Zoom Zoom

Here's a high-def stream w/radio LeMans..might take a few tries to get on, but it's the best picture and English commentary. Excellent coverage and race, though now with darkness they don't seem to show anything but the pits Live Feed Official Race Site with RadioLeMans commentary

The first "new" Beetle is too cute and too compromised. Not very good performance credentials. Lives up to the "girl car" image. We never got the very cool RSi in the US. The newest one looks much more aggressive; it emulates the proportions of a vintage Porsche 356 in it's roofline, it should be better at interior space utilization, and will undoubtedly be a far better car overall. Will it matter? I wouldn't consider buying the old "new" Beetle, mostly because of terrible reputation for quality/reliability (I like GTI's but again don't trust quality), but also because of the terrible space utilization (the vintage Beetle you felt like your knuckles were scraping the windscreen when steering, the new one felt like the windshield was a mile up front and nearly impossible to clean). Style over substance...not good. If the new ones get a good reputation for quality/reliability and can live up to substance w/style, I think it would be a cool car to own. No way I'd be an early adopter. Time will tell, but the new car should breathe some life into the car and be somewhat more accepted by male buyers

There are other feeds as well. Listen to it on: Radiolemans Watch it on: Sportauto Audi TV The video is roughly in time w/the RadioLeMans commentary. The official race site, the feed isn't working...

The tires are new, and soft. Yes, tall and blocky, but put them side-by-side w/the '06 tires and you'll easily see the difference (tread detail especially). Better...but still not "right" The wheels scale out properly to 19's, but the extra-tall sidewalls make them look clunky and the ride height issue to be more noticeable. It is a nice kit, I plan to get very familiar w/it this weekend.

It is too bad it was never done by Monogram, and probably never will be. Considering all those '30's era classics were tooled up in the '60's, when they were "only" 30-40 years old, and consider now that '60's cars are getting into the 50-year-old category, the market for new-tool classics has pretty much dried up. We might want something really bad, but sometimes have to realize it's not going to happen in anything other than our dreams. One of the 'Mints did a nice Auburn Speedster.

Sadly, it's more like "A man who cannot afford one new kit, not to mention two to kitbash, needs a new-tool '63 Corvette before he blows an internet gasket over people w/differing priorities than his own..." I shouldn't make fun or light of that, really. Lots of people have lots of problems we never hear about. Others wear their problems on their shirtsleeves. I can understand he's frustrated. But in the big picture, when someone can't afford a new $25 kit, there's a lot more to worry about than what kit manufacturers can/cannot/will/will not make. Buying new hobby kits can take a back seat while they take care of survival. Want a new kit(s)? Sell/trade some old ones. Go to a show where builder kits are sold at a fraction of new MSRP's. Build something from the stash. And try not to get angry at folks for the wrong reasons.

Gorgeous model (as everything you build). Just because a model isn't 100% accurate from the manufacturer doesn't mean that a killer model cannot be made from it. This is proof positive. Your model goes to a level that I simply cannot see the manufacturer's inaccuracies. I've seen a good number of really nice built Monogram Mustangs. Heck...I love my built Trumpeter Falcon and plan to build another HT as a race car and a stock CV. There's plenty of room to criticize many aspects of that new kit, but there's plenty right to make a good model from it. Knowing that ahead of time can prepare the builder to overcome those issues, or minimize their impact when the model as a whole looks so good.

Calm down. Nobody didn't hear you. Your personal life situation isn't reason for a model car company to invest a big sum of $$ just to keep you from being internet cranky. That's not their problem, and you obviously have much bigger things in life to worry over than...this. Seriously.

