Mark Brown

Personally, I think what a lot of us have is not some hoarding complex, but plain old OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder). I think almost everyone has it to some degree - humans just like to collect stuff, to "feather their nests" with objects that make them feel comfortable. In our case, that happens to be model kits (and in my case, also includes music CDs - around 3000 of them - and books).

Let me ask you - how long have you been building? For me, part of it is time - I've been building for over 40 years and I don't throw anything away, so I've accumulated a lot of stuff just because of that. Another part of it, for me, is how I build. A typical project of mine might involve parts from a dozen different models. I never build anything from the box, and rarely even close to that. I won't build all of those kits, but they're all potential sources for parts. Another big factor has been mentioned....over time, I've missed out on many kits because I didn't grab one while they were available. Once I got to the position in life where I could buy them as I wished, I started getting them while the getting was good, in case I never got the opportunity again.

This pretty well sums up my hoarding, too. I cut my collection way back a couple years ago when I sold off about 500 kits - I probably have at least that many left. I've managed to slow my kit buying down a lot since then, too. The only reason I sold them was lack of space - I'd completely run out of room and it was becoming a real problem. As Danno mentioned, for many years I couldn't afford to buy all the kits I wanted, and by the time I was able to, most of them were unavailable. So if something even remotely interests me, I pick up one (or two), since there's no guarantee that I'll be able to if I wish to at a later date. Since my build rate is about one finished model every three or four years, I should be in good shape till I'm about four thousand years old.

Thanks, Greg - I got 'em here:

The stance is right on and those transplanted wheel openings look great. Excellent progress. If I can offer a bit of advice: those look like "wrinkled" slicks - am I right? It's hard to tell for sure in the photo. If I'm seeing it right, it looks like you've got that tire backward. And something to be aware of is that the only time you'll see a tire wrinkled like that is on the launch.....it wouldn't be wrinkled in one direction when it was sitting still. It's something most modelers overlook when they're using those wrinkle wall slicks. Keep up the great work!

I did the same thing, Mike, but at that time, they wouldn't sell it in quantities less than 100 feet, in three foot sections. Dan Himmel and I split the order, and I think I eventually ended up buying most of his back from him. That had to be at least ten years ago, and I'm down to just two or three pieces now. It's good to know that I won't have to buy another hundred feet when I run out!

It's really pretty easy with a little practice. The great thing about it is that it costs almost nothing to make them, so you can afford to screw up during the learning process. My learning process always involves multiple screwups!

You can make your own from aluminum tubing, using a six-sided pin vise. Here's how to shape the tubing using the hexagonal vise: And the results:

I love the Raboesch Super Styrene for any kind of cage or chassis work. It's very bendable and holds bends well - very easy to work with. Unfortunately, it's become difficult to obtain - according to my LHS, Midwest Products originally imported it to the US but hasn't carried it for a few years. I was running short on my supply and just ordered a bunch from Cornwall Model Boats in the UK. They were great to do business with - Sam was quite helpful and I'd recommend them highly. If you haven't tried Super Styrene, you should give it a shot. Get some 2.0mm (.080") tubing and rod, as they're both useful, and you're good to go. http://www.cornwallmodelboats.co.uk/acatalog/styrene-profiles.html

That's being VERY generous - it's simply awful. Almost cartoonish.

No, the 400M in your friend's '78 was the biggest engine the Bronco ever had.

The last year for the 390 in the F-series was 1977. Last year for the 360 FE was 1976. I'm pretty sure the FE series engines were never offered in the Bronco.

Why not swap in the 429 from the Revell '70 Torino kit and call it a 460? Truck that big needs a bigger engine anyway.

You can make a pretty realistic Schiefer mag using a kit base (there are plenty to choose from) and a RMCOM resin cap, like I did here.

Unfortunately, Bil Davis, always the definition of a "gentleman", thought that his gentleman's agreement with Gordon and Evernham was sufficient. Gordon's defection to Hendrick, and the way he went about it, earned him the derision of an entire generation of Ford fans, who - correctly - saw him as a way to end Earnhardt's domination and return Ford to the winners circle on a regular basis. Am I the only one who cannot get used to seeing gray in Gordon's sideburns? It just doesn't seem that long since he was a scrawny little kid who couldn't grow a moustache.

Right you are. Another popular mag in the '60s and '70s was the Schiefer, which also used a distributor-style cap. Pretty easy to duplicate in scale. The twin mag ignitions that are SOP on modern fuel motors didn't show up until the '80s, pioneered by Dale Armstrong. Here's a pic of the Schiefer magneto.

