mrm

Thank you guys and thanks for looking.

This is absolutely box stock. I love this model and in my opinion both the real car and the model are very much underrated.

This is super cool. Now I want one.

So I finally took some pictures of the model, altho it was finished about a year ago. A quick recap: The chassis uses stretched frame rails from the Revell's '32 3 window. All the cross members, other than the most forward one were scratch built. The fenders were stretched and the step panels filled. The front part of the body uses part of Revell's Dan Fink Speed Wagon and the rear part is very modified rear section of the Boothill express. Front and rear suspension has the main parts of the Revell '32 kit. everything else is pretty much scratch built, aftermarket or very modified. OUR RIDE STARTS WHEN YOURS ENDS Full progress here: http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=52441&page=1

This is a first generation Cadillac CTS-V This is a DTS And the plastic model is actually a STS-V

I think you are right

This has been done now for over a year, yet I still have not found the time to take picturtes of it and post it in "under glass". And Russel, definitely not my last ride.

This is not a STS or DTS. This is a CTS. DTS replaced the Deville in 2000 STS replaced the Seville at the same time The CTS was a new concept at that time and had the uphill battle to replace the Catera and fight off it's bad reputation. The one the model represents is the first generation, which originally had a Saab V6, BMW transmission, body panels built in Indonesia and it was actually built in Germany. Then they made the very first V-series, which had a Corvette motor and transmission in it.

Sweet paint. Did this motor come with the kit?

Pretty cool. I am working on a couple of these right now.

Very nice. Love seeing non red Ferraris.

Very nice. Love the color.

Definitely my type of Street Rod. Traditional, but not retro.

Wow! This is definitely different and super cool!

Very cool work on both of them. especially the California. However the three carb set up with the aluminum tray is typical for a competition engine. Californias like the one you are making had the big oval air filter on them.

wow

Mean looking Evo. Love the wide body.

Really cool . Love the choice of colors. What blue is this, Blue Hera?

So the windows were masked, painted and the wipers were attached. (I hate masking and painting windows with a passion lol) Next all the photoetched grilles were cut out and sprayed with semi-gloss black. Some of the holes got clogged, but I cleaned them up with a pin after the picture. Rear view mirror was attached, the grilles put on all the openings and then the body was put over the chassis. This was a fight and almost gave me a heart attack. My wife was also not very excited with the language that accompanied the process. LOL Almost there... There are still some touch ups needed. Some polish, tail lights, headlight lenses, painting and mounting the wheels, rear window and grilles, some decals and wax….. Stay tuned and thanks for looking.

You have the rear lower A-arms on top in the front, which would make turning next to impossible. There is no visible clue to how are the wheels steering and the entire suspension is not connected anywhere to the shocks. The rear set up is just plain impossible in real life. You have the engine bolted to the frame and then a rear axle is solid but has half leaf springs attached to it and no shocks. It is also unrealistically thick. I am not an engineer either, but it is just common sense. I really don't get some builders on here too, who one day flame somebody for having "floating" alternator on their model and the next day comment how this chassis looks fine. Now, please don't take this the wrong way. I am not trying to put your work down. I enjoy it and love your idea. I am just trying to figure out what are you trying to do. Because if you were building a fenderless early '30s rod I would understand the challenge with the front suspension and even the rear suspension challenge. But you are building a full fendered rod with big fenders that have plenty of space to fit any suspension set up on earth. So adapting the Testarossa's suspension would have been easy, straight forward and very realistic as it would be 100% doable in real life. The rear would've been more complicated but still doable. I learned a lot on this site and on contest and shows exchanging info and tips with other collectors. I have made a million mistakes and I would have not known if somebody did not point them out to me. And that is all I am trying to do. This is what we are here for, right?

I don't mean to rain on anybody's parade, but looking at the suspension set up, I can make no sense of it what so ever. Other than that I love the idea and can't wait to see it finished. I am a big fan of Ferrari power in hot rods.

Today was dedicated to polishing the body Next all the deyail painting has to be added and then the only thing left would be all the photoetched grilles.

Оhhhh, I see now….So I was clueless about where the pictures came from. Then the tune changed to "pissing on someone's effort". Now I don't understand "the difference between looking at a photo on a computer screen and looking at that same photo in a printed magazine". You still remember the fact that the same pictures were published in your own previous issues and in other magazines, right? Yet they look far worse in the last issue. But I don't want to compare apples to oranges, because it would be unfair to compare a shoestring-budget-magazine to a publication with much greater budget. So lets leave the competition out of it. Let's assume I don't know jack about photography, printing or anything related. So just plain common sense. If a picture gets - let's say darker, when published, then bright orange, pink and red, would look darker orange, pink and red. Well, then how come Red, Bright orange and Pink (and most on here know very well, what unpainted pink plastic in the old japanese kits looks like) Look pretty much the same color in the last issue? And the pictures used are from the same person, with same equipment, at the same show, taken at the same time. MAybe there is some black magic that I am totally clueless about . This is going to be my last post in this thread. But let me leave you with this……Take these three issues and compare them. I am not even going to ask you to go any further back. Look at the pictures in them and tell yourselves in the mirror, that the quality is not on a decline. Don't tell me. Don't write it on here. Go ahead and convince yourselves that besides technology getting better faster than it takes you to release the next issue, besides growing your following (meaning growing your sales and profit) you have kept the quality of the rag and the pictures in it. P.S. My offer to help pro bono with what I can still stands by the way.

