Art Anderson

That TTX Tri-level would be huge in 1/25 scale, considering that the real flatcar itself is 85-feet long over the couplers (or the same length as US railroad passenger cars from about 1920 out to present-day AMTRAK. Art

I could have. However, the Revell '50 Ford pickup is a lot more current and state-of-the-art than the AMT '49 Mercury (which dates all the way back to 1962), and in the bargain the AMT Mercury flathead engine has "rudimentary" spark plug wiring detail engraved onto the cylinder heads, which looks kinda bad to my eyes. AMT's engine did contribute its transmission to this project though. Art

First thing is to build up the chassis, modify the front crossmember to accept the very nice flathead V8 from Revell's 50 Ford pickup (in real life, very much the same engine as used in Mercury and Ford passenger cars. This necessitated reshaping the oil pan to clear the Merc's tie rod, and then modify the exhaust manifolds to passenger car configuration and add the essential, separate "crossover" exhaust pipe connecting the left side manifold to the right side part, then adding the correct passenger car exhaust outlet at the rear of the right side manifold. The crossover pipe, along with its couplings on the manifold, and the outlet coupling were made from bits of Evergreen 3/32" styrene tubing, with bits of brass rod making the locating pins. All glue joints done with Goldberg SuperJet CA glue. The pickup truck's transmission isn't correct for a passenger car, being a top-loader using a floor shift, and lacking the longer tailshaft housing used in passenger car installations, so it was cut off, and the rear of the bellhousing carefully filed both flat and square. I cut the transmission unit off an engine from the AMT '49 Mercury, and once filed to a flat face, glued in place with liquid plastic cement: The chassis came in for a bit of modification to the front crossmember. I found a picture online that shows the downward-slanting areas just inboard of the upper A-arm pivot points to be boxed in, rather than open channel as done by Revell, so a couple of bits of strip styrene were stubbed in place there with CA glue, then filed to match the shape of the crossmember in those areas. A couple of bits of .080" thick strip styrene were used for the front motor mounting points. I drilled a hole in each one to accept the locating pins on the Revell engine's front cover plate, but lacked a small drill thick enough to accept those locating pins. A dental burr turned out to be the exact diameter needed, so it got chucked into my pinvise, and with a bit of rotating that, workable locating holes! Other than possibly fabricating the extra-heavy duty oil-bath/oil wetted aircleaner (which mounted beside the carburetor) and fabricating a stock exhaust system in sections like the real thing so I can finish off and smooth down the seams down the centers of the X-member legs, the rest of this model should be straight-forward assembly. Art

My rule for my model room? "Eintritt Verboten! (Verstehst Du?)" Art

Bull! (to put it mildly!). This hobby is as alive and active as it has EVER been--only the names and our ages have changed! Art

