Ace-Garageguy

Ah, where to begin... First, the cheapo blue generic razors from the grocery store, that USED to cut and last like the "more expensive spread" now only last for a couple of shaves before disintegrating. When you knock the whiskers out under running water, the heads break off after about 3 or 4 shaves. This is a new phenomenon. Fixable with a couple dabs of Loctite toughened super-glue, but WTF ??? The rear universal joint I put in my Chevy truck 2 years ago has already failed. The original lasted for 20+ years, but the new one has already disintegrated (must be made to the same quality specs as the razors). Same mostly reasonable driving style, same greasing of the joint about every 10,000 miles. The needles in the bearing must have been as soft as welding rod. Oh, the joys of Chinese-made parts. The septic tank in my new place has backed up, and stinking brown lumpy water is coming up in the bathtub. Apparently, the prior tenants were notorious for causing regular plumbing problems, flushing didies and paper down the thing. Morons didn't understand indoor plumbing, and apparently the tank is now full of crapp and paper. Lovely. And the build I've just started on a '47 Caddy convertible came to us from a used-to-be-good shop. The car was disassembled there, and all the rust was bodge-welded and bondoed over. The iron LS the morons swapped in was 1.5" too far to one side in the chassis, and the steering shaft was fouling the headers. Same morons had done the steering install. The trans tailshaft housing is so high the UJ WILL foul the trans tunnel, and the "custom" trans mount is made of 1/16" sheet!!! The Camaro front subframe somebody hacked into the car isn't square in the chassis, was installed 2" TOO FAR FORWARD, and it's been built with Ford bolt-pattern aftermarket hubs and ADAPTED back to GM to match the '70s Caddy rear-end pattern...which makes the front track 2" too wide. And to top it all off, besides EVERYTHING needing to be redone (not my problem, as I'm paid straight time for what it takes), the fools dumped all the parts in various boxes, jars and cans with NO LABELS, including every single nut, bolt or other fastener on the car, and piled sharp scratchy greasy parts on top of perfect glass lenses and new chrome. Oh...and the "relay board" someone had started building was just that: a pine board that looked like it had once been a fence picket. Morons morons morons. Sometimes I just have to wonder where all the smart people went.

And all this time I thought it was just me having those problems...

Not to worry...Dystopia's coming on strong.

Screw-tops for me all the way...unless it's a box of wine.

Very clean, appropriate colors, fine finish. Beautiful indeed.

I was in WallyWorld today (stocking up on Chinese work shoes and incense) and saw a bunch of kits for $19.95. They also sell Testors spray paint, and just like in the old days, some moron had opened a can and sprayed stuff everywhere. Things never change, really. Anyway, $19.95 for current Camaros and Mustangs and a few older kits, '55 Chebby convertible and a big Pete kit too.

I usually drive too enthusiastically to have any use for cupholders.

The Monogram 1/24 '53 Chevy hardtop is really a pretty decent kit, except for stupid headlights and a couple other small issues. '53 and '54 are quite similar. It's got a 6 cylinder and can be built very close to stock. If you want to do some extra work, the differences between '53 and '54 could be overcome.

Kinda makes me wish there was a "National Enquirer" channel. I'd MUCH rather watch blatantly false and made up stories about the lotto-winning-love-child-of-a-space-alien-and-a-chimp than the heavily-spun, try-to-sell-you-a-load-of-bull-exhaust posing as "news", spouted by overpaid talking heads who often don't know enough about the subject they're reporting on to know if they're saying something that's even remotely true. And at least, most people probably wouldn't believe the stuff...unlike the "news stories".

Wow Gene...that Krylon "chrome" is definitely worth some more experimentation. Thanks for the heads-up on that.

