Art Anderson

And yet, given that teh most common definition of a T-bucket (hot rod wise anyway) is a Model T Ford roadster--Norm "Wo-Woo" Grabowski's car isn't! If you look closely at the rear corners of the body, you can see the short flat panel at the rear corners, just ahead of the shortened pickup box, that tell the body shell's origin as a Model T Touring Car body that had it's entire rear seat portion removed (there was actually a body seam at the bottom of that short flat panel, where the two sections joined. Art

The only plastic kit of that era Torino was Johan's '72 Torino GT, which was a fast back. No kit of the body style even of the S & H car was ever done that I ever saw. Art

Of course, to be truly accurate, Kookie's Kar (Norm Grabowski build) isn't quite a true "T-bucket"----that term being very much standard in referring to Model T roadsters. Grabowski built his T using the forward half of a T touring car body--you can see the straight panels on the sides, on which the rear doors of the touring body were hinged. Art

Yes, Revell produced the Gowland & Gowland 1/32 scale 1903 Model A, beginning about 1951. Art

Uhm, Ron.... That Sedan Delivery is a 1926 Model T, not a Model A (one giveaway is that Model A Ford production did not begin until early December 1927--and then as a 1928 Ford. Art

That missing panel line between the front end of the rocker panel and the front quarter panel has been a bit of a peeve for me ever since I finally realized that virtually every model kit of a 1949-later car lacked this very visible little detail. I've never had a problem scribing those in myself, frankly--I generally take care of them (when missing) with a few gentle strokes of an Xacto razor saw blade. Art

Jon, there is no difference in wheelbase (or for that matter in the chassis whatsoever) between the 4-cylinder and V8 versions of the 1932 Ford. All US-produced Ford passenger cars for 1932 rode on the same identical 106" wheelbase chassis. Art

"Model B" was used by Ford, but not really advertised that much--Ford's advertising for 1932 focused on the Model 18, but even that was referred to in most ad copy as the New Ford V8. Apparently the reason for this was a concern that some potential buyers would be afraid of "gambling" on the "newfangled" V8 engine, so the B was referred to, in some advertising, as "The Improved Model A" (which in many ways, it was). "B" was used, however, throughout 1932 as the prefix to body style numbers (witness "B-400", which was the body style number for the Convertible Sedan). Model B was used for 4-cylinder pickup trucks (it was a few months before V8 engine production reached a level which allowed Ford to begin installing them in trucks and commercial vehicles. Even then, all Ford heavy-duty trucks (1- to 1-1/2 ton) were referred to as Model BB trucks not only in Ford literature but also on the street, 1932-34 (as a follow-on progression of Model TT and Model AA trucks). You are correct that officially there was never was a Ford Model C, that coming from a curious casting code of a raised letter C on the engine block of 4-cylinder engines produced in 1933-34 (Ford dropped the Model B 4-cylinder engine in midyear 1934, due to very low sales) Art

Don't forget "A little dab'll do ya!" Bryl-Creme! Art

I seem to remember the "heyday" of model kits of drag racing cars being pretty much about 10 years say, between 1965-66 and perhaps 1975-76 or thereabouts. After that, relatively little was done with really new kits, until the mid-1980's, with Swamp Rat XXX, along with some Pro-Stock cars from Monogram? By then, the two most prolific makers of drag racing model kits, Revell and MPC, were on their last legs as free-standing brands of model kits. Probably the biggest cause for such a drop-off of new kit development was the rapid decline in sales, due mostly to the decline in the birth rate that began in earnest by 1960, with the "Official" end of the post-WWII "Baby Boom" having been declared as December 31, 1964. Consider that the last of the true baby boomers graduated from high school in 1982-83. What drove such sales as existed after that depended on early boomers coming back into the model car kit market, something which really began in earnest about 1981-82. But there, a funny thing pretty much happened: For a lot of those who came back to model cars (I still remember my days as a hobby shop owner, in the 1980's to the early 1990's, when I almost NEVER had a day where I didn't get several phone calls and walk-in customers asking me if there were still model car kits being produced!)--for many of them, their tastes and interests in cars, and the models thereof, changed from what they wanted to build as kids. Funny how that happens, hmmmm? Art