Some replies to replies: AMT did the annual kit of the '65 Mustang fastback. Annual Kit I was aware of it but left it out because I assumed it had the metal axle chassis that I don't want to see in a kit. Please tell me that kit wasn't turned into the'66 coupe. I'm not sure if it was permanently altered, but pretty sure that's where the '66 coupe started. While it would be kind of nice to have a new-tool 1/25 scale fastback, I hardly consider it a priority considering the options in the marketplace. I will say that Monogram's 1/24 '65 and '66 Mustangs all have some kind of odd proportions that I never quite figured out. The AMT annual nails the look. Agreed, both counts. I can't believe how people noticed all the goofball proportions in the Renwal/Revell 1/12 kit thread the other day, but can't see the same thing (albeit to a slightly lesser degree) in the Monogram kit. It's wonky and the wrong scale to boot! The AMT body is out there in resin though...good enough considering how many kits never got done right once, much less at all...and the '67 Mustang kit can donate a chassis if you want better detail The Monogram kit is nowhere near as wonky as that 1/12 Renwal kit, but ever since day 1 it has bugged me, I bought the kit(s) but never built any of them. I never took the time to really study what is really wrong w/them in body proportion. We were promised this by Accurate Miniatures. They failed to deliver. Weren't they also allegedly working on a Daytona Coupe? Not sure about that. Two of their employees told me to my face "we have licensing to do any and all of the 289 roadsters including the FIA versions, we're going to start with the stock version but at this point not sure how much detail to put into it". If that was actually true, too bad they had no capital to follow through, and they already proved that they didn't always make the smartest of business decisions. Academy is supposedly slowly working on a Cobra Daytona with "Revell-like" detail, but man...they're taking forever. It was announced well over a year ago, not sure they've even gotten to tooling yet. For all-new tooling, I'd like to see a 1/24 scale Austin Healey 100-6 because the old Revell multi-piece body kit is crude, wrong scale for subject, and the wire wheels are awful. Stock, optional "laid back" racing windscreen, racing components, etc. I wouldn't mind this one one bit, but can we have a good FHC E-Type, or any 70s/80s Aston in there while we're UK-dreaming? UK dreaming? I want a Tamiya '54 Bentley Continental R. I'm kind of surprised Gunze never went after the FHC E-Type. I have a Heller kit, looks decent in the box, but have no idea how difficult it will be to build. All E-Type kits suffer from the fact that it's basically impossible to tool up a model w/o seam lines in the body. I figured how to fix it on the Gunze convertible (install interior from outside), but a coupe is another story. I will not build an E-Type w/the seams! Every time I looked at the Heller kit, I ended up frustrated as I couldn't find an easy way to deal w/the problem. I wouldn't mind any Aston. Even a *good* full-detail DB5 in 1/24 would be nice. I'm pretty sure the Japanese DB5 is curbside? The Aurora DB4 is okay, but 1/25 http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/uploads/emoticons/default_laugh.png' alt=':lol:'> I'm a real scale snob when it comes to subjects done in 1/25 that should be 1/24. Especially those tooled up later than 1990 (Revell squarely in the crosshairs on that http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/uploads/emoticons/default_laugh.png' alt=':lol:'> )

AMT did the annual kit of the '65 Mustang fastback. Annual Kit Monogram did the stock '65 2+2 that's the basis of the Shelby reissue that's currently available. They'll probably reissue the stock 2+2 at some point. They're not hard to locate. Monogram Mustang 2+2 While it would be kind of nice to have a new-tool 1/25 scale fastback, I hardly consider it a priority considering the options in the marketplace. I will say that Monogram's 1/24 '65 and '66 Mustangs all have some kind of odd proportions that I never quite figured out. The AMT annual nails the look. Honestly, I'd rather see accurate '69 and '70 Mustang kits retooled (and done wisely one tool could do both). Only AMT annuals ever really looked right; Revell's '69 Mustang is all-wrong up front (while the same basic tooling is used on the Shelby that looks great), Monogram's 1/24 70 Mustang is okay but also has shape issues up front. Get an AMT '63 Corvette fastback and combine it w/Revell '67 guts. Another case of "it would be nice if..." but hardly necessary for all-new tooling. Revell's '63 curbside is a great looking model. For all-new tooling, I'd like to see a 1/24 scale Austin Healey 100-6 because the old Revell multi-piece body kit is crude, wrong scale for subject, and the wire wheels are awful. Stock, optional "laid back" racing windscreen, racing components, etc. I'd also love to see an all-new tool 1/24 scale Cobra 289. Subject matter requires 1/24 scale (aka International scale), and a higher-level of detail than the old original, and especially some nice in-scale wire wheels and tires. Lots of stock/racing options. We were promised this by Accurate Miniatures. They failed to deliver. Porsche 914-6. The old Revell kit is the wrong scale (1/25 instead of 1/24), engineering is crude, and they're hard to find. Kit should have integral windshield frame, and offering it as the wide-body variant first would really be excellent. Narrow-body version would also be welcome. 1/25 stuff: 68-70 AMX. '70 Hemi 'Cuda. '69 Impala. Variants of earlier subjects: '76 Eldorado CV. '63 Falcon Sprint. '61 Pontiac Ventura.

