Harry P.

The history of Pocher is kind of complicated. Apparently there was a fire at Pocher at some point, after which Rivarossi (a model railroad company) acquired Pocher, and sold Pocher kits under the Pocher/Rivarossi brand. Pochers were also sold under the Tyco brand at some point, I think after Rivarossi went bankrupt. But the exact sequence of fire/ownership/bankruptcy is kind of murky. I have bought kits marketed as three different versions/brands: Pocher, Rivarossi and Tyco.

? His name was Norton. Ed NORTON.

So did Alice!

The bigger the better. You can't ever have one that's too big... only one that's too small!

Remember: DO NOT post hints or answers here! PM me with year, make and model. The answer: 1951 Toyota "Toyopet" Model SA

Very nice illustrations. And yeah... that Groucho was a piece of work!

Yeah, I agree. I don't mean to be "Debbie Downer" on this kit. I do see the roofline as being "off," but overall I think Moebius is to be commended for a job well done. I'll take a new kit (with a few small flaws) of a car never produced before over no new kit at all any time!

I do now. But I won't ban anyone on my own. My opinion: This is Gregg's forum. If anyone is going to be banned, I'll leave that to Gregg. Ultimately I feel it's his decision. It's true that he and I talk about certain members, what to do with (or about) them... he asks me my opinion... but actually pushing the ban button? I won't do that unless Gregg oks it first.

My take on it: I give Moebius huge credit for the way they operate. The subject matter they bring us, the fact that they put up their work for critique by us, the fact thet they actually listen to us and take our input seriously, etc. For all of that, I give Moebius all the credit in the world. And yet, after all the time and effort they put into this kit, when you see that roofline being off like that, you can't help but wonder... what the!!!??? I have to admit I'm really on the fence on this one. I want to give Moebius a ton of credit for doing what they do and how they do it, but then... . Oh well... I hope this kit sells like gangbusters for them.

Exactly. Which makes the pushbutton start ridiculously redundant!

I agree on the roofline being off. It's not by much, but it's definitely noticeable.

Oh, ok... that makes sense then.

Plus, don't you have to shut the engine off by turning the key? In other words, you need the key in the ignition anyway... so what's the point of pushbutton start? Answer: enough consumers think it's "cool," so automakers offer it.

Apparently no worse today than in 1928!

I think most of the technology on today's cars is all for the better. And a lot of it is on there not because the automakers are padding their profit, it's because the feds forced them to add those things. Sure, cars were simpler and more straightforward 40 years ago. But that was before the EPA, and before federal safety and economy standards were put in place. Plus, today's consumers want and expect the "bells and whistles." They expect a car to have a killer sound system, a GPS system, a bazillion cupholders, heated seats, etc., etc. People today want that stuff in their cars, so the automakers are giving the people what they want. However... there are examples of technology for technology's sake. Like BMW's ridiculously complicated I Drive system. Tuning in a radio station was once a simple process that required a twist of a knob. Now, you need an advanced degree to figure out how to do it. That sort of over-the-top complication of a simple process for no good reason other than the "wow" factor is a step backwards, IMO. Tuning a radio should not require a session with the owner' manual.

A picture is worth 1,000 words. I found a shot of the real car taken at just about the same exact angle as Dave's kit body. The black outline on the kit body is an exact tracing around the real car's outline. Here is a direct comparison. A perfect match? No. But awfully close.

I think you have just officially replaced Art Anderson for the "Longest Post Ever" award...

To all of you guys that think cars all looking alike is some sort of new thing... 1928 Ford, Plymouth and Chevy:

Agreed! This country gives out driver's licenses like candy. They're basically meaningless. If you can fog a mirror, you get a license. There are way too many people on the road who are clueless. Not using turn signals is the least of their problems. They drive as if they are the only car on the road, and they assume that everyone else will give way to them and their stupid moves. I see it over and over, day after day. I have to wonder how some of those clueless drivers are still alive, given the way they drive in traffic. Just one example: I was driving along the road, in the right lane of a 4 lane road (2 eastbound, 2 westbound). I was directly alongside a car in the left lane... I was going a little faster than the other guy was, so I was gradually passing him. Not an intentional pass... I was just going 3-4 mph faster than he was, so I was just gradually passing him by. So here I was, pretty much directly alongside his car. And he suddenly decides to change lanes. He ran right into me, scraping along the whole side of the car. We both pulled over into the next side street, and he told me he didn't see me. Well, duh! Of course he didn't see me... I don't think he hit me intentionally. But the question is... WHY didn't he see me? Answer: he didn't bother looking to see if there was a car in the way before he decided to change lanes. My car wasn't invisible. He just didn't even bother to look. Typical clueless driver who thinks he's the only car on the road. And there are thousands and thousands of them out there.

Reminder: obvious political comments and swearing aren't allowed on this forum. So if you see that your post has been deleted (and you know who you are)... that's why.

How about the internet?

The full movie here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziAXmTCeapE

Well, you can argue whether or not FWD is better or worse than RWD, you can argue the merits of a manual shifter vs. an automatic, you can argue gas vs. diesel... they all have their pluses and minuses... but you can't argue styling. Styling is completely subjective. It's like arguing about which color is the best, or which ice cream flavor is the best. There's no "right" answer.

Exactly! Anyone who can't tell a Mustang from a Camaro from a Challenger isn't looking. And as far as retro styling goes, I'm a big fan. I love the new yet old current Mustang and Challenger. IMO, a good design is timeless, and I have absolutely no problem with a manufacturer revisiting and putting a slightly new spin on a "classic" design. I wish the new Charger looked a whole lot more like the classic 68-69 version. In fact, the whole reason I bought a new Mustang is because of the "retro" styling. I love it.