Chuck Most

If somebody doesn't do it, I will.

You're already ahead of the game, then.

No, I think that first pic is where insurance payout checks come from.

I realize now I didn't point out the Hydramatic I used was the one included in the Cadillac parts pack. Why jump into the spare parts box if you don't need to? I've seen them in resin, I have a cast metal one somewhere (RB Motion, maybe?) but they're super-easy to find in kits. The Revell '49 Merc I mentioned (coupe and woody) have the Cadillac engine with a Hydramatic already attached. The Revell parts pack caddy includes one, and IIRC so does the AMT parts pack Pontiac engine- and that one's molded separately from the engine block. I believe the Custom version of the Revell '50 Olds has one as well (the 2-in-1 kit had a manual). Easiest way to get one, though, would just be to use the one from the Cadillac. If you go with the Chevy, you could back it up with a Powerglide. I think the AMT '53 Corvette had a decent one, molded separately from the engine. There are some of those in resin. Of course, the easiest way to to it would be to use whatever transmission came behind the engine you plan to use.. do a little digging around and you might already have all you need to make it work. But if you're feeling a bit more adventurous, like Bill mentioned, you can mate anything to pretty much anything. On the subject of adapters, here's a link to some transmission adapters for Hudson engines. Kind of the opposite of what you're planning (these are for putting a modern trans behind a Hudson engine), but maybe it'll give you a few ideas. http://www.wilcap.com/hudson.html

I've actually built two Hornets with the Parts Pack Cadillac engine- both had GM Hydramatic transmissions backing them up. Which is just fine... the GM Hydramatic was actually offered as an option in the Step Down Hudsons. That being said, I see no reason why you couldn't stay with the stock trans- somebody somewhere has probably done it 1:1. You will need to modify and/or replace the existing transmission crossmember, or move it backward- I just moved the crossmember back on both of mine. You may need to trim the battery tray a tad to avoid possible clearance issues with the left valve cover when installing the body- once the battery is in place this modification likely won't be visible. For the Cadillac engine, I'd suggest using the shorter headers provided in the kit. You could probably also adapt the stock Cadillac manifolds from the Revell '49 Mercury if you have a set kicking around. I can't speak for using the Chevy engine, but I've swapped Cadillac, Pontiac, Mopar, and even an AMC V8 into these kits, and the basic steps are pretty much identical, no matter who made the V8 going in. You'll need to trim down the mounting pins for the engine- the one on the front suspension crossmember and the one molded to the top of the steering idler. I used the four-carb manifold on one, and one of the rear carbs was almost touching the firewall, but that's because I didn't mount the engine as far forward as I should have.

Telemarketers? Take a few lessons from the master... Here's one that would be very handy around Christmastime... And the greatest act of trolling a telemarketer in history... Nobody will ever be as good at messing with telemarketers as Mr. Mabe, but you can still have some fun with it.

I love it! I'm a Ford guy, but I've owned a couple of these, and for my money, they're about the best car GM managed to squeeze out in the '80's. Assuming you avoided the diesel... Well... you're belief is on the right track. The amber turn signal lens came for '84. That year, there was no "base" Delta 88- they were all Royales, or Royale Broughams. As far as I'm aware, all Deltas came with amber taillight lenses from '84 on- they even carried the theme over to the front-drive version.

I believe AMT/Ertl did with their '62 Catalina. That may have been on the custom version only, though, but I seem to recall that kit having a clear wheel.

Try to find an AMT/Ertl reissue of the '72 GMC- it was a short stepside. You'd need to use the Chevy tailgate, but the GMC has the right bed and chassis (assuming you want to to a short bed stepside). It was last issued in the early '90's and was later retooled into the '72 Chevy long bed.

I like it already.

This is beyond stupid, but it still made me laugh. 'long ducks'

Oh, that's Rasty...

That it was...

Well... there's the problem (for me) of the whole time/motivation thing. That and the more superstitious thing... seems like the last year or so, if I ever decide to do a WIP thread on something, the project crashes and burns within a week or two. I can make all kinds of progress on something if I'm not posting updates, though.

Quite a while back, I was able to snap up an old Life-Like Buildems bank for the princely sum of five bucks. It is an HO scale building kit, and appears to be from the early '70's. The kit was open, but complete. I thought "why not?" I don't know what kind of plastic it is, but many parts were warped from age. The plastic used is, oddly, somehow both soft and brittle at the same time. But after a few minutes and relatively few curse words, I had the four walls up. Here it is shown with a couple of the HO scale vehicles I have in my stash. Yes... I do have a small collection of HO scale vehicles. What of it? I didn't want to build it as a bank. The building bears a very strong resemblance to an old equipment repair building near my home- 100 years ago the building was a shop with living quarters on the second floor. It was a tractor dealer for many years, and after the tractor line they sold went belly-up they switched over to used sales and repair. The shop is now only open whenever the semi-retired owner feels like being open, or by appointment. I wanted to do something like that. So... A sign was made using Woodland Scenics dry transfer lettering and graphics. The Oliver tractor in the pic is actually 1:64 scale (yes, I have quite a few 1:64 tractors as well), but I may end up using that scale for the "inventory" because I've never really seen a good-looking HO scale tractor. I plan to omit the kit-supplied base (which is molded to look like a sidewalk), and make a small enclosed "lean to" on one side of the building.

