Bernard Kron

It's under: Home Forums> Social Forums> Hot Rods> Period-correct Hot Rods of the 30's & 40's started by gwhite, May 23, 2014 .

Hmmm... (link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnZHRupjl5E&feature=youtu.be )

I just tried it again. It seems to work for me. Here's the resultant link in Internet Explorer 11: http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/evolution-of-the-hot-rod-1930-1949.925033/ Here's the Google search page. The H.A.M.B. thread is the first one on the page. : https://www.google.com/search?q=Evolution+of+the+Hot+Rod%3B+1930-1949&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address&ie=&oe= The search was for: Evolution of the Hot Rod; 1930-1949 It's well worth the trouble to find it.

Fantastic! The H.A.MB. is just too huge and sprawling to purposely search across it for such treasures, so thanks so much for posting this. In particular starting Page 2 there's an incredible discussion of the earliest sightings of the use of the term "Hot Rod" and of it's origins. I have always fealt that it was a pre-WWII term since it pops up fully formed in 1945, already well entrenched in the language. That it had a negative connotation was also already clear. Here's picture from this thread that is extraordinary, not only because the reference to "American Hot Rod Racing Club" at the bottom of the ad is pre-war but that its East Coast at that!: The reference to "slab bang racing" and figure-8 racing would imply some sort of jalopy style cars. Further along in the thread there are these perceptive thoughts about the term, as well: "...racers didn't like the term "jalopy" (for obvious reasons) and it's been pretty well documented that they resisted the term "hot rod" too. At some point in the past, were the terms synonymous (meaning junked out, shoddy, unreliable or unsafe)? I've seen references to the problems of hot connecting/piston rods in both marine and railway literature - typically indicative of shoddy maintenance or worn out components. An engine with a 'hot rod' was quite literally on the verge of self-destruction. The fact that a "slam bang" racing event is being sanctioned by a club with 'hot rod' in the name leads me to believe there may be a connection here... According to the article the preferred terms were "gow job," "hop-up," or "soup-job". It's interesting to note that these terms come from horse racing, where 'gow' 'hop' and 'soup' represent the "doping" of animals to increase performance. Similarly, in the southwest, a hot iron (now an electric shocker called a 'hot shot') is used to move horses or cattle along with great speed. "hot rod" could have been derived from "hot iron", although it leaves room to question why racers rejected the former and embraced the latter..." What's so interesting about the pre-war period is that virtually all the stylistic features of the postwar Hot Rod have been worked out to some degree, and with de-mobilization pay returning GI's would take the hop-up world by storm and fuel the explosion of Hot Rodding as we have come to know it. This thread provides an excellent image of the prototypic pre-war era. Thanks!

Perhaps the most elegant GT Ferrari ever offered. Your model presents beautifully. Lately I've been eyeing the AMT/Italeri (?) version of one of this car to dip my toe in this subject matter, but those p/e Borranis certainly do the business and I am tempted to consider the Gunze kit. Is it a curbside or full detail?

Built for the Out-Of-The Box Challenge on the Vintage Drag Models forum, this was the first funny car project I’ve ever taken on. I’m afraid if you look carefully you’ll see some rookie mistakes. For one thing I just couldn't get the motor to fit without cutting down the front of the oil pan. Is this something unique to the Mustang body or is there something I just don't understand about fitting the motor? But overall the finished product has the brutish, purposeful look I remember from seeing these cars race. Even though the OOB challenge allowed free choice of decals and wheels and tires it was otherwise very strict, including banning detailing of any kind, including basic engine wiring and plumbing. I’m afraid I got carried away and, besides going whole hog on the paint and decal scheme, I wired and plumbed the engine and cut out the rear window and installed transparent red acetate – big time no’no’s which meant an instant DQ. But I enjoyed participating, working on a new subject for me, and have been very impressed with the many fine builds which have resulted. These are great kits and very enjoyable to work with. I'm sure I'll be building more of them. Thanx for looking, B.

