Richard Bartrop

I've seen some custom Fords sporting Meteor grilles, so it would not surprise me if a few custom Mercs received some Canadian dental work as well. Some Canadian customizers have worked their magic on the '49 Monarch, and not surprisingly, they respond as well to the customizer's touch as the Mercury.

Some are models, like the Pontiac Laurentian, and some, like the Monarch, are makes in their own right. From what I've read, that's a cats eye style reflector in the end of the Monarch trim.

As for whether there's enough demand for a D-type kit. Jaguar thinks there's enough demand to build the real deal. http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/classic-cars/a16643641/jaguar-d-type-continuation/

The Exoto model is pretty spiffy! We've talked about converting existing tooling before. Turning RoG's XKSS into a D-type would seem to be a natural choice.

What about moving the body back on the frame?

If you ever wanted to take the plunge into scratchbuilding, this would be the project for it. The mechanical components can come from pretty much any hot rod kit ever, and the body is a nice, simple shape. If you don't have the equipment for vacforming, there's always stretch forming https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?33140-Stretch-forming-plastic-parts. The frame may take some work, but if you've ever built one for a hot rod or dragster, you already know how to do it, and if you don't want to open it up, you don't even need a complex frame.

An article from 1952 showing how to build a full size belly tanker http://www.bellytanks.com/1951/“how-to-build-a-belly-tanker”-by-tom-beatty-1952 You don't even need to cannibalize a model kit. This very nice model of Art Arfons' Green Monster #6 got its body from a vibrator

According to https://kustomrama.com/index.php?title=Car_Craft_Dream_Rod the Dream Rod was restyled into the Tiger Shark in 1966, before the Hot Wheels. I have the 2006 issue of the kit, and it looks like there are a couple of headrests and a headlight pod left over from when it was the Dream Rod.

I've peeked into it once in a while when it had something relevant, but not every day, so I guess I'm not one either. Darn, and your opinion is so very important too.

To be fair, they all had other problems, but if they didn't have the recession on top of everything else, maybe some of those problems may have been able to have been sorted.

Hard to say. 1958 wasn't a great year for styling for for or GM or Ford. Hide the grille, and it doesn't look all that different from the Chevy of the same year. Others tried that mock grille idea before and after, with arguably better results, but to me, anyhow, it's not that bad. In any case, they'd gotten rid of it for the 1960 model year. Design by committee was certainly not unique to Edsel, and the more enthusiast driven designs; the Continental Mk II and the two seater T-Bird, didn't last any longer than the Edsel. American Motors survived by going small and cheap. Was it quality? None of the Big Three were any great shakes for quality in 1958. I'm inclined to to think the Eisenhower Recession was the biggest factor. Edsel failed, but so did the Continental division, and Lincoln was nearly shut down. Desoto, Studebaker, Packard, Hudson and Nash were also lost to it.

I still haven't started on the '29 I bought fro the first time they came out, so I think I can be patient.

And imagine if all the time and money spent on plastic models was put into something useful. Or the hundreds of millions that gets spent on some pointless blockbuster so that people can kill a couple of hours in a darkened theatre. Or for that matter, any of the other useless stuff we buy and do every day. Funny how none of that ever gets questioned.

If you mean the moon landings, yes, I enjoyed them immensely. And has been pointed out many times, the technological spinoffs from the space program, have paid for it many times over.

No rocket scientist here, but it does strike me as prudent. There were 29 engines on the end of the rocket, so 29 opportunities for things to go horribly wrong.

From what I understand, it was a test flight, so it was going up anyhow, most likely with a concrete block as a test weight. I think it's safe to say that we probably wouldn't still be talking about Elon Musk's concrete block, so I'd say, he got his money's worth in publicity, and then some.

Or better yet, some future belt miner. "This week on Asteroid Pickers, we found something really special." Also, I'd like to think we can all agree that the moon hoaxers are idiots.

Very much, but it was the real deal, which is what made it so exciting. And I have no problem with a little hype and pubilicity if it gets people excited about space travel.

That is really nice. I'm okay with the trend to restraint in AMBR winners, but the previous couple of winners were maybe a little too restrained. This has just enough glitter to give it interest without overdoing it.

Thanks for the photos!

If they're going to celebrate 50 years of Edsel in 2018, maybe this would be a good opportunity to reissue the Thomas Flyer to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the 1908 Great Race. Better late than never, right?

As long as the plastic is in the box, that's the important thing. Now the "investors" will have a new "rare collectible" they can foist on the gullible.

It is, a state that lent its name to both a ham, and a Volkswagen camper.

Nice choices. The XP-96 Stingray would be on my list for sure.

Definitely looking forward to this one hitting the theatres https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/james-mangold-direct-ford-ferrari-project-fox-1081866?utm_source=Direct