Art Anderson

Here's a British Model T Touring car that has a very similar cowl to what your kit has, Harry: http://www.modeltbook.co.uk/images/header.jpg However, the fenders appear to be from a much later Model T. Art

Well, an interesting note on the box art model for your kit: Note that on the box top, the T in question is Right Hand Drive--which Ford never produced in the US, certainly in the years 1908-27 when the company's only product was the Model T. However, before Ford Motor Company established Model T production lines literally world-wide, they did produce export models, which likely included Japan. Note also that the body has doors, something which Model T lacked 1908-11. That leads me to believe that this kit (which was produced originally in Japan by Bandai I believe?) is modeled after a T at least bodied in Japan, for the Japanese domestic market. Surely you are aware (going to a bit later year) that Ford built open bodies ater 1912, in the US (roadsters and touring cars) with just one driver's seat door, that being on the right hand side, with a fake pressed "bead" in the left side sheet metal to make it appear to have a driver's side front door. However, possibly due to either Canadian regulations or perhaps British Empire laws, Model T roadsters and touring cars 1913-25 all had a functional driver's side front door. That's just an example of how T's did vary from country to country. It is also quite possible that the "lunch-counter" or flat fenders remained in production (assembly operations) in other countries until the supply ran out. In short, that does not look like any domestic (US) Model T Ford body I've ever seen. Art

Harry, Ford, as with most every other automaker back then, didn't do specific model years, nor did they update everything as a package. Rather, as newly designed parts, bodies, came about, they are introduced piecemeal, as the earlier parts ran out on the assembly lines. Pretty much the same as the old VW advertisements stated "Most any part from the new (VW or Model T) will fit every one ever made". In other words, "running changes". The only accurate way to date a Model T to a specific year is by engine and frame number (no VIN until January 1956!), and that of course, would depend on both the frame and the engine being original to the particular T being dated. Art

Well, one thing: When Don Holthaus casts up a reproduction of an old kit, such as that Dodge, it will be just as nice as the original styrene kit, and at $100, probably a lot less expensive too. Art

Not to mention that back "in the day", cars tended to not be driven at nearly the speeds we do today. Art

Rail frames never did have much in the way of crossmembers back in earlier days. About the only way engineers could figure to give those open-channel rail frames any sort of real torsional resistance was to deepen the "web" of the channel section, to allow beefier (read that taller) crossmembers, and relying on the rather heavily cast engine crankcase and transmission housings to resist serious twisting. Of course, closed body types had the ability to make a much more torsionally stiff unit once installed. It wasn't until the 1929 Cord L-29 was put into production that the first X-member crossmembers were installed in automobile frames, which greatly reduced the tendency of such frames to twist. By the middle 1930's, many automakers (most notably Ford) were beginning to install "doublers" inside otherwise open channel frame rails, adding strength and torsional resistance (although this was a bit limited, due to the reliance on hot-riveting--welding of automotive frames didn't really hit until the late 1940's). Art

It's very simple, actually! On any conventionally designed V8 engine, the camshaft is in the "Vee", between the cylinder banks. With an overhead valve engine, it's not a problem to put the valves on the outer side of the cylinder heads, with their exhaust mainfolds on that side, but unless one wants to put exhaust passages across the cylinder banks--THROUGH the water jackets!--then the exhaust ports on a flat head engine will be on the side of the cylinder banks closest to the valves. Art

Years, now decades ago, model paints could be used to get very nice paintjobs by hand-brushing. This was because the early hobby paints were essentially what used to be called "4-hour" enamel, meaning that they took about 3-4 hours to finally dry to a tacky (sticky) surface, and dried to the touch overnight. That changed when Testors announced their "PLA" series of hobby paint in the now-familiar 1/4 oz square bottles.. PLA stood for their addition of a "plasticizer" to their paint which caused it to dry to the touch in a very short time, but that severely limited "flow-out". "Flow out" is what paints do once applied, it's what allows the fine droplets of spray paint to come together in a smooth surface, for example. Without that ability, brushed paint will tend to retain the brush stroke effect (the thicker and thinner areas of paint which are inevitable when applied by a brush). Testors's competitor in the hobby market, Pactra, didn't start adding any sort of quick-setting component to their line of 'Namel hobby paints until the late 1960's or so. Today, about the only enamel paint close to readily available in brushable form that will flow out smoothly is the brand "One Shot", which is a line of enamel paints formulated for those signwriters who still practice the art of hand-painted, hand-lettered signage, and is used as well for custom, hand-created pin-striping on cars and other surfaces. This enamel paint takes the seemingly forever time to dry to the touch, and ultimately dry "click-hard" but with the proper wider flat brushes, it can be used to apply quite smooth paintjobs on model cars. Art