Boy is it tempting to jump in on this discussion. The rush to autonomous cars and the internet of things is symptomatic of a high-tech industry that's struggling to get past the initial phases of consumer exhaustion on some pretty big successes over the past few decades. But this is such a huge subject with such profound implications I'd better steer clear of that and focus on autonomous cars per se. The big buzz from a business point of view a couple of decades back was the idea of what was then called "recurring revenue" - biz-speak for selling a subscription to a service or to media. The huge success of cable television which had virtually entirely replaced free-to-air TV in the USA was one of the main drivers of the trend at the time. The key to all this is that the user must surrender their right to ownership of the contents and the means of delivery. We've come a long way since those early beginnings and quite a few things are no longer owned by their users. For example many people don't realize that they don't actually own the songs on their iPod, just the right to the personal use of them. Your right to duplication and sharing is extremely limited. This is totally unlike buying a CD, let alone a 45 or LP (or a book for that matter), where it was virtually impossible for the publisher to keep track of the subsequent use and distribution of the material. When I went to college, for example, it was common practice to make Zerox copies of book chapters for our course work. No one said boo, probably because their were helpless to enforce the copyright. Autonomous driving is a data play. It's all about mapping roads, intersections, etc., and about probabilistic models about what happens on them. This is very complex stuff, and yet we all deal with it every day with our humble human brains. The Big Plan is to rent you a car when you need it that will drive you where the data can get you. The various early phases are already in play. Tesla, for example, is Beta testing one part of autonomous driving, the part that scans in real time the actual situation you're in and adjusts the car's parameters accordingly. Google is mapping roads and testing driverless cars on them. Uber will rent you a car and driver, but eventually you'll just request a driverless car. Or you can rent a car from Daimler Benz's Car-To-Go scheme by the hour and just park it wherever you are when you're through using it. The data-net keeps track of their location and the subscribers who are authorized to use them. When you need one they'll tell you where it is and you just (hopefully) walk to it and, er, Go...The driverless car, or course, will drive to your door. Meanwhile cars are getting ever more complex and dependent on automated feedback loops and the sensors that drive them. The weight, complexity and cost of cars is ever increasing as a result. Much of this trend is the result of legislated mandates, often driven by the industries that benefit from them. (Think 5-mile-per-hour bumpers and air bags for early examples.) The idea is that the "quality" is also ever increasing and that this new scheme will take the ever-escalating capital cost and distribute it over a radically larger user base. By eliminating the skill of driving, the potential user base is limited only by the cost of services as a percentage of income, and of the capacity of the network (the roads) to hold them. The other big issue is user liability. In theory if the network and everything on it is owned and operated by a government or private oligopoly then they are ultimately responsible for what goes on there. This is definitely not what they want. Uber is fighting tooth and nail in court rooms around the world to avoid being responsible for the activities that occur in the "rides" they make available. But you can't have it both ways. How this shakes out may actually far more important than the enabling technologies being developed right now. But ask yourself this: Are you willing to give up your ownership rights as an operator of your automobile? What if you can't afford the subscription fees? Or what if you want to go somewhere that's not on the network? Or what if that part of the network is unavailable when you want to go there? Or forbidden to you? Or.... The current network of roads already limits where you can go to a great extent, but you still own the means of transport and the use of those roads is still very open. All this will change with the Driverless Car and the business model that will accompany it. I'm actually quite optimistic that all this will be worked out. That's because I think people are far more aware of these issues than many business and technology leaders think. It may indeed prove to be that much of this technology is simply not needed, or will be used in ways we haven't yet imagined. Meanwhile Tesla just had a Big Problem with an unintentional beta tester in Florida.

The first clearly detailed w.i.p. I've seen of this kit. The bare metal interior bits are especially nice and should be a real hit with modelers. Great bench shots and nice crisp work you're doing! I'm surprised the chassis needs stretching since it's already out there to accommodate the roadster's big nailhead (assuming it's the same as the roadster kit, of course). Should be a sweety!

Super write-up on re-engineering and modifying to get what will no doubt be a superior result. Looking forward to more, more, more...

