily, by some miracle, no damage was done.
Steve
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, ncbuckeye67 said:
Only 40 year old MPC kits are available
Sounds like heaven to me! 😉
Steve
-
1
-
-
This is the exact recipe that I use for my red sauce.
The only addition is fresh chopped basil.
I usually omit the sausage, but my meatball recipe includes ground beef, ground pork and ground Italian sausage.
Everyone loves Clemenza's sauce!
Steve
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, 1959scudetto said:
Fishing for compliments, Steven ?
Absolutely not!
Just wanted to put it out there because only the photos still exist now.
The model itself has been stripped and prepped for a re-do.
Steve
-
Thanks people!
43 minutes ago, Watertown said:What's with all of the self deprecation?! This is a beautiful build/example of a bygone kit. I'd be proud to have it in my display case any day! Nice work, sir!
37 minutes ago, stavanzer said:My thoughts exactly, Mike. Steve's Photo and building skills were excellent then. No reason for the putting himself down.
I appreciate that fellas!
I suppose it's just my way of saying that if I were to do it over, I would do a much better job.
You may be interested to know that this particular model has been disassembled and stripped in preparation for a probable upcoming rebuild.
I've always wanted to do one of these oddball Mopars in a full detail configuration, and this is the prime candidate for an all out Dodge Dart D-500 build project.
Hopefully I'll get on it soon.
Steve
-
3
-
-
I got to digging back into some old photos and decided that I should probably post some of these old builds that I probably have not posted before, and if I have, it was a long time ago.
These models are from a far gone era when I was still building minimally, with very few additions and limited detail.
This was back when I was pumping them out, one every few weeks to a couple of months, and when I was still honing many of my paint, foil and general detailing skills.
Even though these models are far from my best efforts, they are representative of the progression of my modeling skills, and in the end, I suppose they should get some exposure and a little love too.
This is a Johan/X-EL 1961 Dodge Dart, and the date on the photos say that they were taken in 2012.
Not as far back as I had anticipated, but I'm pretty confident that the model was built some time prior to that.
Could have been as much as 10 years earlier.
It's become very difficult for me to track time anymore.
In any case, it's an old curbside build from a time gone by, so please don't expect much.
My photography skills back then were obviously even worse than my building skills.
Steve
-
12
-
-
1 hour ago, Nicholas said:
Just for the color.
I use primer and clear right from the can.
Steve
-
If I would have known, I could have sent you several sets.
My wife ordered a bunch online to give to co-workers for both of us, but the forecast here is rain all day.
Lot of good they'll do us.
Steve
-
16 hours ago, deuces wild said:
Ok, thanks guys!.....🙂👍
Use what you have.
You can drive yourself nuts with minutia, but it's not rocket science.
If you have Testors acrylic, thin it with water and use that.
Steve
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Leo64 said:
I know Norm at Replicas and Miniatures of Maryland offers several different tail lights for custom work, but looking at his latest price sheet I only see '54 Mercury ones and '56 Lincoln as anything close to what you are looking for. I also tried looking to see if there might be anything available for 3D printing, but so far can't find anything.
There is a resin 1956 Mercury Montclair kit on eBay, but it isn't cheap at around $200.
Steve A.
Also looks like a pretty rough casting.
Lot of pinholes, dimples, etc, along with a warped hood.
Steve
-
On 3/31/2024 at 8:21 AM, David G. said:
Hello Everybody!
It's time for a quick update on the '57 Ford.
I've installed the micro magnets in the body and doors.
Now it's time to check the alignment and adjust as needed.
This is just a crude test fit to check basic alignment and function. Assembly is just a mockup at this point.
As always, thanks for following along and always feel free to share your thoughts, opinions and insights.
David G.
Just for future reference, you can install those magnets before paint, fill them with a little putty, sand and paint.
That way, they'll still do their job, but they'll be almost entirely invisible.
I use these magnets for creating removable hood hinges, installing them in the body and hinges prior to painting, and adding metal strips to the hood.
You can see in these photos where the magnets have been circled in blue, and then the finished pieces and model.
Steve
-
11 hours ago, Leica007 said:
I would stay away from using alcohol on the chrome
Yes, absolutely!
Stay away from any solvents that may damage the chrome.
Remember, you're only creating a simple "wash".
There's absolutely no need to over think it and go out and buy a bunch of unnecessary products, or to nerd out over the thinning question.
Thin aqueous acrylics with water, and enamels with mineral spirits, and you'll do just fine.
Steve
-
1
-
-
You know, I've knocked over far more paint bottles, thinner jars, wine glasses, beer bottles, milk jugs, gas cans, etc, etc, etc, than I've ever spilled glue bottles.
If I spent all of my time trying to devise "spill proof" solutions for everything that I've ever dumped at one time or another, that's all that I'd be doing.
Not quite sure why we have to always go through such contortions for solutions for every simple little problem.
Must be something in our modeling DNA, but it sure begins to look like a whole lot of silliness after a while.
Steve
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Dave Van said:
I have been using Dupli-Color primers and paints since the 1980's without any issues. My only rule is Dupli-Color #1699 first....then any paint of any kind....even Dupli-color lacquers. Always woks for me.
That’s the one that I use almost exclusively.
Steve
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, deuces wild said:
Hey guys... Can I use Testors acrylic black and thin it water or Windex or maybe a combination of both thinners???... I'm still learning about this stuff.... Testors is all I have on hand...🙄
You can use basically anything.
