Pete J.

First of all, thanks to all of you for you kind words. Gregg, I was very surprised to walk in on Saturday and see your award. It really means a lot coming from you. Thank you. There were a lot of really nice models to pick from. The Cayman and the GT1 both had spectacular finishes. I would not have wanted to have been responsible for deciding which was the best. There were some really nice bikes on the table. I guess I should pull one out of my stash and see if I can do it justice. Very nice pieces. Kind of a different split for the awards in bikes. Bikes painted green and bikes painted yellow or red. I have no idea how they judge armor and aircraft. There are so many entries that they really have a chore. Of course the best part was renewing old friendships and meeting new people. Every modeler you meet has something new that they can teach you and are only a step away from become a new friend. Great things contest, especially at this level. If you have a chance you should go, even if you don't put anything on the table. Super opportunity to get the creative juices going again.

On the road at 8am Thursday. Should be in Phoenix by 2:30 or so. Just in time to hit the heat of the day. See you all there.

Mark, have you seen one? I never have, even at C&C and that is saying a lot. I've seen three Enzo's, 2 Veyron's, several Porsche GTs, even some Saleen S7's and a ton of Lambos and other Ferraris, but never a McLaren.

Porsche 935 1:12 scale . Yup, some will.

Well it is definitly a McLaren F1 and I'm voting model because of the photo not the car. It's a depth of field thing.

That is why they invented scissors.

R/C'rs have a sponge insert for their tires and I have used it quite sucessfully, and the great part is that it is just abount the perfect size for 1:12 scale tires.

I.....ah.....have no clue. Two seat, drop top. Thats as good as I can get

Frankly, that would be "contest Judging" and if you want to stir up a hornets nest, start a posting with that as a topic.

. I have to agree. Complementing poor work only encourages poor work, but blunt unwelcome criticism doesn't help either. Both sides need to arrive at the table with a proper attitude. We should have a separate section with an appropriate title such as "shooting gallery". The rules should go something like this. Gentlemen on both sides of the table. Put your model up and be prepared to have it looked at critically. Commenters: Keep it civil. Comment but keep it to the model and keep it constructive. Bad Paint - Not a constructive comment. Constructive comment - Orange peel, need sanding and polishing. Here is how you do it. Etc. Maybe Harry is listening and would give it some consideration. What do you think?

Sounds like you have some body modifications in mind. You will need to get some filler and sanding materials. Time to go to the beauty shop and auto store. The auto shop for some two part glazing compound. This is a find grained putty and works great on models. I personally use Euro Soft, but Bondo and several others make the same thing. If you buy some, transfer both the compound and the hardener out of the plastic containers and into glass. This stuff was made to be used quickly so the life of the plastic containers is much less that the chance of you ever using it up on plastic models. Now the beauty shop. Sanding sticks. Most finger nail finishers use a variety of sanding sticks with different grits. Get a reasonable variety. Use them for wet sanding the plastic and putty. They are great for shaping body panels and blending new body panels. Most skilled modelers are not proud of where they get stuff. For the most part they want something that works at the best possible price. Good luck!

There are several here who have suggested it, but the transition to a higher level isn't about kits. Going out an buying better kits is a waste of time without practice. If you have the opportunity, go to ebay and pick up some junkers or somebody's spare parts then get out a saw and start hacking and re-gluing parts back together. Learn how plastic reacts and how to correct mistakes. Then take some of your hacked up bodies and play with some paint and tape and see how you get it to look realistic. It may sound boring but frankly a lot of my best projects started with discarded bodies. Let your imagination run amok. After you have that then get into the books or on line photos and see what you like. Oh, and have fun! That is most important. Detail is not important if you haven't mastered the basics. When you look at the stuff here on line, know that many of these models involve hours of basic prep work and meticulous finishing. The really great stuff is never done quick and easy. Good Luck!

Ok, I am confirmed good. This is a bit like a race team. The body is coming in from California and the engine from Pennsylvania. It is really weird when you have to coordinate parts for a model! Well, it will be good to get an overdose of plastic. See ya there. Pete

Harry - I am going to go real on this one. I am probably wrong the the tires are the basis for my guess. Just enough dirt and just flat enough to be real. I do question the "Plate" though. If it were real, I would expect at state plate and not a year plate. Flat out guess based on conflicting information.

