Matt Bacon

Ahh… they saw that Pistonheads “feature” as well! best, M.

In need of something a bit less involved, I turned to a Revell Easy Kit snapper. It could certainly be built without paint and with the stickers provided as an option instead of decals, but I wanted to make one I've seen locally regularly. It's Zero Paints "Kemora Grey" externally, and I liked the look of the rich mahogany upholstery. This is just Taimiya red-brown primer with a Citadel flesh contrast paint over the top... Several different flavours of "black" to give the interior a bit of variety. The wheels are cleverly designed to make painting relatively easy: the "spokes" are a separate insert moulded in black, with the diamond-cut look added thanks to an SMS Hyperchrome pen. Brake callipers are lurid Citadel green. he front end is very cleverly engineered to nest various pieces one on top of the other without the need for lots of masking to give a realistic result. The lights are also a pretty good combination of detailed moulding and decals, but I'd strongly advise stripping the chrome from the plastic provided and recreating the look based on references. It's been Revell's Achilles heel for over a decade -- most cars since the 2010s have not had chrome headlight "buckets" and look so much better with charcoal grey mouldings and embedded projector lenses like the real thing. Bizarrely, Revell usually gets the underlying structure and relief moulded right, and then chromes the sprue! All the best, M.

Looks like you could do 66 or 70, though for some later cars you’d need to add a chin spoiler. Patto’s place has 1/24 decals for the Kwech 1966 car. best, M.

You're doing brilliant work, and I hope when it's completed you'll get someone to turn your automotive sculpture into the master for the ultimate correction set!! My only comment, and it may be the same thing as Bill's @Ace-Garageguy is that the rear edge of the door shutline and the front edge of the wheel well cut out are straight and parallel for a decent amount of their length.... best, M.

My word... spectacular! Brilliant building, painting and detailing. Mind you, that now makes me want to add an Avanti to my build list... best. M.

I have the Michael Zumbrunn “Ferrari Legends” book. I won’t paste the picture in here, but take a look at the yellow 250SWB here: https://en.wheelsage.org/persons/158403/author/rp1srp He’s one of the most sought-after photographers for auction catalogues, with cameras, lighting and skills to match. Look at that picture and tell me it doesn’t look as if there’s a curve in the fender over the front wheel… best, M.

You might as well have all of these here: best, M.

It's a great project, Pierre. Your model body photos are taken from a higher relative position than the ones of the real thing so the relative positions of different features may appear different than they are in real life. On the real-life pictures, the lower sills of the door windows are almost lined up, but the model pictures have a discrepancy of almost 20% of the door height at that point. It doesn't seem like a big deal for the vertical height of features on the near side of the car, but it'll throw off the lower corner of the rear valance quite a lot. I know you're constrained by photographing it in front of your computer screen so it's not that easy. Depends on your camera, but for a compact DSLR you want 45mm focal length lens and a 50mm on a full frame camera to get a view like the human eye. I think you need to drop the "horizon" on your model body profile pictures to more or less line up with the lower door window sills to get a truly comparable image. If you do that with the right focal length lens, and pull back as far as you need to get the framing of the body the same as the "real-thing" pictures then you can compare like for like... You're probably just wanting to make the point, which is absolutely fair, but even the best thought-out photos need to be treated with scepticism unless you know the exact details of the lens and geometry of the set-up... best, M.

Look what I found: It's not the Sport model, but they had enough profile to make it into cross-sectional fame in a leading boys' magazine... best, M.

Looks fabulous, very clean build with great colour choices and very neat detail painting. Forged carbon looks very good. I hope you had less trouble than I did getting the rear clip to fit and stay in place! It looks like you did the body tweaks to fix the awkward panel shapes on the rear wheel arches and at the front of the doors, and it looks all the better for it… Great build. best, M.

No need to pay bonkers auction prices any more in ‘24. That’ll please many! best, M.

Sill waiting in South Yorkshire, too... Is there anyone in the UK who has got theirs yet? best, M.

I'm probably thinking about this more than it deserves, but... We know there's a fair bit of not-strictly-accurate reuse of parts between the Italeri 1/24 Ferrari 250 kits: chassis, doorcards and air-cleaner mix and matched between the 250GTO and 250 SWB, for example. I just took a close look at the 250 California Spyder and 250SWB that I have to hand next to the desk. It looks to me like the designers assumed that the front end of the Cali Spyder and the Berlinetta were basically the same, and it was just the roof and haunches that were different. The Spyder looks like this in real life: My guess is that the Italeri 250 kits were all based off the same masters, because they thought that Ferrari and Pininfarina had done the same... (or thought it would be OK from a maximising return on investment perspective) best, M.