You excel at these so it's always nice to see something new off your bench. This is the classic Weapon of Choice for small displacement GT racing from this era and your color and paint scheme, and usual fine detail execution, capture it perfectly. This is what replica modeling is all about!

I've thought about getting one. Working under magnification has always struck me as its own thing, at least for me, requiring a shift in my way of looking at things. I've been more of a "standing back and looking at the overall effect" sort of builder, but I'll be the first to admit that fine detail can have some pretty powerful effects on the "overall effect". Definitely food for thought...

Thanks everyone., Harry, I'll give the foil another pass and see what Ican do. One of the purposes of doing these big Americans is to improve my BMF chops. They offer lotsa practice, LOL!

These are heart-attack gorgeous, and for me, too, virtually the ultimate combination. With the pending demise of Modelhaus, and acknowledging the fact that these are even better than what I've gotten from then, as far as my own needs, their commercial availability would be something profoundly to be desired!

Artful use of what's in the box of this classic kit. The result is surprisingly original and impactful. I think the treatment of the metallic finishes on the motor is especially successful. I'm surprised you didn't come up with something similar for the wheels. Very cool build.

I'm really looking forward to this one. This is exactly the body type I wanted to do for this year's dirt tracker. I'll be watching carefully to see how you do it. Too cool!!!! What kit is it exactly that you're using?

Gonna look sharp. The yards of BMF looks great against the blue metallic. Looking forward to seeing the whole thing come together with the big blown Caddy and the wide whites to see the effect they will have.

Thanks so much to you all for the kind words. Photographing the color was especially important to get across how the car actually looks. It's a text book example of using plenty of diffuse lighting. With essentially zero experience in building these types of cars I think I was very fortunate in having started with one of these later-period AMT kits. The fit, build-logic, instructions, and detail are all very good indeed. None the less even though it was essentially OOB my rookie status showed every step of the way and I found myself sticking very close to the instructions in putting it together. Even the simple (or so I thought) job of lowering the car (offset spindles in front and blocks in the rear) was complicated by adapting the Pegasus Sovereigns so they would fit in the wheel wells. But the overall look of the result made it all worthwhile, and I'm sure I'll do better on the next one. I'm a HUGE fan of the showroom stock builders and my admiration of their meticulously sanitary and realistic work has only increased as a result of this project! Again, thank you for all the appreciation, B.

A straight up hot rod with far more attention to detail and skill in execution than it's no-nonsense appeal would imply. The improvement in the stance is the result of some judicious tweaking, and the execution is meticulous throughout without ever calling attention to itself (your discussion of the carbs above is an example). IIRC, adapting the 5-window louvers to the rear of the Revell 3-window is nowhere near as straightforward as it is on the roadster or even the '29-'30 Model A decks, because of a significant difference in the width of the trunk opening. In any case the shot of the red and gray cars shows that while you've always had your own unique style you've added some depth and subtlety which is well demonstrated in this fine build. Regarding the black wash on the grill, I too have been frustrated by the lack of responsiveness of the Revell grill to simple black washes. The expense and complexity of the p/e grills has kept me coming back to fighting the good fight to get them looking right in plastic, but so far it has eluded me. Others have succeeded so I know it can be done. My frustration is compounded by the fact that, as you point out, it's especially difficult to get them to photograph properly.

[font size="4"]’62 Pontiac Catalina Mild Custom Even though I’ve long been an admirer of what I consider to be the height of American automotive design, the period immediately following WWII through to the late 60’s, and especially the work of GM’s Bill Mitchell as it was revealed in the early 60’s, I’ve never actually built models from the early 60’s This AMT ’62 Pontiac Custom kit has been in my stash for many years, untouched. Lately I’ve felt that it was time I tried my hand at these, and that it was the perfect sort of project to begin to hone my skills in candy paint jobs and epic BMF battles. So this is virtually OOB standard with the exception of the lowered stance (brought down about 3 scale inches all the way around), the Pegasus Sovereign wheels and pin-wall tires, and the Duplicolor MetalCast transparent orange over Duplicolor Metalcast Silver ground. As essentially stock as it is there’s not much to say except that this was a very different experience from my usual diet of Old School Rods and Kustoms and classic drag cars. And the BMF and paint presented real challenges to assure a crisp and clean presentation. But it was a pleasure to build it from what is a well-engineered and detailed kit. It had the desired effect of opening up a new subject area for my modeling. Thanx for lookin’, B.

