Ace-Garageguy

Sadly, I think that this is a question only experimentation will answer. If the Scale Finishes paint is hotter than what Tamiya's primer will block, and if Scale Finishes primer has been formulated to deal with this specific issue, then...yes. Lotsa ifs in there. You may have to modify your color application process, shooting very light coats (which I try to avoid because of the potential for getting grainy orange-peel).

I had an '87 El Camino for a couple of years and rather liked it. Nice car interior for dates, car handling, low...like a car...big enough bed to actually haul something bulky...pretty useful vehicle if you only have one and sometimes need a truck, but don't want to drive one every day. And I'd buy another OLD one before I'd buy a new bells-and-electronic-whistles laden, over-complicated and heavy new one.

The patterns, or "swirls" (the lines that indicate where the plastic hesitated flowing during mold-filling) in the surface are a dead giveaway that there's crazing of the plastic itself going on under the primer. If the primer is not a sufficient barrier, you shoot the color on the "wet" side, and the solvent in the paint is on the "hot" side, you'll get this effect...especially these days as manufacturers continue to experiment with cheaper and cheaper grades of polystyrene that is increasingly LESS solvent resistant. If this were my own model, I'd be madder than hell, because both your paint products SHOULD be entirely compatible with Fujimi's plastic. If there is indeed crazing of the plastic, as it appears to me to be 100% the case, stripping will only uncover bare crazed plastic. If this were my own model, I'd try building up lightish coats of color over what's already there, with plenty of flash time in between. You may be able to fill the crazing, sand it all slick, and apply a wet flow coat over the top as usual. Notice this identical appearance, and the line on the door. Dead giveaway. (This model, not mine, is on the Drastic Plastics board, and is said to have been painted with Scale Finishes too. No mention of what primer, if any, was used. It's a Monogram model, and some of their and Revell's kits are VERY sensitive to solvents too these days.)

They appear to be "anti-roll bars". Some people call them "sway-bars" but that's not technically correct. Also called a "stabilizer bar", essentially, an anti-roll bar is a transverse torsion bar that is allowed to pivot in bushings bolted to the chassis, while the ends are connected to the ends of the axle(s) with links. They can be used on solid axles, as in your model, or independent suspension as shown below. The purpose is to resist leaning, or "roll", as a vehicle traverses a turn.

Not if one of 'em has a big enough hammer...

Sorry dude...but you've just defined yourself as one of those "big nitpickers". Welcome to the club.

Well, you know, not a lot of new trucks around here actually get used as trucks. They're fashion statements, or references about the driver's manliness, or corporate tax-writeoffs. It's mostly the second or third owners who actually use the things for...work...and the manufacturers don't give a rat's rear for the needs of the used-vehicle market. You really gonna put a bunch of greasy, sweaty, smelly guys in the leather seats in your shiny new power-everything pickup, and take a chance on scratching the bedliner by actually carrying something heavy?

Yesterday, I finished up the carb retrofit on the '89 GMC pickup. '89 was GM's first year for EFI on their C15 trucks, and it worked OK until about 2 years ago, quit entirely 6 months ago...when it went into total meltdown mode. Simply not smart to repair the EFI. GM no longer supports the electronics and all that's available new is Chinese aftermarket garbage. Buying cheap or junkyard electronic bits is a sure-fire way to get stuck by the side of the road. As the vehicle's age now puts it out of the mandatory emission-inspection-to-get-a-tag requirement, I decided to fix it with parts on-hand. I used the stock EFI intake manifold and machined my own adapter to fit a 52 year old Rochester 2GC carb that hadn't run in over 30 years, and was pretty rough (rebuilt it, of course). Ditched the computer-controlled-advance distributor in favor of a '76 vintage HEI unit. Avoided the expensive and "necessary" bypass fuel pressure regulator, or the "necessity" of replacing the fuel pump (EFI runs much higher fuel line pressure than a carb needs, and will overwhelm the needle valve and flood the carb) by making up a simple T in the line before the cheapo pressure regulator, so excess simply runs back to the tank, while the carb gets its required 3-4 psi. Got lucky and found a really cheap Edelbrock air filter adapter that mated the OEM GMC filter base to the Rochester. Used the old EGR-valve location on the manifold for a heat-source for the automatic choke on the 2GC too. Truck now starts on the first twist of the key, runs smooth at idle, and pulls like a freight train. If anything, it runs stronger than it did with EFI, as I was able to crank in more ignition timing. The exhaust actually smells cleaner, too. So glad I just did it my own way, instead of going by all the internet "expert" advice posted by, apparently, folks who have never done it (so typical). Stupidity like "it won't run with a carb because it has a fuel-injection cam" , recommendations to "machine the block for an old-school mechanical fuel pump, and replace the cam to get one that has the pump-drive eccentric", and all the other "necessary" parts like an intake manifold, fuel-pump, bypass pressure regulator, aftermarket air filter, etc...that aren't. I figure the old girl now has at least another 100,000 miles in her, and she's repairable by the side of the road in Podunk on a Sunday afternoon.

Heller makes a 1/24 Delahaye 135, about 1936 or so. The radiator shell is similar, and it should supply a decent chassis and engine. You'd have to scratch-bash a coachbuilt body (is that another Figoni et Falaschi job?), but it sure would be a worthwhile project.

