Harry Joy

The weathering is a bit much. Darkened panel lines are a fad that I wish would just go away. And why the builder felt it necessary to add 1/35th scale rivets is baffling.

I have found BMF to have spotty availability. My local shop couldn't get any for a few weeks mid-summer, and I couldn't get it online either. About the same time I found it online, it showed back up at the hobby shop. The shop got some again just this past week. So like any good hoarder, I bought some even though I had plenty. Guess you can blame me for some of the shortage.

I've been sold on airbrushing for a few years now, but it's hard to find a better primer than Tamiya's rattle can. The thing is this - the regular Tamiya Surface Primer is decent stuff, but if you want to find out what everyone raves about, you've got to use Tamiya Fine Gray Primer. Significantly different from the regular Surface Primer. Get the Fine Primer, and you will find it's not necessary to use it in an airbrush.

b-body posted exactly what I was thinking. Warm the can, and do light misting coats. The paint has pooled from too much at once. And some Tamiya rattle-can colors spray vastly better when warm. Either keep the can on a window sill in the sun for a while before using, or heat a pan of water, remove the pan from the heat, and put the can in the pan for a few minutes. Tamiya spray white is in my opinion the best pure white out there, especially since Floquil's Reefer White is dead and gone. But it does not have the same spraying properties as the Tamiya primer. Tamiya Silver Leaf also likes being warmed, among other colors.

It is best to use the techniques described before the model is painted. I've used similar methods in airplane modeling, but it takes a lot of sanding "in place" and subsequent sanding with progressively finer sanding sticks, then an application of Future.

I was on Main Street in Tupelo, MS today, sitting in my car at the railroad tracks, when I saw....

Those are dead links - closed accounts, or removed from the picture hosting site by the poster, or sometimes pics where the link changed. No matter why - they are essentially dead links.

Just addressing these two points. I mentioned above the issues I saw in the two different AMT kits, recently boxed. I did not catch some of the short-shot body areas until I sprayed primer. I imagine that renders those flaws invisible in the packing process. Also, I am currently building a Hasegawa Fairlady and some part were factory shrink-wrapped with broken parts. The missing parts were not inside with the sealed sprues, so the breakage happened before the trees were wrapped. The parts were fine, detail parts - and again, only a highly sophisticated computer on the assembly line would have caught the issues. I'm not bent about any of the issues - I fixed them (with basic modeling practices). Just found this to be noteworthy - especially with the AMT kits. If I bought two kits at random times from different retailers, it's something I'll know to look for again in the future.

Hm. I bought a couple of kits of the AMT 1966 Olds 442, that I just posted finished pics of, and each were from the latest boxing. Both bodies had warping and were short shot in some areas, with excessive flash in others. And on neither body were the short shots, flash, and warping in the same areas. I've been told by several guys that this is par for the course with AMT.

Just to add to the general knowledge, everything said above about liquid cements and tube glues is correct - you are looking at trying to separate welded parts. However, if you are using CA glues, and many do for some applications, it is easier to separate parts. CA is essentially just a butt join, not a weld, and many parts can be separated with a quick, sharp smack. CA glues have poor shear strength. Residue can be sanded off. A stubborn CA join can be hit with a CA debonder (most of which involve acetone, in case you are allergic). I use Tamiya Extra-Thin Cement and CA on all of my builds, and which one I use depends on the particular application. I tend to use liquid cement for body work, or to add extra strength to structural parts. I use CA for most everything else - engines, interiors, small parts, essentially detail stuff where shear strength is not an issue. It is not unusual for one of my models to have exclusively liquid cement on all exterior visible parts, and CA on all interior parts.

My stepson, about to turn 25, asked me a while back where the GPS is in my car (2013 Impala). I directed his attention to the glovebox. He opened it up and shuffled the papers within (registration, car manual, and a stash of maps), and said he didn't see it. Once he had a pile of maps in his lap, I said that was part of my GPS, and suggested he pull back one more layer in the glovebox for the rest. When he laid hands on the compass, I said "There you go". Yeah, he thinks I'm a fossil.

You don't need to clear coat TS-17. Out of the can, it has a nice shiny finish, almost like it as a clear coat. That's one of the things that impressed me about it from the very first time I used it.

2013 Chevy Impala LTZ, This picture was taken the afternoon I bought it, a couple of years ago.

Thanks folks!