Time and age, to put it mildly! Materials back in the late 50's? Well of course I did buy a few tonneau covers from younger kids who could be persuaded with a quarter or so to part with that part from their AMT Ford or Chevy pickups, but what about putty? Tried Plastic Wood--didn't work. Then experimented with some Revell Type 'S' Cement (Revell's plastic glue) and an old can of Johnson's Baby Powder (left over from my earliest formative years!), and that worked great, but the aroma was a bit embarrassing when my buddies would come over for a group building session! (AMT's Contour Putty was a God-send for sure! Paint? Before there was Testors in the little square bottles, Revell's model paint sets, along with the lesser-known but equally decent paint sets from Comet got a good bit of my allowance and paper-route proceeds. What a discovery, that first rack of Pactra "Sof-Spray" rattle cans--the colors weren't great, but the paint worked great--and when Pactra introduced their first candy colors in 1960--wow! It was about that time that I discovered that Pactra's Flat White (in 3/4 ounce jars for all of 15-cents back then) was the only white paint that would both dry and stick to those early vinyl tires for whitewalls. Some think that it wasn't until Tamiya introduced their "plastic-friendly" spray lacquers back about 15yrs or so that we got lacquer sprays that worked on plastic models with no hassles--not true! AMT Corporation introduced a really nice line of such non-penetrating lacquers in late 1962, going on to produce them until about 1973-74. Tools? My very first modeling tool was a pocket knife that was a birthday present from my Dad at age 10--July 1954--Dad was "old school" meaning that when a son reached age 10, he was old enough for a pocket knife and to learn how to sharpen and maintain it. I literally wore the blades of that knife out on the oil stone, honing it to an edge that in my young mind rivaled the sharpest of Xacto blades. Files? Before hobby shops discovered needle files--it was Mom's fingernail file and orange-wood sticks--Mom never knew (or if she did she never admitted it!) why her nail file kept disappearing! Airbrush you say? I first saw airbrushed finishes when I was probably about 11 or so (1955), when visiting a middle-aged neighbor whose daughter was in my 5th and 6th grade class in school. Mr. Nelson was a model railroader, as well as an advertising artist for our local newspaper (back when newspapers did their own artwork for advertising clients), and showed me what he could do with an airbrush. Finally, on the day after Christmas, 1961, at 17, I walked into our LHS (actually a Mom & Pop Auto Supply Store--Bell Auto Supply), and asked Mr. Weber if he could order up a Binks Wren airbrush, with compressor, a moisture trap and the hoses to go with it. "What in the h**l do you want with one of those?" he asked. I explained that Mr. Nelson recommended that setup to me and I wanted one for painting model cars. "Well, OK--I suppose you have the money for all that?" I showed him (by then a very trusted friend who got a lot of my money at $2 a shot for model car kits!) $100 that I'd saved up, so he got out the catalogs and we agreed on the afore-named Binks setup. "I should have this here tomorrow if I call in the order to (his primary hobby wholesaler whom I won't name here) if I can get through on the phone. He did, and they did--and by 1pm the next day I was on my way home with the first really high-tech bit of equipment my workshop ever had. That Binks diaphragm compressor lasted me until 1990 when it finally gave up, threw it's connecting rod (too old a model by then to get a replacement rod), the Wren is now consigned to a box of memorable model stuff--finally too many trips to the floor irreparably damaged its soft cast-aluminum body, but I still use the moisture trap with every spray job--guess I got my money's worth, huh? Many more tools and bits of equipment have followed me home over these past 61+ years I've been building models, but it's also been "time" that has changed things. I've gotten older, more experienced and questionably a bit wiser over those years. I've learned a ton about techniques (still use a lot I've learned over time of course), and certainly have picked up several hundred pounds of printed reference materials along the way. But should go without saying that since the middle 1990's, the internet has become not only a meeting place with other modelers, but certainly the first place I look for information about this or that car I might be working on. And, along the way, over time, I've been both coast-to-coast and border-to-border in this hobby, both physically and of course, over the net. Art

Oh, I forgot to mention how we got the clear plastic shapes for bubble-topped customs! All we model builders had to do was hang out around the variety store that was about 3 blocks from home--wait for a kid to come out with a newly purchased pkg of Silly Putty! Back then, SP came in a 2-part plastic "egg", in a blister card with very clear 1/2 egg-shaped blisters on each side! Just a quick negotiation, perhaps a dime or two changed hands (back when a dime got you a tall coke at the drug store soda fountain), and bubble tops for two custom car models. Art

I'm using the '50 Ford flathead, with the tranny cut off and replaced with the transmission from the AMT '49 Merc (easy swap BTW). I've found that the pickup oil pan is incorrect for a passenger car, won't clear the Merc's tie rod unit with the engine set forward as it needs to be. Pics once I get the front engine mounting points built for the front crossmember, and the oil pan shapes corrected. Art

I remember that pretty well too. Testors simply took a look at their lineup of the then only line of bottled paint they sold, which was a rack of 75 different colors. They "discontinued" the entire line for perhaps 6 weeks, brought back only the better-selling colors as "new products" and went forward. Art

It's made by Campbell Scale Models--HO scale metal chain. Very nice, BTW. Art

I looked that up: There is a guy in Juneau AK who makes all manner of enameled jewelry pins--and produced the Bantam Logo in miniature as part of his line. Supposedly he has trademark rights to the logo (although if he no longer makes any product using it, within a fairly short time the trademark becomes public domain again. Art

I wonder if the biggest "fly in the ointment" re: model paint prices isn't the bottle rather than the paint itself? Consider what a glass color jar for an airbrush costs to buy--almost as much as a comparably sized bottle of any model paint (and thats for a jar with lid, not the airbrush material delivery tube installation). Art

