This is the sad but inevitable truth. A few months ago we were discussing the impossibility of relying on exponentially increased subscriptions to buoy the magazine up. Now that what I commented on seems to have come to pass, (in the lack of enough new subscriptions to keep MCM financially viable), here's another idea/"plea for cash" for financially propping up what appears to be a flailing, if not failing enterprise. The lack of consistency in both the product's quality & timeliness has kept me from spending the cash for a subscription, & considering that all the other modeling forums are basically free, I know I'm not going to throw good money down a bottomless hole to keep an enterprise going that seems doomed to failure. At some point it becomes time to cut your losses & move on. Perhaps that point has been reached for MCM.
"The other day I helped out at a local auto upholstery shop and asked the boss about the sprayers. He said 'I could spray the fence next door from my desk with it!', meaning, I assumed, the thing packs a punch!" In all honesty that alone sounds like an extremely valid reason not to use such a product, (which I admittedly have no experience with), on a model car, as it sounds like you'd have even less control with one of those compared with even a rattle can. At least a modicum of control when painting something the size of a model car body is desirable, so having something that "packs a punch" sounds like it defeats the purpose. But, to each their own I suppose.
I can't find any record of Tony running any ARCA races. However, I do remember that in addition to NASCAR races, Tony also ran on the USAC stock car ciecuit, which in the 70s was still very popular, as popular as ARCA back then, if not more so. That's a great looking model!
I am in no way trying to be rude, but if you're unable to set aside money to buy the airbrush & accessories for the reason you state, how can you afford the Preval sprayers, the paint for them, rattle cans or models, not to mention the other essentials required to build them? As to cleaning them, usually lacquer thinner works nicely on cleaning an airbrush of any/all different types of paint. The cheap stuff sold at Wal-Mart does the trick. Lacquer thinner also thins enamels for airbrushing as well as it does lacquer paints. I know, as I've used it for all the above in my airbrush. I've read that it can also be used with care to thin acrylics such as Tamiya for spraying, but you may be better off with their acrylic thinner in that case, as from what I've read using lacquer thinner with them can be tricky at first. In this case I haven't tried lacquer thinner with acrylics yet, so I can't fall back on my personal experience for that.
Good points & I too use both an airbrush or a rattle can. Most times the airbrush is my choice simply because of the fact that the color I need is only in a bottle, other times it's because I need/desire a finer spray than a rattle can affords. For the former, it turned out that Testors Model Master Duck Egg Blue enamel was the perfect shade for my Ohio George 33 Willys build, & it's only in the bottle, so the airbrush had to come out for that one. A note for anyone that wants to try that color, it dries flat so you'll need to apply a gloss clear coat over it. I also tend to use a lot of nail polishes on my models, which also requires an airbrush of course. For custom painting, (& not just as to mixing custom colors, but fades, fogging & other custom techniques), an airbrush is pretty much essential. Yes, you can achieve some of that with a rattle can, & turn out spectacular paint jobs, but those do have their limitations once you get to a certain point, & that's where you need the airbrush. I also decant a lot of rattle cans into my airbrush, for thinner coats & better control. Returning to the Ohio George cars for a moment, I found that Dupli-Color's Avignon Blue Metallic, (a Honda color), was the perfect match for the primary color of his Malco Mustang, & Dupli-Color's Intense Blue Pearl, (a Mopar color), was as exact a match as there was for the darker blue pearl fogged around the wheel arches, door handles & other areas to replicate the 1/1. Now, there was no way I was going to get a fine enough spray with the latter color to replicate that with the can, so it had to be decanted & applied using the finest tip of my airbrush. I also decanted & applied the primary color with my airbrush, simply for better control. Those Preval sprayers just don't look like they'll allow good enough control for more intricate work, & that's where the airbrush is essential. Again, over time the cost of using them is going to be wind up greater overall than the singular upfront cost of an airbrush & it's needed accessories, much like buying cans of propellant becomes higher than just buying the compressor. I understand the budgetary concerns expressed in the initial post, but sometimes it's better & smarter to save up for & budget for better equipment, rather than spend that same amount of money using what could be an inferior product & method.
Perhaps I didn't include the required amount of rainbows, butterflies, unicorns & puppy dog kisses in my comments........., but as that seems to vary from one poster to the next, since there is such bias here, I'm not sure what the required minimum is.
A double standard here!?! Why perish the thought!! And yes, I am being extremely sarcastic in this comment due to my experiences here over the years. But some snowflakes get their noses out of joint when confronted with a differing opinion or fact & get coddled, no matter their own antics.
I've never had as good results for this without the accelerator as I do with it. It might be simply because I know I have a limited time window to sand it once I apply the accelerator, so I don't let the part sit around too long. I've also had good results using superglue, baby powder & accelerator to fill larger voids in poorly cast resin parts. On one I used a dental pick to open it up more, backed the hole with masking tape, & applied an almost paste like mix of superglue, baby powder & accelerator to the void, let it set & then sanded it. Worked like a charm.