Great model. Yunick, with his "Best Damm Garage in Town" was another one of my heroes. Outstanding mechanic, race-prep guy and innovator. This is the car that was widely rumored to be a 7/8 scale model, as raced. Great story, but not true (though the car DID have some other magic body mods). Here's the real deal. http://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/2013/08/21/the-truth-about-smokey-yunicks-78-scale-chevelle/

These are the first final-final-really-really-what-it will-look-like photos I've seen (I don't follow the new cars all that much anymore), and there are still a few details I think could have been a little cleaner and better integrated (like the driving light / parking light coves for one, and the rear under-bumper splitter, and the tag area...and I could do without the crease through the gas door on the quarter panel). However, I think overall it's a taught, well-proportioned and coherent design, it has enough Mustang-ness so its heritage is obvious, and I bet it looks even better up close, in the tin. I see why you want one.

I've got a couple versions of that kit, and there are fit issues, as well as some wonky tooling and wobbly body lines with all of mine, including the sedan-delivery version. Also, none of mine have parts to build a stock version, should that be your goal. All that said, with enough work you can make a very nice street-rod from the kit, but it will take more than average skills to get a really nice model.

Frank Mundy, a well-known Hudson stock-car driver, also owned a 350 later in his life. Beautiful cars, really really really. The 350 GT was toned down, a little more subtle than the prototype.

That's pretty funny, but in actuality, the car in question belonged to an ex I was trying to help out. I was the "competent mechanic" who uncovered the real problem, after I told her I thought she was getting screwed by the dealer. Even funnier, she got extremely angry with ME, for some odd reason, after I'd fixed all the ongoing mystery problems she'd had since BEFORE the car was out of warranty. Even though I FIXED IT, PERMANENTLY, she kept ranting at me that I was a "know it all" and that the dealer mechanics really DID know what they were doing because THEY WORKED AT THE DEALER !! When I asked her, well then, how is it that I FIXED it and THEY just took her money and left her with intermittent problems? she stopped talking to me. Fine by me. I hope she has a LONG term relationship with the dealer. I think she'd probably LIKE fake engine noises, too.

True enough, but a GOOD "car guy" engineer lives enough in the real world to understand cost-control BETTER than any manager who, in many cases, may not even know what makes a car run. Production and upper level management need to rise through the ranks, preferably from the assembly floor, through engineering, and they need to understand EVERY FACET OF THE BUSINESS INTIMATELY. There is a widespread perception in business today that an effective manager DOESN'T NEED TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRODUCT or service. This is endlessly repeated by "experts", who have the opinion that "managing people" is the primary goal. You CANNOT effectively manage a room full of car engineers if you know nothing about car engineering, but I see this misguided idiocy fail over and over again in real-world scenarios.

When you have "car people" running car companies, you get good, interesting cars. When you have professional "managers" running car companies, you get second-rate, soulless cars. Second-rate, soulless cars are perfectly fine for most consumers, or so the corporate wisdom goes...though they don't put it in exactly those words. Marketing is perceived to be what actually SELLS anything...not the ACTUAL WORTH of a given product. Determining the actual worth of a given product would take some knowledge, research, critical thinking and effort on the part of the consumer, and those are not part of the average consumer profile. Average consumers buy what they're told to buy by marketing. if you spend efficiently enough on marketing (and dress some of it up as " factual information" ) so the theory goes, you can peddle the most mediocre junk to the majority of average consumers.

Jell, most of the dealer "mechanics" can't fix the things either. Replace whatever component the computer analysis says is broken. Still doesn't work. Charge more money to "fix" something else. Still doesn't work. Charge more money for "further diagnosis". Still doesn't work. Replace everything. Still doesn't work. Take it to a competent mechanic, who finds there's an intermittent ground problem from a loose, badly-crimped battery terminal...fix it for $35. Unfortunately, the $1500 spent at the dealer to "fix" everything previously is irretrievably down the toilet. Progress.

You REALLY do nice work, sir.

Ummm...so the "stability control" is causing "stability issues". Wow. That's some serious progress and a much better car than folks had before, eh? As far as TPMS goes, I guess it's just entirely too hard to walk around the car once a week with a tire pressure gauge, actually bend over, screw the little caps off and check the pressures? Man, that kind of effort is so exhausting, and WAY beyond what anyone in the 21st century should have to deal with !!! A brave new world, indeed.

