Toner283

As an additional tip, I know you are wanting to Pro Street yours but for a stock/mildly modified car there is a better chassis available than the original one from the 69 Chevelle. The AMT 69 Olds W30 chassis is a direct drop in fit. Basically no modifications and it will go under the 69 Chevelle and give you a far better modern tooled chassis. Probably the 69 Hurst Olds will also work but I have never had one of those to be able to verify it.

Don't use the search feature on the site. It's basically useless. Check out this thread that Ace Garage Guy posted and use the tips in it. Much better search results.

The old monogram 40 Ford truck kit has a chrome fire extinguisher in it. It also has some Chrome tools and a first aid kit as well.

Opening everything, poor/sloppy hinges, poor door to body fit and generally fiddly to build. Designed and tooled along the same lines as their 55 56 and 57 Chevy opening everything kits. A nice model can be built of it with a bunch of work but it can be very frustrating for a young or an inexperienced builder. Definitely not a shake the box and have a completed model fall out type of kit.

A drop or two of clear paint works good as well for attaching PE emblems to the outer body of a model car or truck. Basically just enough to "glue" the emblem down.

The "vents" on a 67 Chevelle SS hood are there for looks only, there are no actual holes through the hood. The only thing on the bottom of the hood is where the studs come through that the stamped steel nuts thread onto to hold the "vents" in place. They are slightly curved to match the curve of the power bulges or blisters in the hood. (depends on who you ask what they are called) FWIW, the vents on 66 and 67 SS Chevelles are phony and the 68 and 69 SS Chevelles are functional. On all of them the Super Sport hoods have the power bulges and the base model hoods are flat. This is first hand knowledge as my father has owned a 67 Chevelle since 68 (and still has it) and I have a 69 Chevelle.

Thanks! I also spent several years professionally building hot rods and modified cars. Getting paid to work on other people's six and seven-figure cars was a lot of fun but I found that I got burnt out and as a result, I wasn't working on my own projects. The last thing I wanted to do when I got home was go out and work on my own cars after having worked on cars all day. Took a bit of time after I left the shop I worked at, but I've got my fire reignited to work on my own projects now and I'm slowly getting work accomplished on them again as time and money allows. With three young kids at home time can be the most difficult commodity to come across. Here is a couple of my toys.

Thanks! In the 1:1 world, a Deuce frame is not flat on the top. However, a model A body is flat on the bottom. So, in order to mate the two you have to either build a spacer to fill the gap or modify the model a body to sit down flush on the top of the Deuce frame rail. However, the model kit is engineered so that the top of the deuce frame is flat so that the interior and such fits easily. To mate the roadster body to it, I had to sand out a couple of lumps and bumps and tooling marks and had to thin down the body sides slightly at the cowl if I remember correctly. This is also where removing the original rear wheel wells from the Roadster body came into play. A stock Model A frame is flat on the top from front to back. A Deuce frame has the kick up where the frame rails curve up and over the rear end. Quite often in 1:1, hot rodders either slightly "pinch" the rear of a deuce frame to fit inside the model A body or they modify the rear wheel wells of the model A body to follow the contour of the Deuce frame similar to what I have done here. To fix this in scale and make it look good, I used the rear wheel wells from the Deuce kit that mate with the kick up over the rear end and attached those to the model A body. To anyone unfamiliar with the Revell Deuce series of kits, they can be built either full fendered or highboy style (fenderless). To facilitate this, the deuce bodies have no molded in rear fender wells. And the modeller either uses the fenders to fill the rear wheel wells or an optional set of rear fender wells for the hi boy version. I used these fender wells and modified them to fit the AMT 29 roadster body. I feel that it worked out well and it looks like the roadster body is supposed to be on that frame. Sorry for the long winded explanation, but I hope that answers your question. ?

