Ace-Garageguy

Roger (and anybody else reading this)...I don't know how serious you are about saving energy costs, but my electrical bill at the 3000 sq.ft. house I recently moved from rarely exceeded $50 per month, and the 1375 sq.ft. house I'm in now is even less, though it's a worse neighborhood and requires all-night floodlights outside. I run a 5-hp air compressor, a mill and a lathe, as necessary, and do a large load of laundry weekly (electric drier or line-dry when possible). I haven't used the AC in years...I open the house at night, after the sun has gone down, and pull cool air in with a full-house exhaust fan. Then I close the house before going to work. The indoor temperature right now is 75 (last night's low was 72, so the house only got down that far) but it's 90 outside. By dusk, the indoors will be up to about 78, and I'll turn on the exhaust fan again. I also replaced ALL my lighting with compact-fluorescent bulbs years ago, and as they burn out, I'm replacing them with LEDs that use even less energy and last virtually forever. I also only use power that I really need, turning stuff off when I don't. I heat (both places) with gas, and in winter my worst bill was never more than $130 (average around $60) mainly because I kept the house at around 65 degrees. I don't mind wearing a sweater to save money. I'm never uncomfortable, but it's not a lifestyle everyone would accept, being used to full-time AC and/or heat. But an energy-use approach like mine, coupled with a low-power solar unit, could reduce your power costs to near zero, and you'd still have the backup of the grid during extended bad weather.

Refine your search parameter to "paints by bob model car" and you get this link with contact information...http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=39807

1mm LED sources, pre-wired http://www.dccconcepts.com/catalogue/d/nano-leds http://www.modeltrainsoftware.com/led-small.html

Installing solar panels requires some thought (and knowledge), requires working on the roof, most likely installing supports for the panels on the roof that might have fasteners go THROUGH the roof and cause leaks, the panels need to be oriented correctly relative to the sun to work well, the electrical interface, though not complex, requires SOME electrical knowledge to avoid burning the house down...not daunting for you or me, but for the typical DIYer...hmmm. LOTS of potential liability issues when Joe Average falls off the now-leaking roof, electrocutes himself, and ignites the house. I've seen SO much bodged work done by "professionals" in multiple fields, that I'm reluctant to think it's a really good idea to have mouth-breathers installing solar equipment. The people who frequent this particular forum are NOT the norm in several respects, one of which is being able to follow somewhat detailed instructions. That particular ability doesn't seem to be widespread in the general population. I say this with something to back it up. Over the years I've attempted to hire apprentices several times, offering truly excellent pay for someone with no prior experience. One of the requisite qualifications (besides basic mechanical aptitude and being able to work with one's hands) was "must be able to read and follow written instructions". I got ZERO qualified responses.

I've repeatedly bought Chinese LEDs on the 'bay, as has the Cheif, and they have been mostly so cheap I tended to forgive that maybe 1 in 20 is bad. Right now, there's a bag of 100, 5mm LEDs in assorted colors up for $1.56. Hard to beat that price. I don't know how they do it.

Just a guess, but the typical HD customer isn't going to have a clue what to do with a solar panel, they're still a little on the fragile side, and the more tech-savvy customers are likely to do their comparison shopping online anyway. HD's strategy just may be to see which regions start buying the stuff in sufficient numbers before committing to begin stocking them in actual stores.

You're fine putting enamel over lacquer...usually. It's the other way around that gets you in trouble...lacquer over enamel is verboten...usually. In general: ALWAYS TEST ON PLASTIC FROM THE MODEL YOU'RE BUILDING BEFORE PAINTING THE MODEL. And Roger (plowboy) is absolutely correct. You don't need a metallic base under metallics or pearls, but you almost always do under candies (depending on the effect you want). Different colors of primers may have an effect on the color of your topcoats too. White primer generally tends to make metallics nice and bright and clean. BUT...Bernard Kron recently did a gorgeous "flake" job using a metalflake base under a metallic. To learn how he did it, read post #50 in this thread...http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=91554&page=3

Fascinating that the Amish have embraced the technology. Thanks for bringing that to our attention, really. Fact is though, solar panels have been available since the 1950s...the prices have just been high due to low demand and production numbers, and the efficiencies weren't very good for the cost, which led to low demand and production numbers. A vicious circle. Today, with increasing awareness (that could have easily been fostered 50 years ago) and vastly improved efficiencies (that also could have probably been approached many years ago if the desire and capitalization had been there), many manufacturers are producing competitively-priced solar arrays. You can even buy them at Home Depot. http://www.homedepot.com/b/Electrical-Alternative-Energy-Solutions-Solar-Power-Solar-Panels/N-5yc1vZbm31

wikipee article link to Ford FE history...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_FE_engine

FE stands for Ford Edsel...the 2 product lines the engine was originally developed for.

