Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Bill J

Members
  • Content Count

    738
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bill J

  • Rank
    MCM Ohana

Previous Fields

  • Scale I Build
    1/25 and 1/24

Profile Information

  • Location
    Valley of The Sun
  • Full Name
    Bill Jay

Recent Profile Visitors

4,123 profile views
  1. Looks great Gerald! Another fine Dodge
  2. Looking great Gerald :)
  3. Looks great so far Gerald. I have every confidence that you'll make a great Montego for us mere mortals
  4. I would love a new tool 65/66 Mustang 2+2. Like Dave said, they could do the GT 350 versions and all would be big sellsers in 1/25 scale. THE orignal pony car!!
  5. I need to look into that. There is a community college a mile from me. I think all the schools are still closed for the virus though. All the kids in elementary and high schools are doing virtual classes this year. You are right, I shall look into the CC having some classes. Probably only need some basics.
  6. Pete the one i have is a manual lathe. My buddy had bought it, used, to try some machining and ended up buying a CNC machine. Since he was not using the manual lathe he gave it to me. I sure can't complain but I need to find way to learn how to use it.
  7. I wish I knew more about machining. I made something in metal shop in high school over 50 years ago, don't remember any of the processes. I bought a small lathe with a mill attachment and it sat for years and I traded it for a computer part. Always regretted that. A few years ago a friend asked me if I wanted a mini lathe that he was not going to use, he has a nice CNC machine. So I took this little lathe and once again I have not used it. It came with some tools and stuff, all of which are alien to me. Not planning of letting this one go but I also have no idea when I will ever learn to use the thing. My friend with the CNC machine is not a machinist either and all he uses his CNC for is all programmed out and all he does is secure some material into it and press GO. Pretty amazing actually. The crazy part is that when I was 19 I worked in a machine shop. I started sweeping and maybe cutting off stock on a large band saw. They were just beginning to train me to set up some actual machine work when I got a draft notice. It was 1966 after all.
  8. Maybe relevant to this discussion, most new muscle cars are priced out of the range of most of the buyers that they are meant to attract. What I mean by that is back in say 1969 a new Camaro Z-28 or Mustang Mach 1 was just a bit over $4000. A young person with most any job could buy one, or nearly any other muscle car they desired. Today, the top muscle cars are nearly all above $50K and most potential buyers cannot buy one, even with creative financing. For that matter a new Jeep is priced out of the range of many who would like to own one. I know that for a hard fact because I have a 2012 Wrangler and a 2021 is about $15K more for an equally equipped model. Any way, the cars you mention as not having kits are just not as popular in 1:1 either, in terms of sales. A nice new Corvette is very cool but so impractical and not a very sound investment either. I live in a large city with good weather and good streets and see a lot of cars. I have seen exactly 2 C7 Corvettes in all their years and not a single mid-engine 'vette. Cars are continuously pricing themselves out of existence.
  9. I know what Greg is saying. Cars were much more interesting and unique back in those days. They did not all look the same and they did not share power trains either. Today when you see a classic they are real head turners. However, there are fewer of us that remember the cars from when they were new. Unfortunately not everyone achieves some of our ages. Young people today are unlikely to identify with most cars of that early era. From a model kit perspective, I would imagine the costs involved with tooling up a new kit and producing it in this volatile market would perhaps scare off the bean counters at most of the model making companies. I would imagine that Moebius, although having done well with their Hudson kits, under new ownership seem to be less interested in old orphaned car brands. I have always wanted a model of a late '40's to early '50's Packard, which is much like the Hudsons of that time. I know it will never happen. Perhaps one of the reasons that the Hudson kit sold well was the movie connection from "Cars" and/or the NASCAR connection from the days when they raced real cars. I have to say, that every time I see "Back to The Future" I really enjoy seeing the old cars and particularly Doc Brown's yellow Packard convertible. Yes, the subject is still very interesting to many of us but perhaps not enough to motivate the model companies to help us relive the past, sadly.
  10. Pete, what you say makes sense from today's perspective but going back to the beginnings of the GT class and the Prototype classes, it makes more sense to have room for some luggage and another person. Incidentally, while at some point they stopped this, originally the spare tire and jack made perfect sense, the driver was required to fix a flat anytime he had one. I would think it was very hazardous and the requirement was changed. The concept of the GT class was a "touring" car that a couple could pack some clothes and enjoy a road trip of several days or more. To be eligible for the GT class in FIA racing the car had to meet those requirements and also sell a defined number of cars for road use. In those days the "prototype" class had to meet the same requirements and the only variation is they had not met the sales of road versions. So you could build a few cars to race and not bother building any for sales to road users. Eventually the Prototype class has evolved into purpose build race cars that do not follow the GT class rules. The reason a Ford GT-40 MKI was eligible for GT class by 1966 was because they had built and sold enough cars for road use. A few of those street versions ended up as race cars. Ford never built many MKII or MKIIB versions and never produced a street version, so the MKII always was in the Prototype class. At the time, they had to meet the GT class requirements, except for road car sales. This was a very defining and golden era in sports car racing.
  11. Actually they were required and also at Daytona. In 1966 the Daytona 24 hour race was also sanctioned by the FIA and the same class rules applied. The cars were allowed to remove the suitcase boxes for practice. The boxes were in the way of some suspension and gearbox access and some engine work was easier without the boxes. For qualifying and the races, the boxes had to be in place. This also applied to Sebring. I am not sure what year they FIA rules were dropped at Daytona and Sebring but it was after 1970 for sure. This is the # 98 Daytona 24 winning car from 1966 and it clearly has the suitcase boxes. I believe this no suitcase rumor began because of a How To write up in one of the modelling magazines. I believe it was building a 1966 Daytona GT-40 MKII The information was incorrect and likely based on a few photos taken when boxes were removed for access during practice sessions.
  12. Gerald, Gopher Racing makes a sheet with various under hood markings. Sheet 11065. There are some Boss 429 markings but not sure if they are the size to fit the valve covers on your build. They look small but maybe not as small as you would like.
  13. Gerald, all of your hard work paid off. The Allison Charger 500 came out great. I really like it. I keep starting Charger 500 builds and stop at some point when I can't seem to find the patience to do them right. You stuck with yours and it shows in the final pics, great job!!
×
×
  • Create New...