charlie8575

Stunning job. My dad's first new car was a 318-powered '68 that he'd like to build sometime. That's a great job on that, Geoff. Charlie Larkin

Definitely some nice workshops and some very good ideas there. Perhaps someday, I'll actually have enough room (and money!) to do something in that general direction. Charlie Larkin

Great job on one of the toughest interiors to replicate well. I like the base, too. That script just sets it off perfectly. Very well done. Charlie Larkin

Thanks for the clarificaiton, Art. Charlie Larkin

Having looked into a lot of this myself for my own possible company... A 3-D scanner (Z Corporation makes an excellent product and is one of the more common ones), costs about $30,000. The prices have been pretty static the last several years from what I understand, so don't expect these to be $500 items in the next ten years unless something totally revolutionary happens. 3-D scanning works by holding a "gun" that looks like a radar gun (and uses a lot of the same concepts of radar) and running it along an object. The scanner picks up targets, which can be attached directly to the object, or are sewn into a netting material which drapes over the object. The scanner picks ups the targets and renders the object, quite accurately, into a 3-D CAD program, SolidWorks being the most common. There are two basic types of 3-D printer. Z Corp and a couple of other companies make one that uses a granulated material. Through the proprietary software and CAD, the computer sends a signal to the printer, which then electro-statically charges the granulated material, which is plastic and some other stuff, forming the object in question. The major problem is that this material is NOT paintable or sandable. These 3-D printers are also the least expensive type. Commercial units are around $10,000 for a small one. The other style of machine, made by ObJet, an Israleli company, and I believe one other company, uses a polymer material that is very close to injection-molded styrene in quality and feel. It works like a plotter, dropping out the plastic "ink" drop by drop to form the object. Clear material is available. The issues. The granualated media machines will simply not work well for modeling. The liquid machines are VERY expensive. The smallest ObJet starts at about $30,000. Also, the liquid for the ObJet is incredibly expensive. The black acrylic-like material which is the most common medium, costs $1100 per cartridge. In addition, many of these parts aren't paintable. There is a very, very long way to go. And, like Casey, Gregg, Bill, Brett, and Art, I agree- emphatically, these machines will NOT, at least in the foreseeable future (again, unless something absolutely revolutionary happens) be capable of producing full kits for consumers. Between the expense of the material (which isn't dropping at all), and the speed (an average car kit in either style of machine would take 36-48 hours to print), this is not economically feasible, and I do not think it will be anytime soon. Small parts- like wheels, details and so forth, might be able to be produced economically, but not in large scale and not for at least another few years, regardless of what Moebius is doing, bearing in mind they're a very small company. For Revell, Tamiya, or even AMT or Aoshima to do this economically is a far sight down the road. To put it in to perspective, when I went to visit the Objet office in Rhode Island in January, I was given a wheel as a sample- roughly a 1/25 size, which one of the engineers patterned after the ones on his Mustang, just to play with the machine a little. That one rim costs about $5 to make. For $20, you can get a nice set of aluminum rims from one of the aftermarket companies. Which would you rather? For the record, the quality is outstanding- you could say "injection molded," and not have much basis to argue. In closing, no, this will not be DIY kits.The speed and cost are not where they need to be, and because of the way the machine works, I don't know if they can be made that way given the limits of physics and computer science and engineering. Charlie Larkin

Somebody used to make very nice GM door-handles in pewter, but they're long OOP. I think the man that made them died. I agree, door handles would be a very salable item; they're not expensive to make and there are enough old damaged glue bombs, builder goofs, scratchbuilders and other uses for them that you could probably make a decent go at it. Charlie Larkin

What really upsets me is this guy has a bunch of items I'd actually like to get. I'll monitor the situation. If he begins to shape up, I'll order. Otherwise, does he go to any shows, and if so, could I ask someone local to those shows to act as a proxy for me? Charlie Larkin

I take no offense. You expressed your opinion, I expressed mine. I now see we're talking about two different products. The big LTD, at least to my eye, looked to be pretty well-done, as I believe it was based off the AAR LTD, which means it had a very good start. I'll agree the 1988-91 Panther left something to be desired; that said, until someone does one in styrene, that's the only choice. It does need massaging to get right, but it's far more workable than trying to scratch or convert your own. Charlie Larkin

