Ace-Garageguy

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.

You guys are a hoot. You continually miss the point, even when I spell it out. Only a moron would think I equated the Challenger disaster with model car faults. But the culture of not paying attention, dodging responsibility, "forgetting", trying to get by with the minimum amount of work and still get a paycheck, passing-the-buck and making excuses is exactly what led to the big Challenger boom, and to the mis-proportioned models we get. And Tom...I've bought around 40 kits this past year. I bought $35 worth yesterday. How about you? Plus tens of gluebombs, lotsa detail bits, tools, etc. Just because I'm not posting much in WIPs recently doesn't mean I'm not buying, and I'd rather not be forced to do a lot of remedial work on a NEWLY TOOLED kit before starting in building my own vision from it. I have 4 or 5 of the Revell '57 Ford and several more of the Revell '50 Olds. I AM a consumer of these things...probably buying more kits, parts, tools and materials in a year than the great majority of builders here, and I have a right to voice an opinion concerning things I buy. Or do I ?? To BobbyG...you don't use a "slide ruler" as you call it to measure things. It's a mechanical analog computer. To MonoPed...I'd think with your avatar being a representation of one cover of Atlas Shrugged, that you'd get it. Have you ever actually read the book? To Austin T, I quote:"Why would this bother you,I've seen you mention plenty of times in the past the only kits you purchase are second hand and rebuildables for your projects." Check your reading skills there buddy. I've said repeatedly I enjoy rebuilding trash into something nice, but NEVER that's ALL I build. I have multiple build threads of NEW kits going on this very board. And as stated in my response to Tom, I bought around 40 NEW kits over the last 12 months. How 'bout you? YGTBFK ME.

Rod 1 should be bent to clear the dropped base of the open element air cleaner but the 325hp engine uses the same rod. The straight rod is for a small block. As for photos of what's 'correct' that'd take up some time. For the base L35 325hp engine there were those with positive ventilation (breather in passenger side valve cover) and closed positive ventilation and/or A.I.R (with vent tube from air cleaner to valve cover and/or air injection reactor) just to name two major flavors. Rod connects directly to a bellcrank pivoted at the firewall, and working directly off the accelerator pedal, similar to this (upper illustration, below).

Maybe if someone in product development was doing a little more of that, there wouldn't be so many complaints. Exactly that should be a part of someone's job...and speaking up about it...before final tooling is cut. You really can't make the lame excuse that it would add all this supposed cost to the model, or destroy all the company's profits.

I would think with all the hyperbole and stupid exaggeration about "if we ask for perfect kits all the model companies will act like 5-year-old spoiled babies and take their toys and go home", it would be easy to recognize my exaggeration to make a point. Apparently not. The point is: A damm job is a job. A job is where you get money in exchange for doing something CORRECTLY. .Do it right, or do something where it doesn't matter to ANYONE if you can't.

Looks great as a hard working, heavier truck. Fine job. And "Quality Parts"? Sure. High-Quality parts? That may be something else entirely.

And for the 100 dozenth time, maybe for people who are new here...NO ONE EVER EXPECTED A PERFECT KIT. What we expect, and what we deserve, is kits free from gross errors instantly obvious to anyone who's particularly familiar with the 1:1 subject. This is NOT unreasonable "rivet counting". It's simply demanding we get what we pay for. I think the Revell '57 Ford is a very nice kit. The very obvious errors on the outside of the body bother me, and I'll fix them. I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO.

I've worked "professionally" on aircraft, racing cars, and a variety of other high performance projects my entire life. "Good enough" isn't, and rushing to deadline has its consequences. I sincerely hope the next guy who works on all of you "good enough" folks' car brakes does a job that in his eyes is just "good enough". See how "good enough" it is as you sail through an intersection and get hammered flat by a semi. Why are so many of you so quick to give people who GET PAID WELL to do a job, even if it's only making toys, a free pass for turning out second-rate work? "Measure twice, cut tools once" should be the operative phrase here. MEASURING ACCURATELY ISN'T ROCKET SCIENCE. When your daily job involves creating something tangible with your own mind and hands, and possible loss of human life if you foul up, sometimes on a large and dramatic scale, you get a little different perspective on the meaning of "good enuf". Rushed presentation, 80% concept intact...

We should have a contest. Design "something cool" to make from that. Harry judges. Winner has to go get it and build his design. In 1:1. It has to run. Well.

The custom Ford 9" I ordered for the '47 Caddy came in 3 days instead of 2 weeks, and fit absolutely spot damm on. Spring pads, width, pinion angle and ratio all perfect, and all the correct bits to put it together. And Vintage Air corrected their mistake, sent me the right parts in one day, and a free return authorization for what they had shipped incorrectly. Now I can finish up the AC as well. Measure multiple times, order once.

