Dennis Lacy

The Burbank Choppers car club and the late Gray Baskerville would have been better off kicking themselves in the balls than coining the term "rat rod" back in the 90's had they had the foresight to know what it was going to devolve to. For what it's worth, there are THOUSANDS of shiny, pretty, "finished" street rods that are absolute safety and mechanical engineering failures too. People generally have the misconception that if a hot rod has shiny paint and chrome and looks nice then it must be perfect. Probably 50% of them that you see on the road aren't as well-built as you think. A lot of "good enough" and "close enough" goes on in the garages they are built in.

Cool choice on the wheels. They look kinda like old school Stern 3-piece wheels that Saleen used on their 1993 SC and SA10 models.

Text book dry lakes profile. Absolutely awesome work going into this roadster, Bill. If I close my eyes I can hear that Olds crackling on alcohol at the starting line!

I just read through this entire thread. I knew very little about the car, let alone that there were so many variations. The amount of variations did not surprise me, though, because many vehicles back then went through running changes until they were correct or, at least, better. The die-hard attitudes the builders of these machines had has always fascinated me. To have a seemingly "finished" vehicle, take it and run it, decide it's not good enough then take it home, tear it all apart and in some cases start over - that is dedication. Then take into account that many of these vehicles were "home made" with, in some cases, 20-30 year old components (LaSalle transmissions for one) and what these men were able to accomplish was nothing short of incredible. It truly was the romantic age of automotive racing. Of course, advancements in technology has led to faster and fancier machines, but it's nothing I can relate to. Bill: There are other builders that are revered for their eye candy but many times feature obvious mechanical errors that are always dismissed and brushed under the rug, Every time I see a thread by you it puts a smile on my face because I know I'm in for a treat. Yes, I enjoy the subjects you choose but just as much I enjoy your dedication to quality and fidelity.

The bodies are also re-inforced with steel structure and that will rust too. Sometimes during restoration it is necessary to cut the body open and repair the inner structure. Moisture is a Mo-Fo.

I didn't think scale mechanical fidelity was important? I was under the impression that as long as the model is jam-packed with stuff and shiny paint that it's good enough for the girls we go with? Now that I know accuracy is important to some people, I need to re-think my approach.

And look at that, the doors even fit the body! (that's an inside joke with myself) Seriously, this is an incredible piece of work. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread, it put a smile on my face. I remember the adds in automotive magazines in the 80's and early 90's. There was one with a head-on shot with a dark car and the interior glowing yellow/orange. I personally like the swirly wheels like the red W8 car in that video has. When I think Vector, those are the wheels that come to my mind. If you made a set of those and do decide to sell copies of the car, I would buy one. I wouldn't care if the wheels aren't "era correct" for the rest of this versions details.

BLAH_BLAH_BLAH_BLAH, man, this coupe just keeps getting better. Gonna be one killer hot rod when finished!

It's too bad that you got in such a hurry to paint that you didn't take the time to make the doors actually fit and be the same shape as the holes in the body. Those gaps are gonna stick out like a sore thumb no matter how fancy the paint job is. Kind of a shame with all the detail you've put into other areas of the project. I will concede that the final fit of the engine does look better than the mock-ups and more true to the 1:1.

I think it was said somewhere else in this thread (maybe?) that the Monogram that "screwed" Steve is not the same Monogram(Revell) that exists today. All different faces, owners, work ethics, everything. So, holding a grudge is pretty dumb considering the people that "screwed" him are long gone. The bottom line is that no matter how much it would make some of our fantasies come true, there is no way that there will ever be a new-tool Uncertain T produced by a model manufacturer. The best bet would be someone taking molds off of a minty kit and reproducing it in resin. Even that is unrealistic. I think the best Steve is going to do is sell some of his autographed pictures for a few extra bucks a month and continue to fill his Facebook wall with a bunch of F.M.L. pissing and moaning about his bad health and empty bank account. I removed him from my friends list 'cause I got tired of hearing it and getting jerked off waiting to see some current-day photos of the car which is supposed to still exist.

