Harry P.

I assume you work from a photo. The "grid" method is really time consuming. Have you ever tried projecting the image onto the paper with an Artograph and quickly laying in the basic shapes that way? It's a whole lot faster than the grid method.

If Detroit is going to be running via taxpayer money... we better see government oversight!

Sunday nite post... so I won't have to get up early tomorrow for George!!! Real or model? The answer: REAL!

Tell me more about your technique. What brand/grade of pencil do you use? What about paper... Anything special? By the subtle tonal gradations in your work I'd guess a hot-press paper? Do you start by roughly sketching out the various masses or do you go right in and do finished work section by section? Do you use an Artograph to start with... or freehand sketch? Sorry for the third degree, but your work is very good and I'd like to know more...

I don't know... I mean, posting diecasts and photos of other people's work, that's easy to spot. Maybe he was just yankin' our chain???

I agree. No offense to the flame, but if this forum is hosting a model car contest, shouldn't it be an MCM contest???

Ummmm.. Mark, I was kidding!!! I've seen enough "what is a muscle car" posts to know that there is not, and will never be, one definition that will be accepted by everyone. That's simply an argument with no solution. Are the original "Rocket" powered Oldsmobiles muscle cars? Are the Hudsons that tore up the track in the early 50s muscle cars? Is the hemi-powered '55 Chrysler 300 a muscle car? What about a '57 Bel Air with FI? Is a Corvette a muscle car, or a sports car... or neither one? The list of potential "muscle cars" depends on your own personal definition. And even the "official" definition you mentioned is still only one man's opinion, after all.. Ok, now that that's settled... I ask you this: What was the first automobile? (Let's see you answer that one definitely!) And the Cugnot steam tractor doesn't count!!!

It went to pay for benefits to retired employees and their families. That "legacy cost" is one of the main things dragging GM down. BTW...anybody see the opening skit on SNL last night? The Big 3 guys testifying to Congress. It was HILARIOUS! The bailout "plan" that "Rick Wagoner" presented was a classic. Check out youtube if you missed this, guys... it's worth your time. Edit: I checked, I guess the video hasn't been posted yet. But when it goes up I'll post the link... it's that good!

Hoo boy!!! Hey guys... maybe next we can debate what is or is not a muscle car???

Here's just one example of another member who competes several levels above yours: That's Dave Thibodeau's work... he's just one of many other members here who can build at that level.

Fantastic! A+ from me...

Couple of minor points here. First of all, a Cuda is a Plymouth, not a Chevy. You might want to get your facts straight before posting. Second... this "nobody can touch my stuff" nonsense... are you kidding me??? Have you seen the kind of quality some of the other members here are capable of? I can only assume you're joking, because if you're serious, you have some major delusional issues going on!

Click on " My Controls" (top right of page). On the Control Panel page, look on the left side under the "Menu" heading for the "Personal Profile" section. Click "Edit Signature". You can figure out the rest...

Alclad chrome comes in spray cans too.

I like it! Definitely a piece of automotive art...

I think that the bigger, even more basic problem with GM (and Ford and Chrysler too) is the fact that management is so incredibly shortsighted. They are so intent on making a quarterly profit and keeping the shareholders happy that they don't see the big picture. They just blindy blunder on, selling whatever model car is the flavor of the day (huge SUVS and trucks), whatever models will make them the most profit per unit, instead of looking around at what's happening in the world and forming a marketing plan that conforms to changing reality. Why do the Toyotas and Hondas of the world eat GM for lunch? Here's a perfect example. Toyota began working on their hybrid vehicle program more than 15 years ago. The Prius debuted in the Japanese market in 1997 and in the US in 2000. Apparently the Japanese automakers saw something that the US automakers couldn't see, because while Toyota was busy planning a product line for the future, what was GM doing? Cranking out giant pickups and SUVs. Toyota was focused on future sustainability and future profits, while GM was focused on how much money they could make that day. Now that the market has dramatically shifted–a fact that the Japanese automakers saw coming–GM is frantically playing catch-up by making Yukon hybrids!!! That's right, they're putting what new technology they have into making a car that gets 20 mpg and sells for $50 grand. Let's see... cars were getting 20 mpg 20 years ago! And they didn't cost $50 grand either! Or the Volt, a hybrid car that'll go 40 miles on a charge. Forty miles? That thing will be spending more time plugged into a wall than it will on the road. And at $40,000 it's priced far above most people's budget. So who exactly does GM figure will buy a $40,000 hybrid that goes 40 miles on a charge? While Toyota was busy working on their hybrid program, GM was busy sending lobbyists to Washington to try and stop federally mandated CAFE standards. What a difference in philosophy between Totota and GM!

