Ace-Garageguy

I guess that counts as a "modern driver" issue. (from post 106): " And a modern driver wouldn't have any issues!" PS. My sincere apologies for the off-topic digression.

Fire hydrants can be SO annoying when they ignore you !!!

Man, that is one fine model. I've gotta check the big trucks out more often. Gorgeous work, sir.

Man, that is GORGEOUS. I'm just like a little boy when it comes to big ol' working trucks...love to look at them still (though I don't build them). Beautiful job.

Gotta watch those "clearance" numbers on underpasses pretty close.

And, you can eat, put on makeup, send and receive mail, play games, watch TV, talk on the phone, pay bills and read a moving map (that even TALKS to you !!!)...ALL while you DRIVE!! The wonders of the modern world !!!

The search function within the section works pretty well, but it's helpful if posters include a specific reference to exactly WHAT a thread is about, particular car, part, whatever, in order to make search results actually relevant. If you start a thread about Buick nailhead engines, call it "Buick nailheads", rather than "some engine pictures".

He asked a question about "grafting" parts previously http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=91830#entry1226377 and I gave him an answer somewhat similar to your advice. But, IF the clip is cut and fitted CLEANLY at the door-opening lines and cowl panel, it should be possible to avoid the filler issue entirely.

I may be wrong, but I see this as another backhanded "fun" bash against folks who want to take the extra effort to go farther. IT'S ALL FUN, whether some of us (like me) rarely finish a model because the scale-engineering gets completely out-of-hand, what each of us does, whether "trophy hound" or one-model "career" builder, if it wasn't "fun", I seriously doubt we'd do it. Fun to me, in part, is solving difficult problems. That's why I build real cars that have to WORK as good as they LOOK. MY definition of "fun" doesn't have to be the same as YOURS, and neither one is better.

My cat-friend of 14 years is still alive this morning. She's been in decline for several weeks and stayed out all night, but I found her this AM. She is having a hard time walking, but she's still breathing, and has a pretty good appetite.

Stop where YOU want to stop. Adding ONE additional detail does NOT REQUIRE ADDING OTHERS. BUT, spark plug wires are about the most basic of added details, and IF you're going to do plug wires, try to get them approximately in-scale. Real plug wires don't look like sausages or hoses or rope, and when they look like that on a model, it's disappointing (and so easily avoided).

Great job on a much-maligned kit. Really one of the best builds of this one I've seen.

Hmmm. There are rather a lot of builders who go to considerable effort to make nice models, beyond the casual time-passing level, who miss things that would improve their work considerably. ME included. No one is bashing omissions here, which for some reason seems to be the assumption of several people. Build what and how you want. The point is, IF you WANT to build above-average models, WHAT are some things to take notice of. As usual, defensiveness and off-topic drift always creep in.

Many of the more experienced builders use Bondo "Professional" TWO-PART (you have to mix it with the included hardener) real-car glazing putty as body filler. It works very well for heavier filling on models. DO NOT CONFUSE IT WITH THE ONE- PART FILLER / GLAZE which is essentially the same as all the model putties like Testors, Squadron, etc. The one-part putties (just very thick lacquer primer) work fine for minor scratch-filling, and though some guys say they're OK for heavy work, I tend to disagree. If you fit your front clip well, you really shouldn't need any filler.

Though I don't have any specific pix of what you need, these were unibody cars, as you're already aware. I've owned several Mopars of this approximate vintage over the years, and worked on many others. Because of the welded, unitized nature of the structure, the body-chassis was painted as a unit, with the undersides getting some paint in the process, and coverage could vary from car to car. Naturally, the factory did zero masking of the underside, so you got what you got. And of course, the body-chassis structure was painted before the front lower subframe/crossmember (black) or other components were bolted on. Here's a '68 Road Runner that has too much undercoating on it, but you get the point. http://www.autotraderclassics.com/car-article/Road+Runner+Chassis+Restoration+Part+1-66658.xhtml

How about these beauties... Cadillac SoVile

Excellent.

Me too. But it's so I can eat breakfast and answer e-mails so when I get to work I can concentrate on surfing the internet all day.

Actually, the original question (the title of the thread) seems to be this: "What do model builders overlook that could improve their models?" Started by sjordan2, Yesterday, 03:45 P

Come on guys. The reversed hat-brim keeps his neck from getting sunburned, and his chest is overly sensitive to UV, so he keeps the Oakleys hanging there for extra protection. Geez. Give a man a break.

There are a lot of folks, hard-core rule-follower sheeple, who would gladly trade freedoms for perceived security. They came out in droves after 9-11, in far far greater numbers than I ever thought possible. These folks also think that if you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't need to worry about an invasion of your privacy. I have a feeling that just as laws are taking their sweet time catching up to the reality of the internet and all its havoc wreaked on privacy, identity theft, etc., the systems could well be in place and functioning well before the courts get involved to determine the legality of them. It's hardly any stretch to go from roadside, speed-activated cameras that record the licenses and faces of speeders, or stoplight-cameras that catch light-runners, to in-car devices that are required to get a vehicle licensed. There are no SPECIFIC laws forbidding it, so any legal challenge would most likely happen after-the-fact, and we all know what happens once the camel's nose is in the tent. In Georgia, a police officer has to have "probable-cause" to stop a vehicle. Speeding is one acceptable probable-cause, and a case could be made that an in-car device that snitches AFTER the operator violates a law is simply a technical extension of the policeman's existing right to stop a vehicle he observes being operated in an illegal manner. PS. Who's the new Harry?

Not to worry. Soon, the onboard artificial intelligence will communicate directly with law enforcement and snitch on the driver whenever the car is exceeding the speed limit (or is driven with transient G-loads that indicate aggressive or "reckless" behavior) sending out its VIN and license plate number, and a DNA scan of the driver to make sure the right perp gets the ticket, plus a dash-cam shot of the driver's face just to be sure. The technology exists now. Then ALL the scofflaws will get fined. Feel better?

I like it too. Though not my particular taste, your proportions and stance look very good. Nice work.

I think this may be the Minitropolis Police Pursuit fleet...

I'm assuming the K-9 unit is a chihuahua.