Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Force

  1. 19 hours ago, pontiac.maniac said:

    Andy, that's what I've figured out with research. I was thinking maybe being 577 cubic inch it may be a larger engine,but,it's all internal stroking that makes the 429 a 577. I feel it's a very cool car as well! I'm drawn to the car by itself,then there's the facts of it was driven by Ronnie Sox and won the championship that season,was powered by the cat in the hat Jack Roush and owned by Dean Thompson! It's a piece of history. 


    The engine in the Revell-Monogram Pro Stock Thunderbirds is 500 cubic inches but based on regular 429-460 blocks, and 577 is not that difficult to get out of a 429-460 block with longer stroke and larger cylinder bores.
    One thing that can be different for the very large cubic inch mountain motors is the deck hight and bore spacing (center to center of the cylinders) and the centerline of the cam shaft is often moved up to allow for longer stroke, and most of them, if not all, are based on aftermarket blocks as the OEM blocks do not allow that large displacement within the OEM specs.
    You can bore out the cylinders but not too much so to do much larger bore you have to extend the bore spacing, and that will need a completely new block, crank and heads.
    Another way to gain more cubic inches is to have longer stroke but the deck hight limits how much you can go there so some large engines have engine blocks with taller deck, wich is quite easy to do in kit form, put in a shim of plastic between the block and heads to move the heads upwards and you also have to shim the intake manifold as the heads gets further appart with this modification.
    The engines used today in NHRA Pro Stock are loosely based on factory engines but the DRCE (1, 2 3 and 4) is specially developed for racing with 4.900 bore spacing and a modern 500 cui Pro Stock engine has short 3.600 stroke and large cylinder bores at 4.700 inches and revs 10.500 rpm.
    To compare it with a OEM Chevy 454 wich have 4.250 bore, 4.000 stroke and 4.840 bore spacing.

    • Thanks 1
  2. As Gerry says, there are many to choose from, but you have to decide if you are going to do a Mk I, Mk II, J-Car or MK IV
    For Mk I you have the Revell GT and the newly issued 68-69 MK I (reboxed Fujimi), the Fujimi kits and the old Testors/IMC/Union kits.
    Mk II Fujimi, Revell (reboxed Fujimi), Meng and IMC/Testors/Union kits
    J-Car IMC/Testors/Union and MPC.
    Mk IV IMC/Testors/Union and MPC
    There are also some aftermarket stuff for the GT 40's, both complete kits and conversion kits

    • Like 1
  3. As the 289 and 302 (except Boss) pretty much are the same you can look for parts for a 302.
    I can't remember right now if I have seen anything like you are looking for but the Weber intake manifold can be converted to fuel injection with some injector stacks and a few modifications.
    But I believe the Ford racers prefered to use the larger more powerful FE instead of the small block for racing in the "heavier" classes and I don't think I have seen many blown 289's except for Paxtons back in the day.

  4. I have both the Meng and Fujimi kits and both has their drawbacks, but I think the body has better proportions on the Fujimi kit, but as Justin says all the Fujimi GT 40 kits are curbside.
    The Meng kit is full detail but has some issues and I belive it's based on their 1:12 kit and the wheels and some other parts are not that great as some details are quite crude representations of what they are supposed to be.

  5. On 3/7/2023 at 2:17 AM, k100 said:

    Thank you Rockford and Force for the good information , I should have been a little more clearer on the drive shaft ,the shaft from the mid bearing to the front axle is off center. Maybe that’s the way it’s to be .

    thank you 



    Yes it's supposed to be that way, the U-joints takes up that angle difference as well as the differences in hight.
    No axles as far as I know has the drive shaft in the center of the axle, it's more or less off center depending on manufacturer and how the power dividers on the forward axle are made.
    How much angle difference there are from the center depends on the distance between the center support bearing and the forward axle, on a longer drive shaft it's not as visible as on a short one.

    As you see here the drive shaft is not exactly in the center.

    Semi-Truck Accident Attorney Utah | Siegfried & Jensen

    And this one

    What Causes a Semi-Truck to Overturn? │ Pajcic & Pajcic

  6. 15 hours ago, Mr. Metallic said:

    Original issue was back in 2007, and it was a Special Edition. I'm not sure how long it was in the catalog, but is sorely needing a reissue. 

    Yes you are of course right, I just checked my kits bought back then...16 years ago...time flies.
    I went by Scale Mates timeline in my earlier post wich often are wrong...so it's 2007, not 2011.
    And yes, it's time to reissue this kit.

    • Like 3
  7. Yes that's right, the drive shaft are slightly off center on most axles as the pinions are to one side of the ring gear in the differential, and in a power divider wich are used on dual drive tandems gears go down to drive the pinion on the forward axle and another shaft goes past the ring gear and come out off center at the rear of the pumpkin to drive the pinion on the rear axle. 