Yes to all that you ask about. Where years ago, a lot of product/brand licensing was handled in-house, almost with a nod of the head and a handshake, the costs have gone up for licensors. Where once it might have been some minor management person, now the corporate legal office has to be involved. Couple that with the rise of licensing agencies over the past 30-years or so, and now it's a profit-making thing for the agent(s) involved, plus a cost to the licensor to be charged to the licensee as part of the total licensing fee. Product/brand/trademark licensing costs are figured as a percentage of the model kit price, per kit sold, with an agreed upon "guarrantee" billed upfront when the license is granted, with an accounting provided by the licensor periodically for as long as they produce the licensed item in question, still using the same percentage royalty charge per kit as agreed on at the outset, as a general rule. Art

The Danbury Mint '35 Ford Coupe was a very short run, and the last run of any new diecast from Danbury. Art

Actually, the requirement for "protecting" one's trademarks and logo's is the biggest reason for licensing--this was specified by the US Supreme Court almost 30 years ago, in a trademark/copyright dispute involving US automakers and the producers of foreign-made counterfeit repair and crash parts. Art

Fleet sales are counted in the total sales chalked up by carmakers. Art

Great history, Greg! (don't forget the Hubley 1/20th scale cast metal 1930 Model A kits!) Art

Unfortunately, I suspect that just about any current race car of today, save for say perhaps Nascar, is risking producing a "one hit wonder", meaning that once a particular year/version is kitted, then what? Of course, there's also the matter of licensing with regard to any race car: Realize that not only will this be a consideration with regard to the driver (for a top-flight race driver, his name and/or face bring in a ton more money than he might get in salary from the car owner or even prize money!), but also the chassis builder, engine builder (who did the castings for that engine?), possibly most (if not all) the major speed equipment makers whose products are on the particular car being modeled, wheel manufacturer, tire company--then the major sponsors, PLUS all the accessory sponsors whose logo's appear on the real car--NOW, that can add up to some serious expenses, believe me (at least NASCAR licenses--or at least used to--the entire required accessory decal package, which is mandatory to be placed, in a set layout, on every Cup or GN car). Add to this that while individual accessory part mfr's may be willing to let a race car owner place their decals on the car, even next to that of some other mfr whom they have no love for whatsoever--on a model or toy, they can, and have in my experience, FLATLY refused the use of their decal if "Manufacturer X's" logo is to be on that model body decal sheet! All of this relates to potential new model kit subjects, but also is a big part of the equation for a potential reissue of an existing tool, for which the sales potential almost always is considerably less than the first runs of that kit when it was new. In addition, the smaller the production run, the higher the per-unit costs associated with it, due to production set up costs, tooling repairs and maintenance, all the way down to new box art etc., and of course, the ever present licensing hungry bear. Last, there is the marketplace itself to consider: While there are probably several million model car builders currently active in the US these days, judging from the offerings of the various companies producing kits that are sold in this country, how many are race car builders, and of those, how many are drag racing enthusiasts, and then of those, how many are Top Fuel Funny Cars or TF Dragster enthusiasts (to the point of building those sorts of cars)? I do attend several model car contests, all of them at least a day trip from home (including Classic Plastic and NNL-East, both of which are hundreds of miles away from here), and my observation has been, for literally years now, that race cars as a general, all-encompassing category often are rather scarce on the tables, compared to models built of streetable civilian cars and pickup trucks, of all categories, styles and types. Now that has to be for a reason--certainly the supply/general availability of all race car models--but also a matter of interest areas. 30 years ago the last week of this coming January (2015) will be the 30th anniversary of the announcement by Revell of their model kit of Garlits' Swamp Rat XXX--has there been a new kit of a current for the day Top Fueler since then? If not, why not? I would submit that sales history spreads doubt on the part of not only model companies, but also the wholesale/retail buyers who are, in fact, the customers of model kit companies, the first tier of people they have to please. And all of those can be a collective tough nut to crack. Art

