Ace-Garageguy

Great looking, fast looking car. Nicely engineered too...entirely plausible.

Beautiful !! Not much I love to look at more than naked old race cars.

X2

And an older photo, still running as F/G... And if you DO decide to build a gasser Hudson, look at some period pix first, and read the old NHRA rules. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2006u57wp7sqpxt/eZJPZZcJdZ The classes changed over the years...some were added, etc., some years allowed engine relocation and other years allowed a certain percentage engine setback, and in general, the rules got more permissive as time went on. The stupidly nose-high junk a lot of people are building today look goofy, would handle horribly, and are just flat wrong. The nose goes UP when they launch, but in general, they sat pretty close to level otherwise.

Love it !! This is a perfect illustration of what the model car companies COULD be capable of consistently, using currently-available technology...if they want to. It's also a great indication of how modeling accuracy has every chance of improving more and more...especially in the hands of motivated, skilled aftermarket guys like this...as the technology proliferates.

I haven't read the whole thread, and this has probably been mentioned before, but the blobular chassis detail molded-in-one-piece driveshaft/suspension/axles on the old AMT kits used to drive me buggy. That's probably one reason I moved to Revell kits back then...and probably a large part of the reason the prices of today's kits seem inflated more than inflation. It takes a LOT more tooling expense to do all those parts separately.

Wow. That took some intense pattern-making...and very good eyes and fine muscle control ! Impressive, to say the least.

matthijsgrit is right. The Revell C5 kits can be had really cheap on ebay. The engine is molded in one unit with the driveline, but it's simple work to cut it free with a razor saw. The red engine and driveline are Revell C5 LS1. I've cut the LS off to mate a 4.6 Ford modular engine to the Corvette torque-tube and auto gearbox.

Here you go. http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/0901gmhtp-ls1-ls6-ls2-ls3-l99-ls4-ls7-ls9-lsa-engine-history/

In those days, gassers ran a weight-to-engine-size classification. You could still be a class-winner (G or H for the gasser classes, most likely) with a heavy car with a smallish engine if your prep, tuning and reflexes were better than the other guy's. Naturally you couldn't run as quick as a Willys with a blown Olds 394, but you COULD win your class. A lot of guys just raced whatever they had, just for the fun and challenge of actually RACING. Here's some Hudson racing history and tech. http://home.comcast.net/~sarahdyoung/ReturnOfHudsonArticle.html

Kirkham Motorsports makes the most accurate (all aluminum body, correct frame and suspension...289...427...289 FIA...Kamm-tail Coupe) replicas on the market. That's what their advertising says and it's true. I've been involved with full-scale builds of these cars...and they are absolutely spectacular. Lotsa really pretty pictures here... http://www.kirkhammotorsports.com/

I'm like an 8-year old. Soon as I get a kit, I just HAVE to look in it. Of course I say it's to see what condition it's really in...but the truth is, in the rare cases of long-sealed original kits, to relive some of the old feeling of opening a new kit for the first time as a kid. They say the sense of smell is the most evocative of memory, and for me, the smell of opening a sealed vintage kit is as good as a time machine. And of course, as Carl says, I'd be concerned for potential warpage of the model if a box was in that condition.

http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48443

Maybe it's a Goth thing.

Where are you guys getting Pasti-kote? Its been forever since I`ve seen any around here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CarQuest has a limited selection...including several primers...in my market area.

Because it's ALWAYS special to have a worthless opinion on things that are meaningless and trivial, and to make that opinion known worldwide. X-zackly.

Yes sir, that's a hot-rod. Hard to beat two-fours on a vintage Hemi in a chopped three-window.

I've seen a fair bit of Plowboy's work on the forum. He's not afraid to show it, and he didn't start this chitstorm, either. The guy who throws the first punch better be ready to back it up, IMHO.

Wow...that explains a LOT.

A late-model pink Lambo roadster, and a '64 4-door Comet.

You must not have been hanging here very long. A lot of these guys tear the manufacturers new ones for every significant flaw in new issues. Including me. Model companies SHOULD be held to some sort of "professional" standards...like getting things SCALED correctly if they're going to call them "SCALE MODELS".

I guess if I had to choose, I'd rather be drenched in p than going up in flames. Still...

And in the end, what does anybody gain from saying "builder X does wonderful work BUT did you see how wrong he got one particular aspect of so-and-so? I mean, what CRAPP!!! " ? Lead by example.

Models aren't necessarily produced continuously. There's a production run, the things are distributed, warehoused and sold. If a sufficient market is seen by company management, you'll get re-issues over time...as long as the tooling hasn't been lost or destroyed. Most everything ever produced can be obtained at some price, and we're currently seeing a LOT of reissues of kits we never thought we'd EVER see again. I've bought Revell reboxings of some of the GT40 variants for reasonable money in the not-too-distant past...but to commit to the huge expense of designing and tooling to produce a completely new kit, the potential market has to be pretty large. Obsolete race-cars, even as iconic and beautiful as the GT40, don't strike me as being massive sellers...especially when pristine kits can still be had.

That's VERY true, but that's not how I'm reading the majority of responses to this topic. Pointing out something that could have been done better on an otherwise spectacular build is one thing, but calling that build "mediocre", "lazy" or "unprofessional" (I'm quoting terms you've used here) because of a few flaws is something else entirely. Where are the "professional" standards for building model cars documented? I'm really curious. I know where to look them up for most of the fields I WORK in (as in vocation), but I'm completely ignorant as to where to find them relative to model-building (model-building for pleasure...not prototypes for product development, wind-tunnel work, etc.).