    Oshkosh Differential | e Pro Gear



  8. On 2/26/2023 at 5:30 PM, Oldmopars said:

    I really wanted to print the tread fully open, but with the required supports, it doesn't keep all the holes open. So, I think I will change that, but otherwise they seem to look good.

    Ignore the missing handles, that was my fault.


    Nice, the curved part on top could maybe have a sharper radius as it looks a bit too round, that will also put the step slightly higher.

    On 2/27/2023 at 5:23 PM, Oldmopars said:

    Ok, I got a good dash to print out. I should have cleaned it a little better, so ignore the shiny spots and fuzzy areas, that was me.

    I'm going to go back and increase the size and depth of a few things. While they are the right size in scale, once printed it would be very difficult to detail as the features are just too small. They printed, they are there, but good luck painting them. 

    I discovered this on things like panel gaps. You have to exaggerate them a bit in scale, so that once printed they show up well enough to clearly detail.


    As you say, some things needs to be exaggerated some to look right, but overall it looks good.

  9. 19 hours ago, Oldmopars said:

    OK, some research shows that the dash is the same for the K100E. So that helps. 

    Yes, the E model har the same dash as the C model Aerodynes, and that goes for both the E model Flat Top and Aerodyne cabs, so the dash you have done will work just fine for the E model.

    15 hours ago, Oldmopars said:

    Ok, I have to make one more adjustment. The top step seemed too low, I raised it up. Added the flange under the step. 




    Yes a little tweak was necessary and maybe even a bit more, the upper surface of the step should be slightly below the bottom of the curved part and it could be even slightly higher, and the radius of the curved part could be slightly sharper and this would move the step and handles up even more and it will be close to perfect according to my nitpicking eye. 😉

    16 hours ago, Oldmopars said:

    This, I hope will be close enough.  According to the pictures, there is no Diamond plate on the sides, or the sides of the steps. I just may print a set to see how they look in the real world. And Yes, the lower step has holes all the way through like the real thing. 



    You are right, the sides of the battery boxes are steel and don't have any diamond plate, it's only the covers that are aluminum diamond plate.
    There seems to have been a couple different patterns for the lower step used on the W900 battery boxes and one I have seen on many trucks is like you can see below but the one you did will work just fine and you don't have to change it if you don't want to.



  10. Just now, Oldmopars said:

    I did reduce the size of the brake valves, but I hate to go any smaller. Because they stick out from the dash, and are not a feature of the das, if I go too much smaller, they may become an issue to print. Not that they can't be printed, but that they will be very fragile and just break off before you even get them painted. 

    As for the K100E, I think it would be a fun project. Charles has the Ford W1000 now and I am waiting to see how that goes getting it printed. Some tweaking is required. If we can successfully get those to print and they work good for him, I will be doing more. If not I may have to see if I can print one good one and send it to a resin caster as a master.  I have lots of time to draw/design, I have ZERO time to print or cast parts. 

    For the K100E, would a flat top or Aerodyne be more desirable? When I get to that point, having a Revell cab and interior would be helpful. I will have to keep my eyes open for one or borrow from somebody. I am thinking full cab at this point, but we shall see. 

    Don't worry about it, the dash looks really good and I like to see it printed...as I said, I have lots of kits who need this dash.

    If you do a K100E I'm up for one.
    Flat Top or Aerodyne, well it's depending on personal taste, I suggested the Revell kit because the basic kit is the same for both the Flat Top and Aerodyne with different separate roof sections on the same cab, the downside is the price they go for and that they are not in production right now.
    But if you do something for the AMT kit you are pretty much locked on the Aerodyne as the only Flat Top they have is the K123 with a shorter and older style cab.

  11. On 2/20/2023 at 11:06 PM, Rob Hall said:

    So the Ford-branded cars in NASCAR today still have 'Ford' based engines, and are not just a generic power unit?  I haven't paid close attention to NASCAR in years...  they have a spec chassis but not a spec engine apparently..

    Well the NASCAR Ford FR-9 is not that Ford based as it's not a production engine, it's especially developed for NASCAR by Doug Yates and not available in any form in any car from the Ford factory.

    On 2/20/2023 at 11:22 PM, niteowl7710 said:

    They aren't spec engines like say Super GT or something, but for the most part there are only one or two places making engines for each manufacturer and everyone else buys engines from those shops.  Externally they are more or less the same, the main differences being how the air intakes attach, and SJR did address those changes between all three kits.

    You forgot the most noticable parts on the engines, namely the shape of the heads and valve covers wich are very different between Ford FR-9 and Chevrolet R07, they could at least have done those 4 parts right but it doesn't look like they did.
    Most of the rest of the engine is pretty much covered by the air cleaner and vents.