For starters, you really don't indicate what diameter tubing you want to bend, along without saying just how tight a radius you are trying to achieve. Some things to consider: Metal, all metal, isn't flexible, nor is it more than minutely elastic, unlike say, soft rubber, which will bend fairly easily and also stretches a good bit without fracturing or tearing. With metal (and of course plastic) when you bend the stuff, since the surface on the inside of the bend really cannot compress (unless it buckles or wrinkles up), the surface on the outside of the bend, certainly with tighter radius bends, has to stretch. But since metals don't have much at all in the way of elasticity, the metal has to fracture or tear apart at least slightly. Now, with a solid piece of rod stock (I suspect you are thinking of brass here), the rod, being solid clear though, cannot really collapse (kink) due to the relative non-compressibility of solid metal, but its cross section will tend to go from truly round to at least slightly oval in section--tubing doesn't have that solidity, so unles the surface of the outer surface of the bend in the tubing can stretch, the side surfaces will buckle at least slightly, causing the tubing to lose its round cross section, up to and including the point of collapsing, or "kinking". So, what to do? Staying with what's easily available in hobby tools, K&S Engineering (the folks who make all that small brass and aluminum tubing sold in hobby shops) do offer a set of "tubing benders", which are made from small-gauge spring steel wire, closely wound into coil springs. These are sized for the larger sizes of their brass tubing, in a set that begins at 1/8" and several sizes larger--so if the size tubing you want to bend, those can be an option. However, be advised that you really cannot make very tight bends with these, and still get the coil spring bender off your piece of curved tubing. Dubro, also a maker of stuff for RC plane builders, makes a single bending tool in brass, grooved for their 1/8" OD brass or copper tubing, that will give an approximately 3/8" inside radius bend, to a maximum of 180-degrees (bend to any more of a circle than that, and you'll not get your bent brass tubing off this bender!). These are intended primarily for gas powered model airplane builders, for bending brass tubing for use as fuel lines. Another, and easier system would be using solid brass rod! You can bend this very tightly without its kinking on you (for the reasons I noted up above), the smaller the diameter rod, the tighter the bend. Of course, once you have the bent shapes, soldering is by far and away the best way to attach these together, although for applications where what you want to build isn't to be structural (say as in a set of exhaust headers as opposed to a complete dragster or race car chassis) epoxy will work, hold it just fine. K&S offers several sizes of brass rod, from .020" on up, with their 1/32" and larger sizes corresponding to the ID of their smaller brass tubing. Plastic tubing doesn't work much better at being bent--both styrene and ABS plastics tend to fracture when bent, but styrene rod stock can be bent with the careful application of heat. Hope this helps! Art Anderson

Greg, Mainly because it's taken almost 60 years for large numbers of now middle-aged and older model car builders to grasp the appeal of those Hudsons (and to an equal extent, the '55-'56 Chrysler 300's)? Seriously though, were it not for the tremendous racing heritage of both of those subjects, I wonder if they'd ever have had the interest they do now. Back when we 50-70yr olds were teenagers, you might have gotten some of us to buy a C300 or 300B kit, but a Hudson Hornet--I don't think so. Art

Aurora, in 1/32 scale?

