Ace-Garageguy

There are 8. I spent some time studying the photo carefully, and as mentioned, the light source casts shadows that make it appear that the spacing is odd at the top, leading to only 7 terminals, when in fact, it's fine. What appears to be a dark absence of a terminal at the top center of the cap is actually a terminal, but the angle the light is hitting it makes it appear dark. If you force yourself to see what IS there rather than what it APPEARS is there, it becomes apparent what's happening. EDIT: Spex84 beat me to it. Well done, sir.

Great looking little truck, and another one I wish I'd bought full-scale.

Beautiful beautiful. Just about my favorite real car on the planet. Very clean work, well staged and photographed too.

Oh YEAH! I missed that. Now I finally know what to do with that kit. Thank you. Excellent idea, love the wheels and the woodgrain. Oh yeah. I'll be sure to credit you as the re-designer.

I LOVE those things, often wish I'd bought one. Nice.

That's my absolute favorite color on the '36 Ford roadster. Excellent choice, sir! Shaved doors, skirts and flippers are just enough to set it apart from the stock herd, too. Nicely subtle custom touches.

Still a WIP, but getting closer...

Yes, and that would have been stamped using matched-metal dies on the original car, not bead-rolled. I'm really looking forward to seeing your progress using this technique. Sounds like you're coming along nicely. Next trick is making the recessed look for the other side.

Snagged another one of these at an "antique" store a few towns away, for $50. Very close to complete, just missing one pair of front tires. The store owner was under the impression it was missing one entire body, so I just paid and walked out smiling. This gives me multiples of all these old Revell double-dragster kits except the Fumin' Fiat / Thunder Charger. It's looking like none of these will ever be reissued, and I'd like to have a few to see me through several builds of historic cars once I retire.

Pretty slick trick !

Yeah, coming in at a price modelers will pay is part of today's problem, and a large part of why so much of everything is made in China now. Seems as though, rather than finding a way to make prototyping and tooling skills cost-competitive here, real businesses in general just say "it's impossible" and offshore-source most work like this. 3D printing, as you note, makes it possible to develop masters without the very high degree of manual skill that was once common among American tool-and-die makers, but you still have to learn the programming / computer processes...and the mold-making and production end of it too. Probably the only way you'll see the parts you'd like to have available is if some modeler creates them out of necessity, and makes molds of his results to share his work. The decal thing Steve mentions is another hole in the market I'd also like to see filled, and these are all products I'd seriously consider developing if I didn't have to actually make a living from the work I do. One would think that, given the incredible connectedness the internet makes possible, it wouldn't be all that hard to pull together a small group of comfortable retiree-modelers who collectively had the skills to do something in this vein (and buy Modelhaus while they're at it).

For accurately measuring small quantities of multi-component products for models, I use a beam scale, UNWAXED PAPER Dixie bathroom cups, and disposable plastic droppers marked in CC / milliliters. The aircraft epoxy I use has to be mixed to an accuracy of 1/2 of 1% to work correctly, and the method I use works well. It's necessary to use UNWAXED PAPER cups, because waxed ones will contaminate your chemicals, and plastic one will often melt. The plastic droppers are made of a chemical-resistant material. Glass droppers are preferable, and re-usable, if you can find them.

Love that pair of '55s, and the tubbed '57 post would do very nicely too.

Always a treat to watch you work, sir. Always.

Beautifully done model. Really makes me miss London of the late '60s-early '70s. Even the looks-like washed-out morning sunshine is perfect.

Beautiful work, and I LOVE your COEs.

Pretty cool.

Yup.

I've never used the Scale Finishes product, but the term "2K" means, industry-wide (in real car products, anyway) "2 component urethane" (as in: you have to mix a hardener in it for it to dry), but the term has been taken over by a number of single-component products, some in spray-cans, wanting to capitalize on the perceived benefits of the real thing. I'm sure someone with first-hand experience with the Scale Finishes 2K product will chime inhere...

X2. Fine looking model. And yes, I remember Letraset very well. Still have some, and use it occasionally. Is this 1/16, like, I believe, the Minicraft kits?

Great job with the photo hunting. This is really a neat little truck. It appears from these shots that it's still a unibody, like the '59-early '60s version, so probably would be very close in structural design details. The apparent light gauge of the frame-rail material would indicate a unitized type construction. Heavy conventional rails aren't necessary when the body of the vehicle is designed to absorb the major bending and torsional loads, and the structure only requires heavy local reinforcement where high point-loads are fed into it from things like spring shackles...and these photos appear to indicate that this is exactly how this truck is built. The bottom shot, and the third shot from the bottom look particularly like the frame and body are of unitized design, and NOT utilizing the Scout or any other separate frame. That construction method could have manufacturing cost benefits from the standpoint that all the major components would be made on relatively simple machinery like bending-brakes and shears, without having to resort to heavy press-tools. And a body-building company could deal with the entire fabrication operation. A unibody design could also make sense from a weight standpoint, as the body is made to do double duty as a structural member, weight can be removed from the rails, and the vehicle payload is raised without having to beef up the suspension. It would also be relatively easy to scratchbuild from flat styrene, obviously. Speaking of suspension, the front axle looks to be very similar to the Ford F100 unit of the early 1950s.

Yeah, it's been hammered a few times. Try the well-explained search function at the top of the "questions..." topics, and type in "glue" as your search term. You'll get these hits, among others...

YEAH !!!

I have multiple copies of the Auburn, the Cord, and the '48 Lincoln, in both the original Pyro and later Lindberg boxings. All of them have scale and proportion issues, but they make good bases for customs or hot-rods. They're really worthless for building correct-looking replicas of the stock, unmodified real cars...though the Lincoln has been built up by a few guys to look surprisingly good...even though it is somewhat underscale. This is by far the best build of the Lincoln I've ever seen, and it shows what you can accomplish with these kits if you try hard enough. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/26396-1948-lincoln-mild-custom-completed/