Danno

Oh. Okay. Well, good luck. Seems like a big job for just one person!

Where's that new moderator that was supposedly coming on line to help you out, Harry? You've done a good job, as best you can, all by your lonesome, but sometimes the 'one town, one ranger' thing just doesn't work. You're gonna burn out, too, if you don't get some quality help!

Excellent build! Awesome, Jimmy! And it's not even scratchbuilt! Love it.

Huh?

Nice!!

Turned out beautifully, Bryan. Nice job!!

Sweet! Nice job, Bryan.

Looks great, Raoul! Nice job for a quickie!

Nice job, Matt. Probably your nicest build IMHO.

Nice.

There are critically judged contests that evaluate the undercarriage, chassis, frame, underside of the entries. Typically, they make it clear in at time of registration or in advance that models will be picked up by judges. Judges generally take very seriously the responsibility of careful handling; they don't want an entry damaged any more than the builder does. If they don't take that responsibility seriously, they shouldn't be judging. Those events quickly develop a reputation and builders stay away. In the case of a critically judged contest that makes it clear that models will be handled, if you do not want your model handled, you don't enter.

Whoa! GOOD point! I missed that one. But now that I go back and review the photo again, I see that it does look like a very natural pose! Good eye, Gabe!

Brian, Thankfully the guy in the blue shirt in your first picture was wearing a hat. No glare or reflection or flashback from your camera shot. Too bad the guy in the black tee shirt in your second picture wasn't so considerate! The shine kinda bleached out a little of the photo's detail! (But John Teresi looks good!) Seriously, though, I think your pics demonstrate good and not so good presentations. Not meaning to be critical but, I think your elevated rack (showing the '70 Dodge) was a little too "busy" to effectively display your Dodge. The rack was constructed of thick, heavy beams and crossmembers, etc. ~~ it tended to obscure the mirrored views of your car's undercarriage, and being nearly the same color as your Dodge, it caused an optical clutter that (I thought) took away from your build. The rack virtually overpowered your Dodge as the center of visual attention. I think a display should enhance the presentation of the model, rather than compete with it. Take a look at the two cars on mirrors in your first picture (as circumstances would have it, John Teresi's '49 Merc and John Teresi's '59 Caddy). The very simple mirrors with minimal elevating structures don't detract or compete with the cars, and don't obstruct the mirror surface ~ providing maximum reflection of the cars. And because the supporting or elevating components were contrasting (black, in fact) colors, they did not blend visually into the cars being displayed. Thus, no confusion as to where the car left off and the display started, or vice-versa. I agree with others, an over-the-top display tends to distract the viewer from the build. Less is more. IMHO.

HAS to be real. No self-respecting purveyor of die cast would waste the investment ... And I must say, this car is not "butt ugly." Or, at least, I've never seen a butt that ugly!

No self-respecting car thief would steal it. Same reason the Ford Taurus is the least stolen domestic car. Can't give 'em away.

Amazing, Alyn, just amazing! Great job.

WOW! Now what do we do with our time while we are waiting ... Thanks for the info, Tim.

Ditto here.

constanantly ???

Reminded me of some of our Phoenix neighborhoods, except for the broad daylight, clean uniforms, and then they put it back together.

WHY would you need that?

I always made the 'smoking mice' joke, too ... until one fire I investigated where it turned out to be ... packrats stealing wood matches from the kitchen and taking them into their nest in the attic ... they chewed on them, one ignited ... the rest was history. So, even though cigarettes weren't involved, I actually had a 'smoking rodent' fire!

David, I saw that newscast also. They did a poor job of separating the two stories, but the employee/cigarette causation was in relation to the moving & storage company warehouse fire a couple of nights before the Arizona Street Rod fire. Origin & causation of the AZ Street Rods fire is still under investigation. Sad on both counts: The moving & storage warehouse fire (also a 2-alarm) destroyed personal property and personal effects of 60 families. Unbelievably devastating to them.

And, Wayne, half of the first part ~ proving the cause of the fire ~ is also proving that no other causation could have occurred. That's what makes it particularly challenging ... proving what caused the fire and simultaneously eliminating all other possible causations. Then, there's the real challenge (as you said) of proving who did it to the exclusion of all others. = = = = = = = = Having said all that, it should be noted in this particular string that there is as of this time no evidence to indicate the Arizona Street Rods fire was incendiary (arson). Part 1-A and Part 1-B are still in progress.