I am going to address this straight to Tom Geiger, as apparently he decided to write a post based purely on presumption. I do attend some of these shows and I see exactly what happens there. But let me backtrack a little. What am I saying and why is it bothering me? Well, I have been following this magazine (can't say the same about the site unfortunately) almost since its beginning. What I loved the most about it was exactly that it was a shoestring operation sticking it out to the big guy (SAE). No need to give me any benefit of the doubt. Some of you must be really clueless. So going back to this magazine been the underdog and coming up from the ground as everyone's favorite is a thing I have always admired. I am still a big fan of the magazine and far from clueless who's operation it is. I am also very well aware of how the pictures are being taken and by whom. After all, anybody who attended any contest has seen who takes the photographs and how it is done. Separate area, little light booth and a nice camera with nice lens mounted on a tripod. Then any model that after the judging had a little card {photo invitation) next to it gets taken to that photo area for the photos. Then the model club supporting the venue decides which pictures get sent to the mag for publishing. Then the mag decides which ones to publish from the ones they received. Pretty plain and simple. And here is where I get completely lost. The same photographer who takes the pictures for certain event then posts them in a "fotki" (or such) album for public viewing, where you can order them even printed on a t-shirt. And these pictures for whatever reason look lively, sharp and authentic. With nice vibrant colors and plenty of detail to give you an idea if the model you are looking at has return throttle springs on its carbs. Yet the same pictures of the exact same photographer taken at the same time with the same equipment published in the last issue look completely different. Also on this very forum plenty of modelers post their work and their own pictures from contests. Somehow it baffles me that these pictures taken most of the time with pocket size cameras and sometimes even phones, turn so great. And I am talking about pictures taken right on the contest table, with no special lighting, in the crowd and pretty much on the go. So what gives? Third and last, as you said it yourself, these are pictures taken by different people, at different locations with different equipment. Well, I don't know how did it happen, but in the magazine they look like they were taken by the same person in the same conditions with the same equipment. And we all know that is not the case. So this is just one more thing that shows that the problem is not in the pictures taken. It is how they were edited, compressed, adjusted or whatever was done to them. And no, this is not "some reason I see the need to pee all over it". Don't even try to pin this on me, like I am disrespecting all the hard work and effort put in by the clubs and their volunteers at the shows. What I am saying has nothing to do with them. It is called constructive criticism. And the "need" for it comes exactly from that I care for this magazine and I like to see it do well. Not lower its standard every year, which unfortunately has been happening ever since the man in Hawaii's health problems started. I understand that this is run on a shoe-string budget. And because of that, I will offer for the next contest issue to do all the picture editing work or help with whatever I can. And I don't want anything in return, except to see good quality pictures. I don't even want any credit given or my name mentioned. I will just do it. One thing I will agree with you, Tom. It is SAD. Very SAD that people are so blinded by "the kings new clothes" that they stop noticing when the Average Joes' amateur home pictures are better than the ones in a rag you paid money for. Its even sadder when on the very same magazine's site where there is plenty of material to be compared, people like you and the magazine's staff actually are trying to shift all the blame to "the volunteer that has done his very best to represent his club and their show". It's not only sad; Its a shame.

So, this goes into a nice discussion until someone criticizes the issue and then all of a sudden - whooop, let's burry the thread. This goes to all the builders who got their models published; Do you really feel the photography represents faithfully the countless hours you guys spent rubbing and buffing that paint out? Or all the research, time and money you invested in detailing your model? Is everyone just going to turn a blind eye to fact that on one same page four different models are described as pink, red and orange of different variations, but they look the same grainy color on the pictures? As model builders that create some stunning pieces, I would have thought that most people on here are very detail oriented and that includes the way their work is (mis)represented. Or are we willing to sacrifice our integrity (that we get so mad over, when someone builds a model for their kid) just for the great honor and privilege to have a picture of our model published? Because, I don't know, maybe I am the only one feeling this way, but going home with a trophy in the junior class, where you whooped some 7 year olds buts with your photoetched sprinkled, urethane clear coated model would bring me just as much satisfaction as having a picture of my model printed on which it kind of resembles the color, finish and detail of the actual model.