Maybe offering a "full range" of cars and trucks isn't the way for a reformed GM to go. Maybe they should get out of the Hummer and Yukon end of the market and become the company known for hi-tech, innovative cars. Maybe a smaller, more tech-driven GM could be a successful company. I don't know for sure, but it's one possible way for them to go forward. Besides, Hummers and the like are only profitable if you can find enough people willing to buy them. That number is shrinking. And if the government can mandate that cars must offer air bags, must meet certain fuel efficiency and crash standards, etc., then the government can also mandate that, for example, no vehicle that gets less than, say, 20 mpg can be sold. Pretty simple. And you can bet that if the government did make that the law, the car makers would come up with pickups and SUVs that could get at least 20 mpg, whether on gas, electricity, hybrid or whatever. Make the automakers build more efficient cars, and they would. They'd have no choice! The current system, where their product lines must meet an "average" mpg standard, is the loophole that lets crazy stuff like Hummers get through. Finally, no, I don't advocate GMC giving up heavy trucks... I never said that! All I said is eliminate the "GMC" brand on light trucks and make Chevy the source for GM's light trucks. Even though GMCs and Chevies are built on the same line, and theoretically it doesn't cost GM any more to badge some of them as "Chevy" and some as "GMC", it just seems silly to build the same identical cars and call them by two different names and sell them at two different dealerships! It's like a company operating a chain of both "Joe's Char House" and "Bill's Bar-B-Q", both with the exact same menu! What would be the point? Like I said, if GM eliminateed "GMC" branded light trucks, at least they could save whatever money they now spend on advertising campaigns for the GMC light truck/SUV brand. My basic point is this: GM is in the fix that it's in right now because of how they operate as a company. If they expect their bottom line to change for the better, then they have to rethink their current business model. If "business as usual" was working, they wouldn't be in the position they're in! How can we give them billions of dollars without requiring them to come up with a realistic, new plan to go forward? If they don't make any changes, then any money they get in order to keep operating as they have been isn't going to solve anything... it's only going to slightly delay their ultimate collapse.

My 2 cents: I'd also replace the mesh in the lower valence to match whatever mesh you use in the grille opening.

What did Jairus charge you to build a model of his idea?

