Ace-Garageguy

It's pretty straightforward with a little applied arithmetic. Find a good profile photo of the short-bed look you want on google images. Save it and print it. You know your model is 1/25, but you'll need to know what scale your print is to be able to figure out where to cut and paste. That's just a matter of taking a reference measurement from your model and comparing it to the same measurement on your print. Once you've done a little math to figure out what scale your photo is, it's easy to determine how much to take out and where to cut to get the look you want.

Very true...BUT, how much $$ is, say, a Ross Gibson engine kit these days? In comparable bucks, the Revell kits are / were much cheaper. And the price of today's resin front end for a hot rod doesn't compare favorably with the about $7.00 that a parts-pack "Roadster Chassis Speed Equipment"" parts-pack would sell for in 2014 bucks...and you got 2 front axles (with hairpins and radius rods), 2 complete rear axles (two different widths, one old Ford banjo and one quickchange center-section) plus buggy springs for both ends of two cars, and miscellaneous brakes, shocks, brackets, steering boxes, torque-tube driveshafts, 2 Moon fuel tanks, and 2 cool steering wheels (one dragster-style semi-butterfly and a 3-spoke).

A dropped I-beam axle, '39 and later Ford "juice" brake backing plates, straight-tube axles, and a couple of different quick-change rear ends, all with appropriate buggy-springs and hairpins / radius rods WERE available in the old old old Revell Roadster and Dragster chassis-bits parts packs. That stuff was / is great.

They're still available for reasonable money, and I think you'll find that, as builders of traditional hot-rod models mature and find out just how good those Pontiac, Cadillac, Chevy and Ford engine kits really are, the supply will be starting to dwindle. Many of the parts-packs bring fairly big money these days too. I started collecting them again several years before they started climbing. The Hemi and "nailhead" Buick engines (not part of the re-release some years back) are almost impossible to find now, as is the non-blown smallblock Chevy, and I've bought nailheads from as far away as Finland. I recently bought a Chrysler that's obviously Revell-based, possibly made in pirated or reverse-engineered tooling.

Now THIS is fascinating. Jim... apparently I've been a fan of your work since it was introduced, though I never knew who had designed the parts-packs, or had any idea that they were all done by the same guy. I bought as many as I could get my hands on when they were current. Those kits, combined with what I learned reading Hot Rod magazine, laid much of the groundwork for my knowledge of suspension and chassis construction, and gave me an early intro into recognizing and identifying US V8 engines. The Revell parts pack line was responsible for my preference for everything Revell back then. The detail and scale fidelity of those kits gave a more advanced builder the ability to make some beautifully-detailed models with correct hot-rod guts. Since I've been back in car modeling from 2005, I've re-acquired multiple copies of every one, and I'm as impressed with their accuracy and usefulness today as I was when I was just getting going, many years ago. Were you also involved with the design of the Mickey Thompson Challenger and Tommy Ivo Showboat kits? One more question...was the Olds V8 ever planned to be introduced in parts-pack form? The multiple versions of it in the Anglia, Willys and Roth kits remind me of the appearance of the Pontiac, Buick and Chrysler in other car kits.

I've picked up a few incomplete kits cheap over the years, primarily to use the suspension and engines in hot-rods. I've looked over the parts pretty carefully, and I've done some dry fitting. The kit doesn't seem to be any harder than any of the large-scale kits from Revell, and I'd say it's easier than the smaller scale XK-E kits. There are some minor proportion and shape problems with the body shell...it just doesn't look quite right...but I've never sat down and carefully analyzed exactly what the problems are.

Wow, that's a rare one. Good luck with your rebuild and upgrade. Just a minor clarification...the awful engines in that kit aren't "nailheads", which Buick made from '53 thru '66 and can be identified by a rear-mounted distributor and vertical valve covers, unlike just about any other V8. The exhaust port spacing on a nailhead is unique too, with the ports paired closer together towards the ends of the heads. The engines represented in this kit are 1966 cast-iron 340 cubic inch engines (derived from Buick's aluminum 215 engine design) , identified by a front-mounted distributor. If you want to upgrade the kit engines and maintain accuracy, nailheads aren't what you'll be after.

Thanks to you guys for remembering and asking about this one. I've had zero modeling time since the middle of November, but less than one more week should see me getting back to work on her. She's on the bench, patiently waiting for Monday afternoon.

