Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum

Karl LaFong

Members
  • Posts

    332
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Karl LaFong

  1. Got some more work done over the weekend. The engine and suspension were installed (no more droopy traction bars). The injection throttle was constructed from K & S 1/16th inch tubing, Tichy bolt heads, and Detail Master ignition wire and parts from their photo-etch carb details set. The injection scoop was painted Spaz Stix Mirror Chrome over Tamiya Black. The fuel tubing connectors are gold crimp beads. Hope to get more done tonight...
  2. Thanks for the kind words! One of the things that irked me about the Miss Deal kit is that there was no room for a fuel pump - the blower guard bumps up to the fuel tank. I ground down the old fuel tank supports and added a strip of Evergreen styrene for the new fuel tank. The fuel pump is from the Revell Ed Roth '57 Chevy - it and most of the other engine goodies are based on the Revell Sting Ray Engine Parts Pack. The fuel tank is modified from the Fumin' Fiat kit (originally the Roadster Chassis Parts Pack). The original tank was in two pieces, when joined together there's a pretty nasty seam. I shortened one of the pieces and reduced the seam. I had to give up on the white wall slicks. I had used Floquil acrylic paint and small cracks appeared, plus I wasn't happy with their appearance. I wish it had worked, as I really like the look of white wall slicks from the 50's & early 60's. I also enlarged the rear wheel openings.
  3. Revell's Miss Deal is a great source for early 60's Revell Pack parts, so swapping in parts from other Parts Packs is a snap. My sources were original Parts Packs (the front wheels), kits with re-popped parts (Revell '57 Chevy for the injector & scoop), and the Fumin'Fiat/Thunder Charger (rear wheels). I'm backdating the kit to a circa 1962 altered. The only body mod I've done so far is filling in the gigantic slot in the trunk. And I hope to clean up the whitewalls before the next posting....
  4. Are there any rattle can paints that match Mercedes silver from 1955? Would Tamiya's Gloss Aluminum be a close match?
  5. Very cool project - seems like the Johan classic car kits are far more affordable than the 50's - 70's cars. Not to hijack this thread, but was the Mercedes red from the 1930's a solid color or metallic? It's difficult to tell from pictures of the actual vehicles.
  6. VERY cool & original!
  7. Nice!!
  8. The major inspiration for this build was the box art from one of the many re-issues of this kit - I've always liked the canted headlights options for the custom. This one is based on the 90's "Diamond in the Rough" issue. Paint is Tamiya Mica Red over Testor's True Gold. Seats, steering wheel, and center console are from the AMT '49 Merc. Wheels are from the circa 1963 issue of the AMT 1950 Ford convertible. Tail lights are from the parts box; the remaining parts are from the kit. All in all, this is a surprisingly well engineered kit and was a hoot to build.
  9. I bought this kit about 10 years ago with the intention of building a street machine. While it was missing several key items like an engine and firewall, it did contain new Modelhaus bumpers and the original kustom parts. I'm a sucker for early 60's AMT customs, so good-bye street machine, hello kustom. The interior is painted Tamiya pearl white, with Scale Motorsports decals on the seats. The exterior paint is Tamiya clear red over Tamiya Metallic Red. Wheels are from the AMT '61 Ford; tires are old Monogram items. This one time I wish the builder HAD glued on the fender skirts! Thanks for looking!
  10. Gerry, Thanks for the review! Looks like there's less flash than there was in the Model King version.
  11. Does the tuner version include the roll bar that is in the race versions?
  12. Great job on the car and great choice of records!
  13. What a shame! Great job on the masking - you have more patience than I do.
  14. The Fuman version of the Entex/Bandai Mercer has a clear coating on the yellow parts trees. I'm assuming that it gives the builder the option of not having to paint the parts as they have a glossy sheen to them. At least in theory - the actual coating has plenty of orange peel and dust in it. I tried Scalecoat Washaway and it does remove the coating. The combination of many parts + small volume of liquid means this is going to be time consuming - that's why we have Christmas vacation...