Sculpturally the bike is... interesting, but I'd be WAY more impressed with the VW if the Hemi was stuffed in the back-seat area, mid-engine.

A very simple method of equalizing the pull on parking brake cables is this system widely used on older sports cars with a parking brake handle as shown. Its function is obvious, so keep it in mind. The cable connecting to the rear wheel brakes should be labeled "secondary cable" Another way to accomplish the same thing, but using an "equalizer lever" instead of the slider is below. The rear (secondary) cables running to the wheels are functionally identical to the diagram above BUT, instead of a "primary cable" there's a short cable connected to the "2690 brake lever". Then, right AT THE ARROW TIP (and going towards the front of the car) there is another cable that connects to the E-brake handle under the dash. At the arrow tip, going towards the rear of the car, there's a return spring. At the end of the equalizer lever AWAY from the arrow tip, there is a pivot. These parts basically mimic the simple layout shown above. Similar system under a car shown below.

Roof looks pretty flat for the north country. I guess the builder never heard of "snow load" . Too bad. I hope there's no significant damage to the other cars, tools and models.

Poor poor poor little car(s). That's one of the worst messes I've ever seen. The big-car equivalent of a 5-year-old's gluebomb. It looks really sad to me. I want to give it a nice dry warm home.

If it really IS your best, that's certainly good enough. Nobody ever really expects perfection. Even in natural mathematics, Pi, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter, is hardly perfect in any conventional sense.

Lots of discussions on the board already. I respectfully suggest you try one of the search functions. All will be revealed...even multiple lists of online free videos explaining in-depth the processes and materials involved. Many of the videos are professionally produced with correct information by the manufacturers of the materials themselves. There is also, I believe, a several-part article in back issues of the magazine.

Two days after I got the P551 code on the PT Cruiser from-hell beaten into submission by correcting rodent-chewed wiring AND replacing the sensor, the little beast decided to put up a P420 code, which is "inefficient catalyst". These two are in no way related, and the 420 is most likely because the cat was damaged by the owner running the thing for a year with an internal coolant leak. I've built the top-end, it runs beautifully now, doesn't overheat or anything else nasty, but it looks as though the cat may have to be replaced to pass this state's idiot OBD-only (no sniffer) emissions test. I've had bad luck with cheap aftermarket cats...some of them so poor they won't keep the 420 code from triggering even when they're brand new. A decent name-brand cat is expensive, and the Mopar part is insane. Vehicle owner is running on empty financially after her place of employment burned down. Bugger. I DO know one last little magic trick for this...we shall see.

The "Fiberglass Trends" logo on the car is the giveaway. If my creaky old memory is correct, FT produced fiberglass lookalike "Cheetah" bodies and steel tube drag-racing-oriented chassis, not actual Cheetahs. FT built one of the prototype glass bodies for Bill Thomas, but when they didn't get the production deal, they went on and built a knockoff drag version. This is one of their catalogs. Most of the drag-racing "Cheetahs" you'll see are actually Fiberglass Trends' clones.

Beautiful model and photography. That first shot looks like it's on a high bank. Had to look twice to make sure it was a model.

1A. AVOID SMASHING YOUR HAND WHILE HAMMERING BY GETTING SOMEONE ELSE TO HOLD THE NAILS.

I had an Avenger with a 140 Corvair engine for a short time. Kinda horrible fiberglass...heavy, 1/2 inch thick in places, cracked everywhere because the whole mess flexed so much, doors and deck chipped paint on the edges constantly (again, from the flexing), leaked in the rain...but it sure was fun. I had absolutely no idea it was ever offered in model form. Gotta gets me one. Had a Lotus 7 and selling it was one of the stupidest things I've ever done. Had an Intermeccanica Speedster on a shortened Bug platform, and it was better than a real one (had late Bug non-swing-axle IRS, front disc brakes, etc). Currently have a Beck 550 Soyder, soon to be back on the road. Two I used to lust after were the Myers Manx SR and the Brubaker Box. There were a surprisingly large number of fiberglass kit-cars available in the 1950s to refit chassis like Austin Healey, MG, etc. One of the better looking ones was the Devin. I'd like to see this offered in scale some day.

Comes with a sack of life-sized plastic nads.

There's a magazine? Like, you have to pay for it??

Interesting that the "How to become a machinist" piece was written when South Bend was an American company actually manufacturing machine tools here, and when competence at one's job was a condition of employment. Also interesting is the reference to taking personal responsibility for poor work...and not one single word about "self esteem". Nothing said, I see, about "you're entitled to make plenty of money and get ahead just because you're special".

X2