Ace-Garageguy

Interestingly perhaps, my own knowledge comes from hands-on experimenting with alternative fuels and an almost lifetime involvement in the field. Propane dual-fuel systems in the 1970s. An alcohol fuel pilot program run by Ga. Tech in the '80s, during which time I ran my own Triumph GT-6 daily on alcohol distilled by solar energy. In the 1990s I was heavily involved with a push to rationalize the use of CNG (compressed natural gas) as a motor vehicle fuel. I've run a cobbled-up Geo Metro on the bottled gas you get for running barbeque grills, and got over 65mpg (equivalent) in steady state cruise with nothing more exotic than a crude vaporizer / regulator / converter. I've been a loud proponent of rooftop photovoltaic-powered hydrogen-producing, household-sized units for powering vehicles. And I did some pilot work on the concept of leasing back photovoltaic rooftop power-generating units to electric consumers by public utilities...a concept that is working profitably now in several areas. I can say with some certainty that the "100 mpg" carburetor, supposedly able to get that kind of mileage from a 4000-pound V8-powered barge, is bunk. I can also say with absolute certainty that a LOT of promising technologies have been allowed to languish, or have been ignored entirely by the business-as-usual fraternity that's pretty well run things up until now. I think this last sentence pretty well encompasses the subject of your "diatribe".

Certainly no disrespect intended, but really, before you can make valid judgments about anything hinging on science, you have to know some science. You also have to know what's accepted as scientific fact, and WHY, before you're in a position to change the knowledge base by doing something new. And to change the knowledge base, you have to be able to repeat your results, openly, repeatedly and transparently. Just saying you have a magic carburetor and hiding it in a box doesn't cut it...even if you DO have a magic carburetor that somehow defies known physics. Real science is not absolute...it changes every day, and at any moment "as far as we know right now" is the qualifier of scientific "fact" that any GOOD scientist will insist on. And just an FYI...faster-than-light travel, "known" for years to be completely impossible and only fit for science fiction, now looks very much like it IS possible. It'll be a while yet, but the numbers are looking...interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

I really have to agree strongly with Snake on this one. I do a LOT of slice / dice and heavy mods, and though I haven't done a Corvair convertible conversion, doing just as Snake suggests makes the most sense. It's relatively easy to remove the hardtop portion of any model and leave the windshield frame intact. The Corvair convertible in 1:1 uses welded-on, painted A-pillars, with a stainless cap where the top seals. Cutting the roof off and retaining the existing windshield frame is without doubt the smart way to go about getting a convert.

Going by known principles of physics (inconvenient little things like how much of the energy produced by burning fuel in the MOST efficient IC engine is wasted as exhaust and cooling system heat, and how much actually makes "go"...something the most wonderful carburetor in the universe could not have ANY effect on whatsoever) and the amount of energy contained in the bonds that are broken when fossil fuels are burned, the 100mpg carburetor is total BS, perpetuated by people who want to see conspiracies everywhere. It's actually good to have a strong background in engineering, mechanics, and science (which I happen to have) in order to know what is baloney and what is not. Things like this do no good for the reality of the situation, which is quite bad enough without overblown claims of shadowy criminal exploits among the oil and automobile companies. And one part of the truth is that it IS possible to get much more than 100 miles from one gallon of gasoline. I believe the current world record is something like 12,600 mpg, set by this little beauty. Somewhat impractical for real-world conditions, it's still on the leading edge of demonstrating what IS possible by shaving weight, improving light vehicle structural performance, enhancing vehicle aerodynamics, and optimizing engine design.

Very interesting. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What I'd REALLY like to see from both Porsche AND Corvette would be de-contented cars without all the silly bells and whistles that get in the way of the pure driving experience. An entry-level Porsche or stripped Corvette that were once again about driving as opposed to posing while you talk on the phone while sitting in rush hour traffic would certainly get my interest.

Sounds like a rough few months. I can identify. It also sounds like you have a good attitude for moving forward. Stay positive, and good luck.

Good comments above, and I hope I didn't sound like I was trying to discourage you. Many of my period builds are of things that could have been done, but to my knowledge, weren't. A custom "53 with the Ardun conversion is a natural, really, and to do it in 1:1 would be far simpler than swapping other engines from different manufacturers.

Frankly, I agree entirely. This is hardly the world we were promised back in the 1950s, and the technology exists to have solved a great many more of humanity's problems than has been utilized intelligently to do so. But what do we see? Primarily...tech as toys. Again, it all comes down to greed for money, greed for political power, and fear of change. But you still have to applaud the people who are doing something visible to move us forward as a species. The Elon Musks and Burt Rutans (and even the much-maligned Mr. Gates) of the world who actually get things done realized early in the game that you have to have money and connections to accomplish the big things. Progress doesn't happen because of some genius idealist working in a vacuum. And waiting for the other guy, or the government...well, it'll be a LONG wait. There is so much resistance to change, and so much literal hatred and badmouthing of people like Musk, that it's kind of remarkable anything worthwhile ever gets done at all.