Actually my comment about tech inspection really nails the engineering issue. After looking at the real car, you had to be a bit nuts to drive it. The fuel system makes it a rolling Molotov cocktail. There is so little driver protection from accident that it almost assures driver injury or fatality. The brakes were absolute ######. The rotors were changed multiple times per race and would fail at the most inopportune times, like the end of the Mulsanne straight. If you crashed the engine was quite likely to try and join you in the cockpit. There was so little head room that in a rollover head injury was quite likely and on and on. It was an extraordinary car for it's day and todays cars can generally trace their linage back to the engineering that went into it, but engineering has not stood still. Todays cars are entirely different even though they run in a similar contest. Engineering has indeed progressed but not in obvious ways.

Interestingly, if you could get past tech inspection, the GT 40 would be competitive at todays Le Mans race. If you look at the speeds and the times, It would be in the top 10 finishers. Quite an accomplishment for a 45 year old car. Of course it would never make it past the inspectors but it is fun to think about. In fact the Mark IV at 5200 miles would have beat all the cars until this years race.

Now this is 1047 which was driven by Gurney and Grant, DNF'd and was a Shelby car. (I think Carroll is third on the left in the foreground) Maybe we're both right-H-M did the rear tank (I have not seen any race evidence of that) and Shel did the front one. It only points out how hard it is to find data as the cars were changed so much THEN (to race at Daytona, Sebring, Neurbergring etc) and changed years later in restorations.

Right you are! I've not seen that photo. I also noticed that in this photo it shows from deflectors on the lower air intakes to route the air to the oil coolers that I have not seen before. Most of the cars I've seen do not have those. These cars were run and modified on the fly so there is no "right" configuration for the season, only a "per race" configuration and sometimes that changed during a race. Makes it very difficult to do a "correct" model.

I brought up this photo again to point out a couple of interesting bits that you can see from this side. Notice that the oil tank has a sight gage(the round thing on the side). It made it real easy to check minimum oil levels. You will also notice that there are a number of oil lines going to the the brace between the shock towers. That is because that is hollow and was used as a collection tank. Lee also does not run the clear velocity stack. He claims that the car runs slower with it. I will also tell another story about this car. Lee was running it at Le Mans once(he didn't say why) and on the mulsanne straight at 170 mph the engine quite, but the car kept accelerating. He said it scared the begeebers out of him. He explained that at that speed the wind noise overcame the engine noise and you couldn't hear the engine any more. When he got back to the pit, he asked Dan Gurney if that ever happened to him. Dan said that it happened every time. During the real race he said it was a good thing. Endurance racing is really hours of boring and each time it happened it woke the drive up with a rush of Adrenalin.

Actually, I reviewed a bit of the video and I am wrong. The oil tank is an IIa configureation. Remember that at Le Mans they required a spare tire, thus the oil tank in the spare well came later.

Actually, the Mark IIb was a result of a letter that Mark Donahue wrote to John Holman, outlining some modification he thought would be beneficial to the car.(Lee gave me a copy) One of the recommendations was to modify the car so a driver could escape if it was on it's top. The result was a modified passenger door. They cut the dog ear(top)of the door off parallel with the window and riveted that in place. That way at least the passenger side door could be opened if the car was upside down. I can not say if all the cars were modified that way, and I am sure the in restoration, a number of the cars were converted back. It is a subtle change.

Yes, that is the IIb configuration, to some extent. It was a race to race configuration depending upon if the spare tire was required or not. Same thing with the suitcase carriers. His also has the roll cage with the rear hoop inside the firewall, though he doesn't have the passenger side door top cut off. Also the coolant hoses run around the passenger side ala 'b, not up the center tunnel. Yes, I can imagine the cobra would sound very much the same. Nothing quite like it

Yep, that is the car. This view shows an original location for an oil catch tank. As you can imagine these beasts had to have a lot of oil. 427 dry sump would require it. Incidentally, did you get to hear it run. He fired it for us and standing behind it would qualify as a religious experience. I have a HD video of it from about 4 feet directly behind the engine. Kind of like the start of the movie Grand Prix. As far as I know he never sold one. As he explained it, for $750,000 the boys that can play in that neighborhood would rather drop a million plus and have an original car. Perhaps some day soon the originals will get to be worth enough that $750,000 for a continuation car will look like a bargain. Want to shoot yourself? He told a story that in the early 70's all the cars were back a HM in the back and someone came buy to try to buy one. He offered $5000 and John told him to go home and get his trailer. The guy came back with the cash and John loaded up two of the cars and the guy drove off. At the time they were nothing but useless old used race cars.

