tim boyd

...As I've touched on a number of times in the past, the preponderance of evidence is that the Hemi Hydro is 1/25th scale, not 1/20th as suggested above. Check out my review of the latest Hemi Hydro issue for visual proof: http://public.fotki.com/funman1712/first-look-at-all-n/whats-new-revell-ho/whats-new-revell-ho/ The caption with this image from my review reads "The last topic I want to address here is the rumor by some respected modelers that this Revell kit is actually 1/20th instead of 1/25th scale. Intuitively this seems a disconnect, as the original 1963 kit was designed and merchandised as a companion to Revell's just introduced 1956 Ford F100 pickup kit.And in fact, the kit DOES scale to 1/25th. Here is the original AMT Rayson Craft Trophy Series kit on the left, and another of my Hemi Hydro builds on the right. The back of the hulls are placed directly against the vertical backstop of the metal structure. At the front, you can see that the AMT hull is only 1/8 inch (or a 1/1 scale 4 inches) shorter than the Hemi Hydro.The Revell hull is very wide, but as you can see with the AMT Rayson Craft, early 1960's drag and ski boat hulls WERE wide by design. Here the Revell hull is probably oversized, but not by as much as most people think. Here's another image from my online review: ...and the caption that goes with it: Now let's compare the Hemi Hydro on the right to the AMT Hull Raiser (with its Kindsvater Hull) first issued in 1968. The AMT kit is actually LONGER than the Hemi Hydro - by 1/8th inch (or again, a 4 inch difference in 1/1 scale). Bottom line? #1 - when you check the magazine images of early 1960's ski boats, some of the hulls are really, really wide, so even though the Hemi Hydro appears too wide for 1/25th scale to our circa 2015 eyes, there is ample evidence it was scale correct at the time it was tooled #2 - the overall length of the Hemi Hydro scales exactly between the AMT Rayson Craft and AMT Hull Raiser (Kindsvater) boat hulls. So from my perspective, at least, it's time to put to rest the discussion about the Hemi Hydro having been tooled in a scale larger than 1/25th. Best Regards...TIM

John...that is one truly spectacular piece of work. My deepest congratulations, Brother, you rock! TIM

X2! Incredible stuff Harry! Cheers....TIM

Just to amplify a bit, the basic rear tailamp design is shared between the '69 and '70, but the moldings around the tailamps are slighlty different. Doing this from memory (as I was a huge Charger fan when they were new), but some Google Image searches should confirm the slight differences for '70. TIM

Just a second vote confirming Dennis' comments about the V8-60 and its lack of power/torque to adequately power a car in any applications other than very light hot rods/racers. But it sure does look cool, doesn't it??? TIM

Personally I found these (and other engines in other posts) to be both interesting and very well done. But that scratchbult gas V-12 GMC engine takes the cake. A fascinating topic, in 1/1 and 1/25th scale. Also like the Ford 534 Super Duty....TIM

Bill....excellent feedback and very helpful. You, I, and Bill G. all agree on the vent windows (I noted this in my original picture captions and Bill commented above in the thread). As to your Point A, I wonder if the visual impression here would be lessened once the windshield is installed and painted/foiled accurately. Because here we are seeing only the surrounding "sheetmetal" whereas the other bodies include the moldings with the body instead of the windshield piece itself as with the Moebius kit. My guess is that with the windshield installed and trimmed, it would be lessen the concern (that is, appear more correct) but not entirely eliminate it. I had not noticed your Point B. This is why having a detailed critique is so helpful. Best Regards...TIM