Nice start, nice chop. Here's a similar build I have going of a gluebomb-save of that same kit...might give you some ideas. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=72071

Hard to beat a traditional chopped custom in black...and almost everything you need to build it is in the box, including a top chopped about this much, and similar skirts. The tops on these are what ruin most builds. They're separate and don't fit the body terribly well. They take some jigging, patience, and finessing of the bodywork to look really good.

Kinda had to chuckle at that one. Solar panels kinda need to be...wait for it...in the sun.

I have nothing to add. I've been thinking of this question for many a long time, but youse guys have certainly given me a lot of ideas and places to get materials to start experimenting. Man, I love this forum.

Yes sir !!! I want some !!1

Cost is always cited as the hold-back for widespread implementation of solar power installations. BUT...very intelligent and PROFITABLE business models are already available for solar energy...based on a rather old idea. One particular company installs solar arrays on the roofs of buildings with no up-front costs and sells the generated power to the building owner AT RATES COMPETITIVE WITH CONVENTIONAL GENERATION, and puts the excess power back into the grid (excess power is sold to the local utility company). And they make a profit for the company and its investors. Look up SunEdison...(from wikipee: SunEdison offers customers access to solar power without financing the individual projects generating the power. SunEdison collects capital from investors and uses it to construct photovoltaic plants. The plants are operated by SunEdison after construction. Investors receive a cash flow from sold solar power, including subsidies from governmental organizations. The solar power is sold to commercial, government, and utility customers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The issue isn't that nobody "owns" the wind or the sun. The issue is that power-generation companies have been foot-dragging for many many years because that's what hidebound humans do...resist change for as long as possible, even if the change is entirely logical, easy, profitable and NECESSARY.

Yup. Couldn't go for it, having just spent close to $600 on my cat. Oh well...the models aren't happy to see me when I come home, and don't sit in my lap and purr.

One of my faves was John Bissinger's '32 Ford 5-window... Then there's Karsten Schmidt's 356A Speedster... and his equally beautiful 550 Spyder... Anything by Jurgen Kowalski, like this W196 GP Mercedes... or his Jag Mk II 3.8... Also anything built by comp1839 (Dave Smith). Fantastic craftsmanship, fabrication, machine work, and knowledge-based accuracy... Charles Rowley's fire vehicles,,, mackd-built (Alain Bradet ) D-8 Cat...

I saw what looked to me like a mid-'70s Autocar dump truck, in beautiful shape, still working hard for a living...parked in front of a liquor store. Very much like this...

Exactly.

Yes, but...there are several interesting scientific techniques that give us a better look into the distant climatic past than you might think. One is sampling ice-cores from the polar regions. The mechanics of the formation of deep ice from snow accumulation and compaction seems to be well understood, and it forms in readily identifiable, annual layers, much like tree-rings. By counting back the layers and analyzing the CO2 content of the air trapped in the ice, it's possible to get a very good idea of atmospheric CO2 concentration for millenia. Again, the raw data indicate un-arguably that the atmospheric concentration of "greenhouse gasses" is far higher now (and measurably increasing with industrialization) than it was during long-ago warming events, whose cycles are at least theoretically understood. Of course, it's almost a moot point, because we ARE running out of fossil fuels and will HAVE to come up with some widespread alternative within 100 years or so. And of course, there are those who argue that oil will last indefinitely somehow, far far into the future.

Trust me, it's everywhere...

Agreed 99%. There is some compelling raw data (the stuff the REAL experts produce, not what the "pseudo experts" shout at every opportunity...on both sides) that does make a good argument for a human contribution to the phenomenon, however, like the known and provable increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration since the dawn of industrialization and widespread burning of fossil fuels, the apparently-understood inter-relationship between CO2 concentration and the so-called "greenhouse-effect", and the seeming disconnect between the time-period of rapid de-glaciation we're seeing today and what is THOUGHT to be the natural cycle and time span of previous warming events. Apparently, there is a coupled ocean-atmosphere-astronomical-agricultural-industrial system that science is only beginning to understand, and it's far too early in the study to form any "final" conclusions...but it also seems to me misguided to continue dumping massive amounts of CO2 and heat into the atmosphere, insisting that it makes no difference whatsoever and that global warming is a made up problem. Until we KNOW, it might be wise to behave with some moderation.

My first guess is that the tooling is toast. The Caddy engine in the Revell '49 Merc isn't anywhere as nice as he old Caddy parts-pack, and the Hemi in the Revell '32 5-window inn't as nice as the old parts-pack version either. Seems like if those old tools still existed, Revell could have saved considerable $$ including those vintage trees in the respective kits, rather than tooling all new (and mediocre) versions.