Mmmmm...Indian food !!! A big plateful of lamb vindaloo and a giant Kingfisher (brewed with pure Ganges river water) would sure go good while waiting for the next installment of "Harry fixes his garage-door opener". I wish they had take-away curry shops here on every other block like I remember in Old Blighty.

Yup, like when you buy a Coke, you're paying for the marketing to sell it to you, and the packaging and transportation to get it to you. Cost of product is insignificant for brown sugar-water.

Very nice. I agree about the turbo-911 sound, but it's sure hard to beat the N-A exhaust note. Thanks too for the heads-up on the Fujimi flatnose rolling stock. Exactly what I've been needing for a stalled project. Singer, yes. If I had the bucks for one, I'd happily live in a tent next to it. Good looking work you have going on here.

How could I possibly forget...radial aircraft engines lighting off, or cruising overhead late at night. When I was small and all of commercial aviation was radial-powered, I used to lie in bed at night and wonder where all the airplanes were going, imagining the softly-lit cabins and the beautifully dressed and perfumed women, when flying was still an adventure and an event. I've usually lived close to airports, often military bases, and I really miss the sounds of the big old round engines. I worked at a small airfield in Az. a few years back, and the neighboring hangar was the off-season home of a fleet of Canadair 215 firebombers, each powered by a pair of war-surplus Pratt & Whitney R-2800s. The high point of my week was often hearing the start and runup of those engines after overhaul or maintenance.

I have to agree that the little Ford pushrod V8 is one of the sweetest sounding engines out there. The Porsche 928 V8 has an aural similarity. I love the sound of a Ford flathead through open pipes too, which is unique in all the world. Heavily-cammed drag-racing V8s staging and launching still make my pulse race, and the air-cooled, flat-six Porsche 911 engine still does it too. Big-inch 4-cylinder bike engines that rev like formula one cars do it, hot-rod 4-cylinder air-cooled Porsche and VW engines with light flywheels and 4-into-1 pipes, and just about anything with a V-12..

Something to realize (that's been obliquely mentioned but never stated simply) is that it doesn't matter how many kits actually get built. It's only important to the manufacturer how many kits get SOLD. Judging from the wide availability of older kits on outlets like ebay, and from looking over my shoulder at my own un-built collection, I think it's a pretty safe bet to think a high percentage of kits never DO get built...at least by the original purchasers, which are the only purchasers of concern to manufacturers. This is pretty consistent with the 1:1 kit-car and kit-plane markets too, where the skills and time rarely come together to turn aspirations into reality.

And "holy flying car, spaceman!!! Apparently these primitives are STILL burning fossil fuels. I guess they haven't yet realized that that big glowing yellow ball in the sky is a source of free, unlimited energy, forever. Primitive indeed!!!"

I've seen those as short-route milk trucks a hundred years ago, and fitted out as ice-cream trucks too.

Different is good. Very good.

The early Stone-Woods-Cook version (light blue) has a blown 394 Oldsmobile and a vintage B&M Hydrostick transmission. No photoetch ever included (that I'm aware of anyway). The later dark-color Revell SWC Willys runs a blown early Hemi and has a PE grille. The Mazmanian car also runs the 392 blown Hemi, and has a PE grille. The Pitman version is also a blown Hemi car, with the PE. (I'm pretty sure).

Just for the record, the AMT / ERTL '34 3-window you mention is one of the MOST pathetically wrong kits ever offered. It borders on Palmer scale-fidelity. Kinda goes a little beyond the "wrong wiper motor" scenario. It's a pathetic mess. And you seem to be of the opinion that it's either YOUR way or all the model companies are going to go under. I kinda doubt it. There's room for everybody to prosper here, and nobody needs to hog all the toys. MY scenarios have been presented as entirely viable ways to give more legs to EXISTING TOOLING, and get some cars popular with today's hot-rod crowd, both young and old...guys who actually BUILD CARS as opposed to pretending to drive cars in games...and make some possibly nice, quick returns without having to shell out a lot to do it. BUT I AGREE ENTIRELY that the younger gamer market probably has a lot of potential, but they're the ones who go for "newfangled" tech, so why not develop a current, printable model for that market? Do a test run of putting a couple of high-end 3D printers in selected locations...maybe gaming-heavy, bricks-and-mortar stores...and see if anybody wants kits of game-relevant cars? Shapeways and other commercial print-to-order companies could also print out "newfangled" stuff from online orders. Let's REALLY try to get in the kids heads and pockets. Make the ENTIRE product line NON-TOOLING-DEPENDENT. A NEW way to do it. In the meantime, make some quick cash by putting new life in some older kits, as already suggested. And by the way...there are some pretty interesting things going on these days with some pretty savvy marketing folks going after boomer bucks. Here's a May 13 article from slate.com called "Silver Is the New Gold". Guess what it's about. http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/05/silicon_valley_and_baby_boomers_finally_noticing_a_750_billion_market.html

Time warp motorsports. Wonderful.

