Inspirational to watch you correct what should have been right to start with. I have a couple of these and may try a different approach, now that you've so kindly pointed out what exactly is wrong. Great color choice for this car, by the way.
Had some Nikon photo-editor compatibility issues with my new hard-drive in the Win7 machine that weren't there with the old drive, and that took a while to work around...but it works just like it worked in XP now, even better than when I had the old 7 drive. Finally got enough real-life fires put out to grab some bench time these last few evenings. Listening to the local PBS affiliate doing their classic jazz Saturday night program. Life's pretty OK for the moment. I lost a lot of detail due to primer buildup, particularly the (should-be) sharply-sculpted body lines on the rear quarters, and I had to correct them. Also had a devil of a time getting the scribed panel lines straight enough, learned a thing of two in the process.
Now she's in Duplicolor white primer, getting very close. I still have to make the center panel for the forward bellypan, and finalize the header openings, then just a little more 600-800 grit sanding of some areas. The body lines on the quarters are still a little too fat and vague, but I have a method worked out to slim them down and sharpen them a bit more.
I have several, from pristine original Pyro and Lindberg boxed kits to awful gluebombs, one of which was salvaged from a dump. They fit together very well, build up easily, the engines are detailed enough to take farther and look quite good, and the proportions aren't too bad. The chassis is very simple and pretty much detail-free. The scaling, however, isn't very accurate. The model is smaller than it should be for the scale, but it makes a great basis for a hot-rod-custom. I've never formally measured one to see how far off it is, but I've driven and worked on real 1:1 Auburn boat-tails and fiberglass replicas, and the model is definitely undersize. You could probably use the Pyro / Lindberg model as a good basis for making an accurate model of the subject, with some work.
In all fairness, it would seem that many old farts are also homonym-challenged, but they don't have the ready-made excuse of being conditioned to quickie thumb-spelling on the ol' texter thingie. "HOMONYMS are words that sound alike but have different meanings.Homophones are a type of homonym that also sound alike and have different meanings, but have different spellings. HOMOGRAPHS are words that are spelled the same but have different meanings.Heteronyms are a type of homograph that are also spelled the same and have different meanings, but sound different. WORDS THAT BOTH SOUND THE SAME AND ARE SPELLED THE SAME are both homonyms (same sound) and homographs (same spelling). Example: lie (untruth) and lie (prone); fair (county fair), fair (reasonable)." OMG, OMG...couldn't we just measure some header-spacing nits instead? Accuracy in ANYTHING is so hard !!!
1) What's a map? 2) I texted all my friends, and the only one who'd ever heard of the Revolutionary War said Germany won, in 1975. Tribal knowledge is powerful. 3) We should all be trying to conserve synaptic resources (whatever they are).
And if you have a life where you can be a couple inches off in your measuring, you have it pretty damm easy. The guys at the car model companies WANT to build good models without instantly visible flaws. Otherwise, we'd get Palmer-quality every time. QED In general, today's kits are VERY good overall, simply because the people doing the work care enough to make it so. Just a little more care in evaluating the work before it's committed to final tooling is all any of us are asking. Quite reasonable. Adult business men don't take their marbles and go home in a snit like babies because someone had the audacity to point out something that could be better with a product. They try a little harder next time, or carefully evaluate and correct the flaw if it's caught early enough.
Thanks for the good illustration of the contrail phenomenon, Greg. Many of the photos on the web purporting to be "chemtrails" and portraying the differences between them and contrails are obviously doctored or outright fakes, and surely no one who's spent their lives looking at the sky would believe the hysteria hook-line-and-sinker. They often fail to take into consideration the very low temperatures in the upper atmosphere, and the stratification of layers of the atmosphere...with temps and wind velocities and direction varying with altitude, often unpredictably. While I certainly don't doubt the government's ability to do stupid, often destructive things, sometimes on a massive scale, I don't believe these trails are some kind of nefarious secret project.