I built this one after building Revells new 29 Model A Roadster and not being 100% happy with the proportions of it. Something just looked off to my eye. So, with this one I started with the chassis and running gear out of Revells 32 Ford 5 window kit. The chassis is built essentially box stock although 90% of a chrome has been removed in favour of paint. The front spring has been modified and recessed into the front crossmember to drop the front another four or five scale inches. Both front and rear axles have had backing plates added to have drum brakes rather than the kit disc brakes. The backing plates are either from the Revell 29 Ford kit or the RM 40 Ford kit. I don't remember for sure which kit I pirated them from. The hemi is box stock except a scratchbuilt 4 deuce intake with 4 of the strombergs and air cleaners from the Revell 29 ford roadster kit. No wiring or additional detailing was done to the Hemi. Just paint detailing since this is just a shelf model. The biggest difference is the rear wheels. To me, the offset on the steelie rear wheels of Revell's 5 window looks goofy. The centre of the rim is way too close to the outside of the tire. A hot rod with wide wheels should have a deep set rear rim. To fix this, I used the wheel backs from another set of front wheels from a second 5W kit, the wheel backs from a set of the front torque thrust wheels that are included in the kit, and the original rear wheels to scratch build a proper looking set of deep rear wheels. I removed the centre portion from the Torq Thrust wheel back and sanded it smooth where I removed the spokes and used that as a new outer rim and attached it to the kit steel wheel. Shaved the back side of the kit steel wheel down to narrow it a fair bit, and then used the second set of front wheel backs to deepen the offset even more. Looks like a proper hot rod wheel now. I mostly only used the body and interior of the AMT 1929 ford roadster. I feel it is better proportioned than the newer revell offering. One exception was that I used the 1940 ford dash from the 5W kit with Crystal Clear canopy glue to act as a gauge face rather than the kit piece. I also used a straight pin bent into a curve to make a swan neck shifter. I removed the original rear wheel wells and instead used the wheelwells from the 5W kit to make the body sit down nicely over the frame. I sectioned the grille shell and the grille from the Deuce kit to make the body lines flow nicely. I also trimmed down the recessed firewall from the Deuce kit to fit the smaller roadster body and to make room for the Hemi. Questions and comments always welcome.

Far from it. I also for years have thought that the 35 was a far more attractive car than the 36. And the 36 is also a far from ugly design.

If Moebius ( or any other manufacturer for that matter) were to to tool up a modern 1/25 scale issue of the square body Chevy pickup, I believe that those would sell extremely well right now. Square body pickups are hotter than they have ever been in the one to one market. The old 1/24th scale MPC/Monogram/Revell kits certainly show their age, they're kind of finicky to build/paint cleanly and the detail on them is very poor. With a new tooled kit there are multiple different options for additional releases ( short box/long box/stepside/utility box, regular/crew cab, two-wheel drive/four-wheel drive, lifted/lowered, round/square/four headlights, etc) and endless possibilities for build variations. I can understand I'm manufacturers reluctance to risk the $$ to tool up and release a kit of something obscure (as has been stated several times, the Moebius Hudson releases surprised a lot of us and how well it did in sales was also a surprise) but something as common and ubiquitous as a square body Chevy pickup, I'm shocked that no one has released a modern tool kit of it yet. I would bet that most of us either have owned a square body Chevy pickup or know several people who have owned them. Personally, I have owned six or seven of them and still own three. Manufacturers, if you're reading this, please start with an '86 regular cab long box 2-wheel drive. ?

Another vote for Tamiya smoke. You can add coats until it looks right depending on whether you're looking for show chrome or older patina'd Chrome.

Probably far cheaper than replacing product and having to mail it twice. Like the instructions given to me by my dad is a kid. If you don't have time to do it right you must have time to do it twice.

I seem to remember reading on one of the threads here on the board that the main tooling for the Futurista had been found but all of the clear tooling and the tooling for the tires was missing. IIRC, it was determined that the benefit to retooling missing parts didn't balance out to what it would cost to cut new tooling in order to reissue the kit. The above is based on a fuzzy memory and may not be factually correct. Hopefully someone who knows better than me or has a better memory than me will chime in.

I load trailers day in and day out for a living and as our older trailers are replaced with newer ones, the new ones all have the side skirting. 90% of the trailers we deal with are Great Dane. Any of our short haul trailers do not have the trailer tail on them. All of our long haul trailers do. The ones that we have with the trailer tail are all manually deployed. However, none of our trailers with the tail have the bottom piece that shows in the photos you posted. Only the two sides and the top. The trucking company that we deal with the drivers are told they have to fold them out unless they're broken and if they damage them they lose their safety bonus so they're pretty careful with them. A couple of the drivers have said the trailers actually haul easier with the side skirts and the tail because there's less turbulence.

