Ace-Garageguy

PS. It doesn't have to be all that hard to take the 'filled' areas out of the back, either. Just gently support it in a vise with the backside facing up, and attack it with a Dremel drum sander. You remove the thickness of the metal 'wall' in the back of the part, once the 'holes' are opened up you file the back flat, and then lightly dress the edges with smaller files from the front. Goes fast.

Had exactly this problem on an old Pontiac promo I bought specifically to convert Revell's '50 Olds to a Poncho. I bead-blasted the flaky stuff off and primered the whole thing in several coats of SEM self-etching black primer. It's not a high-build primer, but it builds enough to get all the pitting out with minor sanding...if it's not too deep. NOTE: If the pitting is REALLY bad (which mine was) all you gotta do is shoot it in a high-build or "scratch-filler" primer (Duplicolor, SEM, etc) over the self-etch before sanding it slick. The self-etch is hot and ensures good adhesion. The high-build fills. Get it slick, shoot it in gloss black, and Alclad.

Ummm...do you really mean that the way it sounds?

So, Mr. Smartypants...how many courses did they have on multicultural basket-appreciation, huh ? HUH ???

I have a cold black heart. I take, take, take, with never a thought for anyone else. I am the center of the universe, and I never do anything for anyone, but I expect everyone to do things for me constantly. I will never say "thank you" because it's a hassle and I wouldn't mean it, so why bother? Just to make you feel good? I don't think so. Besides, I'm so special that people should feel grateful for being allowed to give their time, effort and money to me anyway. I also take credit for other people's ideas and work whenever I can. If anyone trusts me, I screw them, because they should learn it's stupid to trust people. I never worry about getting screwed, because it's impossible for it ever to happen to me.

Cause, like, celebrities are, like, important. And we'd all put our heads up celebrities butts if we only had the chance, and inhale the sweet sweet nectar therein. And they have a lot of money too. That makes them more important. Who cares if some broke never-heard-of-'em soldier or cop or fireman dies? Like WHO CARES? Note: This is intended as sarcasm. Got it? Sar-cas-m. Too bad it's so true. The artist formerly known as I think it means "WTF?"

Just on another 1:1 note...I'd vastly prefer to run a 289-302 in my own car simply for the sound. I think the little Fords are some of the sweetest sounding V8 engines ever made, and I always think Chebby's sound like they're missing on one cylinder. It's the differences in the firing orders, obviously, but to me, the Ford is THE engine of choice for sound...but I'll probably build this thing with a Chebby.

I'll often hit walls with builds, get in to mods that were terrific fun to mock-up and look at and imagine, but that end up taking rather a lot of intense effort to get right. In my real-life, I HAVE to keep going in situations like that. Make it happen no matter how sick of it I may be. In my hobby life, I can just box 'er up until the mood strikes me to do more. Sometimes they'll sit for years and over the intervening time, my vision for the build changes or my skills improve to the point where an earlier problem is now no big deal. But I NEVER throw anything out just because it got a little tiring or difficult.

Pretty sure Greg was being ironic. He is a vet, as you know, and was also a teacher.

The country needs Charlie Larkin for Secretary of Education...or someone very like him who accurately identifies the problems with the system as it is today, and its effects on the employability of its graduates, hence the economy. In Charlie's words "We have eliminated virtually all that is useful from education." Just imagine the effect of hearing simple unvarnished truth come from a government orifice.

I read in bed at night to help relax, mostly fiction or history, and I usually read during the times I take on weekends to sit outside in the sun to keep from looking like something that crawled out from under a rock, mostly non-fiction or technical.

'27 Ford roadster on the current '29/ '32 frame. One of the really popular and totally neglected (in styrene) hot-rod icons.

Just finished Ray Kurzweil's "How to Create a Mind" and Ayn Rand's "Romantic Manifesto". Before that "The Blind Man of Seville" by Robert Wilson, and "The Nuremberg Raid" by Martin Middlebrook. Wading through Kendra Cherry's "Essentials of Psychology". It's a drag because it's written apparently as an entry-level textbook, aimed at an audience with little to no basic scientific knowledge. I find myself thinking "well...duh" quite a lot.

Guess I didn't make myself clear. My complaint was about the hooyah in the rear pipes making the header assemblies unsuitable as bashing-fodder to use in OTHER chassis without removing the hooyah. If I build the kit more-or-less OOB (unlikely), I'll put the steering where it should have gone, and correct the header hooyah there too. This isn't a bash at Revell...it looks like a super kit across the board and I'll buy several, just as I did with the '29 roadster...but simply a statement of fact about the header design, the steering box location, and the really unnecessary hooyah. Google pix of channeled (or not) '30-'31 Fords with Chebby engines. You'll see. Speaking of Chebbys in Fords...I wasn't much of a fan of the old Ford / Chebby bellybutton combo for years either, but now that I'm getting my own full-scale '32 rails off the ground and beginning to mock up my own rod once again, I'm starting to lean heavily towards little Chebby power for exactly the same reasons they were so popular in the late 1950s. I have a lot of junk ones, amassed for close to free. I have some pretty cool parts, like a 3X2 manifold and a pair of double-hump fuelie heads, that have kinda fallen out of the sky too. Little Chebbys rev tight, they're almost bulletproof if you use a brain during building and driving, and they're light and powerful for their weight. All very good reasons to use a Chebby, and laugh at the engine snobs I'll be leaving in the dust. PS. I'd really LOVE to run an Olds Rocket in this thing, or maybe a 289 Ford...but I don't have any parts for either of those...yet. The 394 Olds I DO have is going back in the '63 convert it came out of. Chebby's looking pretty good. Fast. Cheap. Light. Reliable.