Lets start with the avatar first. The answer is neither. Confused? Actually it is a "continuation" car. The car is Lee Holman's personal car. He was gearing up to build continuation cars. The Historic racing society recognizes continuation cars as new cars built to original specifications by the original builder. There are continuation Cobras that were done by Carrol Shelby. I know it is an interesting distinction, but with a few exceptions, these are essentially cars made from NOS or new parts made to original specification, with updates for safety. So not a recreation because they are a continuation of the original build. His chassis was build at Titus in England from the original panel jigs that survived the Abey Panel fire, so they are original in all aspects except for some very minor details. He outright owns all the original blue prints from the Mark IIs and manufactures all parts to original specs. His cars are essentially, new original cars. His fuel system is changed for safety, in that the car has two fuel pumps on each side and the crossover is eliminated(hell of a fire hazard). Why I am sitting in his car? A year and a half ago, Matthew Wells, his brother, and I were privileged to visit his shop in Charlotte, N.C. and spend the day with him photographing the cars and listening to his stories. I think the one thing that is very unclear to most, is the role that HM played in the Mk IIs. It helps to understand if you know the position the HM played with Fords racing effort. HM was much more than a racing team. From Ford's perspective, HM was a racing factory. They were huge. They had everything needed to fabricate racing cars on a large scale. All the Mark II white metal chassis were ship to HM and the building was done on site. Engine, suspension, trans axles, all of it was installed by HM. From there the cars were given to the racing teams and three were campaigned by HM. Between seasons they all came back to HM to be refurbished and were then sent back out to the teams. That is why you will see them all together in a shop at various time. This is a similar role to what Alen Mann played with the Mk I's. HM in this role, was more behind the scenes and did not get a lot of the credit they should have. Incidentally, Lee was an integral part of the team and was involved directly with the campaign. I have seen several picture on his wall in Charlotte, that have him on the pit wall at Le Mans. The man knows more about the cars, that just about anyone living today. Incidentally, George Stauffer's car was restored at HM, because he his the major repository for all things Mk II. How that came about is an interesting story also. When Ford got out of racing they did so because they were afraid of legal actions and went on a rampage destroying everything to do with racing at corporate. They were trying very hard to divorce them selfs from all bits racing, not just the GT 40's. Since HM was involved with a lot of stock car and rally car stuff, they when to HM and made them the owners of all the racing stuff along with all the responsibility for it. Holman has a letter that gives him the rights to all of it. He actually can use the Ford logo and the other racing trademarks to produce parts. Kind of interesting. He literally has stacks of original blueprints for Ford racing cars. The bit about the Bendix submersible fuel pump was one of the stories that he told us that day in January of '09. He did not clarify whether this was original, or if it was an engineering development and I was not wise enough to ask. I do know that he was adamant about the safety of it. There very well may have been multiple pumps. I have a drawing of the lay out but it is a Mk I's somewhere and Lee said that the system was different in the Mk II. The subject came up when discussing the originality of his car. You are quite right about the filler necks. Being on both sides of the car, I did question the cross over tube and he said that the cars could be filled from either side and the crossover took care of the balance. Quite a simple system. The comment about Firestone is correct. They did develop the fuel cells, but bailed early in the program. It was about the time of Ralph Nader's rampage and corporations were running scared. Firestone also supplied some early tires. I will have to dig through and see about the entire fuel system and the relation between the Mk I and Mk II's. Have fun with the build.

Not quite right. According the Lee Holman(Holman Moody) there was a Bendix aircraft fuel pump submerged in the right hand tank. There was a single crossover pipe about 2" in diameter that ran under the seats. How would you like to be sitting on that one. You may see a different configuration now on restored cars as the cars were converted to exterior fuel pumps, one on each side and the crossover pipe was eliminated for safety reasons. Apparently the Bendix pumps were prone to shorting out and associated fire problems. On restored cars with two fuel pumps they are individually controlled with a switch on the dash.