Aaronw

Neat idea, the modular part is nice too, building a car, and one is fine, want to build a big ship or a semi, add the second booth. The fan is marginal, from what I've read the rule of thumb for a cross draft booth like this is a flow of 100 feet per minute at the face (or 100 cfm for every square foot of the opening). So with a face opening of 1.43 sq feet the fan should move at least 143 cfm, and that doesn't include going through any exhaust ducting, so really something like 160 to 175 cfm would be needed to meet the recommended flow. For comparison with a brand popular with many here, the small Pace booth has a 1.66 sq ft (20x12") opening, with a 143 cfm fan, for a flow of 89 fpm at the face. This booth has a 1.43 sq ft (16x13) opening with a 105 cfm fan for a flow of only 73 fpm at the face. If you are airbrushing it is probably adequate, but I would guess it won't get all the fumes from a spray can.

That would be great if Dave has them. At least that means they will eventually turn up again. I've seen the Illini stuff and have most of it on my wish list. Between AITM and Illini I could spend $1000 without even trying.

Matt Conte at Dencon Resin might, he does some stuff for the Dodge LRE to make it a 4x4 or change the years. I thought he had some similar conversions for a Chevy truck but I don't see it listed. Worst case you might be able to make the Dodge conversion work for you, I believe GM and Dodge used some of the same suppliers for parts on their 4x4s. http://www.denconresin.com/

I'd really like to see more plain working 3/4 and 1 ton wheels to upgrade the many 1/2 ton pickup kits out there, for both modern and vintage trucks. Also regular sized 4x4 wheels for working trucks, not the monster truck tires and custom wheels included in many 4x4 kits. Finally some regular 4x4 tires / wheels for big rigs. There are some nice high floatation tires with off road tread out there, but nothing I've seen for an aggressive tread on a regular wheel except for the Paystar kits which has an older military style non-directional tread. There is one out there, I got it off ebay and it is a nice conversion. I don't recall who the caster was or have any contact info though. There might be slight difference year to year but it should work for any year from 1947-53. A good 1954 conversion for the Chevy would be nice, I don't believe GMC changed until 1955. I've seen one 1954 Chevy cab on ebay but it wasn't a very good effort and the seller was asking way too much for it.

Ed might know more being a Ford truck guru, but I think the issue with the camper special bed also involves the wheel well. I remember seeing something about the wheel well being farther back so there was room for the spare tire compartment.

Has anyone heard from Silver State resin recently? He had a nice selection of 40-60s Peterbilt and Kenworth cabs. He shut down a few years ago but was supposed to start up again after getting some things ironed out, but seems to have just faded away. I got one of his 50s Peterbilt cabs which was very nice, but would have liked to get more.

I picked that cab up earlier this year, but haven't figured out exactly what to do with it yet (or more accurately decided on which one of the dozens of ideas I have to use it on). Looking forward to seeing what you do with this. I really like this style of GMC so I was very happy to see it show up at AITM, it is also one of the nicest cabs I've bought from him. Someone makes a DD 6-71 diesel which would go well with this truck, I don't recall where I got mine but I think Sourkrouts sells one. Of course if you are going to do it as a modrnized custom you may be looking for something more substantial to power it.

I've got the same paint shaker, I was a bit when I bought it, but have been very happy with it. For a paint stirer I just use a piece of sprue, or for paints that really need a good mixing (like most metal colors) I use my dremal (just remember to shut it off before taking the bit out of the jar or you will get modern art )

The rule of thumb is to have 100 feet per minute for a cross draft, or 50 feet per minute for a down draft booth. To find this figure take the square footage of the face (the opening) and divide into the cfm of the fan. Just to make it easy lets take a 24"x18" opening which is 3 square feet. If this was a cross draft you would need a 300 cfm fan, if it was a dwon draft you would want a 150cfm fan. You also have to factor in your ducting, if you look at the ratings you should see something like 300 cfm @ 0.000 in SP, 290 cfm @ 0.100 in SP, 275 cfm @ 0.200 in SP etc. Cross draft = air goes out the back or side, down draft = air goes out the bottom. To put it simply each 0.1 in SP = 10 feet of ducting (or equivelant, 1 fot of that flexible dryer ducting = about 3 feet of smooth metal duct, small diameter duct adds more than larger diameter, and turns add considerably to the effective length). There are charts you can look up to give you this figure or you can just eyeball it and give yourself a good bit of extra capacity, if you are just going 3 feet out a window look at the 0.1 or 0.2 figures, if you are using flexible dryer vent maybe go with a higher 0.3 or 0.4. That 100 or 50 fpm figure is just a target point, many of the commercially produced booths fall short, on the other hand you really can't have too much air flow either (short of sucking the model into the filter ). When I designed my booth I calculated that I needed a fan in the high 300- low 400 cfm range, but got one rated at 485 cfm just to make sure I had enough fan. I bought the Dayton 1TDR7 485 cfm, which was $144 last year. Most of the blowers Grainger sells assumes they are going into a fixed system so don't include a cord. They sell a heavy duty 8' cord that is easy to wire in for about $7 (#1FD82). I built the actual 24x24x20" booth from 1/2" plywood, the whole project came in right around $200 which is a bit less than where most of the smaller commercial booths start.