The 3-wheel Morgans were likely offered in several different colors, dark green being one of them. Of course, I've no information as to original factory colors, but I've seen pics of them in red, dark blue, green and black. Art

I punch a time clock at work---not interested in doing that at home though (although I did keep time records years ago, when building box art models for AMT and Lesney/AMT. Art

That would have been Chris Etzel.

OK, a simple answer here: For converting a correctly done '59 Chevrolet 2dr sedan body shell to a 4-door isn't rocket science. The front doors of the 4dr were 6" shorter than the side doors of a 2dr sedan, which means simply moving that door post (AKA B-post) forward by that distance and rescribing the door line. The rear door ends just forward of the bottom rear corner of the quarter window (don't have the exact measurement any more, as I no longer have my '59 Biscayne 4dr--real car), but that can be interpolated from the picture you posted. Note that there is a slim pillar there, which is the rear edge of the door frame itself with a corresponding post behind it (inside, does not show to the exterior enough to worry about) and of course, that small, non-opening quarter window between the rear door and the base of the C-pillar. The roof line of a '59 GM 2dr sedan is different from that of any of their 2dr hardtops, due to the windshield being taller (to see that difference, compare an AMT '59 El Camino windshield with the Revell '59 Impala HT or Convertible--hardtops that year were simply convertibles with steel tops welded in place), you will readily see the difference. I mastered a '59 Biscayne 2dr sedan in 1994, using my own real '59 Biscayne 4dr sedan as a reference. I used the roof from a JoHan '59 Cadillac 6-window sedan (from just behind the windshield header back to the tulip panel (that's the sheet metal panel between trunk lid and the bottom of the back window), with the A-posts and windshield header from the AMT El Camino. It was a perfect fit, BTW. The JoHan roof had to be widened by .125" due to that company making their promotional model (and the model kit that came from the same tooling) that much too narrow, along with some other "undersizing" in order to meet a GM requirement then that all promotional model cars had to fit in a standard size box. Tom Coolidge's '59 Chevy 2dr sedan is quite well done, so the moving of the B-post and front door rear edge will work there, as I described above. Art

Consider that when AMT tooled up the Freightliner, most tractors didn't have front wheel brakes--I eliminated the brake drums on the one I built way back in the day. Art

I've seen the real Bonneville Dream Car--stunning machine! (saw the other, unrestored one at the auction at Auburn IN about 15 years ago or so. Art

Started on something pretty much out of character for me: A pair of 2013 Mustang Boss 302's. One will be black, with Sterling Grey graphics, and the other? The rarest of all, Ford built just one. in Red Candy with Sterling Grey graphics. The graphics will be something new for me as well--have a couple of sets of pre-cut vinyl painting masks coming in the mail, courtesy of John Dezan up in Quebec. So, some new stuff, new paints I've not worked with yet (Scale Finishes base coat/clear coat) and those vinyl masks. If I don't screw them up, I might learn something new. Art

Harry, Certainly true in the days of simple 1-piece "tub style" interiors in model car kits. With the introduction of platform-style interiors (and while we're at it, why the reliance on a separate interior floor laying on top of another floor pan already molded to attach to a separate frame?) it would be fairly simple to make the interior door hardware (handles and window cranks) as separate plated parts (for cars that have/had chrome hardware, unplated if that's what the real car has) and separate armrests where appropriate. But, I suppose that long tradition, perhaps also tooling costs enter in here. Art