I think the Lindberg kit is trying to capture the general flavor of this car. http://www.conceptcarz.com/view/photo/316431,10058/1929-Mercedes-Benz-SSK_photo.aspx This is a really neat site I found that documents an all-original SSK. I love the quote from the owner's manual that's on the first page. http://louwman-ssk.mercedes-benz-classic.com/ While the Lindberg kit might not be 100% accurate, I actually rather like the look of it. And, as these cars could be ordered for custom bodies, a body like that is within reason. The cream/brown sounds like a nice combination. I might actually try that. Orange wheels and a tan interior would set that off rather nicely, I think. Charlie Larkin

Microscale makes a brush-on temporary adhesive that's supposed to work pretty well. It guess it's similar to the glue for Post-It notes. Good luck with your move. Charlie Larkin

Nice way to solve the bench-seat, although it should be molded in a little more, as the 2000-05 had true split-bench seats, not those goofy bucket with the center console that doubles as a seat. I like the fundamental concept, though, and may borrow liberally from it. Charlie Larkin

That's a nice line-up, Philip. How are you going to handle the rest of the trim and some of the other differences? I like where this is going so far. Charlie Larkin

No pictures right now, but... Re-primed the T. I'll probably put a coat of paint on that tomorrow. The Chrysler ended up in the Purple Pond. Something got into my paint, and all the sanding in the world wasn't going to get rid of it. I've also painted the first coat on the interior of the Chrysler. I did it with brush-painted Acryl Radome Tan. It'll need a second coat. I might also dig out my Olds and do a little more with that. Charlie Larkin

It's actually a nice kit. I'm going to try and put a bench seat in mine and build it as a civilian car. I just need to figure out how to make the wheel covers. Charlie Larkin

Something subtle for color....I'm thinking a pearlescent cream or other type of off-white with a white top and a red and white interior. I like how this is coming up. Charlie Larkin

For helping me get to paint jobs where I'd like them to be, my airbrushes and a decent set of paint-brushes. Next up, Xuron sprue cutters- these work beautifully. Charlie Larkin

I never knew they were a full-service hobby shop. Good to know, Jim. Thanks for the tip. Charlie Larkin

Speaking as someone with some industrial arts study in my background, I can cede that if that tool was cut to spec, then, yes, in absolutes, the job was done right. However, doing the job right and doing the job right are two different things altogether. Think of it this way: you ask a carpenter to frame walls for your house. The dimensions are 24 feet in each direction. The carpenter makes a pair at 22 and another pair at 26. The workmanship is good quality and the walls are true, square and plumb. The job was done right- the workmanship was good and the square area will be about the same (576 square feet at 24x24, 572 at 22x26). But, the job was done incorrectly- because specifications were altered. Or worse, one wall is 22, one is 24, and the others are 23 and 25 feet, respectively. Now what do you do? Should someone lose their job over this? I don't know, while I don't think any of us would want to see that, I do know that repeated errors are enough to cost someone a position, or lead to a re-assignment. There seem to have been enough issues coming out of Revell- and a lot of the other manufacturers lately, that it makes me wonder who, or what, is to blame. Poor tooling shops? Bad designers? Incompetent pattern-makers? Learning curve with the 3-D prototyping? Tradition, as pointed out? Are we, as modelers, simply starting to make more note of these things? Perhaps some combination of these considerations is the cause. Whatever the reason, a major lapse in process control occurred, and to a great degree, who or what to blame is besides the point. The process went out of control somewhere and this is the result. Adequate quality and process control and reference checking would have eliminated all this. Charlie Larkin

I wish I was still teaching junior/senior high school and that I could show this to my students. So many of my kids looked at me very strangely for building models. As did a lot of the faculty, which was very off-putting. Keep up the good work, Andrew. You have tremendous talent and will make a good role-model for your peers, especially if everything you do, academically, socially and personally turn out that well. Charlie Larkin