GM absolutely positively DOES have (or had, not too long ago) some top-line engineers and designers. The C5 and C6 Corvettes that delivered super-car performance for real-world money, and won a few impressive races (like LeMans, ya' know?) are irrefutable proof that there was talent working there. And I've got a couple of early '90s GM trucks that, for the most part, are as reliable as a stone axe. Now, I'm not so sure. I haven't researched anything GM in a long time, but if the pathetic, raspy-tinny exhaust-note of the current 'Vette and the transformer-car looks are anything to go by, I'd say nobody is really driving the bus any more. And the current CEO just isn't somebody I'd buy a car from.

Exactly. There's NO EXCUSE for this kind of exceedingly POOR PERFORMANCE. One would think that, with today's primary goal of every corporate employee being to cover his or her precious ass, and to avoid any individual decision making that might possibly bite one in said precious ass, that there would have been quite enough CYA meetings to have forestalled problems like these. And as far as I can tell, there really aren't any actual car people left at GM, and certainly none in upper management. They'd all just as soon be making refrigerators or iphones as cars, and the actual car-manufacturing business only exists as a necessary evil, as a way to generate income. When the business model becomes "we're here to make money, and unfortunately we have to make cars to get it" instead of "we're here to make damm good cars, and the money will follow", this is exactly what you get.

You can get different results depending on how you apply it, and how you prep the surface before. I achieved this simulated bare-aluminum just-finished body by using metalizers in non-traditional ways. The scratches in the surface are INTENTIONAL, and represent sanding and tool marks the body builder would have left in the aluminum, before primer was applied. The real Challenger One, Mickey Thompson's land speed record car, was introduced to the press looking like this in 1959. I've done a LOT of experimenting with the stuff. I also have to recommend primering, IF you know how to shoot it slick with no orange peel. It dramatically improves coverage, and insures you won't buff through high spots. The wheels on this car were molded in dark blue, primered slick, and shot with metallizer and buffed. They have NO orange peel and look exactly like die-cast alloy parts.

The Testors "sealer" for their Metalizer line will stop it from rubbing off, but it WILL RUIN THE EFFECT, and make it look like ordinary silver paint. I know this from experience and experimentation with the product. Some WATER BASED sealers have been suggested to overcome the problem, but I haven't tried them yet. It also seems a lot of folks haven't realized that you HAVE TO BUFF the stuff to get a good metal effect, and they seem to want to shoot it dry and grainy, and just wipe it a time of two with a dirty rag. All that will do is give you an as-cast appearance, as in cast-aluminum or cast-iron. To get a good SMOOTH METAL effect, you need to carefully prepare the surface, as the material is pretty thin and will show defects (like poorly filled glue seams and poorly-removed parting lines...even sanding scratches). I personally primer everything I'll be using metalizer on and final sand with at least 800 grit, wet, to eliminate orange peel in the primer, and any other imperfections. Shoot FULL WET COATS of metalizer, and EXPERIMENT to learn how to do it BEFORE you paint your model. Shot correctly, it will flow out slick and smooth. Let it dry for a few HOURS at least before buffing. I've found the inside of an old sweatshirt makes about the best material for bringing up the shine. ------------------------------------------------------ Though far from perfect, this will give you an idea of what to expect. The intake manifold was shot wet with Aluminum and buffed, for a smooth die-cast aluminum look. The bellhousing was shot slightly dry to get a slight grain, and simulate a bright, sand-cast alloy look. The injector body was shot with Titanium and buffed for a contrasting cast-magnesium look, and the blower housing was just left in gray primer, to simulate an as-cast aluminum look common on some industrial parts.

Though your upper photo is of a Super Beetle with the strut suspension (the torsion-bar cars were more common Baja bait), I see your point. An easy starting point for making the conversion is to cut the fenders off of the body and swap then side for side, using the reversed curves for the basis of inner wheel wells.