Ace-Garageguy

And that's a very personal issue. Seems some new builders get easily discouraged when they discover that first-rate, shiny models don't quite fall together. So either they walk away from a hobby that does require some effort (what some of us call "fun") to produce good results, or they coast along gluing things together with a minimum of "difficulty", and they don't get any better. That's OK. It's all about choices. Choices. Some guys stay at it and develop outstanding skills necessary to build box-stock models that are almost indistinguishable from the real thing in photos. Some guys go spinning off into making wild and fanciful (and also very much fun) creations that could never exist in reality...as we currently know it, anyway. And everything in between. But like in any artistic and creative endeavor, it really IS necessary to master (or at least get a good grasp of) the several important skills that, when combined, will ultimately allow a modeler to create a satisfying 3-dimensional expression of his vision, whatever that vision might happen to be.

There's not really a lot of choice in 1/24 engines, especially old US iron...as everyone knows. One that is very simple but looks good built and detailed is the nailhead Buick / Dynaflow trans combo in the old Monogram Orange Hauler kit.

Umm hmm. My thoughts exactly. And if this phrase describes the folks responsible for doing the tooling...and approving it...well, as they say...THERE'S your problem. I can't fathom why anyone lacking those talents would be hired for the job in the first place, why they'd want it, or how they'd be able to keep it after demonstrating a deficiency in that area.

Looking GOOD.

...you rivet counter, you.

Yes, but it will require a two-part mold.

Chrome and hubcaps will be extra-cost-options. Just an added touch of realism...

I still mostly use an ancient 4 megapixel Nikon Coolpix L4. Bought it new, but they're really cheap now used. Also a heavy tripod from the pawnshop, about $15. For lighting, I use 3 $5 swing-arm lamps from the thrift store, with 100-watt-tungsten-equivalent compact-florescent 25W lamps, mixing warm and cool color temperatures. The camera has a 3-power zoom, so the tripod is good for stabilizing it to get sharp depth-of-field. I also use the auto-timer to avoid jiggle. I never use flash for models. The swing-arm lamps allow the light to come from any angle. The Nikon also came with a simple photo-editing suite that allows for color correction, cropping and image sharpening in the computer before uploading to Photobucket. When I take the time to set up a nice shot with a clean background, it does a pretty good job.

I like puppies.

Bravo sir. Remarkable self discipline. Betcha feel better than you did 3 years ago, too.

Good news ! And now we ALL know that Dawn is good for washing models prior to paint. You've helped everyone here by doing that little experiment and posting the results.

I agree 100%. I like the Revell kit. I'll be correcting at least one of mine, but I still like it. A also prefer the styling of the '55-'57 Fords to the Chevs. A '57 convertible is on my top 10 gotta-have-one-before-I-die list.

Somehow, I doubt it.

Post deleted, no point stirring it up any more. It's all good (enuf).

deleted. sorry 'bout that.

never mind.

I had an unfortunate hand in running this thread off the rails too...by simply asking Sledsel, as he has first-hand in-the-garage knowledge of the '57 Ford, just exactly what the body flaws were...cause I like the kit and it looked pretty good to me during my first cursory inspections. He answered fully and I thought that was done. Then the rivet-counter perfect-kit good-enuf business started and I just couldn't hold my tongue about the fact that, toys or not, to the folks who manufacture them it's a job, and it ought to get done right. I sincerely apologize if some of you found that comment and my opinion regarding quality offensive. Notice, I didn't apologize for the comment or the opinion. I'm just sorry some of you think that being expected to do a good job on something manufactured for sale is asking too much.

I don't know that, but I DO know we used to heat synthetic enamel before spraying in the bad old days painting real cars. God, what a stench. The reasons for heating rattlecans are twofold. 1) Heat raises the internal pressure in the can, resulting in finer atomization and 2) heat slightly lowers the viscosity of the paint product, again helping with atomization and "flow". Adjusting air pressure, and tuning paint viscosity with correct reduction should obviate any advantage from heating solvent-based paint to be airbrushed.

Beautifully proportioned, modified and finished model...even more remarkable considering it started as a gluebomb. Great shot of it with your take on the much-maligned Lindberg '40. Just goes to show what can be accomplished by putting some effort into something rather than complaining or giving up. Inspiring stuff here.

No Austin, not over a model kit. Over a philosophy of life that values excellence, effort and passion.

Pretty cool across the board. All my best wishes for you and them. Love the 3rd generation pedal car too.

Yeah, exactly. A defense after I was personally attacked, as usual, after I voiced my opinion that people who GET PAID to make SCALE MODELS really ought to make SCALE MODELS and not loose interpretations of the subject matter. IF YOU GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME, YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE EXPENSIVE CORRECTIONS AND MISS DEADLINES. IT'S SIMPLE. MY entire professional life consists these days of going behind people who got paid well to do a job correctly and didn't. It's then MY job to wipe their asses, listen to their excuses about why THEY couldn't do it, and do it over, MYSELF. Why is it that I can ALWAYS do it, but the turkey before me couldn't? Because they just didn't try as hard as I do, that's why. I don't build models as a continuation of my daily BS dealing with stupid slackers and re-doing their work, but when a kit doesn't look like the subject TO ME, that's exactly what I have to do...if I want to make a model that comes up to MY OWN standards I set for MYSELF. I'm tired of being sold second-rate BS and being told it's "good enough" and offered repetitive excuses about why it can't be better. One more time for the benefit of the slow learners... IF YOU GET IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME, YOU DON'T HAVE TO MAKE EXPENSIVE CORRECTIONS AND MISS DEADLINES. IT'S SIMPLE. ​And it doesn't take ANY longer to get it right the first time than it takes to get it wrong. It just takes a little commitment and passion.

It IS contamination of some kind. That's all it ever is. What kind of dishwashing detergent? What kind of gloves? Some detergents have silicone anti-spot ingredients. Some gloves may have something equally nasty if they're the powdered variety. If you use the same gloves over after getting fisheyes, you run the risk of just spreading the contamination all over again. I've personally never experienced a fishy episode I couldn't kill by doing all the steps you've done. But you really REALLY have to think about re-spreading whatever is contaminating your surface...with gloves, paper towels...something is doing it.

Hey bud...I'm not peeing on anybody's Wheeties. I've REPEATEDLY SAID I LIKE REVELL'S '57 FORD. I'll BUY the DAMM WAGON. SEVERAL OF THEM. AND I'LL CORRECT IT IF I HAVE TO. BUT I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.

There's a lot of 906 info out there if you dig, like dimensioned scale body drawings (click link, scroll down). http://www.tech-racingcars.eu/porsche-906 Here's 910 stuff, including another dimensioned (sorta) body drawing. http://www.tech-racingcars.eu/porsche-910 The length, wheelbase and height for both cars are on the drawings (the width is also on the 906 drawing). Both drawings have scales, so any other dimension may be taken and computed. Yes, you simply divide the real-car measurement by 24 to get 1:24 or 1/24 scale. You can take dimensions off of the drawings more easily if you print them out. I'll explain it if you don't yet know how. Bear in mind the 910 is reputed to have 13" wheels.