Art Anderson

That's because the old, rare AMT '32 Ford Tudor Sedan (and the MPC sedan delivery body which is pretty much a clone of the AMT Tudor with windows blanked off) are way off--too narrow, Art

With the correct updraft aircleaner/plenum from Kitchen Table Resins. Art

Pretty much the only identifiers as to a '33 or '34 Ford are the grille and the hood side panels. '33 hood side panels have louvers that are very slighttly curved forward toward their bottom edge, which '34 hood side panel louvers are straight, but angled to match the rearward angle of the '34 grille. A '33 Ford grille has a much finer, almost delicate-looking chrome surround, with it's fine vertical bars in a slight concave manner--matching that same curvature in the '33 hood side panels. Body shells, particularly the 5-window coupe, are identical, however. Art

This car is the Duesenberg SJN with coachwork by Bohmann & Schwartz of Pasadena CA, styled by J. Herbert Newport (who designed most of the SJN Duesenbergs circa 1935-36), for Mrs. Ethel V. Mars, founder and matriarch of Mars Candy Company. Ethel Mars was known for her flamboyance--this car was originally painted in a brilliant metallic silver, and she outfitted her chauffeur with a metailic silver uniform and cap to go with the color of the car. After the Mars family sold the car, a subsequent owner had it repainted in a very gawdy "Lipstick Red", and then the car was sold to an enthusiast who thought that as a formal, town car, it would look more appropriate in black, which is the color it is currently. The mid-1930's being the heyday of "streamlining", Newport styled this distinctive grille shell, which lays over the standard Duesemberg chrome plated radiator shiell--the thermostatic shutters clearly visible if one sees the car up close from the front. Those "camel hump" shaped spare tire covers were a feature of at least a couple more SJN's, most notably the "Father Devine" town car, a gargantuan ride--on a 153" J chassis that was stretched out to a 187" wheelbase. Art

Yes, And anymore, "one hit wonder" model car kits can have a very uncertain future in today's hobby. Art

I believe that chrome band was a feature of 1932 Model 18 Fords (V8 cars), most of my images of original Model B's (4-cylinder cars) seem not to have that trim. Art

For perhaps the majority of members of this forum (and all of us with more white than color in what hair we still have on top of our heads), a step-down Hudson model kit would have been one of the last subjects we'd have bought as kids 50-60 yrs ago. Face it: Most of us older modelers would have dreaded being seen in a Hudson back then (It took a classmate of mine, when we were in 7th grade to open my eyes--HE know what a Hornet, with the 7X Twin H-Power 308cid flathead 6 would do--and my mother proceeded to confirm that, and showed the two of us! VROOOMMMMMM!). Even as late as say, 15-20 yrs ago, it probably would not have been a salable model car subject, certainly not in the eyes and minds of those making buying decisions as wholesalers or retailers in the hobby business (witness the still-born AMT/Ertl '50 Olds 88 Club Coupe, announced at RCHTA in October 1999!). But, time seems to have a way of letting us warm up to the idea of such cars today. Many of us remember them as cars from our youth, and we tend to wax nostalgic as we've gotten older--just as our parents became nostalgic about the cars of their younger years. Art

I'm not exactly sure what you mean (hard case, bag, combination of both) here, but I'll give it a stab: All 1932 Ford Model B (4cyl cars) and Model 18's (V8 cars) came standard equipped with a single spare tire, rear mounted, the spare tire mount being very much like what AMT did on the 5-window coupe, Victoria, and Tudor Sedan kits they produced. Side-mounted spare tires were an extra cost option on passenger cars, both 4- and V8 models, and standard on the three principal light commercial cars (single spare on the right side front fender), the 1/2 ton pickup, 1/2 ton panel delivery, and the station wagon (through 1939, Ford listed their station wagons in the commercial car & truck line). As for spare tire covers for '32 Fords, those were dealer-installed accessories, the most common being a fabric one which covered the tire only, not the wheel itself; but a stamped steel spare tire cover was offered for use on cars with the standard single rear mounted spare tire. There were aftermarket spare tire covers out there, both the "doughnut" style (covering the tire only) and "drum head style" which covered the entire tire and wheel, such as AMT tooled up at some point in their Victoria kit. Hope this helps! Art

Funny, I never saw that on the three I built? Art

That's a 1966-vintage AMT Annual Series 3in1 kit, as reissued about 16-17 years ago. Walmart had them boxed in that checkerboard pattern in the early 2000's. Art

