Ace-Garageguy

Beautiful model, and a nice tribute to a fine driver. I knew Frank Mundy for a short time, and he struck me as a nice guy, too.

Great looking model, but the images look heavily processed to me. I'd like to see what she really looks like without the augmentation.

Looks great. Unusual and imaginative.

I dumped my access to TV years ago due to what I thought at the time was a proliferation of idiot-targeted content. Nothing's changed, except if anything, the target market must be getting stupider. I've never had much interest in watching other people play sports, I can get online feeds for things like LeMans and Indy, and there are enough online TV outlets (PBS, Hulu, and free VPNs, etc.) that any time I really feel the need for mindless entertainment (or even intelligent entertainment that I might actually learn something from) there's always something, somewhere, more-or-less worth watching.

Wow, I'm impressed. I'm your height but about 20 pounds heavier. Still, I'm in pretty decent shape and get my comparable exercise hiking as much as time permits. Regular continuous aerobic exercise, and having maintained a lifestyle that requires me to move and stretch constantly when working are what I credit most for my feeling comparatively young. Just like a parked car that deteriorates quicker than one that's being used and maintained well, human bodies and brains need frequent use and decent maintenance to stay functioning as-designed.

You kinda have two basic mindsets when it comes to building cars in ANY genre: "form follows function", and the other. Oscar, your Honda looks like it's set up to handle very well. Nice.

Easy Off spray oven cleaner also works exceptionally well. NOT the low-fume kind!! The caustic toxic stuff cuts many types of paint well, but be SURE to use rubber gloves and DON'T GET IT IN YOUR EYES!! It will leave a slightly 'soapy' residue on the part. Remove the residue by scrubbing with Comet or a similar abrasive cleaner, hot water and an old toothbrush. Scrubbing with Comet also gets into all the nooks and crannies, and provides a nice 'tooth' for your new primer to adhere to. I've done this process MANY time, saving older models, and I have consistent good results.

Ferrari 312. Not very successful, but sure was pretty. And the sound...mamma mia!!

My understanding is that the appearance these days (the shape) is almost entirely dictated by the results of the computer CFD (computational fluid dynamics) aerodynamic simulation of proposed designs. I'm having a hard time swallowing that these 'drag-reducing' programs are entirely fully developed however, because so many designs just look wrong. Fiberglass sailplanes, with which I have some experience, are the most aerodynamically efficient machines on Earth. Notice they strangely have no plethora of odd whiffles and projections anywhere...

Neil, great model of a real drag racing icon. Man, that's cool. It's the only model I've ever seen anyone do of that car.

I think you'll like it once you work with it a little. Just a heads-up though...besides being finer-grained than even Icing, it's somewhat 'runnier', which can make it a little tricky to do large fills on vertical surfaces with. But by virtue of being a little on the soupy side, it also self-levels better than even fresh Icing. For 1:1 work, I've found its thinner consistency to be helpful to have on the shelf along with icing, as it works exceptionally well for filling very small imperfections quickly. The Evercoat is another excellent product, in my experience, and was my favorite of all of the 2-parters out there before I tried the USC Icing.

Ummm...what about angle, channel, round, square and rectangular tube, half-round and 1/4 round strip, etc? I use these constantly in a multitude of sizes and you can't make them from flat stock in any efficient manner.

@astroracer Mark...I've been in the 1:1 biz for more than 40 years, and I used to recommend Icing exclusively. It's by far the best product I've used on 1:1 projects and it works well for models. Problem is that the smallest tube is well over $20 now, and it WILL go hard before it's used up unless you build a LOT of models. The TWO-PART BONDO GLAZING PUTTY I referenced above is chemically identical to the Icing product, has the same advantages, and is actually finer-grained than even Icing. Don't knock it 'til you've tried it. And IT COMES IN SMALL PACKS SUITABLE FOR MODELERS NEEDS.

And not to mention, if one really thinks about it, why bother to stay on the reasonable topic of obvious and easily foreseeable LARGE flaws, when we can go off on totally irrelevant and silly tangents that have absolutely nothing to do with the central issue of the original post ? Correct proportions and correct scaling of the parts that ARE represented and included in the kit is all any of us really want...and ejector pin locations on the NON-visible surfaces...or correct me if I'm missing something here. That is NOT unreasonable.

