StevenGuthmiller

Being as I'm going for a little higher level of detail on this project, I needed to address some engine bay issues. The Firewall on this old MPC kit was more or less devoid of a couple of vital details. There was no master cylinder of any kind, so I added the one from the '66 Goat kit. While I was at it, I also added the steering gear, washer bottle & the battery from the same kit. I also decided to grind the wiper motor detail from the GTO firewall & install that. I also got the engine color on. It's a custom mix, so it's probably not perfect, but it looks ok to me. Every step gets me just a little closer! Steve

That's the best part about their paints. The metallic particles are much closer to scale than most rattle can paints. Many of their metallics are so fine that it can be difficult to see without close inspection. The "Cay Coral" paint on this '58 Chevy is metallic, but it's hard to see the individual flakes, but the "sheen" makes it obvious that it is metallic. I basically only use MCW paints for all of my metallic paint jobs. Steve

Yeah....probably not. But I would be all over the Olds wagon, even though I'm not really a wagon guy. I think this is the wave of the future guys. I'm betting that it won't be long before the prices on this stuff comes way down & the quality goes way up. Before you know it, some enterprising soul will be pumping out this stuff for about the same price as a modern kit. I honestly think that we're looking at the beginnings of the future of modeling. Steve

It is much worse than I thought & it shouldn't disturb the people who don't like these year end posts too much. I only managed one this year! Just awful!! I hope to do better next year. Otherwise I might just as well start selling off kits! Steve

looks like you had a productive year! Much better than I did! I particularly like the '51 Chevy! Steve

I think that this whole issue is much ado about nothing. Just like anything else, if you don't want to look at these threads, don't. Every time I look at the Under Glass section, there are tons of exotics, sports cars, racing subjects, etc, that i have no interest in. These subjects might also be relegating the posts that I am interested in, to the second page as well. Does that give me the right to gripe that those posts should be moved to a different or new category because I don't read them? As long as the post meets the criteria of the category that it's in, there's nothing to complain about, just move past them. Granted, we may have to wade through some posts that we don't care to look at to get to the ones we do, but don't we have to do that every day anyway? And besides, I see a lot of builds in the "year in review" posts every year that I might have missed for whatever reason. I personally enjoy them & will generally look at every one. Steve

I guess I would just say "as far as I know". When I bought the car, it had just under 100,000 miles on it. The owner, who purchased the car new, claimed that the mileage was correct & that the engine had never been opened up. A very nice older gentleman who I have no reason to disbelieve. All of the serial numbers are original to the car, so there was no engine swap. Being a '69, a pre-'66 engine is not likely. I suppose that there is the possibility that someone may have repainted the engine, but I find it difficult to believe that someone would repaint the engine for aesthetic reasons. It was not pretty when I bought it, so it would had to have been re-painted early in it's life. Anyway, when I had the engine rebuilt a couple of years ago, the shop that rebuilt it re-painted it the same color that was on it & this is what I got. Just like I remember it from 1981, only a little prettier. Steve

Well, at this point, I believe that I will go with the metallic light blue. From the information that I have, it definitely cannot be considered incorrect for '67. I have a couple of different metallic light blues on hand. I think one of them will be close enough. Steve

That works too! Steve

That's the problem. The chart lists the color as light metallic blue for '69. My '69 Grand Prix always was & always has been the so called "light blue" ( basically a pale turquoise) from the earlier years. The engine was original & untouched to my knowledge when I bought it in '81. So you can understand my confusion. Steve

Ok Snake, I'll believe you. There are so many inconsistencies in colors on the Pontiac engines that sometimes I don't know what to think. I know for a fact that the 400 in my '69 was turquoise from day one, yet when I look at photos of a lot of '69 Firebirds & GTOs the engine color is metallic blue. Could it be that there were two different colors being used for different models during this period? Anybody else have any input? Steve

I agree, if you leave out the pillars, the rest of the frames need to go too. Steve

Now that's nice! I feel your pain about broken parts with this kit. I basically managed to keep mine intact until it was done, but the gold colored plastic on this kit was so brittle that you couldn't breath on it without something breaking off! Terrific save!! Steve

If you're not going to restore it factory stock, I think that I would leave out the B-pillars. Looks kind of nice as a hard top. Steve

With any CA glue like "Zap-a Gap", I use a tooth pick for application. Steve

As a general rule, most guys will limit their pics to just one view of each model for purposes such as this. At least they should. Steve

Thanks Steve. I think I answered my own question when I found this photo. Your pic pretty much confirms it. Steve

Ok, new question. I'm a little confused when I look at photos of '67 Pontiac engines on-line. About half of them are "turquoise", & the other half are "silver blue". I know that the earlier poncho engines were turquoise & I assumed that the trend continued until at least 1969. My 1:1 '69 Grand Prix has the correct color & it is turquoise. Anybody have any insight as to what went on in the late 60s with Pontiac engine colors? I'm about ready to paint the one for my Bonneville, but I need a color first. Steve

Isn't that a little harsh Richard? Doesn't that make every post in the Under Glass section an "I love me" thread? They're all just posts of models that people have finished. I kind of thought that was why we were here. Not just to talk about something that we may finish a decade from now. I want to see every build that anybody chooses to post. That's why I joined this site. To see other peoples work & to improve mine. Steve

I still use Fotki for posting here, mainly because then I can just use the same procedure for any forum that I may want to post on. Steve

Me too! "Build" is easier to type than "model car". When you "hunt & peck" like I do.......... Steve

I just subscribed for another year of Fotki for basically $2.00 a month. No ads, no BS! Even if PB would clean up their act I wouldn't go back! Everybody else can "forgive & forget" if they like. I'm through wasting my time. Steve

Agreed! It's very easy to quote if you would like without re-posting all of the photos associated with a particular post. As an example of this, go take a look at the "Collection Pics" thread in the under glass section. Page after page of the same photos re-posted over & over again! I only leave the photos in a quoted post if I want them there for some sort of comparison. So please people, if we could refrain from that, it might eliminate the congestion & confusion of a dedicated thread for the year in review. Steve

Short of creating an entirely different section, it's really not up to the moderators, that's up to us. But, as you know, things like this can be a little like herding cats around here & I doubt that it would be adhered to. I'm fine with the idea, but I have little faith that it would work. Steve

I think I've finished only 1 or 2 builds this year, so I won't be taking up much space. These "year in review" threads never bothered me. I guess my thought is, the fewer restrictions to what people want to post the better. We don't want this forum to end up like so many others have. Post everything you've got! Steve