Chuck Most

Mine has some nasty sink marks on the cylinder heads, now that I've really dug in and started working on it. But other than that, the kit is molded well. Just wish my 1:16 parts box had stuff I could use on it, besides the stock parts I took out of this kit!

Well, I mentioned the why I do it part, so here's the why-I-got-into-it part... I was surrounded by cars from an early age. From being driven home from the hospital after I was born in Dad's '67 Continental, to spending my childhood playing in my granfather's Model Ts, Model As, his '66 F-100 and his '59 Ford C-600, to learining how to drive a manual at the age of nine in Dad's Chevette. Since I've pretty much been submerged in automobiles for as long as I can remember, it was pretty much preordained I'd end up being a 'car guy'. But I never was into the same kinds of cars as my friends were. Even as a kid, when they were drooling over bright red '57 Chevy drop tops and pink '59 Caddys, I was walking right past those and checking out the crusty '59 Buick four-door and the beat-up brown '61 Plymouth. I've never considered weathered, or oddball vehicles to be 'uncool'- I was into this stuff back when everyone else shunned it! And of course, model building goes hand in hand with 1:1 automotive ventures. It allows you to be a car enthusiast, even if you can't spin a wrench. I personally know my way around a car's anatomy fairly well, but I do know some modelers can barely check their own tire pressure! But they still love cars, and model building is a way for them to participate.For many a parent or older sibling got them into it, but I just found it on my own. My father built models, but stopped in the mid '70's before I was even born. I was the oldest, so no older siblings building. In fact, NOBODY in my family built models, though my brother started a few years after I did. (He mostly got into Star Trek an military stuff, though, with an odd Indy car or Craftsman truck thrown in every few years.) Wow, if I had only known what that 1:32 Fox-Mustang snap kit I built another lifetime ago would start...

I just sidestep all of it by never selling or buying on eBay.

MCW does a few Olds kits, but they are all mid to late '50's. Modelhaus sells quite a few too, rangin in years from '57 to '62. Promolite 2000 did a '59 two-door post a few years back, but I believe that particular one is no longer available.

I've been messing around with this small-block powered Corvair rear subframe thingie- maybe this will end up powering whatever goes on the trailer?

I'd love to see somebody do a four-door sedan body for this kit, so I could model my old '66. Oh, Ed... most resin is way, way, WAY better than R&R!

Love the color, even if it is a little less bright in person, and the subtle but nicely done changes to convert it to a '50 model. Just plain yummy!

I believe the Lonestar kit is molded in China, I would assume the Hudson and Chrysler will originate from there, as well.

Rear axle mounting issue or no, the underside of the Moebius kit looks pretty good to me. The Trumpeter Falcon's piece is far from perfect, but it's a far cry better than the original AMT piece everyone compares it to. Sorry... no way, no how is a one-piece slab with everything molded to it and a hole in the engine block for the front axle going to come close to a full-detail chassis, even if it's less than perfect. Just my opinion. The Hudson kit's underpinnings are a much better representation of the real car, and like Dave says, I can creatively work around the 'generous' rear wheel well issue.

I've been using paint can lids and toothpicks as paint stands for years now, but a local modeler saw me using this technique a few days ago and said it had never occured to him! The photo pretty much explains it all.

Good- just checked my '66, and there's some underhood stuff missing anyway!

Well, I'm not even going to think about getting a Falcon unil it hits the clearance shelf, so for me, the price issue is totally moot. But yeah, factor in the respective MSRP of each kit and the Hornet is a solid value. Know what? If the Moebius Hornet were selling for the price of what Trumpeter wants for the Falcon, I'd still think it was a fair enough price. (Not trying to give Moebius any pricing ideas, just sayin'...)

I think the former Led Zepplin bassist may be onto something there! And even if a kit is totally accurate, SOMEBODY's going to think the b-posts are .010" too thick, and bring the whole 'scale effect' thing into the argument.

Sean- those Revell Camaros could be the best model kits ever made, but I'd never be able to tell you- never built one, or even peeked inside the box of one.

Ditto. Even the best kits I've personally built have some issue. Maybe they're accurate, but not well detailed, or vice versa. If you put a gun to my head,though, I think I'd hand 'most accurate' and 'best detailed' to Galaxie's Chevy kits, or Revell's series of Deuces. They may not be completely, unflinchingly accurate (I don't think such a thing exists in a scale kit), but they're close enough for me.

To me, the 'solid-mounted' rear axle isn't even an issue... really... I like to display my models with the chassis pointed down, so I'm not too concerned about how the rear axle is mounted on a full-bodied car. As far as the kit being in the same league as the Trumpeter Falcon? Well, if you add up all the little flaws and hiccups (obvious, not so obvious, and perceived), yeah, perhaps the scorecard is close, but which one is closer to the real deal? Yep, the Hornet. Then again, I'm one of the guys who LIKES the Trumpeter Falcon (I can think of several good uses for it BESIDES a window prop ), so maybe I'm not qualified to comment on such matters!

What he said! I'd need twelve abandoned airport hangars and more money than an Army of Bill Gates clones to own what I have in model form in 1:1!

The hoods on my models are usually closed or nonexistent, so I can live with the relative thickness. Perhaps they could have used a stiff piece of thin wire or flattened brass, if the thickness is an issue. The AMT '49 Ford kit has a thick prop rod, but I've never seen it actually used. (And yeah, I know, '60's tooling technology vs. '10's...)I'm just glad this feature was actually incorporated into the kit, after all these years of 'lift off' hoods in kits.

I'd agree! I never thought I'd utter this phrase, but... very nice Chevy Citation!

I don't get why the mold bumper guards in place- leave them separate! Looks more realistic, and best of all... you can leave it off if you don't like it. (That's not just directed at this kit, but the majority of kits with molded bumper guards.)

Love seeing the last of the 'boxy' Eff-series trucks done up custom style! Love where this is going.

That's for sure! Curt- was your dad's truck really rusty under the hood? I have a '66 out back (same basic doghouse/cab structure) I could shoot pics of for reference if so. Engine in it is an FE, but most of the little doodads are similar in the engine bay.

You guys keep this up and I'll have to start building cop car models! I really hope Round 2 brings back this one, perhaps even with a correct (non-Boss) engine!

I don't trust doctors that much (most of the ones I've encountered are little more than pill dispensers with heads), but I must say surgeons amaze me. Think about it- you stare under the hood of your car with a wrench in your hand and a blank stare on your face- these guys dive in and fix peoples internal organs! Truly amazing.

Hmmmm... not sure aboot that bubble top, but I will reserve final judgement until I see the end result. That body does seem to lend itself well to a bubble top, though.