    On 2/20/2023 at 11:41 PM, martinfan5 said:

    Yes, Roush-Yates makes the Ford engines, Hendrick and ECR make engines for the Chevy, they joined their engine departments a few years ago and work together on building the R07 Engines, and TRD makes Toyota engines, and thats it for the Cup Series.    Xfinity has some small engine builders left, but most of the teams are using engines from above,  the Truck Series is using crate engines from ILMOR.

    Yes that's it.

  12. On 2/21/2023 at 4:05 PM, 37 caddy said:

    Are they the ones that look the most realistic,i remember back in the day when they first came out,they started on the MPC mack kits and the gravel trailer.Later when ERTL bought MPC they started to come in the IH truck kits.Anyone remember the tires that came on the original issues of the transtar kits,the hard plastic 2 piece tires,thay were horrible looking,wasnt long until i used the MPC tires on them,made a world of difference. harvey

    The soft ERTL tires are Good Year 11.00-20 and I really like them as they have some meat to them, the original tires in AMT kits has 10.00-20 wich I think looks a tad small, or 11.00-22 wich looks better, the makes are Uniroyal, Good Year or Firestone.

  13. On 2/21/2023 at 3:22 AM, Fat Brian said:

    I was asking Scott to make the grille as well, I might not have been clear enough. I see the difference in the windshield but it doesn't bother me enough to fix it considering what a massive pain it would be. Personally, I've been collecting parts for this build for a long time and have square horns and the modern lights but having them would definitely benefit others if this project gets taken up.

    If Scott or someone else does a convincing E model I'm up for it.
    I may be nitpicking but I want it to look right, I'm sorry about that but that's how my mind works.

  14. 17 hours ago, Oldmopars said:

    The Updated Dash


    Aerodyne Dash v5.5.jpg

    Aerodyne Dash v5.jpg

    Now we're talking.
    It looks good, maybe the knobs for the brake valves could have been even a touch smaller but it's good enough and 200% better than the kit offerings, so good work...now to the printer. 😉😄
    When it comes to the drivers side ash tray it's not a big deal as it's under the dash on the "dog house" and easy to scratch build if you want to.

    As for the K100E, I would be interested in whatever you decide to do, a front clip for an excisting cab you graft on or a complete cab, AMT or Revell AG doesn't matter as I have several of both.
    If you decide to do a complete cab the Revell AG kit it might be easier as the roof section on the Revell K100's is a separate piece so you can build either a flat top or Aerodyne depending on what kit you start with.

  15. I believe the more angular grille came at the same time as the square headlights and it would look weird with square headlights and the more rounded grille from the C model.
    But as I said, I have seen someone quite recently who did the headlights and the parts where the headlights mount to, I don't remember where, probably on facebook somewhere...but you also need the more angular grille if you want to fake it...just my observation.
    One thing one could do is print a correct front section of the cab so one could be able to graft it on a K100C cab, because I believe the roof section is the same on the C and E and it's just the wind screens that are slanted 3 degrees more backwards and the front section under the wind screens is 4 inches further forward on the E compared to the C, and make the square stuff like the grille, horns and lights too, in that case we would get a more correct K100E.
    The side skirt above the front wheels are also at a different angle on the E compared to the C wich are more rounded.

    The reason for the setback front axle was to be able to mount longer leaf springs for a smoother ride, but that would not matter if someone did a correct cab as both versions were available on the E model.

    • Like 1
  16. 3 hours ago, Fat Brian said:

    Since we're talking K100 stuff, how about a full update to the square headlight front end? There are only a few pieces that need to be made and honestly the dual square headlight bezels would be good on their own too. I have measurements for the bezels and might can get some of the K100 headlight area if the one I know of is still there. 

    Here's a picture of the instructions from the Revell kit. By replacing parts 155 & 156 with their square headlight replacements and bezels and the grille and adding the dash you've already made that would get about everything needed.


    I have seen somewhere that someone was doing just that but it takes more than the headlights to do a K100E, the whole front section of the cab is different as well as the grille wich is more angular than on the earlier K100's.
    The cab on the E model wich came 1984 is slightly longer as the windshields are laid back 3 degrees more than on the previous K100 models and the cab grew from 86 to 90 inches for the shorter single bunk cab and from 108 to 112 inches for the longer dual bunk cab, so the cab is 4 inches longer from front to back on an E model than the previous models while the roof lentgh is the same.
    So to do a correct K100E you have to do a complete cab, headlights and grille to get the right look as well as the side grab bars with steps wich are different from the earlier B and C models with separate aluminum steps, and the square horns, roof lights and turn signals.
    With that said it's not undoable but more work intensive.

    • Like 1
  • Create New...