I'm sure this guy thought the same thing the first 6 times he was struck by lightning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Sullivan

You don't need an explosion proof fan unless you are building a room sized spray booth to paint 1-1 cars, but it is advisable that you use a fan as David described, where the motor is out of the path of the air flow. These are typically called Squirrel cage or shaded pole blowers. Beyond the type of fan you want to make sure you have adequate airflow, the real danger is accumulating vapors. Almost all of the commercial hobby booths use the same fans you can get from Grainger, and none that I've seen use an explosion proof fan. You can build a perfectly safe booth yourself, just buy the right stuff and don't go cheap. There are lots of people out there using box fans, bathroom fans, stove hoods etc who haven't blown up. It really is a perfect storm event of having just the right air to vapor ratio, and an untimely spark for an ignition source, but it just takes once to ruin your day.

Yeah, that is odd, putting that in the shopping cart just says mailing source ad without saying what the special is. Usually it will say what the discount or offer is and how much you have to spend to get it.

You have to read their discount offers carefully, sometimes it is a direct discount but they also have a lot of offers, particularly the ones at the lower total price end that give you a gift certificate (or basically $10 off your next purchase). I'm not seeing the $25 offer but I do see their common $10 off of a $50 purchase so I wouldn't be surprised to find the other offer is for a gift certificate. Tower's common sales are $10 off $50, $15 off $75, $20 off $149 and $25 off $199. Their other deals are usually reduced or free shipping and a $x.xx gift certificate for a $x.xx purchase.

You should have an introduction area for new members, and then include an outroduction area where members can post their "I'm outta here" proclamations.

BTW why are we arguing aircraft on a model car site?

I had a very long post, (which considering this is not really a short post) but trimmed it down to try and stay on the subject. P-40F & L used the Packard Merlin, same as the P-51. Packard and RR Merlin were essentially the same engine, I use them interchangably. Perhaps technically incorrect but for the most part a Merlin is a Merlin regardless of which side of the Atlantic it was built on. The P-40 had significant improvement with the engine (gained almost 50 mph and much improved altitude performance) and the aircraft remained in production until the end of the war. Production was right behind the P-51 and P-47. Allison engines improved and the N model was similar to the Merlin versions. The final version the P-40Q (not produced due to the end of the war) was only 12 mph slower than the P-51. Not bad for an "obsolete" aircraft designed in the mid 1930s. The P-63B was designed to use the Merlin, but it was cancelled due to the need for the Merlin in other aircraft and the general satisfaction for the Mustang. Considering the P-63 had similar performance to the P-51 while using an Allison, the Merlin version could have really given the P-51 a good run. Without the P-51 pushing development of other aircraft to the side, it is likely either of these could have stepped into its place in history. It was a good decision, Germany proved developing every aircraft to come along is a drain on resources. The P-51 and F-20 have both been singled out for not using Government money in their development, which would seem to indicate most others have. Selection of the F-16 over the F-20 has been tied by some to the fact the US was already invested in the F-16 design. Military modelers do not have the licensing issues civilian subjects do, because public money has been used in their development/production somewhere along the way. Look for any Sikorsky helicopter model, if it has been used by the US military you can probably find a model of it, if not you can't. Sikorsky has a reputation of being difficult to deal with over licensing which has impacted which of their aircraft have been modelled (no civilian helicopters to my knowledge). Sure civilian helicopters are less popular, but none from one of the largest producers of helicopters? We are in agreement about GM, I don't believe that the fact the US Government has stepped in to become a major share holder should make GM's designs public domain. I see a significant difference between the government paying a company to design and build something for the government, and a bail out which is supposed to be repaid someday. Had the government outright bought GM that would be different. However if the government is the largest shareholder it would be nice to see some reasonable licensing agreements negotiated with the model companies or perhaps even an advertising blitz using model cars.

It goes both ways though, I am reading all the time about how contests are not seeing the kinds of numbers they used to. Contests that don't consider why this is happening will continue to shrink until they are two old guys judging each others cars. My issue with touching is only partly based on potential damage, it is also based on fun sucking nit picking and if an award comes down to who painted their sway bar better, some people should re-evaluate their priorities. Now I'm not saying the guy who kit bashes an old 1960s metal axle chassis kit, with a more modern detailed chassis should not get some credit for that, but it becomes his responsibilty to show he did it and did it well. However the guy who built the kit as is but perhaps spent his time detailing the interior and motor should not be knocked out because he did not go hog wild on the minimally detailed kit chassis. Sure as a tie breaker the guy with the detailed chassis should get the edge, but touching a model should be an exception not the rule. Just me, but if judges have to check out the underside of a model, it is kind of like an art critic walking up to a painting and basing his critique on the backside of the canvas, that is not the point of the display. At what point are judges going to ask for the keys so they can hear the exhaust note of the motor?