I wonder if the term "subsidized" isn't a bit of an overused misnomer though? By the 1960's, AMT Corporation's 3in1 Customizing and Trophy Series kit sales FAR surpassed their promotional model business--even when factoring in the sales of what began as promo's as flywheel motor equipped toy cars that were merchandised through hobby shops (alongside their kits), toy stores and variety stores. Consider also that there were other companies producing 1/25 scale promotional model cars aimed at the auto industry and new car dealerships: Cruver Plastics Company in Chicago, Product Miniatures from Milwaukee, Ideal Models (soon renamed JoHan), SMP in the Detroit area, and the "Johnny come lately" Model Products Corporation. While all of those outfits produced promotional model cars at some point in the 1950's onward, the only promo I can think of that was "subsidized" at the tooling level was SMP 1911 Prototype Chevrolet, which tooling was paid for by Chevrolet, and destroyed by the terms of their contract with SMP once the specified run of assembled promo's along with a supply of kits had been produced. What did happen though, was a tremendous amount of cooperation between the automakers and the various model companies then engaged in the development, manufacture and sale of promotional model cars for distribution to car dealerships. Consider the advantage of being privvy to what next year's new cars were going to look like, a year or so in advance, not to mention the tremendous trust that had to be established between automaker and plastic model manufacturer, to keep those new styling features confidential until new model introduction time! That cooperation alone had to have meant a great deal in terms of costs not incurred at say, AMT. But in any event, it was the model companies who (with the exception of the above-mentioned '11 Chevy) stood the cost of development of the tooling, against pretty much guarranteed sales numbers. Another interesting thing is, AMT wasn't in the "driver's" where promotional models were concerned, prior to 1958-59--that position probably had to have been Product Miniatures (PMC), who had a much bigger deal for several years with Ford (producing not only Fairlane Hardtops, but also sedans, station wagons, even the first 1/25 scale Ranchero's), in addition to being pretty much the first (and only -- until 1958) supplier of promotional models to Chevrolet, then firmly ensconced as "USA-1". Again, as with their Ford promotionals, PMC did multiple body styles, and was the first producer of 1/25 scale Corvettes, beginning in 1954-55. Additionally, PMC produced their promo's for Ford and Chevrolet in a wide variety of paint schemes, playing into the need of dealers to be able to show quickly the range of colors and body styles in the days before mega-new car dealerships. In addition to their promotional model car business, PMC had a long-standing relationship with International Harvester, doing promo's of IH pickups and farm equipment in plastic, and a similar gig with Allis-Chalmers, the then prominent Wisconsin farm tractor and implement maker. JoHan, of course, was the smaller of the three, having to be content with doing promo's for Chrysler, Nash/AMC. Hubley was still even smaller, manufacturing only a handful of subjects. Of course, the big change came in 1958, when AMT's management bit on the idea of offering their promo models in styrene kits, with the added customizing and racing accessories we young boys went for in a HUGE way when those first 3in1 kits hit store shelves in the late spring. AMT had dabbled with kits before, offering promo's and flywheel toy car spinoffs as knocked down kits, but those had only limited success--they were more "build your own toy car" than anything like a model car kit, and weren't particularly popular. But, the bottom line is still, from everything I have ever read or heard said to me, that there really wasn't any direct subsidizing of promotional model car tooling--those seem to have been an entrepreneurial game from beginning to end. Art

And yet, Kookie's Kar seldom appeared as part of the screenplay of any episodes, almost always limited (in my memory, and I religiously watched very episode, save for perhaps 2 or 3) of "77 Sunset Strip, on Friday nights. Art