Hi, Andres, and welcome, fellow Bay-Stater! There are plenty of good hobby shops in eastern Massachusetts. I patronize the Spare Time Shop in Marlborough. May I also suggest The Hobby Bunker in Malden, which is within walking distance of the Malden Center Orange Line stop? Other good stores near Boston: South Shore Hobby, Weymouth. Harry's Hobby,, Norton If you're down the Cape, Centerline Hobbies in Hyannis is also very good. Also, as a member of MassCar, I'd like to invite you to our meetings on the third Wednesday located at 45 West St., Medfield. Take either Rt. 109 or Rt. 9 (depending on where you're coming from) to Rt. 27. If heading south, turn left, if north, right, onto West St. in Medfield, we're on the left in a big metal building, in the landscaping company's office. We start about 7:00. Charlie Larkin

That stock '37 is a handsome machine. If someone offered that up in resin or plastic, I'd buy. For curiosity, will the AMT '34-'36 Ford chassis be right for a '37? Charlie Larkin

I know Kenny Anderson (the owner) has had several medical problems over the last year or so. I think he's planning on re-starting production of at least some stuff. I do know I'd like one of those LTD Landaus. For around $100 for a complete resin kit, including an engine, I wouldn't exactly call it overpriced. Charlie Larkin

That is tragic. Did they leave any hints as to where the cars Ford will be selling in Australia will be made or are they abandoning you folks altogether?

This one is WAY off the mark. There is no excuse for the body to have been so badly botched up. Revell not only had no reasonable excuse to goof that up so much, but now they have NO good reason to not recall and repair these body-shells. Their own previous behavior points to this. Moebius and Galaxie, two by-comparison-microscopic companies, re-did entire body-shells even before a single kit was sold. On shoestring budgets! Revell has no excuse and the accounting department at Hobbico needs to understand that it'll cost more than money if they don't get things done right. The lost sales on an expensive capital good (the mold) and then the lost good will from irritated modelers will create havoc. Lindberg, which was much smaller, corrected their badly goofed-up '61 Impala and issued new bodies to people who asked for them. "It's just plastic" was fine when the kits were half the price, but even then, it wasn't really acceptable. A small goof that can be dealt with by a swipe of sandpaper or a file, or easily covered with careful painting and detailing- no biggie. Short roofs, botched windows, misshapen bumpers, and all that stuff. NO! NO! NO! NO! Did I mention no? I never picked up on the short roof on the Olds. It looks okay to me, but if the reason given was to make the Holiday easier- that's foolish and a bad wool-pulling job. They'd need a different body-shell anyway. I call meadow muffins on that one. Perhaps the shape of the car doesn't show it as much? Whatever the case, it's still sloppy if that's true, like missing the little step on the grille. Too bad that can't be fixed easily. Someone mentioned Revell would stop cutting new tools. A red herring but not. Revell won't stop cutting new tools. But...if they don't straighten up and get their subjects cut properly, they will stop cutting new tooling because they'll be out of business if too many errors occur. Several people have said Joe Average won't care. Wrong again. Joe Average is the reason things should be done right. Even more so than us. 1. These are casual modelers. They more than anyone need well-engineered, well-designed kits, and both of those things include subject accuracy. These are the people who will discourage easily if things aren't done right and they'll lose more sales. 2. What if a casual modeler is a real Fox fiend? Or simply likes Mustangs? This will make Revell look terrible in their eyes. From what I understand the 1968 Mustang (I think? Please correct if wrong), was royally botched up. That's two strikes. 3. What if this is a kid this kit is being bought for? Suppose it's a 16 year-old with an LX who wants to make a model of his car? Despite what most of us seem to think, kids aren't as dumb or as oblivious as we think. They catch this, it's back to the video games and other stuff, and the chances of them touching another model of any description dropped exponentially. To any of Revell's engineering staff and marketing people that might be reading this, Please...for all our sakes, correct this error. Save your reputation, and more than that, enhance it, by doing something that will make you stand out as a customer service and quality-control start. Fix these problems. With almost $30 for a kit now, such massive failures are inexcusable and bordering on unethical. With modern design and engineering science, there is no reason for this anymore. Do the right thing. We'll gladly wait an extra year or two for another new tool if we have to. But, please, show respect for your most loyal customers, consumers broadly, Ford Motor Company and Mustang fans. Correct these problems, I think the lost sales will come back, based on what I've seen said here. In fact, they might come back many fold. Charlie Larkin

That engine looks nice. I'll look forward to watching what happens with this. Charlie Larkin