Ace-Garageguy

Many. But I still enjoy the hobby immensely and never feel guilty for not finishing something. I come up on things that need to be worked out, or skills I need to polish (or develop from scratch), or just get an idea for something that's too cool to not at least mock-up...so projects get bumped. I'll also go back to projects that have been stalled and see things fresh, find room for improvement, or better ways of approaching certain issues...sometimes even re-imagining the whole project. It works for me on a hobby level because in real-life, I HAVE to see things through all the way, on a budget usually, and close to on-time. Having the open-ended luxury of working on a particular model only when all the muses are in town and the stars align is a pleasant change.

I appreciate the votes of confidence, but doing long, straight, un-wobbly lines isn't something I've ever been good at...and I hate the look of wavy foil work. I have a couple of those Monogram snappers I bought pretty much for the wheels, so I guess i'll take the suggestion and make the plunge. Will BMF adhere well to bare plastic? I've heard both "yes" and "no". Maybe cleaning the model with 70% isopropyl first would help?

That looks like Bruce Jenner dressed as Elvira. Really scary.

She was beautiful in primer and gold. After the bath, she looks like a custom job that's been sitting in the desert for years. It's a very interesting effect...no rust, just paint falling off in scaly layers. Anyway, best of luck with the re-spray. The body mods and proportions look great.

Thanks to everyone for your interest and comments on this one ! I see I'm not alone in suffering from the "get the mockup looking right and move on" syndrome, too. What stopped the other '57 Ford gasser in its tracks, and will stop this one too...is my lack of ability with BMF. I've got to bite the bullet and try to learn the technique, because the side-spears are so much a part of the visual first-impression of these cars. I've been reluctant to do nice paint on something and then chance ruining it with a bodged BMF attempt...but I know learning new skills sometimes involves risk. It must be time.

Tim, thanks for the comments. If I recall correctly (I'll check in a minute or three) the AMT quick-change centers are too large in diameter to look right with the old Revell axle tubes, though it's mos' likely just a minor measuring / scaling problem somewhere along the line...which is why I used the smaller old Revell parts-pack unit. There IS a difference between Ford model A / midget and V8 quick-change diameters at the bolt-circle (the A is 9" in diameter, while the '35 and later "V8" unit is 9.25"...BOTH quick-change styles were available). The difference between the A and V8 units is kinda small to be visible in 1/25 (only .25mm) , but the difference in the bolt-flange diameter between the AMT axle housings and the Revell QC centers is VERY obvious. Something else to be aware of if you do a QC...all of the flanges on the various kit axle tubes are WAY too thick to look anywhere near scale-correct. Notice the axle-tube bolt flange in the lower LH corner of the photo below. You'll see it's quite thin. Many kit parts represent this flange as being over 1" thick, which looks ridiculous to anyone familiar with the real thing. The kit flanges are very easily thinned to look much better. The flanges on the axle-tubes at lower left (photo below) have been thinned significantly to look more correct.

Correct. Lacquer lasts forever if it doesn't dry out. I have 50-year-old lacquer, still fine, just needs correct thinning to spray right. Never assume your storage containers are entirely 100% perfectly air-tight...especially cans with lids you hammer on.

Love it. Have to agree with Tom too...I like it better with the pipes not going over the roof. Shows the outrageous lines of the whole thing off better, IMHO.

They say the devil's in the details, and the hard part of any build for me is sticking to it after I KNOW how it will look, but still have to go through all the motions to get there. Once I have the overall theme and stance established, I tend to go spinning off into more creative beginnings on new projects, rather than staying with the precise and time-consuming work to complete things. A character flaw, I know, and one I simply CAN'T indulge in real-life. Anyway, this one's shaping up slowly. I've put the front crossmember back in between the frame rails, after narrowing it to fit the pinch, and turning it upside-down to raise the spring (and drop the nose) a little further. You could do it like this on a real one, but making an entirely new crossmember would be the right way, and after this one is trimmed and corrected, that's what it will represent. The frame-rails themselves have been clearanced a bit for the spring ends too. The AMT firewall has also been clearanced to fit the new bellhousing. Rear suspension is shaping up, with the ancient Revell '30 Ford axle bells, wishbones and backing plates, and an equally ancient Revell parts-pack quick-change center section. I've lengthened the hood a scale 2" by adding a 2mm strip of stock to the rear of it. This will be shaped to fit the cowl. I'm using headers from the very old Monogram Indy Kurtis for this. The end tubes are paired the correct width for a nailhead (as are the ports on this old Monogram 1/24 Orange Hauler engine I'm using for a jig), but the center tube spacing needs to be stretched. This is the mashup engine...new-release Revell ('29 Ford) nailhead block, headers modified as above, old Revell parts-pack heads, valley cover, bellhousing and oil pan, and an AMT parts-pack Borg-Warner T-10 4-speed trans. This is the payoff for the additional work on the front crossmember, and the lengthened hood. I was able to get very close to the stance of the original mockup back...with the suspension actually under the car...and that's a large part of what I like best about this particular build.

One of the best builds I've ever seen of this kit...and perfect weathering colors.

