Chuck Kourouklis

Oh... OOOHH... better and BETTER and BETTER for my money! Yeah, this here's another Lay's Chip kit - just one ain't gonna do. THIS is what Revell does best.

Awesome! Thankya, Skip!

I've been trying to resolve that rear fender brow question myself since I got mine, and y'know something? It seems almost to vary from car to car... Is it a separate piece? Restoration variances? Maybe even variations along the assembly line? Whatcha say, Mr J? Turnin' out to be an interesting thing to pin down.

But is it an African or European swallow?

Oh yeah. ME TOO.

Beat me to it, James: http://www3.towerhobbies.com/cgi-bin/wti0092p?&N=N&F=RMXS1285&L=RMXS4053&C=SCBRMX&P=SM&S= Scott, you're certainly right to point out that the sins of Monogram's old Nomad are an order of magnitude worse than those in the '57 Ford. Hell, I was so giddy that Revell got the overall proportions right, it never even occurred to me to check moldings around the fenders. But now that they've been highlighted, it's plain that they're wrong. Ain't gonna have to do major surgery to fix 'em, but they're on-topic because this wagon is gonna share that tooling. And now that Revell has gone to the trouble of a new body mold, it's a natural part of the discussion to see if they've carried these problems over or resolved them. Who knows, maybe you've actually missed how contentious it gets when one faction tries to separate another out and call them nit-pickers or worse. And maybe it's not such a serious matter to you. But did you see the Chicken Little scenario that came up earlier, this whole notion that Revell/Monogram is so monumentally stupid they'll actually withdraw advertising over online postings of individuals whose opinions don't reflect that of the magazine? Years of flailing about with this notion that if modelers don't "behave" on line, the model manufacturers will just stop making kits, a scenario that started off pretty idiotic and gets more obviously so with each passing day it just doesn't happen. So now we gotta come up with some new Pyropocalypse to justify a viewpoint that in the end makes no sense. This is a forum about car model kits, and with that comes a reasonable expectation of a free discussion about those kits, including whatever problems they might have. The root of the drama around here is that certain people just lose it over that discussion for what amounts to no good reason, so they try to stifle that free exchange, and they're abusive about it. If they're not calling you a "no-lifer" for pointing out a feature that's 10% off true, they're making wild exaggerations about personal attacks on the manufacturers largely unsupported by the majority of the content they refer to. There's no reason to put up with that, and anybody who doesn't want the return static might wanna make sure he can't be confused for perpetrating that same tired, repressive BS.

I thought it was something like that, percentage-wise. Actually had to duck out of here for a while, 'cause - wait for it… and are you all sitting down? I HAD TO GET SOME WORK DONE ON A MODEL. Hope nobody has an aneurism over my apparent violation of your precious sacrosanct canon of "nit picker" behavior... Wow - You ain't kiddin', Doc... Pretty effin'-idiot-easy.

You know, I'm not gonna drop this until you guys do. Just what exactly is stupid, obnoxious and off-topic about examining problems in the kit the Del Rio is based on? 'Cause sittin' on your high horse, judging that to be "nit-picking", and deciding you're gonna mock something that's not asking for your mockery at all qualifies as all three.

Y'know, it occurs to me - there might just be a future variation with Rudge wheels and some other odds and ends. Tamiya's done stuff like that before...

Very true. Now if you have kids to protect, that's one thing. But anyone else engaging in the little "tisk tisk" drive-bys - if they can't quite muster the personal willpower to skip the chaff - can also go up to their consoles at the top right and enable the "Manage Ignore Prefs" function. Not in my nature to ignore, personally, but I done heard tell you load up the appropriate users, and it can clean up a thread right nice for you.

yeah, sure.

Yup. Even though I've now demonstrated how people can put their money where their effin' MOUTH IS with a premise that wasn't even mine, you're still more likely to find geopolitics in this thread than you are any of this purported castigation of Revell executives and personnel. People can hoist those rational pinatas and whip 'em all they like, and if that's the best they can do for staying on topic, we might as well go right back to the Gaza Strip...

I thought we might be done with the Latin by now, but if ever there were a case of res ipsa loquitur...

Ain't that the truth. As if commenting on the drama accomplishes ANYTHING other than contributing to it, especially after drumming up a bunch of drama on your own. Guilty as charged here - difference is, I make no pretense about being above it all. You can say that again.

Yes, actually. It could certainly use a good cleaning up, to such an extent that I've decided to cut my own most divergent post. But the model's not even out yet, and people will want to talk about it when it arrives, at which point either this conversation can continue or a new thread about it can start, in which case the cycle will start again: People will like the Del Rio and be on topic. People will describe the Del Rio, maybe take pictures, and be on topic. People will likely find problems as they examine the kit and be on topic. People will take offense to the problems pointed out, attack those who find those problems, and start driving the conversation off topic. And from there, the door's wide open for yes, even geopolitics. Personally, I have a hard time seeing why anybody would even comment on an unworthy thread. There are plenty 'round here that don't float my boat, so I do this crazy thing: I don't participate in them.

**post deleted by author for non-topicality** http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=95522&p=1399347

**post deleted by author for non-topicality** http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=95522&p=1399347

**post deleted by author for non-topicality** http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=95522&p=1399347

**EDIT** The original post made an observation of what a shame it is that keyser's goodwill message should be rebuffed with misattributions out of context. That point stands; all further related posts deleted by this author for going off topic.

"But there's nooo suuuch thiiiing as a perfect hooorse..."

Very funny that sentiment should come up, though - between the pious apologists and the carping critics I referenced earlier, it's very clear just who first tried wearing down the other, to anyone with grasp of reality unwarped by personal ideology. I mean, anyone wants to know my motivation, you couldn't say it better than that phrase, macaronic or not. But I gotta thank Monty W for the true gem: CASTIGAT RIDENDO MORES - laughing corrects morals, the basis for all great satire. The best way to change the rules is to point out how absurd they are, as Monty put it. Yessir, I like that one very much.

Ellway Ayedplay. Well, the Taurus is the first one comes to mind. MIght be others...

HAH. Hat's off. Mine's rougher, I promise: Omnis constructio de miniaturae est divisus in castra duo: pii defensores et calumniatores. (…with all apologies to Gaius Julius.)

My pleasure Charlie - though I do have to point out it was Joe who set it off...

Wa-a-a-aay too chicken here. I'd be screaming, "NOOO, I THINK! I THINK! I THINK!" soon as the fading started.