Ace-Garageguy

Yeah, I'd say real. I have reasons. Let's see if they're good reasons.

Welcome to the site, Joe. I'm in Marietta. One of our fearless moderators, Harry P, builds a number of large scale cars including Pocher. You've come to a good place.

If the compressor on the old Caddy engine is an old-school York-style piston-type, like this, it's correct for many many older add-on and factory air setups from just about everyone (and you might see a V-version of this thing on some big old luxury cars). GM made the switch to a swashplate compressor, below, around the early '70s (may have been earlier). Jag and Rolls used it too, as did others. It was more efficient at idle. Compressors have become smaller and smaller since then, and what you see when you open the hood on a late-model car (or something like a Vintage-Air aftermarket install, made for more than 20 years) looks like this...

This is an excellent point, and one I usually hammer away at myself. Not too long ago, I'd used a real-aircraft engine-enamel rattlecan gray on a Micky Thompson Challenger (vintage Revell kit, not re-issue) frame that happened to be molded in metallic blue. I shot it wet, with only about 5 minutes flash between the 3 coats. It slicked out great, looked fine. At roughly the same time, I was working on a save of a previously hacked '70 Chevelle (also Revell, molded in about the same color of metallic blue, but a much newer kit). I shot the paint exactly the same way, and it crazed almost instantly. Badly. Practically ruined the blue-molded chassis, but didn't touch the custom roll-cage I'd built from Plastruct round rod. The moral of the story is Snake's line above: Test on the actual plastic that you're interested in painting.

Well, that may be exactly what you need to do. "Science" is testing things, getting repeatable results, and writing those results down so you can use them for reference in the future. That's all science really is. Experimenting with the materials YOU have, in various combinations, is the only 100% reliable way you're going to come up with what works for YOU every time. Exactly what Snake says: "There are now so many different kinds of paints floating around, it's almost impossible to make blanket statements about what WILL or WON'T work over what."

The main issue is that changing to 18" rims with short-sidewall tires (the overall tire diameter would be the same as with the current 13 inchers) would require a substantial redesign of the cars' suspension systems as well. Current F1 cars get most of their suspension compliance from sidewall flex. Just watch on-car video, or look at how little 'droop' there is in the suspension when the cars are jacked up. Stiff, short sidewalls would mean that the suspension would have to supply the movement currently obtained from sidewall-flex in the relatively high aspect-ratio tires. In other words, not a simple bolt-on proposition, at all.

Wow. 15,000 pounds. Heavyyyy...

The slower cure material is also "stickier" than "regular" epoxy too, and yes, in general, the fillers or modifiers added to an epoxy formulation for various applications change it's behavior...BUT the resin itself is also a major contributing factor in the performance of the stuff. Adding powdered steel to 5-minute goo will give you nothing but a low-strength gray glue. Powdered metal is added to enhance surface hardness and 'toughness' to resin-systems that are already very tough on their own. Press-dies capable of stamping 1/8" thick steel wheel centers have been made from an epoxy-powdered-steel mix. If you've ever tried to bend a 3" long piece of 1/8 inch thick steel in your hands, you'll get an idea of just how tough those dies had to be. One very high-performance epoxy-resin system I use on aircraft (MGS 285) performs as a very-high-strength structural adhesive with the addition of milled cotton fibers (cotton flock, or "flox") in European composite sailplanes. The exact same resin becomes a medium-strength structural panel adhesive when mixed with micro-balloons and fumed-silica powder, and is used to hold the US-built Cirrus SR-22 together. The same resin again becomes a non-structural lightweight filler when mixed with straight micro-balloons (but the cured MGS epoxy itself is quite hard and not easily sanded; a lower-strength, less-hard epoxy is preferred when using an epoxy-micro-balloon filler). Generally, higher-strength epoxies take longer to cure than the low-strength products, adhere to the surface they're used on much more tenaciously, and are much harder when cured. The straight MGS 285, fully cured, is considerably harder than polystyrene and can be drilled and tapped without the addition of any fillers or modifiers whatsoever. Hobby shops tend to stock several 'timed' epoxies for RC aircraft: 5 minute, 15 minute, and 30 minute. The 30 minute is the strongest and sticks best. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of epoxies for differing applications, but the generalization 'longer cure, stronger cure' holds true for all of them.

Fresh material from unopened tubes makes a difference in strength, and careful control of the 1:1 mixing ratio is also important to get the stuff to perform at its best.

Really like this one...gave me a big 'ol smile. Sure looks the part of a weekend warrior.

