Ace-Garageguy

So, once again, the lowest-common-denominator retards ruin it for everyone else...

Really a shame the old Aurora scaling and proportions were so bad on all of these kits. When I got back into modeling in '05 or so, I bought several of all of them, based on the beautiful box-art paintings. If only the parts in the box looked like the paintings. At this point, they're all on the shelf, waiting for me to figure out what to do with them. They're honestly almost as bad as Palmer stuff, being only fair impressions of the actual cars. Again, what a shame, because a lot of effort went into doing all the little parts and opening bits. If only someone with talent had done the body tooling...

100% demolding too soon, still too hot, above its "glass transition temperature (Tg)". Styrene that's over about 100 C (212 F) will NOT support itself, and will warp and droop in any direction it's stressed in. Trying to cycle the equipment too fast to increase production and raise profits by a minuscule amount is a possible culprit, or the techs just not paying attention to the temps. A change in formulation of the styrene used during a run could also be the cause, because not ALL styrene formulations have exactly the same Tg . To UN-warp it permanently (IF the warp is the result of being demolded hot) you'll have to get it up past its Tg again.

Like I said, a whole lotta stupid around...

"At the paint rack. Why?" Cause there's a whole lotta stupid around, that's why...stupid with zero respect for other people's property, rights, or just knowing how to act like a human being.

The '37 is pretty much the same car...and AMT already has one...

Looking really good. I like the big 'ol pre-'58 Buicks, and of course there's nothing available in 1:25 styrene. Nice work.

Thanks for that. Again, from that angle the sides are too slabular, window profiles aren't right, proportion of greenhouse to body looks a little off, tail profile droops on top and should be more of a curved rising line on the bottom...hmmm...interesting.

I sincerely appreciate the interest, guys. I've been priming...letting it shrink-in...sanding...priming...shrinking...sanding...etc. Getting there, and will post new pix when she's ready for paint. As this will be a plug for molds of the hood, nose and tonneau, I'm leaving the scribed opening lines a little wide to accommodate paint thickness on the finished parts from the molds, but I'm trying to keep them tight enough to look good with the plug presented as a finished model too. Kindof a fine line, and I haven't done anything exactly like this before.

I kinda see your point, but it would take some serious effort to get the power, reliably, from an old Stude engine that you can get off-the-junkyard-shelf with an LS. The LS powerplant is rapidly going the way of the old smallblock Chebby, becoming the go-to HP source for just about everything, and for much the same set of reasons. Frankly, there are some things about the LS engine I don't particularly like now that I'm getting into them. I personally think this particular car would be more interesting with a supercharged late-model Hemi...but I have zero knowledge about them internally so far.

I'd love to see that. I've got a couple of the old Aurora / Revell-Monogram releases, and after looking at more photos of the real cars, I'm itching to try to build a somewhat corrected one. The real one is such a beautiful car, and the models I have miss it by a fair margin.

To address your original questions, I personally find that primering everything gives me better results. Every part will have some parting-line, flash or tree-attachment point that needs to be corrected, and many parts, like engine-trans assemblies, will need to have seams addressed prior to painting. Primering of these small parts and assemblies just gives you a more consistent surface to paint over, and helps to show up flaws that still need work. I also prefer to spray every part, small or large, to eliminate brushstroke marks.

What jumps out at me immediately from Greg's pix: the lower body sides on the real car have more inward-curvature, the windshield goes up into the roof a bit higher, the tops of the door windows are a flatter line on the real one, the tops of the rear quarter-panels do't droop at the back as the model does...and the tail doesn't appear to be so slab-sided and heavy, the tops of the front fenders are rounded as they come forward into the headlight bezels (not straight like the model), the grille of the real car slants back more at the bottom (and is really a prettier shape), the hood scoop is significantly different in shape and curvature too, and the side vents on the front fenders are smaller on the 1:1. Now, if you want to get really picky...