This is Testors flat black enamel thinned with mineral spirits.
Steve
-
1
-
-
Thanks guys!
Just finishing up the basic layout for a removable air cleaner, as I've done with my most recent projects.
Still some refinements to do, and of course some more details need to be added to the intake manifold, but it's beginning to take shape.
Still trying to determine if there's an option for an air filter element, or if I'll just go without.
I'll have to see if I can dream something up.
Steve
-
5
-
-
19 hours ago, Bugatti Fan said:
What were your gripes about the show Steve? You said you would not be going back, but it looked ok to me going by the photographs and you got a couple of awards from it.
Part of it is just the "good old boy" mentality, which I was somewhat aware of from my last visit there some years ago.
But the biggest problem was the fact that it was quite obvious that some of the judging was done on pure emotion rather than the overall quality, or complexity of the models.
By that I mean that as is the standard practice in any contest, judging is done using a number of factors to determine which models are "the best", whether that be per category, or overall.
It appeared to me that the judging (in some cases), was essentially done on a single appearance feature rather than the technical ingenuity required to complete the model to the highest overall quality possible.
I never enter a contest with the expectation of winning any awards, but I do expect that the judges will be professional in their approach to picking "The Best" models to receive whatever awards are being given.
I get the feeling that the judges in this circumstance were either not aware of what was required to build each model, or were just not very good at judging in general.
Forgive me, but I don't think that they really knew what they were looking at.
At least I like to think that that was the case.
Otherwise, there were more nefarious reasons for some of their decisions.
Another turn off came at the end of the show as I was packing up to leave when I heard one of the area club leaders/judges discussing gleefully with a patron about how they "recycled" their awards from year to year, by collecting medals and trophies won by, I assume club members, and reissuing them again at the following year's show.
I suppose that you could call that being frugal, but I found the practice of recycling awards to be quite tacky.
And, if they were able to collect and recycle awards among club members from year to year, that speaks to the "good old boy" issue that I opened with.
Anyway, the whole situation just seemed a bit "seedy" in my estimation.
I believe that in the future, I'll just stick with the shows where I know that the organizers, and when applicable, the judges, have the utmost integrity, which is the rule rather than the exception.
Steve
-
Thanks so much fellas!
It's your encouragement that keeps me going!
Thanks to the generosity of Gerry Paquette, (Exotics_Builder) the conversion of the 4 bbl intake that he was so courteous to send to me, is taking shape as a 2 bbl intake.
I'll likely be doing a bit more detail work on it, but it appears that it will do the trick very nicely!
Thanks again Gerry!
The generosity of many of the members here never ceases to amaze me!
Steve
-
3
-
-
Thanks to the generosity of Gerry Paquette, (Exotics_Builder) the conversion of the 4 bbl intake that he was so courtesy to send to me, is taking shape as a 2 bbl intake.
I'll likely be doing a bot more detail work on it, but it appears that it will do the trick very nicely!
Thanks again Gerry!
The generosity of many of the members here never ceases to amaze me!
Steve
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, NOBLNG said:
Thanks for the advice guys. I can get a bit of a smoother finish by spraying from 4-5” away (left spoon). The right spoon was sprayed from 8-10 “ away. At 4-5” away it is hard to get a light coat that won’t obliterate details.😕 The Dupli-Color sealer I bought sprayed beautifully, so maybe this is a bad can? I have a can of grey that I just bought also, so I will compare them later to see how bad the white is. I could always decant it and airbrush it, slightly thinned with LT maybe?
Looking at the one on the left tells me that there's really nothing wrong with the primer.
That's exactly how it should look.
Duplicolor white is a bit on the transparent side, so it's good to use several light coats versus one heavy one, and doing so is advantageous for plastic protection anyway.
It's actually difficult to obscure detail with all of the Duplicolor primers, regardless of how much you use.
I routinely use as many as 5 coats, and I never have issues with detail hide, even after covering it with 4 or 5 coats of lacquer color, and another 5 coats of Duplicolor clear lacquer.
I know that most people would consider as many as 15 coats of primer, color and clear overkill, and would conclude that that process would cover all of the fine detail, but with the right materials, it's absolutely not the case.
There is a method to my madness, and to date it has served me extremely well.
Multiple primer coats serves to ensure total protection against hot solvents in subsequent coats of paint, and while it's very possible that this many coats might not be required in every case, It's my view that it's better to be safe than sorry, and short of the extra time required to apply that many coats, I have never been able to find any down side, and using this procedure has assured me that I will never have any solvent issues down the line.
Multiple color coats of course ensures uniformity and color depth, which is the reasoning for 4-5 coats of color.
Multiple coats of clear adds depth to the clear, which ensures that there is sufficient material to prevent burn through during the polishing process, which is always a part of my paint process, regardless of how shiny the clear ends up straight out of the can or airbrush.
I feel that polishing creates a more realistic finish than "spray and walk away".
In any case, as an example, this '64 GP has the aforementioned 5 coats of primer, 4 to 5 coats of color, and 5 coats of clear, followed by polishing, and even with extremely fine scripts, such as the "GRAND PRIX" scripts and badges on the lower front quarter panel, there has been no discernible detail hide at all.
Steve
-
2
-
-
And of course, there’s always the possibility that you just got unlucky enough to get a bad can.
It happens.
Even with the best products.
Steve
What would a car modelers Hades be like:
in The Off-Topic Lounge
Posted
Not really my bag. 😁
Steve