The chassis are the same between Revell's 49 Merc lead sled and the Station Wagon--only the suspension parts changed--to give a stock ride height for the Woodie. Art

Aaron, Having owned and used a Sherline lathe since 1982, I am certain you will be most satisfied with their products. In addition, back in 2009, I bought a Sherline mill and most of the attachments I might need for model work--again, an excellent machine, and one that gets called on quite frequently at my bench. Art

Mark has the history of this kit quite correct. If I might add a bit more: Save for the 1/32 scale Pyro kit and the 1/20 scale Hubley metal kit, there have never been any other model kits done of a true 1932 Chevrolet roadster--the MPC/AMT kit has always been the '32 Chevy Cabriolet (fixed windshield, doors having roll-up windows with a folding upper B-post--very much the same body style as the '30 Model A Ford Cabriolet done by Monogram in the same era). Second, the "panel truck" version in the original series (this was done as part of the "Gangbusters" kit as well as a separate, one-body-only kit a year or so after the original Gangbusters series of MPC kits faded from their catalogs. However, the actual vehicle was termed a "sedan delivery" and features a body NOT designed at General Motors Art & Color Department (which later became GM's Styling Division), but rather was a custom design (I believe) done by LeBaron (by then a department/division of Briggs Body Company of Detroit--more famous for styling and building the hign-end coachbuilt bodies for the likes of Packard, Chrysler Imperial and Lincoln--as well as the constructor of EVERY 1932 Ford Sedan Delivery), and was based on a '32 Chevrolet 4dr sedan body. The late Bill Harrison of Monta Vista CA, well known to Bay Area car modelers for his vast library of reference material on 1930's and 40's American cars, told me this, and showed me his file on this particular car (Lord knows where he found all that information!). Bill had worked up (I saw this at his home in 1992 or 1993, while in the San Francisco Bay Area for an NNL-West/West Coast Model Expo) a correct '32 Chevrolet Deluxe pickup cab from the MPC Sedan Delivery and showed me the necessary mods to make it--very notably the much taller truck cab roofline and the considerably different character moldings on the body sides and around the back. Why Sedan Deliveries in the first place though? In many large cities, going back into the 1870's or so, there were "boulevard laws" passed, which restricted the use of commercial vehicles on streets designated as boulevards (primarily in upscale neighborhoods)--commercial wagons, drays and later motor vehicles allowed ONLY for the purpose of making deliveries to homes on such streets, and then often specifying that such vehicles meet a rather high standard of style, trim and of course be well and cleanly maintained. In short, large, noisy, and often rather "ugly" trucks were simply frowned upon in neighborhoods populated by the wealthy, "old money" folks who considered themselves the aristocracy of the cities in which they lived (hmmm, sounds familiar even today!) From this came a market for delivery and service cars and trucks which were as stylish, highly trimmed as the luxury cars owned and driven for and by the wealthy families whose homes lined such upscale streets. In addition, many smaller businesses preferred the more stylish passenger car-based sedan deliveries over panel trucks for making deliveries to homes all over town, for delivering flowers, clean laundry (even diaper services!), prescriptions and the like. The US Post Office Department used sedan deliveries through the 1950's as well. Pickup trucks and panel deliveries from the Big Three automakers were at one time offered with passenger car styling and sometimes with so-called "Deluxe" trim carried over from their passenger car stable mates, most notably from Ford, who regularly produced such deluxe up-level trim and styling on pickups until (or so the legend goes) Henry Ford questioned whether a buyer of a new Model A really wanted to see his car coming at him down the road piled with a massive load of hay on the bed, at which time Ford began styling pickups with either last year's styling themes or even their own distinctive look (witness the 1933-34 Ford truck series which carried over the styling brought out in 1932 while Ford passenger cars got the new streamlined styling of the Ford Model 40-then 1935-36 Ford trucks being given the styling themes of the '33-'34 passenger car line while passenger cars got even more streamlined looks for 1935). But back to the '32 Chevrolet: Chevrolet offered a panel delivery truck for 1932, which used the same styling as all other '32 Chevy trucks, but was much more subdued, a lot more utilitarian in design, and with a body having a much higher roof line than that which was done for the custom-built sedan delivery which MPC modeled their kit after. Art

