Mark

I don't understand this "rights to past designs" business. I don't think it is possible to copyright the "design" of a kit, or to prevent another company from making a kit of any particular subject just because one company made it in the past (whether or not they can make it again is irrelevant). The original Jo-Han company couldn't do anything about Ertl doing a new '69 4-4-2, even with the new kit's engine being a near-perfect copy of Jo-Han's "design". If anyone copied the "design" of a model car kit, it was the original Jo-Han company. Compare the parts layout, decals, and instruction sheet from a 1959 Jo-Han annual kit to those in a 1958 AMT or SMP kit...

You know that, over the next few years, the quality of available gasoline will go right down the dumper...it's just part of the way you will be "encouraged" to go electric, whether you want to or not. I bought an electric lawnmower this year. The six-year-old gas one I had...no choke, no throttle adjustment, no adjusting anything. If you turn the mower on the wrong side to dump the gas out for the winter, carb goes bad and needs to be replaced. And the logical way to turn the mower (which would put the gas filler at the bottom) is of course the wrong way. Meanwhile, this spring I finally got around to putting a new carb on a near 40 year old snowblower that I got for free, with the understanding that it needed a new carb. I've had the thing about ten or twelve years, it took five or six before I bought the carb, and only got around to putting it on this spring. This carb has a choke, has a throttle, and can be adjusted. Bolted it on, hooked up a new fuel line linking it to the cleaned fuel tank. Started on the second pull...would have started on the first if dummy had remembered to open the fuel petcock...

I tried the Dart hood, I can make it work by removing the recessed section at the front and piecing in a flat section from a second hood.

I thought it lost seven wheel covers. Maybe it was five, and two were still on the car at the end.

In days of old, several resin casters offered conversion kits (grilles, header panel, taillight panel) to convert to a '68. Some included a hood also. '69 hood has that peak that rises towards the front (later Dodge Dart Sports used that same hood) while '68 is flatter. MPC put the '68 side markers on the '69 body for the Judy Lilly Super Stock issue, those remained until Ertl revamped the kit into the 383 version that exists to this day. I've got one of those kits, and someone's old '68 conversion but no hood. I think I can piece a hood together from a couple of the Revell Hemi Dart hoods.

True Grit wasn't really a "remake", but another treatment of the original novel. John Wayne's version had a few tweaks to make it more of a "John Wayne movie", and that's OK. He knew what his fans wanted, and he delivered. The Coen Brothers' version supposedly stayed closer to the book, which I haven't read. Both versions are great as far as I'm concerned. But yes, most of the remakes don't make any sense. The theatre within walking distance of my house had The Warriors on the marquee a couple of months back. I asked a guy I know about it, who is more into newer movies. Yup, a remake. "Why?" Apparently some of the supposedly up-and-coming directors have a thing about remaking their favorites. They'd be better served by coming up with original ideas, but I guess those are hard to come by. Why Bullitt? Besides the chase, it's a run-of-the-mill late Sixties cop movie. The Musclecar Review article on it claimed the chase was added after production began, that Steve McQueen and a few other people involved knew the film was a turkey as originally planned (without it). Most people who have seen it multiple times couldn't remember the overall story if you quizzed them about it.

It all boils down to subject matter. If HL has something you're interested in, chances are that on those "40% off" weeks it will be cheaper there than anywhere else. Even with the Revell kits coming in there at $40 now, $24 plus tax is likely as cheap as you're going to get that particular item.

I was just looking at some "extra" '65 Chevelle stuff, thinking about what I should do with this already-paid-for stuff before the new kit touches down. Seems like most kids who built these things back in the day had to use half a tube of cement to stick the windows in, applied to the strips that connect the windshield and rear window. I've got one really nice Chevelle body, the others are messed up to the point that the trim around the back glass is distorted. The last couple of winters, I've been piecing together junk and doing repairs that take a lot of work. Splicing quarter panels into bodies, fixing radiused wheel openings, things like that. I think I can piece together a stock Malibu body from one El Camino, one AWB Chevelle, and one extra Modified Stocker body (the only one with a good roof!)

Looks like a corner of a Monopoly board.

For an easier swap (but with way less detail), MPC '75-'76 Dart would be another alternative. Same underbody again, but the 'Cuda interior clashes with the Dart chassis around the inner rear wheel wells, and the little pocket on the underside of the 'Cuda interior bucket that is there to allow for the fold down back seat. Dart chassis has no front suspension detail, also has a couple of exhaust pipes (but no mufflers) molded in as a unit. Pre-Round 2 issues after the '76 annual don't have those though. As for the 'Cuda, some issues (early Seventies through early Eighties) have '68 side markers on the body. Rest is strictly '69 (hood, grille, taillight panel). Sox & Martin did have one retrimmed as a '69 as I recall, but for Super Stock the Hemi cars must be '68s.