Moebius seems to be really the only one with the nads to do it. The big guys seem to prefer to minimize risk and milk old ideas and tooling (but many thanks to Revell for the great '50 Olds) which may or may not be the most profitable way to go. The "business case" definition, if distilled down to the basics, is "what has the most potential for making a worthwhile profit, while minimizing risk and expenditure ?" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Speaking of milking old tooling, and a natural fit with a much needed and oddly overlooked subject : The AMT '33-'34 Ford chassis tooling in both independently-sprung streetrod and buggy-sprung stocker versions is really pretty good. A natural follow-on is a 3-WINDOW '34 Ford variation. NONE CURRENTLY EXISTS in 1/25 that's close to right. The '34 3-WINDOW is BY FAR THE MOST ICONIC of the '33-'34 body styles in the real world. We're building a real steel one at the shop now too. Do a stock 3-window body shell and package it in place of the 5-window shell. The rest of the kit stays the same. Do a nicely chopped 3-window shell and package it with the independent-suspension street-rod guts. Again, the rest of the kit stays the same. Both kits get new legs, and there's incentive to buy both kits if you want to build a traditional chopped car on buggy-springs.

I'm convinced. From post 116: "Revell already has excellent tooling for the model A chassis, left over from the woody, pickup, sedan and other kits (assuming it still exists). Revell already also has excellent tooling for a street-rod style '32 chassis, obviously. Tool a good 1/25 chopped (or stock) A coupe body, and retool the '32 chassis enough to build a traditional car on it (a model-A built on '32 rails is the ultimate "traditional" combination) with an I-beam front axle and a rear Zee in the frame to accommodate a buggy-spring quick-change, and throw in all the chassis bits from the old A as well. Hire a REAL hot-rod builder and modeler who UNDERSTANDS the stuff (I'll volunteer) to work with the kit designers so that the thing can be built MULTIPLE ways on the A chassis, on the '32 chassis, channeled or not, etc. etc.) using an absolute minimum of new tooling. If it sells, give the whole concept even longer legs by offering different bodied kits...as Greg suggests, just like they did with the run of '32 kits." An easy-to-tool rectangular-tube chassis could be added down the line (a lot of cars are being built with these too in real-world-land), and some different wheel and engine choices to keep it flying as a parts donor, if nothing else." ============================================ Availability of a good styrene Zeeed frame and a beam front axle might even give the old '32 series more legs, as it would then be considerably easier for less-skilled builders to build very nice traditional '32 Fords without the heavy modifications or resin parts necessary to accomplish the same thing today. =========================================== It might be good to look at the REAL demographics of who's building traditional cars in reality. The shop I work with builds nothing but traditional rods and customs and is widely known for excellence. The owner of the shop is 40, and builds models with his young sons. Half of our clients ARE graybeards, but the other half are YOUNG guys. One of the young guys is a fireman, and drives a '51 Merc. One is the son of a prosperous limo-service owner, and had us build, ground-up, a chopped '30 coupe (currently on the cover of the French Mag Kustom). One owns another transportation service that contracts to the county; he's building 2 '32 Fords. Another one is an IT troubleshooter, and he's also building a '32. A theater set designer is doing a chopped '53 Ford. A not-quite-so-well-known musician is doing a '48 Chevy coupe. And we're doing an absolutely period-perfect '32 for a very (very) well known musician. The traditional hot-rod movement is far far from being the exclusive domain of old guys whose days are numbered.

Every time a friend of mine buys one, which is frequently, she says "oooh, these are lucky winning numbers !!!" She's the original eternal optimist, and I think has won maybe a total of $4 or $5. Another rather cynical old friend once won somewhere around $50,000. Apparently, one's mental attitude has little to do with one's chances of winning.

What planet do you live on? Customer service like that was outlawed on Earth many years ago.