Though I'd LOVE to see accurate new-tool '35 or '36 Fords (Revell could base those on the 1/25 '40 kits, as the chassis on '35-'40 Ford cars are almost identical) I'd think Revell would be better off doing a rendition of something never before offered, rather than competing heads-up with the recent AMT reissue of the 1/25 scale '36, and the older (better) '36 kits that can still be had for reasonable money. The strategy of making the '29 rod kit a hot-rod parts source is a good one, even though there are many decent model-A kits already available. Revell's inclusion of all the goodies in their '29 roadster removes it from direct competition with any other A kits, and will probably strengthen sales of ALL of them. I still maintain that the two most iconic hot-rods not currently available in styrene are the '26-'27 Ford roadster, and an accurately-proportioned '33-'34 Ford 3-window coupe.

I think some HOAs may be getting just a little bit out of control... DNA samples of dogs? Fines for playing outside? IVY??

Single-curved windows are relatively easy to make up from clear styrene or acetate. Compound-curved glass is another entire level of complexity, but it can be done...even if you don't have a pattern. To make a pattern, you pretty well have to carve a 'plug' or 'buck' from bondo or some other similar material, making sure it fits your opening perfectly and has no waves on the surface. Once you have a perfect buck, follow this tutorial to make the actual "glass". http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/?showtopic=58564

Almost picked up several 1/35 armor kits at the thrift store very cheap...buncha figures too. Thought maybe a change of pace might help me to get some work done on something model-related, anyway. Went back after deciding to go ahead and get them, and they were gone. Oh well. Somebody got a really great deal on some WWII Russian and German tanks, artillery, figures and motorcycles.

I see you already know that that kit, though it's labeled as 1/32, is actually about 1/26 or so...if you measure the wingspan and divide it out. Only the little pilot figure is 1/32. If you're going for an accurate-appearing GeeBee, you'll need to sand the ribs on the wings flat. The model depicts the wings as being covered in fabric, stretched over ribs...a common enough way to build older, slower airplanes... The real GeeBee had wing skins made of plywood however. They were sanded very straight, and painted very slick.

Art touches on an excellent point I should elaborate on... Roof panels from one GM make in the time period you're interested in will interchange as they do in the real world IF AND ONLY IF the models are scaled correctly. For example, the '50s Olds and Chevy kits from AMT and Revell are scaled quite well actually, close enough so that it's not too difficult to swap roof sections and body panels from one to another...but it's not a drop-on, by any means.

In many cases, the roof panels and the underlying support structural parts will interchange...and that's why, in the real world, those of us who routinely try to restore older cars where there hasn't been factory parts support for years, come to rely on various "interchange manuals". One of the most well-known is the Hollander series. These are still in production, as things like Lexus structural bits can be sourced from Toyota, etc. The vehicle manufacturers also have supplied similar information over the years. Much of the vintage-car info is available online, if you put enough effort into the search. There's an old Pontiac site, for instance, that publishes scans of '40s-'70s interchange info.

Yes sir, looking good !

X3

Silver Aston Martin Vantage parked on the street, in front of the tattoo parlor next to the Celtic pub. Pretty good crowd around it, completely ignoring all the choppers.

Looks good. Removing the floors and blobular exhaust on these really improves them a lot. Another way to achieve a better frame is to use the Revell '40 ford unit. All Ford passenger cars from '35 through '40 were built on the same basic frame, and the Revell '40 unit actually fits under the AMT '36 kits quite well. You may already know, but the "ragtop" was not openable on the factory cars. It was built up over a wood frame, padded and skinned with a waterproof rubberized textured material. A popular custom treatment on these cars was to weld in a steel panel that closed the original opening entirely. Another sometimes-seen mod back in the '50s- '60s was to substitute a tinted clear acrylic plastic panel for the built-up top insert. I've seen both red and green. A fold-back fabric sunroof like you see on old VW Bugs has also been done on real '36 Ford customs. If I recall correctly, the optional engines in the AMT '36 kits were Pontiacs. A very well-detailed and accurate Pontiac V8 with 3 two-barrels is available in the old Revell engine PartsPak #85-7253. AMT also made a beautiful version of the same engine, but with 2 four-barrels, in the old Blueprinter 8158 kit (which has been repackaged and reissued a couple of times...and the engine is available again, now). Because both Revell and AMT did a good job of scaling these models, the engines built up from the parts pack kits fit well in the AMT '36 engine bay, and really enhance the detail.