Jump to content
Model Cars Magazine Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ace-Garageguy

  • Rank
    MCM Ohana

Previous Fields

  • Are You Human?
  • Scale I Build

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Down two, then left.
  • Full Name
    Bill Engwer

Recent Profile Visitors

32,830 profile views
  1. Looks good. I've done it both ways, and I think the way you've done it looks best by far. Nice work on everything.
  2. Much thanks from me too. I've been "needing" some '57 Chebbys to fill a gaping hole in my collection. I have several of the first-release AMT and Revell kits, which I like immensely for what they are, but now I know which more modern kits to go after,
  3. Agreed. Super clean, just enough detail.
  4. Thank you. It'll be a kinda "freelanced" what-if scenario set in the late 1950s, in an alternative history line where steam was kept running side-by-side with diesels, with the layout focusing on heavy industry including construction and major repairs of locomotives. There was considerable research being done into vastly improving both the thermodynamic efficiency and reducing the ongoing maintenance requirements of steam locomotives when the diesels became dominant. But development of steam technology virtually ended with the widespread adoption of diesels for everything. With
  5. Unless the look you're going for is a backyard latex paint job done with a roller...
  6. That's the plan. Since the new place has decent sized shop buildings for real cars separate from the house, at least part of the attached garage will house a train layout. In particular, I want to model a smokestack-America-era steel mill...
  7. I agree. Early gasser rules allowed chopped tops anyway (though I don't know if it was still NHRA-legal in '65), so it's fine by me. For that matter, I'm pretty certain this kit is supposed to represent a "nostalgia" gasser and not a historical period-correct class runner, so why not?
  8. Fine looking models. Especially appealing to me as I have a real '63 Dynamic 88 convertible (identical body style to yours, minus the Starfire side trim), the car I drove in high school, awaiting restomodding.
  9. It's called a "centipede" tender. Like all tenders for steam locomotives, it carried the water and coal or oil fuel the engine ran on. NYC used the same general design of centipede tenders with the same wheel arrangement as Union Pacific (and other railroads) used for its Challengers and Big Boys (though only UP used Big Boys), but NYC's could scoop water from between the rails to give the locomotive more range between stops. Quoting from O Gauge Railroader Online Forum: "They could hold more weight in water or fuel or both and distribute that weight over more axles to maintain
  10. Far as I can tell so far, nobody's getting out of here alive anyway.
  11. Great to see this one back in progress. Looking really great too.
  12. Finally, after years of looking, I scored an AHM / Rivarossi New York Central Henry Dreyfus-designed streamlined 4-6-4 J-3a "Hudson" locomotive. The one I've been after all this time is very special, as it has Scullin drivers and a centipede tender (most of these are not so equipped). I think this is one of the most beautiful machines ever made by man, right up there with the Pennsy S1 and T1 locomotives, the Lockheed Constellation, the Convair B-58 "Hustler" bomber, the 1953 Raymond Loewy-designed Studebaker, and the '55-'57 Thunderbirds. The model was produced from 1972 throug
  13. Looks great. Makes a gorgeous ragtop. Rumor has it that the factory actually built two convertibles for internal evaluation. Some years back, there were photos circulating of a car that was supposedly one of them, very rough, but with top bows and workmanship that were far and away better than what you'd expect from most customizers.
  • Create New...