William, And yet, to get a scale inch in 1/24 requires a good set of digital calipers---while I would challenge anyone to see the difference between 1mm and .040" (hint, it's out to the ten-thousandths of an inch!)--one swipe of a piece of 400-grit. Incidently, 1/25 scale is an architect's and engineering scale, often used for drawings, 1/24 scale pretty much originated here in the US, back in the 1950's, and was adopted worldwide for model cars--I suspect based on the likes of Heller & Italeri being inspired by Monogram Models' 1/24 scale antique and classic car models. But no matter, I build in both scales--after all, to me it's subject matter and the kit first--minute differences in most dimensions being very secondary. Art

And yet, 1/25 scale falls so very easily into the metric system--1mm is oh-so-minutely-close to 1 inch in 1/25 scale. Any questions? Art

Actually, Rob.... FWIW, 1?24 scale began here in the US, years before the likes of Heller, Tamiya, Hasegawa (and the other overseas model companies) ever seriously thought about doing any serious model car kits. I was told, at an HIAA trade show, perhaps 40 years ago, by a representative of Tamiya, that they chose 1/24 scale as that was the scale that Monogram was using for the bulk of their model car kit line, and Tamiya considered Monogram to be their "model" for plastic kit design in a scale smaller than the 1/12 scale F1 cars they were doing up to about that time. My guess is, that the other overseas manufacturers did likewise. Art

I've not yet seen the production chrome tree(s) but it is quite possible that the wire wheels might be an added option in the coupe kit. Of course, yet to come (later this year) will be the Hornet Special Club Sedan, so we shall see. Art

Speaking from nearly 30 years in the retail hobby shop field, Monogram kits never did sell anything like the kits from AMT, MPC, even JoHan. Now, whether or not 1/24 scale made all that difference is something I couldn't really guage--but the old-line Monogram management team (which still headed up Revell Monogram for much of the 1990's apparently saw the wisdom of taking factory stock, even newly designed street rod subjects to 1/25 scale for all new releases after the '59 Cadillac Convertible. Of course, Revell Monogram did stay with 1/24 scale for Nascar kits--I suspect recognizing that 1/24 was, with the first Monogram Nascar Cup Car kits in 1983 being as widely popular as they were simply made any switch to 1/25 scale most unadvisable. Art

It wasn't so much that Monogram chose, very early on, to do model car kits in 1/24 scale, but that model car kits weren't that company's sole focus. Monogram catered to just about every plastic modeling subject area almost from the get-go choosing to go with 1/48 scale aircraft by the early 60's when "box scale" kits began giving way to "constant scale" in the manner of British and European model companies. They soon got into the then popular 1/72 scale aircraft--going head to head with the likes of Airfix, Frog and Heller--not to mention the various overseas Revell affiliates in the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Brazil and Japan. AMT and JoHan, given their promotional model car business, went with the so-called "engineers' scale: 1/25. In addition, AMT Corporation quickly became THE leading producer of plastic model kits worldwide by the early 1960's, nearly all of that in model cars; their kits being widely distributed and wildly popular. I've been told, several times over the years, that as the Japanese and European model companies got into model cars in a serious way, they looked to Monogram as the leader in precisely done model car kits--and since Monogram was doing their car kits primarily in 1/24 scale, they simply followed suit, climbed on that bandwagon. I've found this rather interesting, especially given that the rest of the World, beyond our shores lives by the metric system, and 1/25 scale would be so much easier to create with metric measure--1mm being oh-so-minutely close to one inch in 1/25 scale. At any rate, Revell Monogram (run by the same team who'd been Monogram for years, took the plunge into 1/25 scale, with their 1959 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz convertible, which if successful, would lead to all future model kits of regular production cars being tooled in this scale. The result, it was successful, and Revell-Monogram never looked back. They did, however elect to retain 1/24 scale for future race cars, though. As for the scale difference--that makes no matter to me, the two scales are close enough in size that both fit into my building, and have for better than 50 years. Art

FWIW, If you have a good friend in the graphic arts business--perhaps he/she will have a Pantone book of color swatches! (Pantone book pages have at least 6 of each shade of each color, the more common colors perhaps double that. If they happen to have an older book laying around, but are using the current one, you might be able to come away with a swatch of the exact GoDaddy Green! Art