That's just my opinion.

As in, the Mustang from the movie Gone In 60 Seconds? If that's the case the winning bidder paid $960,000 too much.

There's guys who build models, then then there's Pocher guys. They take obsession to a whole new level!

Thanks, and you're probably correct about them being injector parts. I was looking at those 4 fuzzy things too but despite the blurry pictures I just wasn't finding a 3rd Chevy intake. Regardless, this kit should be, at the least, a good parts source!

Where are you seeing the Man-A-Fre style intake? On the Chevy engine sprue I see a super charger intake and a Hilborn style fuel injector. Care to circle it in the picture it's in? I'm looking and looking...

Chassis is coming together nice. I really like the combo of weathered chassis and shiny cream colored wheels. This hot rod is gonna be kick-a$$.

This is my 1987 Mustang GT that I purchased just a few months ago, back in February '13. Bought it out of Santa Barbara, California. Car was bone stock except for window tint and upgraded stereo. All original mint condition paint, moldings, emblems, lights, everything. Mint interior. 57,200 miles. Owned by an older woman for 24 years who worked for a Ford dealer the whole time she had it so it has had an impecable service record. Was owned by two different guys the last 2 years that didn't have the heart, or the balls, to do anything to it. Then I came along... The day I bought it: Hosted on Fotki Two months after I bought it with a few tasteful modifications: Hosted on Fotki Hosted on Fotki Hosted on Fotki

There ya go!

The engine details look nice and the trunk area is pretty far out. I don't understand why the engine is mounted at such an extreme angle though? Doesn't seem like it's necessary for ground clearance or any other reason? Is the real car that way? Edit - Just went back and looked and the engine in the real car is nearly level and in line with the differential. If you're going for scale fidelity what you have done would never work. Kind of undermines all the extra detailing. Just sayin'...

The stance and "look" of the car look really good. Only suggestion I can make would be to slot the sides of the tractor shell and slide it back a bit over the front cross member. A little too much over hang past the front wheels and the engine compartment looks a little long. Do that and it'll have perfect proportions.

I have one of these Ertl coin banks in the picture. Only reason it's made that way is so it will actually hold some coins. All Sedan Deliveries were converted Sedans. Ford initially was not going to offer the model, customers complained, they had Le Baron convert just under 400 in the later part of '32. From then on out, Sedan Deliveries were purpose-built and had different proportions than a regular Sedan for increased cargo capacity. The larger, commercial deliveries are called Panel Deliveries and they share some of the characteristics of the pickup trucks. In fact, the doors are interchangable.

Not to mention that it has been routine practice for over 50 years for people to chop the top on early 50's subjects when turning them into a hot rod or custom. When done right, it can be a great asthetic improvement. People don't chop the tops on Fox Mustangs. One person did in the mid-90's and it looked stupid. No one, that I know of, has done it since.

Because the first 16 pages dealt with what constitutes a correct special service version and what colors the light bar should be, if the car should even have one at all. I also think people got such an initial hard-on that this kit was actually happening that it took some time for the euphoria to wear off and reality to set in. Yes, the other versions have incorrect roof sections as well. But, for a combination of factors this new kits roof looks the most wrong out of any of them. Not to mention it's too late to do anything about all those other ancient tools. There's still time to fix this one.

I just measured my own car and the verticle height from the outer edges of the upper and lower trim pieces (just as it's marked in the picture above) is 19 9/16". The verticle height of the quarter window measures the same. Plus or minus 1/16th" definitely confirms that "whale392" measured his car correctly. The upper trim piece is glued to the body (except for one small retaining screw at the bottom near the area of the door mirror) so if the trim on one car was pushed on tighter than the trim on another that would account for the 1/16th" The incorrect angle of the B-pillar is a major contributor to the body not looking right. Without the B-pillar leaning forward as it should the shape of the door frame and window opening is way off making the window not only look to short, but also too long.