If you want quality results, I'd seriously recommend stripping the chrome with EasyOff Oven Cleaner spray...the toxic smelly kind. It cuts clear down to the base plastic, which some of the other "milder" strippers don't. It works every time. Wear rubber gloves and don't get it in your eyes. Then, if you REALLY want a nice job, finish up your prep by scrubbing your stripped wheels with Comet, hot water and a toothbrush. It gets all of the remaining residue off and lightly scuffs the nooks and crannies to let the paint stick and flow a little better. Yes it's a little work, and the beautiful results I get are worth it.

Try the actual sources. There are catalogs of all the products available, online, plus lots more info. http://www.evergreenscalemodels.com/ http://www.plastruct.com/ Evergreen's site has an e-mail link that will tell you where the nearest Evergreen dealer is to your location. Plastruct will sell to you directly, and ship it to you.

Man those are gorgeous !! The flared portion is just exactly whet I've been needing for my early, injected Challenger I engines. Much better than anything I've found so far.

Name calling and psychological bashing is childish behavior, granted. Pointing out flaws in manufactured products, made by well-paid professionals in ANY industry is not. It's called "quality control" if it happens BEFORE the product is released to market.

When folks talk about cost of research and measuring correctly being prohibitive, again I just HAVE to disagree. One of the outstanding examples of "no excuse" is the 1/25 scale engines in the Revell Magnum wagon, and the 2009 Challenger. They BOTH represent 6.1 liter Hemi, very recent production engines, and they're supposed to be in the same scale. They SHOULD BE IDENTICAL. The two kits COULD HAVE EVEN USED THE SAME TOOLING. In fact, one engine is almost 1/4" longer than the other one. THE BLOCK AND HEADS...not the accessories or anything else...THE BLOCK AND HEADS. NO EXCUSE will fly. I'm NOT bashing Revell. I LIKE Revell a lot. Still, this is just wrong. No excuse.

I'll have to disagree in principle here. I have some 50+ year old models, the proportions of which are absolutely spot-on. Accurate measuring was entirely possible 50 years ago...it doesn't require new technology. It only requires caring enough to get it right, and getting it right takes NO longer than getting it wrong.

I got the head of my 19 year old Chinese copy of a Bridgeport milling machine safely detached from the rest of it with no damage to me or it. Now building a cradle for the head to securely mount in on my trailer for moving. This is the last large piece of equipment I have to disassemble to move to the new location. Whoopee. The end is in sight.

Automotive "bondo" in the big cans is fine, but it's sometimes a little coarse-grained for model work, depending on the brand. Two-part glazing putty is the same thing chemically as "bondo"...polyester resin and inert fillers...but it's finer-grained and works better for models...usually. The two-part Bondo Professional putty recommended by Jim is VERY good and comes in small, modeler-friendly containers. It's available at most decent car parts stores and big-box joints that have a car section. It works well for thick fill work on customs as well as for fixing minor surface problems, because it's VERY fine grained...much finer-grained than many competing products made for real cars. It exhibits very low shrinkage too. THIS IS 2-PART PUTTY: The "Squadron" white and green Jim mentions are ONE-PART fillers, essentially lacquer primer in paste form, very similar to the ONE-PART Bondo glazing putty. They work well for filling very minor imperfections, but shrink perceptibly as they dry. Some folks seem to have no problem with them in thick applications, but to get lasting, quality results, I've always needed to apply them in thin coats and let them dry thoroughly in between. It's just too much bother for me. My personal favorite for large areas on major custom work is West Epoxy and microballoon. It sticks better than anything else, weighs almost nothing (we use it on high-performance sport airplanes for that reason), sands exceptionally well and it has ZERO shrinkage.

Great looking model, and like Carl said, nice stance. I forget sometimes what really good looking, well proportioned cars these are.

Bravo Harry. The point, well made and stated clearly. Amen.

My apologies for MY misunderstanding of your post. ----------------------------------------------------------------- With the rapid global development of this technology and associated materials, and its huge industrial and prototyping applications, it's only a matter of time before just about any desirable properties can be incorporated into a 3D printed part. Though the capabilities are already impressive and pricing is falling fast, the tech is really still only in its infancy at this point.