Thanks for the picture, Chris. It will help a lot. It shows where the firewall and clutch can should line up, and where the front of the engine block is in relation to the cross member I mentioned. The rear axle is already glued in place and the driveshaft won't slip easily into the transmission because of the angle imposed on it. I'm think I'll probably remove the drive shaft at the rear end and then insert it in the transmission, hoping t it will slide to an accurate fit. Anyway, the picture is what I needed to get my head around this issue. And yes, there are little L-shaped bits yet to be glued in place.

Thank you, Roger! First off, I need some advice, or at least confirmation that I’m right in my assumptions. While the clear coats cure (see below) I can’t handle the body so I mocked up the interior panels to the chassis as best I could. From what I can tell the motor fits behind the front wheel well panels of the interior tin work. The motor also needs to be set back enough so the oil pan clears a cross member behind the fuel tank area. Given these facts it appears that I will need to trim the drive shaft somewhat to get proper placement. I get the impression that many of the parts in these MPC flopper kits are meant to serve for several fairly different cars so this doesn’t surprise me. But I’m a real rookie when it comes to these kits. So I need some advice from some of you more experienced builders. Am I right in my conclusion? (Please refer to the circled areas in the picture below.) Since my last update, I got the remaining decals printed out and applied and got three coats of Duplicolor Clear laid down over them. The trade decals are mainly from Slixx Nostalgia Drag decal sheets while the grill and tail light area decals are made from scans I took of the kit sheets, adding the “Boss 429” to the back. I scanned and made my own decals as insurance in case I messed them up. The Boss 429 decals on the hood were homemade – they’re slightly smaller than the mockup I showed the other day. The clear needs to cure for a few days and then I’ll rub it out. Those extra layers really add depth to the paint and I’m fairly pleased with the results so far. The fogged panels, in particular, really pop now. The chassis is assembled, finished in Krylon Grey enamel with details in various shades of Testors Metalizer for a utilitarian look. That same no-nonsense theme is carried over to the motor and wheels. The rear wheels are finished in Testors Jet Exhaust enamel for a pseudo-Dow 7 finish. The front wheels are finished in Testors Metalizer Magnesium. The engine block is Testors Ford Engine Blue with various shades of Metalizers on the engine parts. The valve covers are actually from the kit, Boss 429 parts designed to kit the standard MPC Hemi heads. The kit also comes with some Chevy Big Block style heads and valve covers to create a mock-BBC look. Thanx for lookin’, and for any advice on the motor placement issue. B.

Really enjoying the crisp, precise work on this, and the tight, low stance, too. Looking forward to more.

I really like the care and detail you've put into this. The tires in particular came out great. The whole thing should be very IPMS worthy. I'm currently building the Blue-Max Model King version for an OOB challenge at the Vintage Drag Models board - which was started for the same reason, to "help" guys finish a build. But I just caught heat for planning (not done yet) to wire the ignition... Shoulda kept my mouth shut... Anyway, my kit came with three engine variations off the same block: straight-up MPC elephant motor hemi, Boss 429 valve covers to fit the kit hemi heads, and heads and valve covers to make a BBC style motor. In addition it had to front frame assemblies, coil and torsion bar, as shown above. Since I have the Mustang body I'm going with the Boss 429 look with home-made decals to match.

Thanks Chris. Actually, the kit comes with quite a number of parts for other Funny Cars MPC put out, including a set of Big Block Chevy heads and valve covers to fit the Hemi block and a set of Boss 429 valve covers that fit the Hemi heads. So I'm running the Boss 429 setup in this car to go with the decals. I'm in the middle of the chassis and engine build up right now and I'll post pics in the next few days.

I really like the crisp red and white look and the 50's style roll bar of questionable worth (lol). Good call on the re-do of the nose, too. Sharp build!