Richard Bartrop

Personally, I think it would best without any exposed spares. That streamline style was all about covering up the mechanical bits..

Exactly. I can't see the new owners looking at all these people waving money at them and not thinking, "Y'know maybe we ought to use some of these moulds we just bought...." They'll probably cost more, which is annoying, but it's not like Round 2 hasn't been putting the squeeze on us.

And it looks like dressing up in period costume and having fun with 30 year old cars is still a thing. Good for them https://jalopnik.com/radwood-is-joining-forces-with-gridlife-to-bring-the-ra-1828116935

When people are talking about something I'm not interested in, I'll find one I am interested in. It's really not that hard.

$15 for shipping? I wish they were that low. In the meantime, the hobby stores here still have Revell kits on the shelves, and some are even on sale. I guess I will make do somehow.

As long as they put their efforts into the kits. I'm okay with that, and as far as kits went, the 90s were AMT's golden age.

I've seen some pretty horrible box art over the years, but I can't remember ever not buying a model because of poor box art. There are some I've passed on because the photo of the model on the box didn't look all that great, but that's a different issue, and the reason why photo boxes are better than painted boxes. On the other hand, when they expect me to pay extra for some extra fancy "collector's edition" box, then that does turn me off.

Bertone takes on the 911, and does a pretty fine job of it, I think.

A Watson roadster would definitely be right up there on my list.

Looks sharp. Thanks for sharing!

I'd always seek out the Monogram kits. They always seemed a little more solid and went together better than the others, and as a kid I liked that the instruction streets told you what the parts were supposed to be. I prefer 1/24 because conversion is so easy to figure out, and architectural rulers had 1/24 on them. That said 1/25 has never been a deal breaker for me.

Great stuff! Nothing like documents from the time for figuring out who did what, and when.

Are there difference4s? OF course there are. There are also differences between a 1/25 Revell Model A and a 1/25 AMT Model A. The engine in the Double T kit is a different size from the one in the Model T Touring, and it's the same engine made by the same company. It still doesn't change the fact that the miniscule differences between the scales is wiped out by the variations from the true scale, and if you switched the number on the box, most would be none the wiser.

But as was mentioned before, even if they had gone to an accurate 1/25, they'd still be the "wrong" size.

This got me curious, so I took a ruler to the Revell '40 Ford kit in my stash. It's labelled as 1/25, but it measures out closer to 1/24.

Sometimes it comes from looking at all the leftover parts from another project and wondering what I'm going to do with them.

Who knows? Monogram still stayed in business for a good long time, and outlasted companies that went with1/25, and 1/24 is still the preferred scale in the rest of the world. Factoring in how much the kits actually deviate from their stated scale, how you can interchange parts between 1/24 and 1/25 kits, and how the same kit has been boxed as both 1/24 and 1/25, I still maintain that any issues over the differences between the two scales are largely the product of people's imaginations.

Just goes to show you can't please everyone. I'm sure there are roadster fans who were happy that they wouldn't have to buy the coupe to get the wheels and engine.

Mostly The Jalopy Journal and Rik Hoving's sites for hot rods and customs. The Cadillac Database has sparked some ideas for the Jo-Han kits. Sometimes it's something I've seen in a book, or at a show, and sometimes another model build will inspire something.

I trimmed the fenders, though I think I need to take a little more off the front ones.

Sounds like a good excuse to me If you aren't already familiar with the Cadillac Database, it's a fantastic resource if you're building a V-16. The have photos of nearly every surviving Cadillac V-16 known to man, and there's plenty of inspirational material https://www.newcadillacdatabase.org/static/CDB/Dbas_txt/V6srv30.htm I have the Town Brougham kit (sorry, I'm keeping that one) and it does include a pair of pieces for the running boards that would be very useful for anyone contemplating the coach still style bodies of the phaeton and cabriolet into a standard model.

Hate those cheap, nasty Veyrons? Tired of having to drive around in a Lamborghini like some kind of hobo? A cool $17.5 million will get you Pagani's new Zonda HP Barchetta, or would if they weren't already sold out. No word if it comes in red. I actually think it looks pretty neat, though whether it's $17.5 million worth of neat is debatable. I wouldn't object to a model version.

Though the kit isn't actually of a "roadster". The original is actually a "cabriolet", or "Convertible coupe", as it has windows instead of side curtain. Cadillac did make a roadster version, and as you can see, there are some differences. "V-16 convertible" still sounds pretty sweet to me.

That turned out very nice! Good colour choice too.

Though if you removed the restriction on scale, there's something to be said for getting something large and insanely complicated like a Pocher kit or Model Factory Hiro. If you're going to be stuck with just one kit, it might as well be one that's going to take a while.