Chuck Most

Yeah, the 8-foot "Express" bed and the 6.5' pickup bed were two totally different animals, the Express looked more like the '38-47 style beds. In fact, there were even two different F1 beds- the Revell kit is the second version, which was introduced in mid 1950. The earlier style bed was the same width, but had the upraised side panels and a small reinforcement just above the fenders.

Correct, sir.

Started on the exhaust. Decided to go with mufflers- these were made from PVC tubing. The stand pipes are K&S aluminum tubing, and the lower pipes I dug out of the spares box. The intermediate pipes are lengths of leftover sprue.

Yeah- the decals were a horror show. The result of residual polyester poisoning from the '70's, perhaps?

Leaning toward adding some rear fenders made from Plastruct roof shingle sheet. Just not sure if I'll go full length or not. I also moved the fuel fillers to the front of the tanks- I'll touch them up later. "Finish" on the fenders will be like the 1:1 above... hopefully.

I'd have to say the Moebius Hudson Hornet series.

I love it! Who says dump trucks can't look classy?

Extremely well done! I've never seen Convoy, but this model is making me want to check it out.

Yeah- the AMT version is quite a mess. As far as the location of the tanks on the Revell, I've seen a couple with just the ends of the tanks under the sleeper, but never the entire tank. Those cab steps are definitely messed up. I'd still like to build the Revell version. I've built a couple of the AMT T600 kits, but the Revell version is on the "one of these days" list.

What I'd do... Lose the steps in the tanks, and either mount the batteries under the cab (doubt there's much room though) or use a second battery box. Air tanks or a small tool box could also be used on one side or the other to balance things out.

My two most recent acquisitions... Got this online for twenty bucks, as a parts donor. It was missing the cab, instructions, and decal sheet. The engine was partially assembled. But it had more than enough good parts to make me jump at the chance to get it. The NTC-475 engine was worth the price alone. The tanks are already on a LoneStar I'm building, and the headache rack might join them. You'll be seeing bits and pieces of this on various Peterbilt projects at some point. A buddy from the forum sent this along a week or two ago- this is the Allison GT-404 gas turbine from the AMT GMC Astro. You might be seeing this pretty shortly in a project. It won't be in a GMC though.

If I recall, the Dragmaster slicks were about eight bucks- at least that's roughly what I paid when they came out. The Polyglas GT set is about double that. They don't seem to be moving as fast as the slicks did, but there must be interest. Inventory is down at both the shops I go to.

Buy with confidence. They make great stuff.

GREAT job!

Aluminum or plastic- whichever you're more comfortable working with. Hard to beat real aluminum if you're going for a polished aluminum look, though.

Speaking of, I seem to recall an LTL with a big ol' sleeper that some guy was working on...

I'd go with a red chassis.

The regular Gorilla Glue does that, but the Gorilla Glue-brand super glue doesn't expand. At least it never has on me. I've used it a few times, but I don't think it's much better than any of the other super glue brands go as far as strength. It also seems more likely to 'fog' parts than some other super glues, though it's not as bad as Loctite in that respect, from my own experience.

Count on me watching this one. I also have to ask, what are you planning on doing with the Fuso? Can't be any earlier than late 1983- that's when Toyota started selling their vans in North America. It does look pretty well-maintained for something that couldn't have been any newer than 13 years old at the time!

The best way to stretch the frame is to use sections cut from a second kit, but since I'm assuming you're new at this I'm going to also assume you don't have any other 378 kits or parts laying around. In that case finding some plastic c-channel similar in size to the frame rails would be the way to go. It's usually a good idea to reinforce the stretched area by gluing plastic sheet or brass in from behind. The old "measure twice, cut once" trick applies here, but as long as you take care to keep everything square and straight you'll be fine. For making bigger stacks, (or even a simple improvement over the kit-supplied stacks) just check out the K&S metal section at the hobby shop. They should have a decent selection of aluminum rod and tubing you could use. It's easy to work with and looks great with a little polishing. As far as tools go, you should be good with the basic arsenal any modeler should have- hobby knife handle and blades, adhesives, sandpaper and files, etc. One thing I'd recommend beyond that is an Atlas Super Saw (or something similar), which you should be able to get at any decent hobby shop that caters to model railroaders, or online. Small clamps and rubber bands are handy to have, to keep things held together as glue sets. Here's a link regarding the kit itself- http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/?showtopic=65864 There you'll find a review of the kit, a few ways to improve it, and some tips on assembly.

Might be a little late to the party, but here goes... It may differ from manufacturer to manufacturer, even in the US. I'm aware of at least one exception. I say this because the method that had never failed me (measuring from center of front axle to the center point of the rear axles) failed me a while back. I was working on a short-nose Diamond REO C92, which had a wheelbase (listed by DR) as 124". So, I measured back 124 scale inches from the center of the front axle, and marked that spot on the frame. When I centered the axles, they were WAY too far ahead. As in, the front axle's tires were about even with the back of the cab. But, when I slid the bogey back so that the front axle centerline was even with the 124" mark, it looked right. Like I said, that's the only time that method of measuring the wheelbase didn't jive with the "center of front axle/ center point of rear suspension" rule. The DR is a late '60's tractor, maybe they measured it that way back then. Anyway, I measured my built Moebius Lonestar, and the wheelbase is 280", as measured from front axle centerline to the center between the rear axles. International does offer the LoneStar in a 280" wheelbase, so it would appear that International uses that method to determine wheelbase.

For the straight lines, I like to use a saw instead of a scriber- for me, that's the best way to get a good, straight line. For the rest, or areas where using a saw wouldn't be practical, it's a straight edge and the back of a #11 blade.

And I've dug out a couple of other long-stalled projects in the last few days. ^The rear wheels and tires on the KW in this pic are the same exact ones on the Western Star, which they are staying with.

I've toyed around with the idea of using a second body, but any open phaeton-type body might work to lengthen it. As far as I remember, the Jolly Rodger frame wasn't any longer than the BH version. The body was significantly longer, of course, but not the frame.