People build some weird things for Bonneville, and even a fair number of the real ones fail to pass tech inspection due to questionable engineering. Coil-overs, especially made with two differently-wound springs, would be unnecessary on a car like this. Coil-overs CAN be used to augment or fine-tune a leaf-spring setup, but I've never seen anything like what's represented here. I have a feeling there's some artistic license being taken, and parts were made to look vaguely mechanical but that don't have 100% analogs in reality. What WOULD be necessary is a lateral-locating link for the front axle. The quarter-elliptical front springs do not provide sufficient positive lateral rigidity to keep it going straight; nor do the coil-overs. But my intent wasn't to start picking the model apart...as I said, the craftsmanship looks to be excellent...but rather to ask about something that jumps out immediately. I have seen people build real cars and never once sit in them to see if it's possible to drive the things....until they push them outside, get in, and find their knees in their faces. I'm always baffled by major oversights on full-scale pieces, as well as a seeming lack of regard for an understanding of the functions of subjects being 'modeled'

I'd sure pay for that. Hillary, BamaLlama or Pelosi, too. One thing still great about the USA...freedom of speech.

Absolutely beautiful craftsmanship, no doubt. But where are the driver's legs and feet supposed to go?

I always hoped Revell would release a full-fendered version of their nice '32 roadster, but with a stock-buildable option. Naturally, the frame and suspension would fit all the other Revell '32 kits as well. And they might look at their OLD model-A chassis for inspiration. It's a true thing of beauty (though incessantly complained about as "fiddly"...which I don't get at all). The tooling is crisp, the parts are represented correctly (not softened blobs made up by someone who doesn't understand the workings), and it has two of the best front I-beam axles in the modeling world.

Somehow I missed this one earlier. VERY cool. Love it, love it, love it.

Very interesting concept.

Nicely irreverent. There ARE fiberglass SL-clone kit-car bodies in full scale that would be a natural for building this in reality without destroying a million-dollar car.

Multiple build-options are always better than only one. I have a large stash of swappable parts, but many modelers don't have that to draw on. To limit a builder to only one possible way to build a kit may tend to limit the enthusiasm of those just starting out, but who want to do some customization. An obvious alternate engine choice for just about anything (included in a 2-in-one OR available as a parts-pack) would be the Chevy LS, with an appropriate 5 or 6 speed manual, or a 4L60E or 4L80E automatic. These engine / trans combos are extremely popular in the real world of car-building these days, and Revell, at least, already has nice tooling to represent the engines. These engines are also being fitted with carb manifolds and distributors in the real rod world (in place of the full electronic FI and ignition controls) for more retro installations, and tooling parts to represent this would be relatively easy. Again, the Chevy LS engine is showing up in every imaginable form of real car these days, from early Corvettes to old Mustangs, '30s based hot-rods, Asian drifters, pro-touring rides, and even European resto-mods. It is the "smallblock Chevy" of the present, and it might be nice to see this particular reality reflected in scale availability.

Without doubt, the most believable slightly-weathered bare metal finish I've seen so far on a model. How'd you do it?

Depends on the particular Krylon. The "Fusion" product, made for plastic supposedly, is WAY too hot for many models, and has produced severe crazing of the surface for a lot of guys...crazing so bad the model was useless for anything other than a radical custom. I have no experience with any other Krylon products on models, but the best advice you'll get here is "test ANYTHING, yourself, before you use it on a model you care about".

I did an experiment like you describe on this old AMT '32 gluebomb I wanted to turn into a "barn find" that's being brought back to life. The car had been enamel painted and decaled years ago, and was completely dry. It also had a lot of orange peel, bad decal edges, and trash in the paint. I started sanding on it with 1200 grit wet, chipped it in a couple of places intentionally, and just fiddled until I got a feel for how it might look in the end. It turned out being more experiment than serious build, and this is as far as it ever got (though I'm considering using the technique on something similar in the future).

(holy cow !!) Gorgeous. I'll for sure be studying your woody build thread. I never really liked the plastic woodies, and your work here gives me inspiration to do a few cars I've never seen in 1/25.

The front suspension from the T-bird "Supercoupe" wouldn't be at all appropriate for a light car like a '32 hot rod. The rear suspension, on the other hand, could be made to work very well. A better (and pretty easy) choice for independent front suspension would follow real-world practice, and use the front crossmember and control-arms, spindles and brakes from AMT's "Phantom Vickie" kit. Here, I've transplanted the Vickie front end, complete, into a '34 Ford. It's even easier to put it in a '32, because the Vickie IS a '32 Ford. To swap the rear suspension, you'll need to assemble the Supercoupe parts on the Supercoupe chassis to see where all the attachment points need to be. I usually do this kind of mockup fitting using tiny drops of liquid cement to just barely hold everything together. Measure carefully, and make brackets or modify the rear frame rails of the '32 as necessary. Every build like this is different, even on real cars, so you just have to play it by ear. Pay close attention to the ride height you're going for, and measure frequently.

And an electric Continental concept car...

Story here: http://jalopnik.com/5079498/neil-youngs-lincvolt-an-all-electric-1959-lincoln-continental-mark-iv-convertible