To more fully understand the various body styles from Ford (as well as just about every other make of US cars in the 50's), bear in mind that Ford had just two body series of cars in 1957--Custom/Custom 300/Fairlane (Tudor sedan, Fordor Sedan, and all station wagons) and Fairlane 500 (which included the Fairlane 500 convertible, Fairlane Club Victoria hardtop, Fairlane 500 Hardtop, Fairlane Club sedan [in both 2- and 4-door versions] and Fairlane 500 Skyliner). Within these series of bodies, a whole lot of sheet metal sharing went on, although each body variant had its own panels, even structural members, as well. With the station wagon, just one roof panel, one set of floor pans (with some makes, a floor pan could be made up of as many as 3 or 4 sections of sheet metal, welded together) Ford used the same roof panel, upper and lower tailgate units, A and B pillars, cowling/firewall, and of course dashboard. Front clips were the same as well. To do a 2-door wagon, Ford used no C pillar, hence the long quarter window glass--just the rearmost D pillar at the rear corners of the body. A longer sheetmetal quarter panel filled in this area from the side doors back to the rear of the body. To build a 4dr wagon, a C-pillar was added, along with moving the B-pillar 6" forward, with shorter front doors and an added rear door on each side. Of course, it was necessary for the front seat of the Ranch Wagon/Del Rio to have a front seat with a split, folding pair of seat backs in place of the 4-door wagon solid bench seat back. So, it was simply a matter of which components got pulled from stock and set up on a body jig for welding up whichever basic body shell was to be built. Art

And, to finish off that polished "glass", follow up with a good paste wax! That will make the kit glass come up as water-clear as it can possibly be! Art

I build what I build, the way I want to build it, for me and me alone. If you mean that by adding all manner of detail just to please and astonish others, I've never done that--I'm the first critic any of my models has to face, period. Art

I think he was asking if there was anyone here who is a MEMBER of that group/club/organization, not actually using "scaleavenue" as their screen name? Art

Solution, and one I follow always: Remove any masking tape BEFORE the body shell goes into a food dehydrator or under any heat source. That's how I've done it since I ruined a body shell by using 100-watt lightbulbs to force the paint dry without removing the masking tape beforehand. Art

Revell, going all the way back to when it was Monogram Models in Morton Grove IL and Revell Inc. in Venice CA, carries a long tradition of multiple versions of a great many model car subjects--in fact I was told, over 30 years ago, that Monogram almost always, with a significant car subject, at least designed two versions of a car (even their aircraft kits saw that as well). In order for this sort of multiple versions of a basic model kit tool to happen, it's almost imperative (and certainly less expensive) to do that next version IF the original kit was designed, and the tooling laid out with such in mind. I don't believe it's out of the question that Revell has at least one, possibly two more variants on the Del Rio--but I somehow don't see any further seriously different versions of '57 Fords based on the shorter wheelbase sedan/wagon chassis--4dr sedans and 4-dr station wagons might excite a portion of the model car market, but it seems to me that a 4dr body style has 2 too many doors for most modelers--yeah, I know, there are vocal car builders out there who would be tickled pink, but how many kits would they really sell if they did them?). Art

Luc, I think your "cost" per mold core/slide is quite low, frankly. Bear in mind, there are considerable development/research costs before the first flake of steel is removed from that raw block of tooling steel. In addition, certainly with body shell tooling, almost any change or modification to those will almost always affect other parts of the tooling as well. For example, to do a 4-door body in a kit that is originally a 2-door will necessarily involve new interior side panels (or interior "tub" if an older style kit), plus a different front seat. A trim level change in most car kits, even if it remains the same body style, will affect not only the mold slides for that body, but if the model is to be accurately done, it will require at least some new interior tooling, perhaps also changes to the chrome parts sprue. In addition, while many tooling bases have room someplace, for additional cavities to be tooled, but if not, then we're talking about another mold base--which also will raise production costs--as a separate tool simply will add to the mold-press time. Art

For starters, Chris stated that the tape did not leave any stickiness behind, so I think we can rule out old tape with deteriorating adhesive. With water-borne acrylic enamels, a lot depends on humidity I would think. If it's been significantly humid, any water-borne paint can take a lot longer to dry, cure out, correct? As for using heat to force-dry paints, I can't see where that would be a problem even with Tamiya's acrylics. After all, the warmer it is, the faster water (and the industrial alcohols used as solvents) evaporate. I've used Tamiya's acrylics in recent months (newly purchased bottles), and dried those parts in my food dehydrator while it was still warm, humid weather, and the stuff dried "click hard". Art

'57 Del Rio not commonly seen? Uh, Ford built and sold over 46,000 of them in '57--MORE than all three years of the Tri-Five Chevy Nomads put together. Art