To be fair, the Italeri designers had the best hope of having access to the real thing. We're spoilt today... not only is there the internet to provide extraordinary quantities of information and quality pictures (how many of my builds are informed by detailed high-resolution picture galleries from top-end auction houses..?), but the historic racing scene is thriving. In the late-70s or early 80s when these things were being tooled up, the chances of the designers having spent time up close and personal with what at the time was just an old, out-of-date, superseded race-car must have been pretty small. Even now, a 250SWB is not a $30m. treasure like a GTO, but they're pretty special collector cars in the $5m. range, and I was bloody lucky to be able to go to a relaxed Historics race meeting and just wander into a pit-lane garage with one in... Those Gunze designers probably only had a good handful of 10"x8" prints and their instincts to go on. A trip (via The Wayback Machine) to the UK Model Cars Magazine Plans archive is instructive: http://web.archive.org/web/20071211013214/http://vsrnonline.com/Mags/MC/MC_Plans.htm Lots of well-drawn 1/24 three-view plans. But the articles accompanying them have what's probably a good sample of the pictures available to the guys who were drawing the plans. And they were in England, with access to see the real things race, and they were (often) contemporary. And yet there are "interpretations" all over the place. And all they are trying to produce is a set of 3-view plans. These days, you could LIDAR-scan a real one, as Airfix do for a lot of their new-tool aircraft models. Or you can get 3D CAD data from the manufacturers (as Airfix does for its new series of 1/43 supercars). Now, many Historic cars _are_ scanned by the restorers or auctioneers to make it easier to recreate unique parts if they are damaged. I'm sure there's an opportunity for the right company to partner with RS Williams or Ferrari Classiche or Eagle to create new-tool kits based on comprehensive and accurate data. But let's not forget what those enthusiast designers decades ago were working with... best, M.

Yep… the Gunze kit has, if anything a slight “peak” or hump over the front wheel arch, whereas on the real car the top of the fender falls away downwards from pretty much the base of the windscreen… best, M.

The 250SWB is a sturdy, muscular car in the flesh, and for me the Italeri captures that much better than the AMT. For completeness, this is the Gunze Sangyo kit: best, M.

I think it’s like a Little Tikes Coupe. It moves by him running. You just can’t see his feet on the floor behind the front wheel… best, M.

Ah, I get it... I wasn't suggesting that you could build a stock car from this boxing without mods, but my interpretation of the fact they'd bothered to make the screen a separate piece was that it was to allow for the possibility of a non-Bond kit without having to retool a whole dash, just a 1cm square radio and speaker part. When I built the 1/16 Revell Porsche 356 coupe Easy-Kit, there were quite a few parts for the full detail kit on various trees of the snapper, plus a 3-part siren and parts of a radio setup designed for a Dutch Police-fit 356 which as far as I know has never yet seen the light of day as a separate release. I think Revell likes to give itself the option wherever it can... it's like the new 1/48 Airfix Sea King helicopter kit, which gives you all the parts for a a number of different variants and overseas operators version that are not included in the decals or instructions, and a tantalising handful of parts which can only be used for more radically different versions, if and when the more substantial bits you need appear in a later box... best, M.

Hi, all, but especially @cobraman. I built one of these a while ago, and I remember there was a real trick to getting the radiator and hoses in place around the suspension and chassis tubes, but darned if I can remember what it was other than "not following the instructions". Can anyone put me out of my misery and remind me? All the best, matt

What's your interpretation of what he's doing here, then? best, M.

I’ve never seen one on anything else. That’s not to say no one in the history of the world ever fitted Campagnolo alloys or Dunlop Competition rims, but wires (with a bit of variation in sizes) are near enough standardised and period-correct. best, M.

Step-by-step: best, M.

Late series DB4s also had the cowled headlights, as did the DB4GT, but you need to take about 10" out of the wheelbase of a DB5 kit to get a DB4GT (I did it with the Airfix re-box of the Doyusha kit, which has a bunch of other issues, but was cheap back in the day). The Airfix James Bond DB5 is 1/24, and full detail (I'm tempted to do a dual build of mine, bought from a charity shop for £7 a decade or so ago, with the new Revell one). Airfix turned it into a DB6, which I don't have. They tweaked the rear end to give the Kamm tail as @Bugatti Fan points out, but they didn't change the wheelbase or lift the roofline like the real thing did to make it a viable 2+2. If I ever manage to snag a DB6 kit, there's a fair bit of work to knock it into accurate shape. My view is this (bearing in mind my default scale is 1/24, not 1/25): If you want a regular DB4 (which is one of the best looking 60s GT cars ever) build the Aurora/Monogram kit OOB. If you want a DB4GT, cut a chunk out of the middle of the cheapest Airfix/Doyusha DB5 you can find, and sand the sides a bit. If you want a full-detail DB5, build and adapt the Airfix James Bond DB5 (or sell it and buy many other kits, or wait for Revell to release standard car follow on to the Bond Quick-build) If you want a James Bond DB5, buy the Revell Quick Build kit If you want a DB6, buy the Airfix kit and prepare to do some work. There's a build thread somewhere on here with suggestions of where you need to cut and how, but basically you need to slide the trunk backwards, and lift the rear of the roof so the C-pilllars join up where they need to... best, M.

Looking at HPI-Guy’s video above, the tracker screen panel on the dash is a separate piece, and it really doesn’t have to be… which suggests that the kit’s engineered at least with a stock one in mind… Doesn’t mean there will be one, but it looks like Revell think there _could_ be… best, M.

Doh! Of course! best, M.