That's painfully obvious from your many egocentric posts, & not just in this thread. It seems that nobody can be as or more knowledgeable than you about any subject. Do tell, what are your thoughts on brain surgery, should someone develop a tumor & need advice?
Sigh, you do realize that my initial comment was in reference to all the praise this garbage was being given, not just your comments? I'm sorry, but perhaps you're not as important as you seem to presume you are, Since it was obvious I was addressing the overall topic in general, while citing specific examples. Therefore I was certainly aware of your comment that mine mirrored, just as I was aware of the inane comment made by another about layering that garbage. Do pardon me for not being an engineer/whatever other professional work you're referencing. I'm merely a retired teacher who builds models & tinkers with my 1/1 cars, including doing bodywork & paint, having taken a course in it, (graduating as well), at my local community college many years ago. With that said, I'd warrant that most people praising Squadron in this thread seem to have less experience vis-à-vis the subject as it relates to 1/1 vehicles at hand than you or I do. I do remember one of the two body shop teachers I had telling us first thing that all one part automotive putties were a waste or time. That was almost forty years ago, & he had been in the business since the 1930's. The shop he started is still family owned & operated even today. I'd warrant that his knowledge, background & & experience trumped both yours & mine combined.
I can understand the issue with sanding superglue, especially with the accelerator. I've learned the trick is to be ready to sand it within no more than 5-10 minutes after applying it. I literally swear by it for sink marks, (especially shallow ones & ejector pin marks, as I've literally filled & sanded 4-6 of them within 30-40 minutes & I mean finish sanding through every grit to where the part is ready for primer. No putty, be it one part or two part lets you do that type of work as fast. It did take me trying it more than once before i got the hang of it, but I am glad I tried it a second time. Until I discovered Tamiya 1 part putty, (as well as getting good with the superglue/accelerator method), I had gotten used to using 2 part putty for everything, as I was so disgusted with the Squadron. That stuff is a huge waste of time & money for all but the most shallow sanding scratches, & even then I'll use Tamiya putty first.
I've honestly never used Milliput's one part putty, so I can't say either way. I do like their epoxy putty, though in this case, I do prefer the one from Tamiya. Both are good however, in this case it actually is a matter of personal preference.
With what you'd invest over time in buying those one time use products, you would actually come out cheaper in the long run getting a decent single action airbrush by either Badger or Paasche. My Paasche single action has served me well for almost thirty years. Such things as those Preval sprayers are basically a waste of time & money most of the time.
Hmmmm, neither does a chorus of people telling him how "good" that junk is in the first place. That's why I mentioned the Tamiya one part putty as a viable option, as well as superglue with an accelerator, not to mention the absurdity of putting that Squadron on in layers over a time period of a week or so, when there are faster & more user friendly products out that that give a much better result.. You did take the time to read & digest my entire post, as well as fully comprehending it one hopes. Or did you merely focus on the one part to take umbrage at? Knee jerk reactions seldom make one look very good. I reiterate; with two part catalyzed putty, Tamiya putty, or superglue I don't have to worry about shrinkage. Ever. Hmmmm, perhaps George Costanza could have used one of those products in that episode of "Seinfeld",,,,, The only way Squadron putty is "worthwhile" is if you tape a quarter to the tube you toss out, so you can say you threw away something of value.
I haven't used that Squadron garbage in at least twenty years. Best thing you can do is throw that junk out & get either the Tamiya one part putty, or a good quality catalyzed two part putty. The small tube of Bondo pictured that includes the tube of hardener with it is excellent for the price & won't go bad before you can use it all like the larger, (& more expensive), containers of two part putty tend to do. Nothing against those larger containers, like Icing & the rest, it's just a lot of putty sitting around that can go bad, unless you also use it on 1/1 vehicles. You can also use superglue with an accelerator for filling. It works especially good on sink marks & ejector pin marks & sets up a lot faster than putty, so you can get to sanding faster. On any one part putty, (which is what that Squadron junk is, & it is junk), other than Tamiya, besides the fact that it can & will shrink as the solvents evaporate over time, sometimes showing up years later, who in their right mind wants to spend a week or more building that junk up in layers, so the solvents do have time to evaporate so it, (hopefully), won't shrink!?! By the time you do all that work, I've got the Tamiya or the catalyzed putty on, set up, sanded & the part I used it on is in primer at least by then, & I won't have to worry about shrinkage. Ever. It's 2017, not 1967, 1977, or 1987 anymore. Get into the 21st century & use something more advanced & better formulated! For those who might get offended by my calling Squadron putty the garbage & junk that it really is, get over it. You're not the only ones allowed to have a bias or express an opinion around here. BTW, other than the color difference, both the green & the white are the same, & both are indeed junk.