There was a time I was heavily into computers, and it was on the verge of becoming an all-consuming hobby. This was many years ago, and I still have oddball machines that I really thought I'd get to "someday". Thing is, with as cheap as used computing power is these days, there's almost no reason to keep an old fossil chugging along. It kind of bugs me to dump something that still works, but if you use your computer for business and other real-life functions, it only makes sense to have something reasonably current. Unless you're really into it for fun, the time it would take you to find exactly what would be required to hot-rod your older laptop could probably be spent much more profitably.

It's taken me years, but I've finally found a computer shop staffed by guys who actually know whet they're doing. I've bought a couple of hot-rod machines from them, built from components from trade-ins. When they make a mistake, they're very fair about fixing it for free...and admitting it. Point is, they usually have refurbished Win7 laptops with huge RAM and hard drives for less than $300. I was given an older laptop with a bad drive...nice machine and not too old...but by the time I'd bought a new drive and more RAM, I'd have spent more. I'd suggest you try to find something like that in your locale.

2012 Indian research-development paper on H-powered IC engines. One of hundreds on various aspects of the topic. http://www.ijetae.com/files/Volume2Issue4/IJETAE_0412_09.pdf

Maybe so, but a fueler doesn't sit there making feathery yellow flames in daylight.

These feathery flames, and the ones out the back of lead-sleds, are the result of an excessively rich mixture with a lot of unburnt fuel in it (or in some cases, fuel sprayed into the exhaust pipe) being ignited by a constantly-firing spark plug in the pipe(s). A top-fuel dragster's exhaust flames is another phenomenon entirely. Nitro-methane burns with a yellow flame, and the exhaust gasses are still burning as the exhaust valves open. The spectacular white flame seen above the stacks at night is pure burning hydrogen, dissociated from atmospheric water vapor by the intense heat, and ignited.

Last time I was full-time in the 1:1 car finishing biz, 2005, several manufacturers had versions of the stuff. It works well to get the car delivered to "industry standards", but in my experience, it can be tricky to work with (getting the painter to follow the instructions exactly), and will show a blend-edge in a few months...long enough for the refinish work to be out of warranty, usually Most recently (2011), my blending has been accomplished by scuffing an area well beyond the color application, and spraying 3 progressively over-reduced clear coats, farther and farther out, away from the color touchup. 1500 grit sanding and polishing, after an overnight cure, was getting me "acceptable" blends on upper-end private piston-engine aircraft, but you could usually still see the blend if you knew what to look for.

Windshield looks very good indeed. How-to, thank you!

Exactly, which is why on 1:1 jobs, where a LOT of time and money are at stake if a re-do becomes necessary, I stick to one manufacturer's product line...for the most part,..whenever possible. So far I've never had a problem using one manufacturer's color / reducer / clear system (say Sikkens, for example) over another manufacturer's catalyzed primer system (like DuPont). So far...

Remember, one man's plate of mmmm-mmmm-good witchetty grubs is another man's puke-inducing handful of bug larvae...

Testors "One Coat" lacquers say " may be rercoated in about 20 minutes". Testors basecoats (that require a clear) say 2 hours. These are rough minimums for re-coating. There's no "wrinkle window" like there is with enamel products.

There is still the issue of oxides of nitrogen, which you get when you burn anything in a nitrogen-rich atmosphere like ours. But current catalytic converter technology deals with it nicely. The cats should last just about forever too, as there's no carbon-fouling like you get with petro fuels. Lubricant life is enhanced, as there's no oil dilution like you get with liquid fuels either. I was heavily involved with natural gas as an alternative fuel for years, and the technologies to use hydrogen are very very similar. As far as the other difficulties, they have all been dealt with experimentally, and the only roadblock to implementation of H as a fuel is the will to do it. At least one European test engine has developed more power running H that it did on petro fuels. And, you can drive your rorty, big-cammed V8 well into the future with a clear environmental conscience.

On the hundreds of 1:1 cars I've shot with 2K clears, blending so rarely gave me results I considered acceptable (you can almost always see the blend if you look VERY close) I started clearing entire panels for touchups...when possible. Sometimes on a 1:1 you won't have any "natural" panel break, so blending of clearcoats becomes inevitable. There is a very tedious procedure necessary to get a completely undetectable blend, and it's not at all practical on a model. So, on a model, I wouldn't even consider trying to blend. Bear in mind you may still get the dreaded "halo" around a metallic or pearl touchup...under your clear (resulting from uneven "dry" metallic particle dispersion on the surface) And if that's not bad enough, you may also get a slight color-shift at the panel line, where the different refraction of the additional coats of clear changes the light reflected from the pigmented surface. Your results may vary.

At least a week of shrink-time of the primer before color, a couple of hours of flash between color coats before clear. Probably unnecessarily-long flash time, but this was the first model paint job I'd done in years, and I didn't want to screw it by rushing it. Then I shot ONE coat of clear to seal the metallic, and let that shrink in for several days before 4 more coats of clear, about an hour flash between coats.

From the shadows on the roof and door pillars, it looks like it may very be a chopped real-steel car.

Sure. His choice to build a 99% period car and spoil it with that last 1%.