Ace-Garageguy

Old school v-belt setup smallblock Chebby, single 4bbl and a 700R4 automatic.

OMG !!! Gravity is only a THEORY ??? I'm not trusting any dang theory !!! I'm gettin' me some velcro boots right now !!!

OMG !!! OMG !!! Why don't we all go flying off into space??? Like on the roundy-round thing at the playground ???

Stainless wires are considered OK for motorcycles, but not really for cars because of the higher lateral loads on 4-wheeled vehicles. http://www.borraniamericas.com/html/technical.html

You can make ANY clear part: lenses, windshields, etc. by following this inspired method. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=58564 Chroming plastic: http://www.chrometechusa.com/model-cars-and-collectibles.html Other simulated chrome options are Bare Metal Foil http://themodelmakersresource.co.uk/articles/article018.html Alclad II, a paint product. http://alclad2.com/

Good observation. The technology already exists to 3D print living tissue, and has for some years. The original crude (by today's standards) attempt involved using a modified color inkjet printer, mouse heart cells, and a sticky nutrient matrix. The printed partial heart began beating. Building fully functional replacements for diseased or maimed body parts from the recipient's OWN cultured cells (not cloned) will entirely eliminate the risk of tissue rejection, and will soon, probably in my own limited lifetime, have sweeping effects on medicine worldwide. There is always a technological tip-of-the-iceberg known to the general population and media, and a massive amount of developing or experimental follow on work, far advanced, happening simultaneously. Unfortunately, it's not considered as worthy of media exposure as Lady Gaga or Justin Bieber's latest antics, and most folks just don't care...even though much of the information is publicly available.

Funny story, and definitely what she probably deserved, but in some parts of the world they call unlawfully moving someone's vehicle (unless you're a licensed towing service and the car is parked illegally)..."felony vehicle theft". So you've gone from being rudely inconvenienced to committing a criminal act. Not worth the risk, from my own perspective; I just don't like jail food. Try not to get caught while "teaching lessons" to inconsiderate jerks. They are often the ones who scream "COP!!!" loudest when they feel affronted.

Yes, as a machinist you're also trained to think of speed of the cutting face of the tool relative to the workpiece, and shop math, which many folks who do machine work don't use correctly (if at all) requires you to figure out the speed of the cutting face as a function of the diameter of either the tool or the workpiece (whichever is turning) and the RPM of the tool spindle or the workpiece. Ignore the math and you get poor cuts, overheated or broken tools, etc.

Again, LINEAR velocity has to do with how far a dot or a runner goes in a given time. ANGULAR velocity in this example has only to do with how many rotations (revolutions) occur in a given time. They are not the same thing, and you seem to be trying to see them as being the same. Two dots or runners can have IDENTICAL angular velocities, but the one farther away from the center (the greater radius) will have a higher LINEAR velocity at the same ANGULAR velocity. Maybe thinking in the units involved will help. RPM, the layman's term for angular velocity, is "revolutions per minute" obviously, but there is NO DISTANCE UNIT there, no feet, inches, etc. Only how many REVOLUTIONS...one revolution is 360 degrees of course...so both dots or runners travel 360 degrees in the same time. Identical angular velocity. SPEED (linear velocity, or how FAR a dot or runner travels) on the other hand, has to be expressed in some kind of DISTANCE unit over time...inches per second, feet per minute, miles per hour, etc. The speeds are markedly different for the two dots or runners, yes, because the one farther from the center does cover more ground (linear) for the same number of degrees traveled (angular). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Maybe another way to look at it to foster understanding: one RPM is one complete revolution per minute, or 360 DEGREES per minute. There are NO DISTANCE UNITS, and RPM is not really a "speed". It's a way to express the number of DEGREES of a circle traveled in a given time. All parts of the line the two dots are on travel the same number of DEGREES OF THE CIRCLE in a given time (RPM) but because one dot is farther away from the center, it obviously has to travel a much farther DISTANCE while it traverses an identical number of DEGREES. Degrees are not distance, but just a proportion of whatever the circumference is of a circle described by a traveling dot. Probably the real problem is that RPM isn't really a "speed" at all, but has come to be used to represent angular displacement over time, which is angular velocity In common usage, everyone knows what you mean when you say "crankshaft speed" for instance, and express it in RPM. It can be confusing, I know. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Things that turn have both linear velocity and angular velocity, and though one influences the other, they are not the same, so the statement that the dots are "traveling at the same speed" is meaningless unless one specifies ANGULAR velocity. They are necessarily traveling at different LINEAR velocities. It's absolutely necessary to separate the concepts of ANGULAR velocity (commonly expressed as RPM) and LINEAR velocity (expressed as inches-per-second, feet-per-minute, etc.) which expresses how far a dot will go at a given radius, at a given angular velocity. Angular velocity (commonly expressed as RPM) and distance from the center (radius, or how far away from the center the dot is) determine linear velocity of the dot, and how much distance it has to travel.

