Harry P.

Yeah, yeah, blah blah blah. So who's the chick in the black skirt?

Why? Are you in the witness protection program?

Thank you, Governor Moonbeam!

If all they had to do is add that cancer warning, I'm surprised it wasn't required of them a long time ago. That warning has been on all sorts of products sold in California for years...

Hmmmm... looks a little crude. You might want to bump up the detail level just a tad...

What was the problem? Did they have to reformulate to meet some sort of new California law?

The easiest way I can think of to give tires that "Armor-All" look (which is what I think you're after) is to brush on a coat of Future, as Mark said, after they've been mounted on the wheels. (but don't paint the tread area!) That being said, most all real tires are pretty much flat black, not shiny, unless they have had a treatment added to them. Even brand-new tires are far more "flat" than "glossy."

Maybe someone could do a how-to for the magazine?

Just a guess here, but maybe tooling $$$ played into their decision. I know that some guys will actually take the chrome trim (if it's a separate piece), strip the chrome, glue it in place, then paint the body and foil the chrome! Seems bizarre to me... I prefer as many chrome trim pieces as possible to be separate chrome parts. To me it's much easier to glue separate wipers in place than to foil molded-in ones, for example. Just my personal preference. I think a separate chrome side spear gives a much cleaner and more realistic look than one that's molded in place and foiled. But the molded-in trim on the Hudson would never keep me from buying the kit.

True. But the model is nicely done, even so. And from the response I've seen here on the forum, very popular, too!

Don't get me wrong, I'm a BIG supporter of Moebius and how they operate their business... but it would have been nice if those vent window frames had been separate, chrome plated pieces.

Actually he's been a member here for over two years!

Did you put down the foil first and them trim out the silver stripes? Or cut the foil to the final width first and then apply it? Either way, what you did there is not easy to do, and you did it perfectly.

Wow, that paint is spectacular! I would never risk running that car on a track!

You'd think that in a country with severe winters like Finland, they would all use winter tires! Why in the world don't they??? And I have news that will make your weather not seem so bad... Denver is supposed to get TWO FEET of snow today/tomorrow.

If you actually follow speed limits all the time, you must be the only person in the country to do so!

Right. That's my point... what the EPA says is "normal" driving is nothing close to real-world normal driving, where we sit still for part of the trip, or it's uphill, or going into a headwind, or in stop-and-go traffic, etc. The EPA tests don't really reflect "real world" conditions.

Also... does the EPA test include sitting still and idling? In the "real world" you spend a lot of time burning gas but not moving... which obviously lowers your overall MPG. Sitting at a light or stuck in traffic, you're getting ZERO miles per gallon. That has to be factored into "real world" driving conditions. What percentage of time spent per typical trip is spent sitting still?

I agree with Johnny. If the EPA test simulates "normal" driving conditions, the estimates would be much closer to what people get in the real world. The fact that the EPA numbers are consistently significantly higher than what regular people get on the street tells you that there's a real disconnect between what the EPA considers "normal" driving and what "normal" driving really is. The fact is, most people do not drive as cautiously and conservatively as what the EPA test simulates. I think it would make more sense if the EPA estimates were the worst you could realistically expect, not the best.

The EPA revised its test in an attempt to provide more realistic estimates... something closer to what a regular person driving in typical conditions can actually expect to see. But their estimates are still over-optimistic. I don't know how they test cars exactly... I assume they're put on a treadmill-type thing and run at a constant speed? Problem with that is that nobody drives on a perfectly smooth, level surface at a constant speed. At least they ought to run the cars at various speeds, stop and go, A/C on, etc., to get a more realistic estimate. And remember... the woman didn't sue the EPA, she sued Honda. So appparently Honda must have made mileage claims in their ads or brochures or whatever apart from the "official" EPA estimate, because the judge ruled in her favor. I don't think she would have won the case if she had sued the EPA.

Wow... that pig really likes that car!

Final vote: 59 REAL, 22 MODEL. I actually thought I'd fool more of you, as there are a lot of detailed diecasts out there of this car... but this one is REAL!

I got so fed up with the sniping and losing stuff at the last second that I never bid anymore. I'll only buy stuff that's listed with a "Buy it Now" or "Best Offer" price.

Only if you shoplift it...

Personally I don't like the idea. Yeah, yeah... I know everybody does it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. So no recommendation from me except to say do a google search and you'll find plenty of them out there. Most offer a free trial, but after that they cost.