The bigger the skull and crossbones are on the package, generally the better the stuff actually works. That said, though, take all possible safety precautions when working with anything as nasty as MEK. I used to use it to make "sprue filler", but have since been turned on to an epoxy putty that works even better and without the extended wait time the sprue filler needed. The discontinuance of a lot of these things is probably less due to problems with occasional handling of the stuff, than because of harm brought on by long-term exposure effects on the people involved in the manufacture of it.

Underbody from the Revell '68 Dart should work, with the wheelbase shortened a bit. 1:1 Dart and Barracuda shared that part of the structure, with the Plymouth having a shorter wheelbase. The current/most recent issue of the Dart has the Hemi, has both the 8-3/4" and Dana 60 rear axles, has other parts needed. Engine compartment will need to be cut from the Dart body. Not having looked at a Dart kit in a while, I believe it has separate door handles that can be used too.

Both, when possible, provided you are stretching the roof. And, try to make the cuts in the "straightest" area; that is, where the least amount of "slant" or "transition" is. Depending on the shape of the roof being chopped, there are times where that really isn't going to change too much. If you are chopping a race car body, try to get as much information as possible about class rules. NHRA Gas class rules allowed for chopped tops, but you weren't allowed to alter the slant of the windshield or rear window. You had to stretch the roof to keep those angles the same as stock. Bonneville classes seem to have allowed changing the slant, as well as changing the shape of the windshield opening. With something like a '49 Mercury, there are articles out there on how to chop that particular car. The successful Merc chops keep the stock windshield "slant", shift most of the roof forward just a bit, and lean the area around the rear window forward to close much of the resulting gap. The rear window opening itself is left stock, as the tempered glass cannot be cut. Other cars with curved rear glass got Plexiglas rear windows in cases where the shape of the window had to be changed. The earlier stuff with flat glass all around makes for a good starter project, just figure out what you want the end result to look like and start cutting...

Too, whenever possible, I try to put a jog or zig-zag in the cut. The pieces then self-align, and there is more surface area to join as opposed to just a small joint between two pieces butted together.

I cut the A pillar perpendicular, not at an angle. The tape can be used as a guide. If you do that, you might go with two pieces of tape, on the outside of the cut line. That way, if you slip, you only damage material that you are removing anyway.

The kit body has the hood molded shut, the grille area filled in, and the "fiberglass" texture on the underside. I haven't looked at mine in a while, but I remember it being molded in red, with the interior pieces red also. That kit was in MPC's catalog through 1971 or 1972 so there were probably several production runs. I have seen other MPC funny car kits with parts molded in various colors, with differences in examples of the same kit. That particular chassis was used in other kits but none are recent issues, nothing beyond early Seventies. I would keep as much of the original chassis as possible if it can be cleaned up. The Polar Lights chassis is longer and possibly wider, but that can work as it is easier to cut something down than to make it bigger. If you can save part of the MPC chassis, I'd look at the MPC reissue Arnie Beswick GTO and Dyno Don Eliminator Cougar as possible sources for replacement parts for axles and suspension. Another now harder to find kit to look at might be the Revell Hawaiian Charger. It too has an early style chassis. I'd maybe look for one of those if the original chassis can't be saved. Then again, I'd circle back around to the Cougar or GTO also.

The local store probably won't raise the price until they get their next batch of stock. The chain stores and Internet sellers jack up the price right away, like the grocery store raising the price on bottled orange juice every time the groves freeze over. Or when the gas station raises the price between one car and the next at the same pump.

The doors would latch into the floor, like the Cadillac Eldorado Brougham (the one Revell did the kit of, that Atlantis now has). Not the most practical, but this was a concept and those were seldom meant to be practical.

Chrysler actually offered a setup somewhat like that on the Imperial for a couple of years (mid/late Sixties). The passenger front seat could be turned to face the rear seat, and there was a small desk. I believe it was called the Mobile Director option. Special-Interesr Autos magazine once got their hands on one ('67 or '68) for an article.

Probably a Ford concept car, based on a 1969 station wagon.

Origins of both would be very recent.

If the '67 is in decent shape, I'd keep it stock and customize a '70. I don't think the custom parts changed all that much. If you are set on customizing the '67, best bet would be to watch eBay for a '67 box with leftover parts included. It's a long shot, but it is what it is. I've never heard of a caster doing custom parts from old kits, other than items adaptable to other cars (wheels, skirts, grilles, etc).

I seldom set foot in 7-Eleven (not many of them around here), but when I do, it never fails...there will be some poor sap who looks like he's living paycheck to paycheck, blowing fifty bucks or more on lottery tickets. Off on a tangent here, but why is it called "fixed income" when it usually leaves you broke?

Don't know for sure, but I think I remember reading somewhere that lottery winnings aren't subject to state income tax in California. So, if there was only one winner, whoever that is will make out way better than they would in New York.

Lottery = tax on the inability to comprehend the concept of odds...