The ONLY thing that changed is the RADIUS of the circle described by the dots or the runners. It's all in the equations relating angular displacement to radius to speed of a point on a line, and is explained fully in the video I linked to. Am I missing some trick point? I understand the math.

Here you go...https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/torque-angular-momentum/torque-tutorial/v/relationship-between-angular-velocity-and-speed

Because angular or rotational speed and linear speed are not the same thing. You are mixing terms. RPM is a measure of angular displacement over time, called angular velocity., not speed. Speed is a measure of distance over time. Both dots travel at exactly the same "rotational speed" (angular velocity), but the outer dot has much more linear distance to cover to maintain the same "rotational speed" (angular velocity).

The rotational speed of the record is measured in "RPM", or revolutions per minute, BUT, because the outer dot is farther from the center than the inner dot, as you say, it has to travel farther, thus faster, do do one complete revolution. For instance, IF the inner dot is 1" from the center, one revolution will be the circumference of a circle with a 1" radius. The formula for that circumference is 2X3.1416X1 (2 times pi times the radius), or 6.2832 inches. If the outer dot is, say, 3" from the center, one revolution will be 2X3.1416X3, or 18.8496 inches. Much greater distance to travel at the same rotational speed, which is actually ANGULAR VELOCITY, not speed per se. The angular velocity of the two dots is identical, but the speed of the outer dot is much greater.

Like the man said...click here...http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=79627

I found out today that this thing got photographed at the 2013 ACME-NNL South event, and made it into the April edition of the 'other' magazine. I'm happy.

Today I 'got' told the chopped '70 Chevelle I did for the 2012 Gearz / Revell contest has its photo published in the April issue of the 'other' magazine, photographed at the 2013 ACME-NNL South event.

Not a dumb question at all, Charlie. The phenomenon encountered during electroplating is usually referred to as "hydrogen embrittlement", explained here...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_embrittlement It's of particular concern in aviation, for obvious reasons. Some paint strippers also cause hydrogen embrittlement of metals, and special chemicals and mechanical processes have been developed to avoid it.

I find your total lack of posting ANYTHING IN ANY WAY OFFENSIVE to be highly offensive. ...

My understanding of copyright and trademark law is that common-use terms like "digger" and "coupe" are pretty hard to lock up as a trademark, but when put up as referring to a SPECIFIC item, i.e. a model car, it may be possible to trademark "The Coupe", "The Digger", etc. so that no other model car manufacturer may use those specific terms to refer to ANOTHER kit. Frankly, I'm kinda surprised these terms were granted trademark status.

A large part of what makes this model so realistic is the surface finishes. There's absolutely no orange peel, but the gloss looks like paint on a 1:1 car, and avoids the "dipped in syrup" look some models end up with. The polished rims, I assume done with metalizer, are also very convincing. I like this one enough to look at it over and over.

@Skydime, a usually pretty smart guy, but who seems to have missed the point entirely this time: The ORIGINAL post was about COCKEYED TAG RECESSES, NOT BASHING LITTLE TRUCKS OR LOWRIDERS. I LIKE LITTLE TRUCKS, and I LIKE LOWRIDERS. I ALSO happen to THINK THIS TAG TREATMENT LOOKS STUPID. That's what the post is about. It's OK to say you think something looks stupid. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EDIT: I just read through the thread again. NO ONE BASHED MINI-TRUCKS OR LOWRIDERS IN GENERAL. NOT ONCE. And, the PERSONAL RIDICULE was directed AT GREG, not done BY Greg. The pathetic mob mentality piled on with making reference to old-age, AARP, fiber in diets, etc. What's up with that? You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Grow up, chimps. If you're gonna be throwing ###### around the cage, I'm going to call it like I see it.

EXCELLENT !! And now you know considerably more than you would have if someone had just told you how to do it.

Exquisite model. Just beautiful.

Geez Austin...lighten up. Voicing an opinion that something looks stupid isn't, in my own humble opinion, "continually disruptive to the general membership" of the forum. It's simply voicing an opinion. I think these wonky tag inserts look dorky too, and there IS such a concept in the world as "good design". This isn't it. Good design is NOT entirely subjective (as in what you like, which is personal TASTE, not necessarily GOOD DESIGN), but encompasses things like proportion, line, surface development, an overall theme, the much used "flow", etc. etc. It's entirely OK in America still, I believe, to like something someone else thinks looks stupid, and it's entirely OK to say you like it, you dislike it, or you think it looks stupid. I don't think Greg is trying to be disruptive. Maybe he's just wondering, like me, why "good design" and "function" seem to be becoming not-part-of-the-equation. PS. I personally LIKE Asian tuner cars, hot Euro imports, mini-trucks, lowriders AND "raw 'merican muscle". You can have donks, but you know, that's OK too.

Kinda how we ended up with stuff like this... ...from this...