Excellent! Thanks....TIM

Bill and Elvin...to be clear here, I am not suggesting that you are wrong in your conclusions, I was simply asking for your analysis of WHAT is wrong. Many people in the modeling community often conclude a kit is wrong in some form or another. Sometimes they are correct in their assessment, sometimes they are incorrect. It helps us all that when a model is critiqued, that the analysis behind the verdict is also provided. That lets others look at the kit with a critical eye, and form their own judgement about the issue at hand. Elwin...if you read the captions that go with my pictures you will find that I largely share your assessment of the Linderg kit accuracy. I stated that it has never appeared to be correct to me, and the comparo photos help to explain to me why that is the case. For those of you who dismiss the Moebius kit because of the roof (and to be fair - this applies to me too, by the way), the comparo photos and your own judgement of the kit's accuracy should really be updated to include the windshield casting because of the way that piece carries the moldings that are normally part of the body casting, If after that you choose to not buy or build the model, that is entirely and rightly your call to make. For the rest of us, I believe you'll find this kit to, in totality, be an excellent scale replica of the real car. All you've got to do is study Steve Goldman's buildup - or several others built on this and other model car forums, to come to that conclusion. Cheers...TIM l.

There is an outstanding article on building the '65 Satellite version of this took by Bill Coulter and Steve Goldman, in the new issue (#197) of Model Cars Magazine that just showed up in my mail box today. Steve's how-to section is one of the best Mopar box stock buildups I have ever seen in print. Congrats to Bill and Steve, and the MCM team, for this article. Highly recommended for anyone considering building either the Satellite hardtop or the Belvedere two door sedan kit shown in this Forum thread. TIM

Sorry...can you be more precise in explaining the problems that you see between the model and the 1/1? Thanks in advance...much appreciated. TIM

Jesus...this kit is notorious for the front bumper and frame interfering with the forward tilting feature when the truck reaches final assembly. When I built this kit (as a race car transporter) for Model Cars Magazine a couple of years back, I showed one way to work around this problem. I don't know if you will run into this problem, but if you do, let me know if you need to see the issue number - it was a two part series and the tilting feature fix was in the first of the two articles IIRC. Best of luck with your cool project...TIM BOYD

Jarda...this is a fascinating project and your work so far is truly inspirational. I don't normally follow the Big Rig forums that closely; but there are several mentions of your prior logger truck project. Is there a place I could look at that as well? Cheers and keep up the inspiring work! TIM BOYD

I was going through my 1967 and 1968 Car Model magazines a couple of weeks ago, and there was an interview of Don Prudhomme by former CM editor Joe Oldham (yeah, THAT Joe Oldham), I think it was in the December 1968 issue. Joe asks Don to describe a run from beginning to end. In it Don says that he would blip the throttle while staging to inject a fresh load of Nitro into the engine to keep it running cool. That's the first time I remember ever reading about that as a way to control engine temp on a blown Nitro engine. (I'm pretty sure I read this in that issue of CM, but please don't kill me if I am remembering the source of this incorrectly). Cheers..>TIM

If you like this, you definitely need to check out the reborn (yet again) Hop Up magazine. Really well done. TB

The really big payoff is those last pictures showing the mocked up result. Everything is "just right". I also like your decision to go with the blanked radiator shell. Most excellent! TIM

Bill...largely goes for me too on the "motorboat" cowl. As a very young Dodge fan even back then, I celebrated the '63 as a step back from the precipice, and the '64 was even cleaner, but I never realized specifically the contribution of flattening the cowl made to that '64 vs. '63 appearance improvement until a few years. From my years in the 1.1 auto industry, lowering a cowl is one of the most expensive things a manufacturer faces in major car freshening...of course, changes were much less expensive back then, but still, for them to make that change for the '64 model year in the midst of what was otherwise a modest freshening otherrwise shows just how serious Chrysler Corp. under Townsend was about moving back to a much more mainstream design language and appearance. And, of course, the resulting sales increases year over year ended up more than paying the bill for that change... TIM

