Harry P.

That's the real bottom line right there. Model car buyers are more price-sensitive than armor modelers, and are willing to put up with lower quality kits in exchange for lower prices. And the model car manufacturers know it.

That was the fashion back then...

That car was specially designed for multi-tasking... you can go two places at once.

Sheesh... why didn't I think of that?

They deleted all of that when they did their big overhaul one day. I remember logging on one day and all of the 1:1 stuff had been deleted with no warning. All of the Auto ID and ROM was gone. The whole 1:1 category had been deleted. In fact, that was the reason I left and joined this forum.

But how do you clip a baseball card in the spokes?

Not true. In fact, what I said was that the real car is ugly, but that was not a reflection on John's work. John didn't design the car, he's making a model of it. And doing a very good job. I am not criticizing him for the way the car looks... he had nothing to do with that. There is a difference between commenting on the looks of the real car and commenting on John's work. And I said that John's work is first rate. The real car is ugly. John's modeling talent is first class. Two different things.

But they weren't fiberglass or carbon fiber or whatever it is they're made of on the Corvette...

It looks like they're trying to make it more of a "social media" type site, not just a photo hosting site. They've added a bunch of new features for manipulating photos, adding effects, all sorts of bells and whistles. Hey, as long as it's still free, I'm not complaining!

That's what I saw, too. Now, why would they take a fairly simple website and make it more complicated? Yeah, we'll all get used to it, but I think "progress" would be making it simpler, not more complicated.

Do you realize you're asking the guy who's made a career of having Photobucket problems to write the tutorial? (Sorry, Skip... couldn't resist!)

Auto ID isn't going away. And ROM isn't either... not totally. I'll run it when I find a photo that I think will stump you guys, but after doing more than 200 of them, the photos are just becoming too hard to find.

Hey guys... can we stick to the model itself and refrain from personal critiques? For some reason John's threads seem to spark controversy. I guess when you have the name recognition that John does, you're going to draw attention to yourself and your work, both positive and negative. But let's refrain from personal comments, please.

The only rule you're breaking is not posting your full name. I assume you'll take care of that?

I'll still try and do it once in a while... just not on a regular schedule anymore. Too hard to find photos that'll work. But if I do come across something, I'll do an ROM. But Auto ID is going to continue on.

Did you miss all the previous comments covering that issue? It's been going on for several pages.

Right! And the reason they still use a solid axle has nothing to do with the "benefits" of one. It's all about keeping the Mustang's price down. That is the bottom line as to why they've held onto that ancient technology for so long.

John, you misunderstood my comments. I was talking about the real car. It's hideous. Sorry, but it just is. Whatever reasons you have for recreating it in scale is your business, and note that I did mention you are doing a spectacular job. In no way was I criticizing you or your skills. On the contrary... I'm blown away by your skills. You know that. You and I have worked together on magazine features, so I'm pretty sure you know that I have a very high opinion of your modeling skills. I was talking about the real car, not slamming your modeling skills. And "plowboy," as usual you're comments are off base. I know that you never miss an opportunity to try and stick it to me here on the forum... don't know why you do it, but whatever. That's old news. But just so that you are a little more informed about reality, it was me that contacted John and told him that I wanted to run a feature on his Bentley in the magazine, and it was me that decided to put it on the cover. Obviously I wouldn't ask someone who's work I don't admire to submit an article and put the model on the cover of the magazine! You might want to refrain from criticizing me when you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Posted at 5:42 PM???

I only see 3 thumbs wide. Also a widescreen monitor. What the????

Chuck, I read the comments referenced in your post. Pretty much agree right up and down the line... you can't disagree with logic! I think one particular line you wrote sums it all up very well: "What's the purpose of an online forum about car models if not a free exchange of information about car models?" I would amend that to say information and opinions... but that minor nit picked, that one line says it all. For the life of me, I can't understand why people join in on an ongoing conversation and try to stop said conversation with the usual "there's never been a perfect kit" type of response. I think we all know there's never been (or will ever be) a perfect kit... or a perfect anything, for that matter. That concept is understood and at the same time, irrelevant to any conversations regarding a kit's pros and cons.

I agree with you 100%. Don't like the "new" Photobucket. Also... when you are in an album, and you click on a photo to see it full size, then you click the back button, you don't go back to the point where you were, you go back to the beginning of the album. At least that's how it seems to be working.

See comment #47 agreeing with you!

Ok, that was a generalization. You might find something that sells for the same price today as it did in 1962 if you look long enough, but you get my point.