The link to swanny's site Mike posted is well named, it is pretty much the article about Future. If you get into some exotic paints, there are better clears out there but Future is cheap, easy to use, easy to strip (just need a bottle of windex) and actually does a great job of fixing bad paint jobs. While Jody's comments about the primer and paint are very good, I've fixed bad paint jobs with Future. It won't clean up a complete mess but it will level out minor orange peel and such. You can use it to make flat paint gloss. I find a final polish with Macguires Scratch X really brings out the shine.

Art actually that is incorrect, they took lots of government money when they designed these aircraft, that is why the military modelers have it so much better than the car modelers, far fewer licensing issues. North American and the P-51 stand out from the rest because they funded the development of the P-51 fully with private money. The British got the Mustang because North American had a good design available and excess production space since the US military wasn't that interested, it was not designed for the British. The US did buy a few for ground attack (A-36 Apache), but for the most part were happy with the P-39 and P-40 until it was clear the US would be getting into the war. The P-51 used the same Allison engines as the P-39 and P-40 so really didn't stand out from them. It was the combination of the RR Merlin and P-51 that made the world class fighter. The P-39 (P-63) and P-40 later received Merlins and also became vry good fighters, but by that point everyone wanted Mustangs. If the aircraft companies didn't take government money then there would be no issue with cancelling the F-35, but no one wants that to happen because we are billions into its development and that would all be flushed down the toilet. John Garand who invented the M1 Garand rifle (which several prominant US generals credited as a war winning weapon) didn't get a penny for his design beyond his salary, because he worked for the government (Springfield Arsenal).

Never mind I see most were tests.

I really don't see any reason a model needs to be handled to be judged. It should be judged as displayed. Would a curbside be judged differently than a full detail kit? (as far as I know curbside is not usually a seperate class). The way I see it the builder needs to make some decisions on the display of the model. If you spent 9 hours detailing the motor including putting little Mallory decals on the spark plug wires, then you should probably display the model with the hood up, or maybe even on an engine stand beside the car. If you spent time detailing the under carriage find a way to show that (mirror, up on a lift etc). You wouldn't take the models out of a diorama to check hidden bits, so why is there a need to do so when displayed alone.

A .50 cal might work for a .30 cal, but the grips and such would probably need some work. There are no 1/25 weapon kits I know of but there are some 1/25 weapons. The AMT Jeep (Hogan's Hero's) has a .50 MG, an M1 carbine, and maybe a pistol. It also has a 106mm Recoiless rifle (basically a light weight cannon). Several police car kits have rifles and shotguns, I know the Monaco (Dukes of Hazard/Joker Goon car/TJ Hooker) has a pretty good stock of guns. Italeri and Hasegawa also did 1/24 Jeeps, but I don't know what guns they came with. It really isn't that hard to make up a machinegun, particularly a fixed mounted gun where only the barrel shows. Some brass tubing, telescoped into itself is a good start for a barrel. Even a flexible mount you just need some tubing or rod, some square plastic stock, putty, some good pictures and time.

I get a lot of my supplies from Megahobby and Tower hobby, both online shops with a good selection of stuff and good prices. http://www.megahobby.com/ http://www.towerhobbies.com/ Micheals has cheap acrylic paints in 2 oz bottles (Folk art and Americana are two brands), that really is pretty decent stuff. Lots of colors, and brushes pretty well. I'm not sure how it airbrushes. I bought a bunch for my son to use on dinosaur models and was impressed with how well it works. I still use hobby paint for the most part but if you are on a tight budget, these paints are worth a look. At $1.99 for 2 oz it is way more affordable than the hobby paints that run nearly $4 for 1/2 oz. Most of the colors are flats, so you may want to find a clear to go over it. While I mostly use hobby paints in bottles I do use a lot of Krylon, Rustolium and Duplicolor spray paint which again is far cheaper than the hobby spray paints and pretty good stuff. Duplicolor has a lot of "official" automotive colors as they sell many as touch up paint.

I hate all the automation in many programs. We have just switched to Office 2007 at work, and the first thing I'm having to learn is how to turn all the "helpful" features off. However, I do have to ask, is capitalization in the forum title really a big enough deal to generate multiple threads?

If you can live with a curbside the Hasegawa kit otherwise seems quite nice, although I've only gotten as far as painting the body (hey its only been two years, I think the paint has almost cured by now )