Chuck Most

Chassis is done- aside from the mods needed to the frame and exhaust to accomodate a Lincoln 430 engine (more on that later), it is build just as Revell intended. Might be able to get it just a little bit lower, but if not I do like the OOB stance. Not the best pic, but you can judge for yourself. Also- I might use the kit Lake pipes, so it shouldn't be rocker-scraping if you want to run those, and I want to leave my options open at this point.

I'm with Bill on the Mini variant theory, but I don't think it's an Innocenti- I've never seen one of those with those tall, narrow panes in the C-pillars. EDIT- Looks like Rob found the culprit as I was posting my response.

Ah. Spider-bots, then.

Kind of early in the project, but I can already tell this one is going to look sweet.

Other than not having any chrome on the window trim, still looks pretty good.

My guess? Spambots.

Reworking the AMT COT kit into something a little nicer than box-stock? Check. A quick explaination of the subtle differences between the Chevrolet cup cars? Check. A reference or two to Jenna Jameson? Check. This thread might just be as close to perfect as you can get.

Very cool! I've wanted to try this for a while. I was thinking of putting the batteries in the fuel tanks, so I could have a full sleeper- with dome lights inside.

Speaking as the devil on Skip's shoulder, to Cato's angel. .... Yes... but it's that 5% that gives the model a story, and sets it apart from others like it. From the years it has lasted to the wrath of the cleaning lady, this model tells most certainly a story.

I'm actually suprised at how 'minty fresh' it looks, considering how long ago it was built. Kind of looks like a 1:1 that's been in storage for a few years awaiting a light cosmetic resto.

I've built about a half dozen of these kits, and I'm still hoping one will come out this nice.

Even better! Forgot there was more than one short-nose White in the movie. I'm going to to the 'Green Goblin' Western Star one of these days.

Sorry, but I've only finished one. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=58359&st=0 Second one is underway but stalled- http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=58721

This one? http://www.imcdb.org/i021566.jpg

Any car looks good laid out low and chopped. This one is no exception. The fact it's a Hornet makes it even better.

'66 Galaxie is a lot better, in terms of interior detail. It isn't very close to a '64 interior, though.

It is a 500 XL. Interior isn't great- the rear AND front seats are molded in. They were reissued as part of the Millenium Series and a few years ago by Model King, so they shouldn't be too difficult to track down.

Nice.

Well- 'retro' and 'rat rod' aren't always the same. You'll see a few rat rods every now and then with billet wheels, air ride suspension, and Vortec small blocks- nothing 'retro' about any of those things! But yes, they're usually built 'the old fashion way', with parts scrounged up from various sources. I can't explain for everyone, but I like them because they're stress-free to own. I can leave a crusty-looking vehicle in a K-Mart parking lot without having to worry about shopping cart rash, I'll save a ton of money on wax, and I'll have fun- which is the whole point of owning a hot rod in the first place. And not all rat rods are death traps, which seems to be a commonly held opinion- in my area I've seen more second gen F-bodies and Fox Mustangs that are downright dangerous on the road than rat rods. I also like them because they offend the traditionalists- and if you ask me, a hot rod should be offensive to at least one other person, otherwise it's just a normal car.

Least effort for a correct engine swap would have to be the AMT/Model King '71 T-Bird- either that kit's engine or the engine block-off (if you want to glue the hood shut) literally drop right into the Galaxie chassis. Rob just mentioned the '69 Galaxie engine- that would work as well, and the '69 kit would probably be easier (and chaper) to locate than the T-Bird kit. Since the engine compartment is rather barren in this kit anyway, I usually use the block-off and glue the hood shut, though one of these days I want to go full-on and detail/correct the engine compartment and stick the Revell Torino engine in there.

Absolutely. Just saying that huge sales don't always equal a better product. That goes for roadsters and econoblobs- most roadsters are purchased more to make a statement, or just because the owner wants a 'fun' car, than for their capabilites. And again- I wholeheartedly agree the Miata is tops in its department- it also happens to be the sales leader. I drove quite a few Solstices when they were new, but when I went for a drive in a customer's ten-year-old Miata I was blown away by how much better it was than the Solstice. It didn't even have any squeaks or rattles, and the new Solstices were already making junky noises! Looks a lot better too in my opinion, though I'll admit I like the first-generation Miata over the later designs. The Solstice just looks like a flabby jelly bean with a split honeycomb grille to me. The Miata/MX-5 might be one of the rare instances where a car is the best seller in its category because it's the best at what it does.

Shaping up to be pretty cool! Hmmmm... twice blown Hemi in a Bantam? I'd certainly want to drive it, but a change of pants might be in order afterwards.

Nice! I've been interested in that kit for a while- how is it, quality-wise?

I don't see how sales figures prove the Miata is better... The air cooled Beetle was the best-selling car in history, and there were better alternatives available the whole time it was being produced. But yes, the Miata is head and shoulders above the Solstice/Sky.

Looks awesome!