  15. I recently bought a Fuman 1/16th scale 1913 Mercer. I tried removing the clear coating on the yellow parts trees in Super Clean, but it had no effect. Has anyone had any luck removing the clear coat, or can it just be painted over? I plan on using Tamiya spray paints - are they safe over the clear coat? Any help would be appreciated!
  16. Very nice! Where there any problems with sinkmarks? I encountered a bunch of 'em in my Steamer and the Aurora Stutz.
  17. GREAT job!
  18. Sweeeeet! Rust rules!
  19. It's a shame AMT didn't release the non-Craftsman T-bird kit with the molded in frame. It's a bitch trying to line up the window glass with the chrome frame & body. Additionally, even when using a sprue cutter, I've ended up taking a healthy chunk out of the chrome frame. I wonder if the mold for the Craftsman T-bird still exists? I'm not aware of any subsequent re-issues of the kit where the body would have been butchered.
  20. Sweeet! Great paint job.
  21. Nice job!
  22. I have to agree with Kevin - love it or hate it, it's one kit that will test you skills as a modeler. In spite of all the negatives, I welcome it back - I tried building it when I was 10, now that I'm 58 I intend to finish it!
  23. I'd have to agree that reissuing this 57 Chevy vs. the snap kit is an odd business decision. When I bought it I was well aware of the pitfalls of this kit (like I said, I like the challenge), but it seems that this kit would give the Revell haters plenty of ammo. I'm not a rivet counter, but it's even obvious to me that it doesn't look right - not as bad as a Palmer, but not as good as AMT's circa 1962 version. Coupled with the ill-fitting parts, it's hard to imagine what Revell was thinking in '63. BUT, people did build the kit and even won contests with it (check out old issues of Car Model & Model Car Science) and it did lead to the original 55 & 56 Chevys, so somebody was buying the kits. Moving to the present day, I'm guessing that because of the smaller parts content (& less styrene), Revell could have issued the snap kit with correct wheels and the Roth decal sheet and made a nice profit. More importantly, they would not have had further tarnishing of their reputation. In answer to Scott's question, I guess it's closer to Revell's 56 Ford truck kit - with patience, it can be built, but probably would be best displayed with the doors open..
  24. On Saturday I picked up the latest incarnation of the much loved (or loathed) 1957 Chevy Bel Air, which was originally introduced in 1963. This is the one with opening doors, trunk, and steerable wheels. Back in the day this kit was controversial because of the afore mentioned features - it was The End of Modeling As We Know It, since opening doors, etc. were the domain of Master Modelers like Dave Shuklis. Now anybody could walk into a hobby shop, plunk down $1.98, and have an award winning model. In theory. Actually, this kit was and is a bear to assemble. Except for the decals, tires, and chrome wheels, it's pretty much a straight re-pop of the Revell/Revell Monogram Hot Rod Magazine version. The stock hubcaps and chrome reverse wheels have been restored, so for the first time in 30+ years a stock version can be built. The tires are no name black walls, but with some whitewall trimming, the wheels will fit the AMT B.F. Goodrich tires found in kits like the '62 Pontiac. There is a drag version, but no slicks or roll bar. The glass is clear, but too small, there's a considerable gap between the glass & body for both the front & rear windows. The only solution I've been able to find is a sheet of .005" clear Evergreen and trial & error fitting. Compared to a Revell/Mongram example I have (yes, I AM a glutton for punishment) there are far fewer sink marks, but there is plenty of flash (see the chrome tree below). Considering the age of the mold, it's no worse than some AMT repops from the same era. Oddly, on my old kit, the copyright on the frame is 1985, on the current version the copyright is 1973. I was also pleasantly surprised to see that the kit was molded in the U.S.A. The decal sheet was printed in Italy - no word if it was by Cartograf. (see below). Not to beat a dead horse, but compared to the AMT and 21st Century 57 Chevys, the proportions off - it's been a complaint since the '80s and it would seem to be unreasonable to fix it now. FWIW, I like it, warts & all. I wouldn't recommend this kit for the casual builder, but if you like the experience of modeling circa 1963, this is WAY cheaper than buying the original issue.
×
×
  • Create New...