From reading the mfr's description, it's a water-borne clear acrylic, which is what Future has always been. Art

Tony, it is hard to say, without some serious reference work, and careful review on most issues--yes, every so often, a new model car kit gets released with even small but (to some) still glaring errors. I would, however, submit that every so often in the model kit industry, there comes a "learning curve" which has almost always been the case as designers, pattern makers, even the "product development executives" leave their respective companies and are replaced (turnover). In addition, for all the "ballyhoo" and almost "religious devotion" to new and upcoming technology--again I am certain that a serious "learning curve" is very much a part of that equation as well. Art

I can't see why not, given that the wheel/tire combo's Chris made were part of kits he also made. Now, it sure would be nice to be able to snag a couple of the 274 Offenhausers. Art

It seems to me that just the regular polishing compound should remove the striping, without seriously affecting the underlying paint! On diecasts, of course the base color is baked enamel, and the pad printing is done with a type of ink, but of course on a plastic body, baking the basic colors cannot be done, for obvious reasons. Anything that will dissolve the pad printing on a project like this will probably damage the original finish on that body. Art

I think it's pretty well-accepted that the Hess GMC Motor Home is 1/25 scale, is it not? Art

's funny! I've got that kit, been hanging onto it for years, but NEVER realized it had an engine! Now, that's a subject begging for some added detailing, for sure! Nice build, Harry. Art

Good point! Most are unaware (and were back in the day), that automakers (GM in particular) were rather adamant that all promotional model cars fit in exactly the same box (or as in the case of the new-for-1962 compact cars, two standard sized boxes). That lead to some rather creative "dimensioning" on JoHan's part for their 59-62 Cadillacs: Overall, their bodies are only slightly longer than a 1/25 scale Chevy Impala, but yet are a tad narrower. Their front clips and trunk area's are shorter than they should be, while the "greenhouses" are very close to the correct length front-to-back, the entire body shells are a good 1/8" too narrow (3" in 1/25 scale). From 1963 all the way out to the last JoHan promotional and kit Cadillacs (their last one was the 1979 Fleetwood Coupe de Ville) are all seriously undersized, no larger than an early-mid 1970's Impala, as you noted. JoHan's Studebaker Lark promos (1960, 1961 and 1962--the 62's were morphed into 3in1 model kits) are all oversized, approximately 1:22.5 scale, which makes them tower over most any other 1/25 scale model car kit. AMT/SMP comes in for some criticism as well, at least from me: The SMP 1959-60 Chevrolet Impala convertible kits all have a terribly inaccurate windshield frame, that having a pronounced upward, curved "arch" to the top of the windshield frame, and the '60 Chevy grille only barely resembles the real car's--and does not begin to fit the kit body shell at all correctly or cleanly. Their 1960 El Camino and '60 Impala Nomad 4dr station wagon bodies have roof lines that are the lower hardtop/convertible height, when the real cars' rooflines were a good 2-3" taller, with a more vertical windshield. In fact, the only accurately done Chevy bodyshell from that era of Chevy is on the '59 El Camino (which started out as a much more highly detailed "Trophy Series" kit. The SMP 59-61 Corvette kits (as well as the AMT '62 Corvette) have a front end that is almost as blunt as a brick--and the lower pan is far to square--to the point it almost suggests a chipmunk with cheeks full of unchewed nuts. The chrome "wheel covers" on the SMP '59 Impala HT kit are not wheel covers at all--SMP tooled up the standard equipment "dog dish" hubcap on a steelie, as opposed to the very stylish and popular Impala full wheel cover. AMT's almost iconic '61 Pontiac Bonneville kit bodies are not symmetrical--that bold, raised character shape down the sides closely matches the real car on the right side of the body, but the left side? Ewwww! It's not even done straightly!. Their '65 Bonneville HT kit has a correct shape to the right rear quarter window opening, while the left side is way off--too arched, the C-post too vertical as well. AMT's '32 Ford kits? Lots of inaccuraces there, roadster and coupe bodies whose shapes only resemble the real thing (Revell has gotten their 21st Century kits of the Deuce much, MUCH more accurate. The AMT '32 Ford Phaeton and Tudor sedan bodies are considerably too narrow behind the B-post, and the Tudor sedan body is far too rounded at the roof behind the B-post as well. While AMT's 40 Ford coupe and sedan kits are actually pretty accurate, their '40 Ford sedan delivery body is considerably too narrow aft of the B-post, and much too slab-sided--all this happened apparently to allow the use of the coupe/sedan fender/running board unit. Now, lest anyone think I'm just dissing those old models and the people who created them, I'm not, really. They were the product of companies just learning the fine art of creating decent plastic model kits--in the case of their "annual series" customizing kits, they were handicapped by having to deal with only such information as the styling departments of the automakers were willing to let out to them, and only minimal measurements at that. The pattern-makers were still in a learning curve I suspect--most of them, while highly skilled, were more than likely recruits out of other industries and had to transfer their basic hand skills from creating tooling for say, consumer goods to miniaturizing real cars into model kit tooling. There were only limited factory drawings of those body shells, most real car body shapes were transferred from clay mockups to steel tooling without benefit of drawings or certainly 3D scans (that technology in the late 50's was a good half century out into the future. But, since the premise of this thread is accuracy yesterday VS today, in general, model car kits of those days of yore weren't necessarily better than what we see today--albeit they were masterpieces of the designer's and toolmaker's art. Art

