Ace-Garageguy

Good looking chop so far. Nice flow.

It really kinda depends on what you want to build, too. In my humble opinion, if you're into '50s cars, the Revell '50 Olds and '57 Fords are top-notch. Their '62 Corvette kits are very well done too. Though the instructions are pictorial, not written, they're well-drawn and pretty obviously self-explanatory. I really like the Fujimi Enthusiast-series, especially the Porsches, too.

In my humble experience, sometimes super glue shrinks when the primer hits it too. Filling the lines with styrene, as suggested above, and letting it dry very thoroughly, is probably better than my other method. I'll have to give it a try as well.

Thanks for the link. I'll mo' debinately be looking at it...

Oh, THAT'S the point !!! Duh...I shoulda known there was a good reason.

Is that what they call them? Really? Gee willikers. What's the point? I don't get it. I kinda like my cars to actually accelerate, stop, and handle WELL...which none of these are capable of.

As far as the original topic goes, I usually keep old boxes to organize parts and other builds in. Happily for both of us, my cat has no interest in anything remotely model-related, and knows better than to get on the bench. Smart cat.

Lucky for her, I met a younger, prettier girl who'd work all night washing parts while I built engines. The murder of her predecessor, and subsequent unpleasantness, became un-necessary.

I think your kitty just loves you, and sleeping with her head in your shoe lets her smell the object of her affection...kind of an olfactory warm-fuzzy. It's probably very comforting in a warped feline kind of way. The reason I think so is because my own cat (excuse me...people don't own cats...I'm her human) often prefers to sleep on my smelly sweaty work clothes.

Have a company ID or business ?? Would you like a FREE 3D printed sample from a MakerBot to hold in your hands and actually SEE the resolution for yourself?? Apply here... http://pages.makerbot.com/de-landing.html?utm_source=desktop-engineering&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=de_10172013

The engines LOOK virtually identical (very very similar, anyway), as noted above. Again, as already stated, the ONLY reason for different blocks is that the "deck height" is higher on the "big-blocks" to accommodate a longer stroke. Visually, the blocks LOOK the same otherwise (though the "big-block" will be SLIGHTLY taller and wider due to the higher deck. This will also make the assembled engine taller and wider as well). Without measuring the deck-height (or the width across the heads) of a model engine in 1/25 scale, it's about impossible to say whether one is a big-or-small block. If you want to be absolutely correct, look up the difference in deck-heights between the two, divide the dimension by 25, and add styrene shims to the top of the block (or remove that amount from a big-block to get a small-block) at the head-mating surfaces. This will space the heads farther away from each other, obviously, so the intake manifold will need to be suitably modified...as Charlie has already mentioned. Here's a very knowledgeable article about identifying one or the other. As you'll see, the differences are all internal other than some numbers and the height / width of the thing. http://quincyolds455.wordpress.com/2009/04/13/how-to-indentify-a-big-block-olds-from-a-small-block-olds/

In my own experience, just filling the existing body cut-lines is almost guaranteed to allow them to ghost back through at a later date...either when the primer hits the panel, or more frustratingly, after the model has been painted and polished...as the paint shrinks in for a LONG time. The only almost foolproof solution I've come up with has been to make a shallow V with the panel line at its center, and fill the V with automotive 2-part filler (correct mixing is essential here), sand it dead flat and use a two-part primer over that. The catalyzed materials vastly reduce the amount of shrinkage, and V-ing the lines helps to blend the filled area into the surrounding plastic, which disguises shrinkage somewhat if it should occur. It's a lot more work, but you get back what you put in.

Also excellent advice, and well-used in the 1:1 body world. Another good trick I rely on at times, both on the big ones and the little ones, is to use a straight-edge to check the flow or straightness of a panel. Laying the edge of a small steel rule along the body side and looking for light shining under the edge (or more obvious waves and lumpiness) will show what still needs work, how much, and in which direction to go...pretty quickly.

