Ace-Garageguy

Well, what's so bad about that, really, aside from the childish name-calling? If the info posted by people who've actually bought the Del Rio kit is any indication, apparently some "issues" with the test-shot pointed out by people very knowledgeable about '57 Fords have been corrected. That's a win for everyone in my book.

That's a good point, really. The AMT 5-window and sedan kits share a frame, and it's fine. Tooling a correct 3-window body to offer in new packaging, using the existing frame tooling, could work nicely. The odd thing about these two kits is that the hoods and grilles of both of them should interchange, just as they do on the real cars. But for some odd reason, the hoods, grilles and cowls are different. Tooling money could have been SAVED by getting the cowls right on both models, so the same tooling could have been used to produce both sets of hoods and grilles. AMT realized both kits could share the same frames and guts, but missed it on the hoods / grilles. I forget right off hand WHICH of the two kits has most accurate hood-grille-cowl, but they're both off (I've measured real cars to verify this).

No. It's a unique version of the 3-window with an un-chopped roof. It's a horrible kit actually, but the body shell from the cowl back isn't really too bad...workable, anyway. Throw the rest away. Worst frame and suspension imaginable. This is the above body, chopped, on the later AMT frame...which is quite good.

Yes indeed. I think it leaked in from some strange parallel universe.

Great looking work.

Good looking cars, both. I really like the wheels on the yellow one, have been looking for something similar. Are they from the kit?

If I actually counted, at this point I'd probably have to question my sanity. But hey...it's like having a scale junkyard where the parts never rust or deteriorate. With this much stuff, I ought to be able to build just about anything...if I ever get the time again.

It all depends on how you define "problem". Though I've never done this particular swap in 1:1 or on a model, I can tell you the engine bay is plenty big enough. You'll encounter what you always encounter doing engine swaps in real vehicles OR models...mounts may need to be moved or modified, coolant hoses relocated, the driveshaft may need lengthening or shortening, the exhausts will need re-routing, and the steering box may need to be slightly relocated. It's also possible the front crossmember or the oil pan may require some surgery. I personally don't consider these things to be "problems"...they're just what you do. The '56 Ford pickup is on the same frame, shares much structure, and it came with a factory-available Y-block V-8 (Revell's kit has one). Good indication the later 'Bird engine will fit as well. And because the '53 Ford truck kit came with a DeSoto engine swap option, it's a good bet your T-bird engine will go in pretty easily too. Best bet is to tack your engine together and mock it up in the truck. Instant answer.

Found these while looking for something else. Interesting ideas for the body in the AMT double dragster, possibly...

X2.

Saw a dead TVR Tasmin at a little shop close to where I live. Went in to find out the story on it, and basically, nobody there knows anything about it or what to do for parts, manuals, etc. I'll be doing some work on it over the weekend, as I used to work on that funky old stuff when it was new. I've never been a fan of the styling particularly, but the cars are light, nimble, and have an interesting tubular space-frame.

Please...evac...not evap. Evap is short for "evaporative emission control", an entirely different concept. See post 5. Evac is short for "crankase evacuation system". While these are often confused, they are two different things entirely.

Agreed 100% And it's the stupid, irresponsible and sometimes vicious actions of a tiny minority that are always cited as the "reasons" for limiting the freedoms of the rest of us. The lowest common denominator in this society has become the real ruling class.

Always a real pleasure to see your work, sir. Always.

Really Tom? All the name calling and childish behavior had died down, but you just had to start it up again. Good boy. I've been checking this thread frequently because, now that the kits are getting into the hands of builders, I'm interested in seeing what folks who actually HAVE the kit (and whose noses aren't up the backsides of some Revell execs) think about it. Your remark that I just happened to come across while looking for info on the KIT, and your subsequent conduct, demonstrates clearly to me and everyone on the board exactly what you are. You must be very proud.

Finally a candidate I could admit to voting for without being embarrassed...

So mature, and so to the point.

The Lotus 340R, built in 2000, wasn't allowed in the States. Supposedly, there's one legal one in the US.

My guess...and this is only a guess...is that there's SO MUCH blowby on an 8000HP engine, the volume of the previously shown oil-separators just isn't enough to cope. Any venting system is going to have to be vented to the atmosphere somewhere. Note the air filter affixed to the top of the catch can in the pump-driven system above. This lets cleaned air blow OUT, after it's been sucked out of the crankcase by the pump. I'm guessing the frame rails have a similar filter attached to them somewhere, allowing clean pressurized air to vent to the atmosphere, and the rails themselves act as the separator / catch-can, probably drained after a run or two.

Very clean work. Looks great. I'm intrigued by the carbon-fiber-look wrap. How does it work? It looks like you did a perfect job getting it to follow some difficult contours that couldn't be done so nicely with real carbon.

Sounds to me like a little confusion in terms there. An evaporative system on street-driven cars is typically part of the emission control system, having to do specifically with preventing fuel vapors from entering the atmosphere. A crankcase-ventilation (breather) system has an entirely different function. The hot, whirling parts inside any engine, and combustion gasses from ring-blowby, produce a constant oily mist at positive pressure (over atmospheric). In a street car, the PCV (positive crankcase ventilation) system handles it, venting the mist-laden vapors back into the intake manifold, and they're subsequently burned by the engine. The problem is exacerbated by a supercharged engine with higher combustion-chamber pressures and more ring blowby. Drag cars of times past (really, any high-performance application) didn't (and still don't) want the oily mist to be sucked into the engine's induction system (where it would interfere with accurate tuning) so they simply vented the oily vapor out through the rectangular 'breathers' sticking up from the valve covers. Later on, racers found they could pick up a little extra power by actively sucking the positive-pressure out of the crankcase with a pump. Of course, the air that was sucked out was laden with oil mist too. It had to go somewhere, and vented catch-tanks were provided to hold it, instead of just dumping it on the track. If you notice in this shot, the large hoses for the crankcase ventilation system, similar to the ones on the OP photo, run from the general location of the valve-cover breathers on the older engine shown above. This is a relatively common pump-driven crankcase evacuation system, showing the pump, hoses, and vented catch-can / oil-separator. There's been endless discussion about the effects of evacuating the crankcase on drag engines, how much vacuum to run, electric or mechanical pumps, plumbing layout, catch-can (oil-separator) design, etc. As I said above, I'm not currently familiar with the big-hose systems shown in the photos. Surely someone who is will pipe in and let us know all about the plumbing at the lower end.

Though I'm honestly not familiar with that particular setup, my best guess would be they're part of a crankcase breather system, possibly to an oil mist and vapor scavenge pump.

Yup. It's a first-generation Oldsmobile OHV V8, (303, 324, 371, 394 cu.in.) with a Potvin-driven, front-mounted GMC blower, Hilborn fuel injection, a Hydramatic auto gearbox, and cast-aluminum Offy valve covers. The B&M HydroStick was a race-bred conversion of the early GM Hydramatic auto trans.

He's right, I'm wrong. Take Hakan's advice here on the flathead.

My grail kits change from time to time. Sometimes acquiring one, finally, is somewhat of a disappointment. Right now, I'm after the Johan '62 and '63 Dodge hardtops, preferably unbuilt, but decent, clean built-ups OK.