I needed a little creativity injection to get me over the hump on a couple other builds...the hump that usually happens when the mockup and design phase segues into the grunt-work phase...so I did this Q&D mockup on an old AMT '57 chassis I'd already started prepping to be a gasser some years back. First time I saw the recent Revell '57 wagon kits, this is what came to mind. Notice...the nose isn't in the stupidly high (and not correct) posture so many 1:1 "nostalgia" builders go for these days. Even this one needs to come down a tad. You can figure a real gasser had a crankshaft centerline of 24" off of the pavement (that's about one inch in 1/25 scale), and the door sills should be about level with the pavement.

I certainly hope you'll document your work and post photos. Should be inspiring to many of us.

I checked the Revell '56 truck...no dice. Same generic trans that's in the parts-packs, etc. The Thunderbolt should almost certainly have a toploader...as should just about ANY Cobra model (the AC-based real Cobra, not the Mustang).

It'll be a lot easier your first time to do two molds of the separate halves. Making a two-part mold gets into alignment, mold-filling and possibly air-bubble issues you're better off dealing with AFTER you have some experience with the basic materials.

Sadly, nope. It's a semi-generic 4-speed, the same as the one in the Revell nailhead parts-pack (except for the tailshaft housing). It has elements of Saginaw, New process, Borg-Warner and Muncie gearboxes.

A coffee filter will most likely strain out any metallic particles the paint is SUPPOSED to have, as well as extraneous trash. Auto bodyshop-supply stores have specific filters made for paint that allow the metallic and pearl particles to pass, but catch the trash. I've used stocking-pantyhose material successfully in the past, in a pinch.

Looks great. Desktop injection molding, sorta.

So much for the "Rod Authority" being any kind of authority. No real facts, no engineering references, no hard data about anything. It's just another kinda "'cause I said so" blathering by someone who's probably never had any grease...Chevy OR Ford...under his fingernails. Both the Chebby and The Ford smallblock engines have strengths and weaknesses. The overwhelming popularity of the Chevy IS in part due to the fact it's a very good engine indeed, but it also got its start in 1955...a full 7 YEARS before the Windsor engines from Ford made the scene. In those 7 years, it became the go-to engine for hot-rodding because of its high power-to-weight ratio and small size. The aftermarket manufacturers were quick to jump on the Chebby bandwagon, and by '62, when the little Ford hit the streets (an engine that IS better in some ways, with more advanced thin-wall-casting techniques making it lighter) there was just no catching up. The small Ford and Chebby are BOTH exceptionally good engines.

Ford top loaders get their name because the bolt-on cover you build the thing through goes on the top...unlike some other transmissions, which may have bolt-on cover plates on the side or even the bottom. They look like this, for the most part. They were generally used in hot, expensive Ford-powered cars like Cobras, and Ford's own performance models. The shifter linkage is still on the side on a top-loader, so having a "floor shift" really signifies nothing. Ford trucks used another top-loaded design, the Borg Warner T98, T18/19. These transmissions DID have the shifter sticking out of the top of the box.

X-acto knives, razor saws, needle files, flat files, riffler files, drills (including a pin-vise and small bits), clothespins and other assorted clamps, hemostats, various kinds of tweezers, sandpaper in various grits, sanding-blocks (flat and shaped), a straight edge and steel right-angle, a small miter-box, straight-pins, fine-line Sharpie markers, a Dremel tool and attachments, a compass, ...lotsa stuff. Depends on what you want to start making. As you learn, you'll also figure out what you like to use for various projects and parts. I find sheets of .010", .020", .030" and about .060" to be the most useful, and if you're working in 1/24-1/25 scale, then 1mm, 1.5mm, 2mm, 2.5mm and 3mm round rod are pretty common for chassis and roll-cage work. Rectangular and strip-stock too, plus tubing in various diameters.

The cosmoline I'm familiar with, applied to new cars before shipment (particularly new cars coming by sea) was a yellowish-brownish concoction looking exactly like this goop on the underside of a Porsche. We removed it with mineral-spirit-based solvents.

Welcome to the forum. I'm sure there are many members here who will be glad to give you their opinions (me included), but you'd be better off scrolling down on the main page and putting this question under the "Model Building Questions and Answers" heading.

Yeah, I know this one too. Many many moons ago, the company I worked for moved their shops into a defunct dealership for this brand of car, and in the attic I found a complete set of factory tools for the engine, shop manuals, plus several complete engines for its little brother, and a whole car's worth (almost) of body parts. The building owner didn't want the stuff, and the shop owner just wanted it gone. I found a US-based group of enthusiasts and gave them everything but the factory tools...which I actually used...until they were stolen, along with all my other tools, about 15 years later. I imagine they ended up in a dumpster or as scrap, because their pawn-value would be about zero.

Just barely in color...the emulsion has probably faded over the years...but it's plain that the sign background is blueish... Then in '57... A little later... Here's a dio of the earlier building front...which is wrong for the time portrayed, as the Ala Kart was built in '58...and how accurate the colors really are is anyone's guess...

http://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/this-homebuilt-rv-has-a-name-shamrockaway-two-62-buicks-gave-their-lives-for-it/