John, There is one possibility I'd try: Why not "relieve" the underside of that decklid, with a series of slits, cut with a razor saw, evenly spaced apart, and as perfectly square with the sides of the panel? I'd consider using a razor saw for this, cut about half-way through. Once these are done, you will have relieved any stress that "flattening out" the decklid just that little bit you likely need would otherwise place on that underneath surface? Once you have the decklid corrected to the curvature needed, you can "fix" it into that curve by simply filling the slits with some gap-filling CA glue and using a setting agent to cure that CA quickly. You could try this on a scrap body panel, or even a piece of say, .040" sheet styrene, see how it will work? Art

John, I did read your post, very carefully, and I stand by what I wrote. Art

It's more than likely a custom-mixed corporate color, rather than one taken from an existing color used in the auto industry. Art

MV Products is still around: Walthers (the biggest model RR suppy vendor in the US, still lists them even now. Art

"Childish reactions"? Really now! To begin with, pics clearly identified as "test shots" and yet so many viewers seem to gloss right past the keyword, that being "TEST"? Irate customers for a test shot? Again, what part of "test shots" is so hard to understand? Test shots are part of a "work in progress", meaning that the model kit in question is NOT ready for production, but are essential in determining what is correct on the model, and what must be changed/corrected before that particular kit is approved for production. However, the experience has been that far too many readers of such posts appear to have assumed that just because a test shot was photographed, and those pictures published, that they represent exactly what the final model kit will indeed look like--regardless of anything said to the contrary, and regardless of the presence of the words "Test Shots". And, that, John, was when the really nasty comments began showing up, not just nasty, but in some cases entirely without basis in fact. In a way, it's neat that a model company would show stuff from "behind the scenes", but that does come with a huge risk--first impressions can be lasting impressions with many (if not most!) of us, be it in regard to a model kit or anything else we may see in our lives. Witness the upcoming Moebius '61 Ventura: Several commented on an impromptu photo taken of a first round test shot body shown to potential buyers (for wholesalers and hobby shop owners) at last fall's iHobby: Immediately claims were being made ON this forum that the rear deck was way too long, the body was out of proportion. However, that body shell is/was created with photographs of the real car, with very visible measuring sticks laid on it, showing its correct proportions (I've seen those, BTW), from front to rear. and overall dimensions were gleaned from more than one authoritative source. Of course, as might be expected, several claimed responsibility for pointing out what they saw as out-of-proportion (including some who have posted in this very thread) and allege that they caused a redesign. Nothing could be farther from the truth in that regard. The model in question meets all the proportions carefully measured, and documented photographically (pretty easy to read a measuring tape and/or carpenter's folding rule in a picture, having every other inch blacked out, believe me!). An issue was raised about the fins in the brake drums of those 8-lug wheels being not evenly spaced around their circumference! Guess what? They aren't on the real wheels either! The issue of the beltline window sill not having the little upward curve at it's juncture with the C-pillar? That had been noted internally before any pics of the body shell surfaced online. In fact, it was an issue pointed out early and often in the reviews of CAD and 3D scan files, not to mention early and frequently with regard to the 3D printed tooling mockup(s). But in the end, the almost unending vociferous criticism that resulted does get very old, frankly. Especially when in comes to the point of being completely unconstructive--more harsh accusation than constructive. Add that to the inevitable frustrations that arise internally from professionals on the other side of the pond seemingly not following instructions, and it's just an awful lot for one product development person to have to deal with. In short, what could well have been an exercise in educating modelers as to just what all goes into creating a model car kit, it became a shouting, carping match that was really quite unnecessary. Ask yourself: Would YOU (and by YOU I mean anyone reading this) willingly subject yourselves to such a mess? Somehow, I doubt that--so why even suggest that someone else do such? Art

Another excellent degreaser for polyurethane resin kits and parts is plain old Naphtha (AKA Mineral Spirits). It works very quickly, just a quick dunk into it, take the part(s) out, lay them on a paper towel to air dry. That's what I used on thousands of grilles, bumpers, hubcaps and head/tail light bezels that were to be plated. I also used it myself to clean resin bodies prior to priming and painting. One characteristic of Naptha that I gleaned from my nephew (who is a recognized professional cabinet-maker/furniture restorer) is that Naptha will not redeposit contaminants onto the next batch of parts--it keeps those in suspension all the way. Pretty inexpensive too. Art

This 1/24 scale kit originated at Italeri. I am completely unaware of any Tamiya release of it? Hmmmmm...... Art

It would be hard--so many choices......but the easiest build I've done in a long time, even though it has a high parts count: Moebius '56 Chrysler 300B. It goes together in a very straight-forward manner, even with lots of parts--I saw no issues whatsoever with overly fragile components or subassemblies. Art