I have a few friends who have this model with full intentions on building, but...never happens. Finally I get to see one built. I have several of the 1/24 version; something tells me the 1/12 kit is based on the 1/24, just larger.

It happens all the time here, and rather frequently this week (similar if not same message that people got when trying to access PM's). It's an MCM problem.

"message bored"

And there are still sites that are optimized for IE and don't work w/the others. One of the main hobby distributors, Stevens International, for instance. Links/menus only work in IE, FF you get nothing.

I like it! It's a neat little kit....I might build one for the annual LeMans palooza sometime.

Testors or Humbrol black enamel. Alclad Chrome requires their base, or an enamel. It will not stick to Tamiya spray black (it won't stick to lacquer). If you want a chrome to stick to Tamiya spray black lacquer, get Spaz Stix chrome. Works just like Alclad otherwise, and the convenience of being able to use Tamiya spray black. Spaz Stix Ultimate Mirror Chrome In a pinch if you don't have Alclad base or Testors black enamel, you can use a black base that can be overcoated by Testors clear enamel. Alclad has to "bite" into the enamel to stick. It won't "bite" into lacquer, but Spaz Stix certainly does.

Won't work in Ebay Motors, for instance, and on some other sites. I could jump through flaming hoops and minimize the page and drag/drop the image into a folder, but that's a royal PIT you know what. Everyone raved about FF, and I did too, when IE was itself a royal pain. IE9 worked great aside from the issue w/this site, and then when Flash upgraded. I despise FF's "takes too many clicks" bookmark menu. Unless someone has some sort of add-on to allow FF to have bookmarks display permanently in the left hand margin (or right hand, I don't care, I just would like it there w/o having to constantly drop the menu down), which I find imminently easier to navigate in IE vs. FF's setup.

You are correct. This board has been very buggy as of late. Oftentimes I get a similar message as everyone today is getting w/PM's, but often it happens just when opening any page...or sometimes when submitting to a thread. This place is buggier than a vintage VW meet

The current outage is on the MCM end. The issue of IE9 users inability to access PM's is apparently a Flash issue w/IE9. I recently got a new computer that naturally had IE9 installed w/the Windows 7 Pro operating system, and have the same problem. Even worse, a recent upgrade to Flash 10 has made many IE9 pages worthless; ads and videos want to go to the upper left corner of the page (and flicker like crazy) instead of where they belong. And before the "you are a complete moron for using IE instead of Firefox" crowd comes to my "defense" , I prefer IE9 to Firefox because I can't stand the Firefox bookmarks menu. IE does it better. Period. But that's apparently all it does better, aside from the fact FF photos often cannot be right-click saved like they can be in IE. Unlike my previous computer, either browser is blazing fast now w/high speed cable internet and the 64 bit operating system. I have to use both browsers, if IE worked like it should all the time, I wouldn't use FF because of the annoying bookmarks and inability to easily save a lot of photos.

I went to one of their shops before and it was one of the best-stocked hobby shops I had ever been to, and with excellent prices.

Even better IMHO is the 50% off this week of Excel knives and blades, and all artist's brushes...in sets or singles. Good time to stock up on workbench supplies.

Looks stellar, very authentic. I need to get one of these kits.

Living in a big city, we have numerous HL's to choose from. They are definitely all different..ranging from a pathetic selection, to a well-stocked and up-to-date (for HL standards) selection. Too bad that each store is at the mercy of their own local management for keeping the shelves stocked..or not. I'm more likely to buy a kit from them from the clearance rack than w/a coupon.

I'm not really sure if there's still a cracking issue or not; never happened to me, it did to others, haven't heard about it in ages. As for spraying over decals...BE CAREFUL! Some decals can take the "heat" of the Tamiya clear, others cannot. You are best to sneak up on the clear...apply in thin mist coats, after the decals are thoroughly dry. I decant/airbrush it, and that's the only way I'd really trust it over decals. One brand of decals may be just fine, another could lead to disaster if you are not really careful. Tread lightly. I would advise testing your paint/decal combo on a spoon. Get a box of disposable white plastic spoons at the grocery store, they're great for testing paint.

So does that mean your weekly Sat. morning Cars and Coffee is really Cars and Nitro Methane?