Did you try Byron Stack's Gasser Madness site? I'd be amazed if someone there didn't have photos of the car. The knowledge about vintage gassers in that group is off the charts. http://gassermadness.com/Gas-FX/index.php

Just a tip for you - if you're interested in accuracy, you're going to want to change it again. Your engine wouldn't run with it set up the way you have it. What you need is one big pipe from each exhaust manifold to a turbo (the inlet toward the rear of the car - the hot side). Then you'll have a big pipe from each outlet on the front end of the turbo (the cold side) to a "Y", to form one slightly bigger pipe. That pipe will go to your tank in the interior, and then another big pipe from the tank to your intake. The way you have it set up now you've got one turbo piped into the other and that would not work - the second turbo wouldn't last a minute with boost coming in the hot side. Here's a pic that might help a bit.

If you don't mind, I'd like to offer a couple bits of constructive criticism, in hopes that it might be of general benefit to modelers wanting to build their own chassis. Please take it in that spirit. A common mistake modelers make is using tubing that's too large, especially for roll bars and roll cages. A great many kits, particularly older ones, use overscale plastic for roll bars/cages, too. Typically, roll bar tubing is 1 5/8" OD (outer diameter). That's pretty small tubing - you can easily wrap your hand around it. It's a good bit smaller than a typical Tamiya or Testors spray paint can. In scale, that's about 1/16". The second tip involves the importance of research if you're after realistic results. I dig seeing guys do their building with brass, and your work looks very good. Unfortunately, your roll cage wouldn't pass tech inspection anywhere that I'm aware of because it doesn't incorporate a main hoop. The main hoop behind the driver is the primary element of roll bars and cages, and the rest of the cage is built from this hoop. My advice to anyone starting a chassis or cage is to spend some time online checking out reference materials. There are just hundreds of race shop websites that have loads of under-construction photos showing just how racecars are put together, and there are plenty of other sites where you can check out the rules that dictate construction. The rules change as the cars get quicker, so what you need to build a realistic cage or chassis is determined by what engine you put in the car (or model), among other things.

Not that I've found. Every time I tried saving money with my resin casting, it ended up costing more in the long run. In my experience, it's a pursuit where you get what you pay for. If the quality of your results is important to you, go ahead and get the best stuff you can find. Your work deserves it, right?

They're actually motorcycle wheels and tires - I doubt bicycle items would last very long at 200mph! Machined Aluminum Specialties makes a photoetch kit. http://www.mas-parts.com/cart/indexframe_phetchwhlcentrs.html Here's a way you can make yours from scratch - not terribly difficult and they look great. http://www.straightlinemodeler.org/wirewheels.htm

No, and I doubt anyone would argue that McDonalds and Walmart are "the best". They are, however, the most successful, and that is the goal if you're running a company. It has nothing to do with the "path of least resistance" - it has to do with the path of greatest exposure and return. Sponsors, like every corporation, have shareholders to answer to, and the shareholders want their money used in the most profitable way possible. Now, I'm the last guy in the world to espouse profitibility over all else, and I personally feel that that mindset is at the foundation of most of this country's problems today, but if you're the advertising manager of a big corporation, your job is to get your name in front of as many potential customers as you can, and to do that, you want to play in the most successful game out there. I used to be a big NASCAR fan and I'm not much of one anymore, mostly because of changes they've made to the sport. But they're still hugely successful so who am I to argue? Obviously, the "benevolent dicatatorship" style of management has gotten them to where they are today and in virtually every form of motorsport where decisions have been made by committee, that form of motorsport has suffered as a result. The two most successful motorsports in the world are probably NASCAR and F1 and those are both run by "benevolent dictators". So, like it or not, it seems to work.

And if and when they do, that will effectively bring an end to a era, and probably an end to stock car racing as a successful nationally televised sport. Remember CART vs. IRL? Divide and conquer......

It's much more practical on a NASCAR car because it's got a completely non-stock chassis. Same with the "7/8" scale Top Sportsman cars like Christine and others - they were all tube chassis cars. To narrow something with a stock frame and interior, you're talking about a mountain of work, only to end up with a car that's not legal for much of anything, classwise. It would be nice if there was a sort of "industry standard" for models, so if you bought four different 1:25 scale '57 Chevys, for instance, they'd all be pretty close to the same size. Unfortunately, that's not the case. I'll bet it's not nearly as big a problem with aircraft and military stuff.