Actually, you're not wrong. Your logic is right on, to a point. Yes it's true that nobody needs a Mustang.. (BTW, I'm considering the V6, don't need a V8 to get me to work and back!) But I think there's a certain "cutoff point" past which things get ridiculous. For instance, we're always going to have cars, right? (At least in our lifetimes... the personal flying saucer is off in the future yet). So we'll need to keep using the energy, resources and raw materials necessary to manufacture, and then operate, those cars, whether they operate on gas, electricity or whatever new tech comes along. But its in our own best interest (and the planet's) to try and be reasonable and prudent in our use of those resources. A Mustang is no bigger, on average, and doesn't use more gas (the V6, at least) on average, than the "average" car. It's not in and of itself a gross user of extra material, extra fuel, extra space, etc. But a Hummer? Come on, there's no rational excuse for that! And if GM is truly serious about coming through this mess alive, it has no choice but to stop producing such an absolutely silly, useless and wasteful vehicle. Heck, you could build two cars from all the material it takes to make one Hummer! Same goes for the gargantuan SUVs that clog up traffic like dinosaurs. How incredibly wasteful to drive yourself to work or wherever in a monstrous car like a Yukon or Expedition or whatever that could seat 8 people and gets 12 mpg!!! Might as well buy yourself a bus and commute in that! Or how about an Army surplus Sherman tank??? Now I know you'll come back and say that some people really do need a Yukon, and that alone is reason enough to justify their existence. Yeah, maybe you're a guy with a wife and 6 kids who likes to take the family and the boat out on the lake from time to time and has enough money that he doesn't care that the thing gets only 12 mpg... you NEED a Yukon. Fine... but the childless yuppie couple where the husband buys the wife an Expedition because she'll be "safer" in it? Please... Sure you can argue that we ought to be able to buy any type of vehicle we want and that government should have no say in the matter. But take that viewpoint to the extreme... if that were the case, what's to stop someone from marketing a rocket-powered car? Or a car that has 1500 HP and does 0-60 in 2 seconds, but gets 4 mpg, or a motorcycle with a V8 that can hit 300 mph? Would you want to share the public roads with vehicles like that, and the type of person that would buy and drive them? Without any government restrictions or limits, the roads would become a free-for-all. I think it benefits everyone if we have reasonable limits on what type of vehicles can be sold and operated on public roads. I don't have the exact answer as to what would be acceptable and what would not, that's for smarter people than me to decide. But we do need some sort of sane guidelines. And Hummers are way past the cutoff point of "sane". As far as the duplication of Chevy and GM light trucks, again, another senseless business plan. True, if both GMC and Chevy sell light trucks the customer can buy from either or. But what's the point? If all GMC light trucks disappeared tomorrow, and Chevy was the only source, then customers would simply go to a Chevy dealer instead of a GMC dealer, right? If you can get in your car and drive to a GMC dealer, you can just as well drive to a Chevy dealer instead. No harm done, no loss, other than the elimination of a duplicate line of trucks. If nothing else, at least GM could eliminate the cost of promoting and advertising a separate line of vehicles. Maybe the savings don't amount to millions, but in the condition GM is in, every dollar helps! It's common-sense stuff like that... elimination of redundant makes and models, elimination of useless and wasteful vehicles like Hummers, consolidation of operations wherever possible to eliminate duplicated and useless management positions, and a serious effort to develop alt fuel/alt energy cars, that would make up the "plan" that Congress (and I) want to see from GM before we open up our wallets and let them help themselves! But so far they haven't come up with any new thinking. They want our money, and they want "business as usual". Ain't gonna fly... not if I was in charge.

Well, it's about time... I beat you guys on this one! It's a MODEL! 1/12 scale scratchbuilt, the "Gerald Wingrove way" (no kit parts, all hand-made!) Next ROM coming MONDAY!

Very cool... And regarding the Art Deco reference... I love Art Deco! Some of the most beautiful cars ever made, IMO, were produced in the 30s, the heyday of the Art Deco movement.

No better place to get back into it than right here! Welcome aboard!

Looks like the feds have told the automakers they're not getting any taxpayer money until they present a viable plan to Congress illustrating just how they intend to re-invent themselves. I would hope that GM's plan includes some consolidation of redundant models... why they have both Chevy and GMC trucks, each basically identical to the other except for minor trim variations, is beyond me. In fact, what is the point of having a "GMC" division at all? Every model that has a "GMC" nameplate is pretty much duplicated in the Chevy lineup. I'd also hope to see the official end of the "Hummer" brand, a ridiculously unnecessary product if there ever was one. Despite its cartoonishly gargantuan size it can't seat more than 4, can't haul any cargo to speak of, can't fit in many garages, etc. Oh, but it can cross two feet of water! Yeah, that comes in real handy on your average trip to the store. I can't tell you how many times I've driven to work and come across a stream that I couldn't cross... had to turn around and go home. Dang!!! If only I had a Hummer!!!

Excellent post! I agree with everything you say. I filled out my government bailout form today. I didn't want to be greedy so I asked for "only" $250 million. Sure I'll have to cut back on a few little thing, and maybe my private jet will stay parked for a while... but I think I can scrape by on 250 mil...