This is my second ever completed car model. My first was about 40 years ago when I was 8 or 9. This started as something of an experiment in car techniques, so parts of it are not up to par. The finish however looks better under real light than under the desk lamp I used for these pics. Disappointing to me since that was what I struggled with the most. After ten coats of paint were down, I screwed up the eleventh and had to strip. The second time around, I used Duplicolor. This was also my first go at Bare Metal Foil, and I did not prep the surface thoroughly enough, but I'm still danged happy with how the whole thing came out:

Well, I've thought about using it many times. I've been modeling off and on since I was a kid, but there have been several distinct phases in my modeling as an adult. I was real happy with my models up until about 15 years ago, when I discovered the internet. I also discovered how bad my models were. It was disheartening, and my building came to a stop. After a few years of soaking up info in modeling forums, I jumped back in about 12 years ago, bought an airbrush, and started applying my new knowledge. Joined a club and started attending contests too, which upped my game. I consider myself better than many modelers, but nowhere near top quality. My biggest fault as a modeler is insufficient patience. I tend to start hurrying things up when I get near the end, and start stuffing up my builds. So I knew about BMF. And I read all the scary stories, while admiring BMF done well. Well, this Olds 442 is the first time I've used BMF and I thought it was a breeze. Among other things, it was easier to handle than I expected, and not that fragile. I found it to be very forgiving of mistakes. Since my post above, which was the first day I used the stuff, I have finished the BMF part of this model. I hope to be completely done with it in the next few days. And I've decided I love BMF. I am a couple of months shy of 50, and have bad arthritis, and not the smoothest of knife handling abilities. But I still found it easy enough to use BMF. My wife is keen on how this model is coming along, and just tonight was pointing out stuff she thought could use some BMF around the house.

I believe I've known about Bare Metal Foil for maybe 12-15 years, and have always admired a model done well with it. But have I ever used it? Nope. Not at all. I was extremely intimidated by it and had seen enough models where it WASN'T done well that I knew how easily it could be screwed up. When I decided to start working on car models several months ago, I knew that BMF was more necessary in this genre, much more so than in airplane models. So I bought some. And stared at it for a few months now, wondering how on earth I was going to manage using it on my '66 442. I am at that stage now that almost everything is done. I finally got a paint finish that satisfied me, and all the engine work is complete. I've been putting off this last big step for days. So tonight, I screwed up my courage and gave it a shot. I did all the work around the windows and vinyl trim, figuring that I would tackle the hard part first. And to my exuberant surprise, BMF was not hard at all. Easy to a certain degree even. It took about two hours of very careful work, sharp tools, and plenty of patience, but compared to so many other steps in modeling, it was a breeze! Q-Tips, toothpicks, and a new X-acto really are all it takes. I wish I had used this stuff years ago.Now that I know about this, and Duplicolor paints, car modeling is not near as difficult as I expected. Which is a good thing, as I have a lot more cars in the stash. Now on to the chrome strips on each side, and my first car since I was 8 years old will almost be done! (Btw, I know this BMF isn't perfect, but for my experiment in making a car I'm darned happy.)

I have used 50 year old decals before, and gotten them to stick well and look new. First, I sprayed the decals with Future as a protective coat, and let them dry. Before I put them on the model, I flooded the area where I was putting them with Future, then over-sprayed once more with Future. At first, they look absolutely awful, wrinkled and ruined. But be patient. The next morning, all the Future beneath the decals had dried, and sucked the decals down like they were painted. I did this on an ancient Monogram model with rivets and raised lines, but the decals came out perfect.

Thanks!

Thanks Ed. I saw it available from MCW as well after posting this. I still wonder if anyone knows a paint formula from Tamiya that might match. I started using Tamiya so I wouldn't have to worry about ordering specific colors all the time, but my mixing experiments never seem to work unless I am working from a known formula.

Does anyone know a good match for the mustard yellow color "Sungold" on the 1953 Bel Air? Or a good mixing formula to get there with Tamiya paints? Thanks!

I can't remember the last time I saw a Mustang II, especially a coupe. In the 90s I was mocked at a Mustang fan show in Illinois for daring to ask why I didn't see one displayed. My fondness for the II is largely due to the fact that I drove one all over the country in the 80s, and always kept it in good shape. I know why people hate them. Don't have to explain it to me. But why should they have been wiped off the face of the planet? They didn't deserve that.

I got a promotion about eight months ago that puts me on the road a lot. I'm building a 66 olds 442 after driving behind one from Memphis to Jackson, MS for a couple of hours. Two days ago, I "got stuck" behind a cherry red 1957 Chrysler 300 for 15 minutes. But today, I drove from Memphis to Tupelo, MS and for the entire trip I seemed to be in a caravan of classic 60s GM cars. At least a dozen Chevelle's, 60s Camaros, GTOs, Plymouths, Buicks, classic family wagons like Town and Country's, more Chevelles, and on and on. Pity was, I am sure the show was in Tupelo, but I met one of my bosses in there and never was able to find where the show was.

The base coat will change the shade so it depends on the look you are going for. Light gold, light base coat or silver. Dark gold, use black. You can even use green, yellow, red, whatever you like, but they all affect the final shade subtly.

Seamless Suckers made some. I've seen it built without them, and the kit engine parts are fine unless you want to do a variant.