I rather suspect that yes, the population of model car builders is growing, at least enough to be a fairly stable-sized group. Going back say, 40-50 years ago (1964-74) this hobby was primarily one for kids, kids from perhaps 9 or 10 to about 15-16 (the age at which we all were discovering real cars and of course, girls). Back in the 1960's I seldom ever noticed there being any older adults building plastic models of any sort, certainly not cars. Back then, adult model builders tended toward building what they grew up around, subjects like "stick & tissue" rubber-band powered model airplanes, gas-powered control-line airplanes (the kind you flew in a circle using a handle with two lines--one for up elevator, the other for down elevator), a few grownups were fiddling around with the then-primitive radio control systems--generally flying from crash-to-crash (!), and of course model railroading. If they were into plastic models then it seemed to me that generally speaking, adult modelers gravitated to ships or aircraft. I believe that today, the average entry age for model car building is somewhere in the late teens to perhaps middle 20's--not unlike plastic model aircraft, armor or ships, and with many of those who at least try this hobby of ours, they do stick with it over time. However, the bulk of modelers that I see at contests tend to be aged anywhere from their middle 30's on up to guys in their 50's-70's (who really knows what the "exit age" is?). I said "growing", but that's a term I liken to an old biological "law": An organism must grow in order to survive; once it stops growing, it starts to die. I've heard many times over my life the saying that paraphrases that biological law: "An organization must grow in order to survive; once it stops growing, it starts to die. Can this or any other hobby be very much different than that? Of course, model car building isn't the big "IN THING TO DO" that it was back in the 1960's with the kids we once were. Time and pastimes do move on--every new age group or generation seems to have it's "hot" thing to do for fun--I think most of us who read and post on this and other model car forums can think of crazes and fads that have come and gone, but yet still around as simply pastimes, even hobbies for some who enjoyed them so much when they were the "new and hot thing to be into", and certainly model cars and building them fit that description quite well, I think. So, why not think of our hobby as something that is still very much alive, with newer and younger builders coming on the scene (and I am not forgetting those "returnees" who left this hobby years, perhaps decades back!), and thus replacing those who have had to stop by reason of aging (and the almost inevitable disabilities that come with growing old)--enough so as to not only replenish the model car builder population, but perhaps even grow it a bit. If nothing else, consider that in 2014, the population of the United States is practically double what it was in 1964. Art

Cordless Dremel, with 1/8" carbide cutter--Indispensible! Art

Tim, Exactly! Having had just enough experience in product development, both in 1/25 scale models, and diecast, the only way I've found to judge any scale model for accuracy (certainly shapes and contours) is looking at the miniature in as close to the angle of the camera which recorded the image of the real thing that one is trying to use. Even with picture-to-picture comparisons of just the real car--different cameras, at different angles to the subject can tell different stories, given the often complex shapes of a real car body. And, when studying the model against the real thing--try closing one eye, so that the model appears to you more-or-less in two dimensions, simply for the reason that a camera has but one "eye" (one lens) while we humans are born with two eyes, giving the ability to see things with "binocular" vision. Art