I think Casey's numbers are pretty realistic, and Art's absolutely spot-on about the steps necessary and the complexity in bringing a kit to market. Revell's Micky Thompson Challenger One, released in the early 1960s was reputed to have cost between $30k and $50k back then. This tallies pretty well with the value of today's dollar, and Casey's ballpark figures. A fair amount of highly-skilled human labor can be sidestepped using 3D scanning to get dimensions, etc., and using CAD and rapid-prototyping (3D printing) to produce "test-shots" BEFORE molds are completed (I'm pretty sure at least Moebius already does this), and CNC-driven machining to actually cut the steel molds. Still, though the hands-on old-school labor is reduced, the need for highly-skilled scan interpreters, tool designers, and CAD / CAM programmers / operators is a significant cost. Though I've NEVER been involved in the model-car industry specifically, I HAVE been extensively involved with product development for production, including things that ended up being injection-molded styrene. It's all the same animal, just with different colors of spots.

What you've got is already closer than any of the suggested other donor roofs would be as starting points (including the one I suggested). If you can re-work your A-pillars to allow for more windshield wrap at the front of the roof, and drop the rear of the roof panel slightly to match the profile shot...probably re-working your C-pillars, I think you'll be pretty close.

All good advice so far, and having difficulty getting a surface 'straight' is very common, even in `1:1 work, so don't feel bad. You'll get it with practice. It's also good to remember that 'smooth' and 'straight' are two entirely different objectives, that have to be arrived at simultaneously, and that makes things a little harder. The shrinkage of the one-part fillers is definitely possibly a contributing factor (if you're using one-part material). Two-part glazing putty pretty much eliminates that particular hazard. Knowing when to STOP sanding just takes time and experience, but one rule to live by is that when you just begin to see the bare-plastic edges of the area you.you filled begin to show, stop sanding and fill more.

Really liking the concept, love the color. Looks like a sure winner so far.

What a beautiful little girl. It's a lot for her to deal with, but it seems she got the strong and loving parents she needs. My sincere best wishes for her, and your, futures.

Great project. I've been looking for one of these, and I like the other restyling I've seen of yours, so I'll be interested in seeing your spin on it. Have you seen Darryl Starbird's take on the car? He ditched the canted quads and cleaned it up some...really attractive car, featured in a 1960 Hot Rod mag.

Gee, just because I know my stuff and I'm not afraid to call an idiot an idiot in this over-pampered PC BS world? Nah, I'm okay. My mission in life just isn't to be inoffensive when dealing with rampant incompetence, which IS rampant, in EVERY industry, and I see it DAILY. I am sorry if anyone was offended by my word choice, but it's accurately descriptive of the behavior noted. At least someone intellectually challenged (happy now ? ) has an excuse for being incompetent in a technically demanding setting. Let me clarify. DIAGNOSING AN ENGINE MALFUNCTION AND RECOMMENDING A VALVE JOB, WITHOUT DOING A COMPRESSION TEST...IS INCOMPETENT...or just plain dishonest. Everything else that was done to the car was idiot monkey-motion as well. When Mike got it and went through the right procedure, surprise...he got the car to run right. Simply amazing what happens when you actually KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

The rather upright A-pillars and the amount of windshield wrap-around suggest to me the old Aurora Aston Martin kit (repopped by Monogram / Revell)...but... ...it's WAY too narrow (going by the rear shot of the 1:1) which would necessitate a section added (and a wider windshield, which would also be skill-taxing) and it's probably a bit too long...so you'd have to section it lengthwise. You'd also have to custom-build C-pillars.

Absolutely good stuff. I build the real cars, and agree with you 100%. Good link too, and excellent other advice you offer.

I'm always amazed that the 'tards will still diagnose a burned valve without even doing a compression test. Just goes to show how few folks REALLY know how an IC engine operates. I wonder what the shop's excuse would have been if the Mustang with the bad Pertronix unit had HAD the recommended valve job and had still run like dog exhaust. I'm also am frequently entertained by how many aftermarket parts are installed with total disregard for the instructions, and then the installer blames the unit. I guess reading the instructions (and understanding them) isn't deemed to be a necessity. My hat's off to Maindrian Pace (Mike). All the right moves, in the right order.

Correct. However, you do need to make sure all your accessories ( AC, PS pump, alternator) are located correctly for the specific application, and that you get the right air filter (unless you go aftermarket).

I once had a striped tomcat that looked a lot like Xerxes. My girlfriend had him fixed when I was out of town...the cat would never look me in the eye after that. Poor kitty. I always thought she REALLY wanted to do it to ME. Same girlfriend who sold my '58 Karmann Ghia and a BMW Isetta for scrap, again while I was away.