Some ask why don't model companies do kits of cars that were (or at least seemed to be) legends in their own day, at what they were built to do? For so many potential model car kit subjects, it comes down to the relative certainty of any new model car subject selling profitably in a rather tight time frame. Very few car subjects, particularly cars such as are mentioned above, have a really high visibility today--certainly if they're to be model kits of cars (custom, racing, street rods, dream cars) built and shown almost exclusively here in the USA. That almost sets an upper limit on just how many kits of an America car will get sold--it's popularity, large or small, more than likely will be much less than subjects having at least some serious international recognition. In addition, if one really looks at the vast majority of new model car kit subjects that have been introduced since just 2000, only a handful of those have been so-called "one hit wonders", meaning a car kit from which only one version is possible--no capability of changing out portions of the tooling to produce what we think of as a "modified reissue". For example, Revell has (and this goes back decades with Monogram Models) done very few model car kits in the past 30 years that were "one version only" products--they having had a practice, going back into the 1960's (as Monogram) of designing from the outset, most all their model car kits with at least a second version in mind (and in some cases, several subsequent versions) from the get-go. So there's one large strike against doing any model kit subject that can be produced in just one version (and that would be more than say, a different set of carbs on the engine) A second problem, certainly with the "California Kid" in the first post: For a long time (and it may still hold true) the owner(s) of the actual car flatly refused to license it's likeness as a model kit or even a diecast model, for reasons best known only to them. No license (or permission of any sort) means no model--end of statement. A very similar situation existed for nearly 40 years with the 1966 TV Batmobile--and it was a bit more complicated: Three parties would have to have gotten on board, granting permission (licensing) for that car to see the light of day as a scale model (other than the rather crude 1/32 scale kit that Aurora knocked out almost overnight in 1966-67) : George Barris, who (by whatever means) owned the actual TV car, 20th Century Fox (the studio which produced the Batman TV show in the 1960's, and DC Comics, owner of all the rights to Batman, and currently still publishing Batman Comic Books. By the time any model company took interest in doing a decent model kit of that Batmobile, DC Comics had taken a stance against the TV Show, declaring that the show (with its campy, almost sit-com on camera antics) simply did not represent the image they wanted to portray with Batman, and steadfastly refused, until 2003, to license a model of the car to any model or toy company. Barris and 20th Century were OK with licensing it--after all, to both those entities, royalties is royalties is cash in the bank. Finally, in 2003, Mattel acquired all rights to everything Batman for toys, model kits, diecast replicas, and managed to persuade DC Comics to license them to produce a 1/24th scale diecast replica. So, licensing problems can, and have stopped some cars from being replicated in miniature for general sale. But perhaps the biggest fly in the ointment here is market interest: Seriously, how many model car builders would jump at the chance to buy a kit of the Manta Ray today? How much interest would there SERIOUSLY be in a plastic kit of a Bill Thomas Cheetah? My guess is, such subjects only appealed to a portion of the marketplace back 40-50 years ago, and any model builder under the age of say, 45, more than likely wouldn't know either subject if it hit them in the face (figuratively speaking, of course). Just consider the rather limited interest in the original 60's Ford GT's--it was 50 years ago last month that the first GT-40's sat on the starting grid at LeMans--now how many modelers today would wear a groove in the pavement getting to their hobby shop (or wherever they buy kits) were a new kit of those cars were to come out (or say, The Little Deuce Coupe, Kookie's Kar?) It takes MANY 10's thousands of people to have a at least a passing interest in any proposed model car subject in order for enough people to step forward with money in hand to buy the kit when it comes out. Just my thoughts, from more than 12 years, both inside the model car kit and diecast production business, including also being involved, on the perimeter in model car kit development to this day. Art

I simply picked up a pre-cut 5/8" plywood shelf at Menard's, cut that to the width of my sash window, then used a hole saw to cut the opening for a common 4" dryer vent. When I get to airbrushing, I merely open the window, insert this plywood plate (which has its dryer hose permanently attached, then close the sash down on it, which securely traps the unit. Works very, very well. Art

In point of fact: In the second semester of my HS Sophomore year (winter/spring 1960, I took Driver's Ed. Mr. Berberian, the instructor (also a History and Government teacher & basketball coach) pointed out emphatically a couple of sentences in the text book we were using, warning about having too many keys on the same ring with car keys. Mom and Dad were also emphatic about that to the point of NEVER having any keys other than ignition and door lock on any car key ring they ever had. Guess what? Nary a problem EVER with the ignition switch (all maner of cars, from Plymouths, to Chevrolet's, a Ford or two, and a VW Beetle).

Beginning with the destroked 260 Ford V8 stock block engines used in the 1963 Lotus Powered By Ford Indy cars, Ford used tuned exhaust headers, with the pipes collecting together at the back of the engine, up above the bellhousing & transaxle all the way through the 427cid Ford GT Mk IV. And, those headers too, were called "bundles of snakes" back in their day, so B-J's announcer was very correct. Art