Can-Con

I like that a lot Chuck. ?

Yea, sure. I'd love to see that happen. I've actually thought about how it could be done before I started but I don't know if it'd be easier to adapt the convertible bits from a '64/'66 to the '67/'69 or reskin a '66 with the later sheetmetal. The cowl looks the same but I wouldn't know how much of the rest would have been carried over as the earlier cars were uni-body and the later were body on frame. But, yea, I'd love to see someone pull it off.

Chartpac makes down to 1/64". Very nice to work with as long as you don't mix up which is the sticky side. , , , Don't ask.? https://www.duall.com/store/product/110135.110135/chartpak-tape-gloss-black-1-64-x-648.html

Those wheels and tires came in the kit so there shouldn't be a problem with them. Those tires are pretty bloody skinny, way skinnier then even the '60 series on my 1/1 T/A. It's a classic case of "The more they overthink the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain".

I'm pretty sure I just did the chassis out of the box in the lowered position when I built the Limelighter, but that was 14 years ago. But this should give you a pretty good idea of how it sits in the lowered position.

Yup, works now. ?

Dave, when I klik on the link it says "restricted access, password required".

Thanks everyone. I did this as a "pallet cleanser" after the complicated, involved builds of the Thunderbird and '32 Chevy delivery. I'd like to get at least one currently started [painted] projects across the table. Thinking on a couple "fresh starts" soon too such as a '59 Caddy, '37 Chevy coupe or maybe even an early 911. ?

Hard to say what's going on with the back of the car with just a pic of the front of it, Greg. But I can tell you 2 things. All '61 Olds had the same rear bumpers and there was no "Canadian" specific '61 Olds as they were never made here. I doubt it's a custom thing as the rest of the car I can see is bone stock down to the wheel covers.

That's one of the ones I have.

Personally, I'd like to see Revell do a few earlier small bumper cars , pre-1974. Fujimi has been reissuing some of theirs and I got the '67 911R and the '69 911S last year but the reissues don't have plated parts [headlight buckets, door handles, etc.] that the original issues had. But the Revell kits are easier to assemble and look as good Some say better but I don't really have a "critical eye" for those cars like I would for an North American car. Highly considering getting the '67 R on the bench next though.

Good question. After all the hype about the kit, I don't think I've even seen one built yet.

Yea, There's a few "foibles" going on with that kit and the headlights are the worst. I can't believe no one has got that right on a kit yet. Hadn't noticed the trunk edge issue, thanks for pointing it out. You'd think a kit that new would be more accurate in the body. You can go on about "loads of details" and "high parts count" but if you don't have the body right, you have nothing.

My problem with that kit [besides the headlight problem which every kit of those Camaros has had since the very first promo] is the shape of the top of the rear 1/4 panels. It's a gentle slope which does not kick back up like on that kit.

Lenny, you need to do Mike's trick from last month,,,

Unfortunately, looks like the OP hasn't been here in a couple years.

If you're referring to those weird extra creases in the fenders, it can be easily corrected with a little putty and patience. That mistake dates all the way back to the first '70 promos.

I call it a paint by numbers model because all I did was paint it and put it together. No extra detailing, modifications or even polishing out the paint. Paint is Duplicolor Metalcast clear red over a Duplicolor silver base with Duplicolor clear coat. No polishing. Engine, seats and all details are Testors bottle enamel. Couple things to watch out for on this kit are the pins on the back of the wheel outers should be trimmed off to fit into the tires properly against the backs and the rear spring mount is called out as plated on the instructions, it's not. I had to get the paint back out and do it 1/2 way through assembly.

Yup. the ads are put up by an algorithm that tracks what sited you've visited [or someone else using your machine] , like Andy said above. I think I can explain why the female clothes ads though, I don't think the algorithm can distinguish between "models' such as we build and female human "models' so we get ads for both. ? And the vehicle ads would be because ,, well what to we build and post pics of on here?? ? One day a couple months ago I was joking with my wife about heating hash brown patties in the toaster but we could if we had a toaster oven. Next day I got a bunch of ads on here for toaster ovens. Never searched for them on any device bit I guess my phone picked up on it.?

Yea, what? close to 30 bars and pubs in a 2 block stretch? ,,, No one'd believe that ,, except another Maritimer. ??

Ya ain't gonna tell him 'bout George Street in Town? ?

Thanks Claude. No, Ford didn't make any Thunderbird convertibles of that generation. '66 was the last year for them until the last generation 2 seaters. The parts were kit custom parts but not for the '69. They were in the '67 and '68s

Thanks everyone. Yea, I had originally planned to use a set of KH "Strippers" on this[the wheels that look like wires] but after I finished the paint and seen how much it would look like a redline Hot Wheels I changed to Cragars and red lines. The roadster tonneau was also a last minute decision. I wasn't originally planning to do that but after playing with it and seeing how the lines seemed to naturally blend together, how could I NOT do it.

Was there Kurt?, I haven't come across it, just the one on the Moebius ones. Got a link?

Not even my wife, believe me.?