Not a revell hater here and I'm holding off judgment until I actually have a kit in my hands and I can judge for myself but that picture posted of the box art model looks wrong. As the owner of a real 69 Chevelle something looks funny there. Not sure whether it's the stripe or the body line on the coke bottle shape of the quarter or exactly what but something looks funky. I hope it's just that the person who built the box art model didn't know Chevelles nearly as well as some of us to who own the real thing. I have been waiting for the 69 to be released ever since the 68 was announced. The taillights themselves on the Revell kit look excellent as they were one of the weakest points on the old school AMT kit. Even the tail lights on the original issues of the AMT kit with the separate tail lights were not anywhere near 100%.

That is 2 completely different trucks. Eddie Van Halen still has the one with the black and white stripes all over it. From what I've been able to discover, Boyd was going to build four or five clones of the truck to sell or give away and when EVH caught wind of it he threatened legal action if Boyd built a truck that looked exactly like his. Boyd changed the wheels and the graphics enough to appease EVH and built at least one. Not sure if any others ever got built or not.

Keep a saved search on ebay for "AMT Service trailer" or "Blueprinter service trailer". They pop up often. I have bought them for as little as $15 US. They also pop up at shows frequently. Usually they sell for between $25 and $40. Just have to keep an eye out for them.

Check out God Hand sprue cutters. Like SfanGoch above, I have a set of Xuron sprue Cutters that I used all the time and that I have had for a long time. A friend at the Hobby Store kept bugging me to try the God Hand sprue cutters. I told him he was nuts and my Xuron cutters were fine, that I was't going to pay him $25 for a set of sprue cutters. At the time I think the Xuron cutters were like $11.99 a set. Finally after quite a long time of trying he hands me a set and says "Here take these home and try them and when you find you love them come back and pay for them." Night and day difference between the God Hand Cutters and the Xuron cutters. The God Hand cutters are designed for the guys who do the Gundam kits. A lot of those are molded in the correct colours and guys don't want to paint them but they also don't want the stress and distortion marks where the parts have been removed from the sprues. The God Hand Cutters minimize these marks and if you wanted to get spendy and step up and buy their expensive ($100ish) set of sprue cutters, they pretty much eliminate any of the distortion marks completely. I don't think I have used my Xuron cutters hardly at all since I bought the God Hand ones. And I have actually bought a second set of God Hand cutters as well because my wife discovered how well they cut and she appropriated my first set for her own crafting purposes. I am actually considering buying a set of $100 ones to use for some of the teeny tiny parts that I deal with. As of yet I haven't quite convinced myself that I can justify that expense. However, some of the folks I have been asking questions of have told me that there is a night and day difference between the cutters that I currently have and the top-of-the-line ones that God Hand makes.

I have the Early Iron and the Lemon Crate both in front of me right now and the orange Early Iron issue does not have the louvers in the tailgate or the hood. The Lemon Crate issue does have the louvers in both the hood and the tailgate. Interestingly enough the road flares are still in the Early Iron issue. In the Lemon Crate the space on the sprues where the road flares were now has the wooden sideboards for the bedsides.

As far as an ignition device, the kit engine has a magneto instead of a distributor so no external coil is required. I cannot recall but the master brake cylinder may be on the firewall.

A sump pump is one thing that I like to have a spare new one "on the shelf" just in case. I have found that Mr Murphy will always cause important equipment (like a sump pump) to fatally malfunction 10 min after the stores close on a saturday night. A water heater, a fridge/freezer or a furnace ceasing to work is inconvenient but water getting into your house is destructive and can get expensive very fast.

I have it. Used to get so bad some nights that my wife would get mad in bed because I wouldn't hold still for her to go to sleep. And even if she was asleep sometimes it would wake her up. I also have pretty wicked bad sleep apnea. However once I got the CPAP machine for my apnea my restless leg syndrome has basically disappeared. When I was getting tested for sleep apnea the doctors asked me a bunch of questions about things that had been bugging me (like the restless leg syndrome) and had been getting worse over the years and most of it was related to my sleep apnea. Might not be related to yours but just something to think about.

That is fantastic news. I love the lines on the Streamliner and I'm glad to see that it is going to be brought back to life.