Not "incorrect" or "misguided" by a long shot. The math and physics worked exactly as envisioned...and don't make the mistake or thinking all the old drag racers were ignorant boobs who didn't understand fractions and slide-rules. The relevant racing technology simply moved on and cars evolved. You wouldn't call the Wright Brothers' sticks-and-string airplane "misguided" and "incorrect" because it wasn't built like a Boeing 787 or a Lancair evolution, would you? I certainly hope not. It was state-of-the-art in its time, the best engineering available, nothing about it was "wrong", and it helped to pave the way for the engineering understanding that makes modern aircraft possible. Just like the drag cars of their day got it as right as possible with the tools, tires and parts available at the time. Exactly. And high ground clearance and nose-up attitudes under acceleration made faster cars simply undrivable. Noses came down as cars went faster to get downforce on the front end to help with stability. And if you look at funny cars today, you see vestiges of the old altered-wheelbase designs. Engines are set back in the chassis, and front wheels are pushed as far forward as possible. Just sayin.

At this point (no real production kit on the bench yet) I agree. I personally find these look better if the rad shell is just barely forward of the front-axle...which would give you rather more frame horn forward of the grille-shell, assuming the horns are supposed to represent stock. Once again, not hard to adjust to more pleasing proportions.

Thanks. There had been a fair bit of speculation of late that it was a single piece, which I thought unlikely given the draft angles on the parts. The test shot photos confirm the whoopdee on the rear header primary on the driver's side. Kind of a shame, as it's usually not necessary to hula-hoop the header to clear the steering on one of these in 1:1, if things are engineered in advance of cutting and welding steel. The whoopdee on the header is just one more thing that will have to be corrected if the what-could-have-been-perfect-generic-smallblock-Chevy-in a hot rod-headers are to be used on something else. Not too hard to fix though.

I want to know two things. 1) If it's a one-piece body, I really want to see how they made sliding tool sections to accommodate that visor overhang / undercut. 2) If the headers really have the little whoopdees on the rearmost primary pipes.

Looks great to me. Far as not being "perfect", it's a race car. Unless it's been ridiculously over-restored, a real one is FAR from perfect.

Hmmmm...ya s'pose some folks don't realize that most of the cobras out there are kit-car repops and that they rarely get built to Shelby factory specs? Just cuz a photo comes up as a "427 Cobra" doesn't mean it's a real 427 Cobra.

Build thread here. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/58538-project-phoenix-custom-61-dodge-dart-resurrection-the-wall-march-29/?page=1 Build thread here... http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/59708-32-ford-roadster-gluebomb-rework-sept-8-15-back-on-track/

Þeir hafa kommur á Íslandi ?

I've found that buffing metalizer works best, for the results I want, if I shoot it over a similar color of primer. The primer has to be sanded almost to a polished finish, like 1500 grit, which is why some folks probably aren't getting good results over primer. Metalizer won't fill ANYTHING, so any slight roughness in your primer, sanding scratches, seams, etc. will make the finished product look like carp. Shooting it over primer of a similar color (aluminum over medium gray primer, for example) helps to hide thin spots you might get if you buff your metalizer too aggressively. I've said this a bazillion times, but if you shoot the metalizer WET, almost to the point of running, it will slick out beautifully and polish up just like metal. Shoot it DRY, it will have a grainy surface that might work for as-cast parts, but it will NOT POLISH CORRECTLY.

Something I've run into on doing the Welly up-scale is that it's not particularly accurate anyway, and some dimensions don't even need to be changed to get accurate 1/25 dimensions. As we're all aware, kit and diecast makers frequently oops on their measuring and scaling, especially these days. Just something else to take into consideration. It's interesting you've brought this up, as I saw several very interesting 1/28 scale plastic racing cars on ebay that i thought about buying for just such a project, but dismissed the idea on the grounds that I probably would just add them to the to-do pile, and not even start on them for years. Seemed better to let someone who might actually build them have a shot.

The Ferrari 712 CanAm car is fairly slab-sided and devoid of compound curves, and looks to me like it would be quite straightforward to stretch it a little. Do a scale 3-view drawing of the chassis you want to use, in the scale you want to use, showing its wheelbase and track width (show the locations of the ODs of the tires exactly) and sketch in the actual shapes of your existing body, with the correct existing dimensions. You'll find you can actually trace around them if you think it through and work carefully. That will let you know how much meat you're going to have to splice in to get the scale-up right at the ends of the major sections of the car, and then you can concentrate on adjusting the curves to get a smooth flow.