Development takes time and money. Battery tech has come a long LONG way in just the past 20 years. This self-launching REAL airplane would have been physically impossible just a few years ago.

West System epoxy is still around. It's certified for use on some kitplanes (real ones). I also use the West 105 resin as the base for my microballoon filler, when I want something that I know won't give me any trouble down the road. http://www.westsystem.com/ss/105-epoxy-resin/

Sure, it could have been done. Probably wasn't, because there were only 250 or so pairs of original Ardun heads made, and most of them ended up in race cars. But it would sure make a cool car. As far as other appropriate engines go,all you need to think of is what was available in junkyards during the time your car model represents. A '53 Ford, in 1960, could have any engine built up 'til 1960, of course. Both the Caddy and Olds OHV V8 engines came out in '49, so there were plenty in the junkyards by '53. Also bear in mind that not a lot of brandy-new cars got customized. Ones that did were usually at least several years old, because a lot of the custom thing had to do with building something as good or better than a new production car, but cheaper. If your '53 Ford custom is supposed to have been built in say, '57, then a '55-'57 smallblock Chevy is entirely appropriate. Nailhead Buicks, Ford Y-blocks and Chrysler, Dodge and DeSoto Hemi engines all became available in the early '50s too.

OK, whose battery tech impresses you? And why?

Yup, stance is looking good. Nice work relocating the spring hangers. Just like real.

100% correct. Though you may not notice degrading performance with the low-end epoxies people usually use on models, industrial and aviation epoxies are considered to have shelf lives ranging from 6 months to two years, or thereabouts (from the time of manufacture, not the time of purchase). Carefully controlled testing will show a slow decline in how well the stuff works over time, and it's even illegal to use some of it that's gone out of date in certain applications...like aviation...though it still seems to work perfectly well...sorta. Andy is right about heat being a factor too. Keeping your materials cool, sealed, and in a low-humidity environment is a good way to prolong their life, and measuring / mixing carefully, even with the hardware-store "50-50" grades, will give you the best possible results.

I've never encountered anything that was "unbuildable", but I've encountered a few that were so awful that I thought to myself "what's the point??" Probably the worst kit I have is a Lindberg '40 Ford that's short-shotted AND warped badly...just not worth the effort to save, 'cause there are so many nice '40 Ford kits on the shelf. But I keep even the really really horrible stuff, 'cause you just never know when a part from something otherwise useless might be just the thing you need for something cool. And yes, "unbuildable" is in the eye of the beholder...entirely.

Oh yeah, but people always think I'm being a mean SOB when I rag about incompetent people doing half-assed work...everywhere...

Several guys have mentioned using bilge-fans made for boats. They have to be "explosion-proof" ("ignition-protected") to qualify for marine use, and can sometimes be found cheep. You'll need a 12V DC power supply as well. Here's a 4" 240 CFM fan. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rule-240-Inline-Bilge-Blower-fan-For-Inboard-and-I-O-Boats-4-240-CFM-/231516685776?hash=item35e77845d0&vxp=mtr

What annoyed me at one time was a female body-shop "manager" who didn't have the first clue as to what she or anyone else in the shop was doing. Couldn't write any kind of usable estimate because she didn't actually know how a car is put together, what the parts were called, or which systems might have crash-related damage...but she'd argue all day if you gently tried to teach her anything. Kinda like a know-it-all guy (who doesn't) with boobs. But I'M ALL FOR WOMEN GETTING EQUAL PAY AND RESPECT FOR EQUAL KNOWLEDGE AND WORK. And I've known plenty of male "shop managers" who were just as clueless and arrogant as this bidge was. Equality, see? Yeah baby.

Yup.

Besides wiping them off carefully immediately after use, I find that keeping tubes of anything, including epoxies, standing on end with the cap up (in something like an old coffee cup) pretty well eliminates the mess from leakage.

Indeed. Great colors for it too. And from where I'm sitting, your BMF work looks just about flawless. Impressive and certainly inspirational.

Nice one. I'm liking the Rocket Bunny look more and more. Are those rising-sun endplates on the wing PE parts?

Cool hot-rodski, definitely. I've always liked Fiats, and a sleeper Lada should be a to of fun.

If only. That would get me interested in current events again.

A agree with Steve...nice job on a very rarely seen kit. I don't think I even really knew it HAD been kitted.