There is at least one in existence, if internet photos are to be believed-

A land-based wheeled vehicle that lacks a watertight hull isn't good in water? Earth-shattering! In other news... breathing is good for you.

Yes and no. No matter what the box art says, the kit never came with a 100% stock interior.

I can't find specifics a '40, but I believe the 8' Express beds (Ford's name for the long bed at the time) were pretty much the same from 1938 to at least 1952. They were 96 inches long overall, 54 inches wide inside, and 21.73 inches deep. I do know of a website that has quite a few line drawings, but nothing pre '52. I'll post it anyway, just because there's quite a bit of other useful info there- http://restoreyourford.com/index.shtml

If you wanted to do a non-factory SAS (solid axle swap) you could go with the Super Stones parts, though the appearance of the axle in that kit leaves a lot to be desired. I'd say if your local shop has the AMT Bronco in stock, and if that's better than the Monogram kit pieces, go for it.

The way to do it would be to use the transfer case and front axle components from the Monogram Bronco that was reissued a while ago, or the F150 Ranger, which is slated to be reissued this year. These are 1:24 scale, while the AMT kits are 1:25, but they should still work. These are the coil sprung "Twin Traction Beam" setup used on F-150 models up to 1996. Typical Monogram, they are a bit simplified as far as parts breakdown, but they do look pretty good with a little detailing. Adapting them to the AMT chassis shouldn't be too difficult. MPC did a 1:25 Bronco, and it was reissued as a special edition by AMT a few years ago. But, I can't speak for how well done or accurate the front suspension would be in these kits, as I've only ever built the Monogram kits... hopefully somebody could chime in with a bit more info on those. Those are the only full-detail kits I'm aware of that have the proper TTB front suspension.

I know 90 days might be a tight window for quite a few builders... maybe even the vast majority. But it can be done. I could do a project in 90 days... IF I weren't doing too many modifications, IF I had all the parts/materials to build it on hand, and IF I had the time/motivation to do so. I know I could do it because... I built this Star in a little less than a week beginning to end, and I was was basically just something I was piddling around with between other projects. And that includes a CAT engine swap (plus all the related tweaks to the intake and exhaust), and swapping out the kit supplied walking beam rear suspension in favor of a leaf-spring setup. Granted, it's not full-detail, but I could do an even better version of something like this in 90 days. Also in a week's time- I had the complete chassis and powertrain for this finished- that included shortening the frame, installing a walking beam suspension, swapping out the kit wheels and tires for Italeri pieces (and the related engineering guesstimates employed to adapt them), and converting the Cummins from naturally-aspirated to turbo charged. I even made new mufflers and standpipes from tubing, because it ended up being less work than cleaning and touching up the kit-supplied parts. I'd have had this one done in about two weeks total, if the cab seams hadn't split on me when I went to install the interior for the first time. That made me a little gun shy for a bit, but the pic I just posted shows the new cab, with the new interior installed... and no split seams this time. Again, it's not fully detailed, but I would be willing to bet anyone at least as talented as I am (and I'd rate myself on the low-to-mid-end of average) could do it, if they had the time and motiviation.Being familiar with the kit and any flaws/quirks it may have helps. Fast-curing adhesives and paints help a great deal as well, and so does having a good mental picture of how you want the project to look at the end can also be quite a benefit... though I do admit the Star kind of "designed itself" as things progressed. The problem for me now is just that... time and motivation. When I built the Star and started on the Dual Drive I was laid off- now I'm working 60 hours a week some weeks, and sometimes when I get home I just don't have any motivation to work on anything, even if I want to. But on the other hand, there's that IH Paystar logger of mine that started off as "I'll just pair up the IH with the Peerless trailer and call it good". That was a couple of years ago and it's STILL not done... so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about after all.

End result... I tried out my idea on the backup lights on this one. The clear red paint is applied to the outside only. I sanded the paint away from over the lenses, instead of stripping it. Not only did this remove the paint, it also removed a few small sink marks over the mounting pins for the taillight panel. For the back-up lights- I cut the pins off from behind, so they were flush with the inside of the lens. I just applied foil to the area where the pin had been. After that, I used Tamiya clear red on the inside of the lens. The lens unit was then masked and painted as explained in the first post, then clear coated. In hindsight, I think should have applied a few more coats of clear red to the inside, or possibly a couple of coats inside and out- at certain angles (like in the pic) there appears to be a "clear" spot in the center of the outboard lamps where the mounting pins are. I don't think I got the shape of the side markers quite right- but that's not the point... the point is the technique works, even if your masks don't quite look like the 1:1 lens. All in all, I think it's a pretty big improvement over the all-red lens you get in the kit.

Thanks, guys. Here are a few in-progress pics, just because.