I thought we had kind of revisited this and determined maybe it wasn't as wrong as some thought at first. Here's a picture I took of a 1/1 after this concern was first voiced on the Satellite kit.... More images of a 1/1 '65 Satellite And here's the closest comparison shots from my session with the Moebius Belverdere (the Belvedere being the one in dark grey...) .. Surprisingly...the crown of the roof above the windshield on the Moebius car looks to me to be closer to the real car pictured above than even the JoHan '64 Fury (in red directly above).... . Can you remind me again what your biggest issue is? Thanks...TIM

Wow....that's a really sharp build so far...TIM

Bill...the above advice is one of the two most important keys. The other one is to start with a brand new X-Acto knife blade, this avoids tearing the foil and also aids the cutting action with the very light touch of the knife blade on the foil Some cars are harder to foil than others, but here you've got a big head start as on cars like the Bel Air and Del Rio, the protruding chrome creates a "valley" that serves as a natural cutline. It guides the knife, thus avoiding the wavy cutlines you mentioned. I like the idea of practicing on a snap kit, and that pictured Revell Bel Air would be a great one to start with. I also agree with one of the other posters here - you underestimate your talent and skills. Your work is amoungst the most compelling and creative that I've seen on this forum. Foiling with BareMetal will be a breeze for you once you play around with it a bit. Cheers....TIM

Tom....as if you didn't know this idea is like waving red meat in front of a charging bull.....let's do it! TB Bill...thanks for the info and advice. Appreciate the point in the flange thickness too....TB

Phil...fascinating to follow, see you work through the issues, and gaze upon the results. Thanks for continuing to post your progress.....TIM

Bill....inspiring progress and results! Funny you should mention/show the old Revell Model A rear components with a quick change in the middle. Working on my 5th variation of this kit, last night I was going through my kits and parts boxes and set aside exactly those same parts (except the Quick Change - I also like the Revell Parts Pack piece but I need to use one that comes from a more accessible source in case I turn this into a future article of some sort - probably the AMT '25T or '40 Willys unit.) Stance and overall imagery look great. Also like your "kitbashed" as it were, Nailhead. Best Regards...TIM

I know that Round 2 will be there, and I have heard second hand that Moebius representatives are also planning to attend. This event has a very different vibe than the NNL Nationals held each year in Toledo. For one thing, the vendor turnout at NNL Motor City seems to me to be larger than Toledo, and more focused on model cars specifically. On the other hand, the model car display has more of a local/regional event than the NNL Nats (which draws a larger group of built models and is a more geographically diverse crowd). Surprisingly, there's some pretty impressive local modeling talent that,for whatever reason, doesn't make the yearly journey to Toledo. So while the model display is smaller, there seems to be to be very little overlap between the models seen at the NNL Nats and the models at the Motor City NNL. All of which means that most Midwestern-based modelers will very much enjoy attending both of these events because they are so different in flavor, format, vendors, and the models seen there. I highly recommend both of them. TIM

Thanks Ed. This approach goes back to and mimics my years of covering NNL's and other events for the various magazines that I wrote for back then (primarily Street Rodder and Scale Auto Enthusiast magazine, but also sometimes in other titles such as Popular Cars, Custom Rodder, and a UK-based model car magazine that is no longer published). The photography used in today's coverage is technically far superior to my preferred "table shots" format, but I do think that a sense of loss occurs as those who were not able to attend the event in person do not get a sense of the event atmosphere from this type of somewhat sterile "studio" photography. (There's a reason 1.1 scale magazines use "event shot" instead of "studio shots" for their automotive event coverage....). I also prefer more in-depth captions that explain how a model was built, or that relate the model or builder to other events in the hobby, or explain why this particular model stood out from the hundreds other fine models at an event, as opposed to today's accepted approach of short captions that often focus primarily on the builder's motivation. Plus, I think that the builders whose work is seen online really deserve credit by having their names associated with their models. So this on-line posting of NNL Nats events with detailed captions crediting the builder is my own way of addressing how I would personally prefer to see model event coverage handled, both on line and in the magazines that cover our hobby. Or maybe I'm just stuck in the past....? Thanks again for your comment. Cheers...TIM