Ace-Garageguy

Probably because I have an engineering background and build 1:1 cars (and other machines that have to actually function) for a living, I have a respect for function and tend to try to get my models to represent correct real-world practice. However anyone chooses to build is entirely up to the builder, but to me, the difference between a "model" and a "toy", is that a model is a model OF something, even if that "something" is only correctly represented engineering, while a toy takes liberties with scale, function, etc. and is more for pure enjoyment and expression than trying to represent reality. Maybe "miniature automotive-based art" would be a more PC term than "toy". Most of my builds use suspension that COULD work, visual modifications that would still be able to accommodate a human driver, structural mods that would be do-able on a 1:1, etc. At the same time, I rarely obsess over correct firing-order or whether I've got all the wires on the firewall represented. Detail is a matter of degree and what the builder enjoys. Leaving detail off of a model isn't a matter of laziness, but a matter only of what the builder finds enjoyable. I ENJOY getting things right, and doing research to be certain I do a fair representation of things I'm not familiar with. If someone else DOESN'T ENJOY going to that amount of effort, that's perfectly fine. This IS supposed to be a hobby, about enjoyment. All that said, in all honesty, it does kind of bug me sometimes to see models built with obviously very little knowledge of function of anything, and no effort made to find out how things actually work. I think some of those models are the reasons why SOME 1:1 car guys look down their noses at model builders, because it can actually be HARD to get everything to work on a real car that's also built for "enjoyment", and the working out of functional details is part of the pleasure. At least to me.

Very good question. In reality, any of the Ford V8 flatheads can be converted to a "normal" looking distributor by substituting a '49-'53 -style timing cover that has a 90 degree drive for the distributor shaft, so if you do it, your model will be accurate. On some 1:1 applications there may be belt and other interference problems. Also, over time, the tubular wire looms got left off on many engines, particularly where a hotter ignition had been fitted. The close proximity of the wires to each other in the looms could cause inductive cross-firing, and if the insulation on the wires had deteriorated, the looms made an easy path for the spark to jump and avoid the more difficult path of firing the plug.

Really cool, and brings back memories. When I was in the Ga.Tech Sports Car Club back in '69 or '70, a guy had a seriously lowered Meyers Manx with a Corvair 140 in the tail. Blisteringly fast slalom car, with Goodyear Bluestreak Indy-car rear tires. I don't think it was ever beaten.

Last time I was in Az, I found an old Stude coupe exactly like that at the bottom of a ravine. The property owner said I could have it if I'd pull it out. I was tempted, as it wasn't badly rusted, just beat to jell from rolling multiple times. Reason prevailed, as the restoration would probably take longer than I still have to live. Very convincing techniques you have. Cool diner project by the way. Do you have digital design files of it? Looks like a US injection molding company could produce it. Surely such a neat moidel could be expensive enough to justify limited US production.

Great job on the little Pie Slicer. I learned to fly in one of these. Also found a gluebomb not too long ago for less than a buck.

google "silicone caulk mold making". Five minute epoxy thickened with talcum powder will work for your part, as will JB Weld in some cases. Complete mold-filling and air bubbles whipped into the epoxy while mixing can be tricky problems.

Wow, wow, wow. That's fantastic. More pictures please, and more details too....... PS. I see you're in Bend. Too bad about losing Cessna. Do you have anything to do with Windward Performance, by any chance?

Great truck. Really convincing.

Looking great.....real nice proportions and stance. What are the wheels from, and what is your avatar? I've never seen anything like that before..........

That's a beaut. Love everything about it.

Boy, this one always opens a can of worms, and opinions abound. The actual truth (rarely very popular when there are so many opinions) is that there are serious scale issues (and the shape of the nose) with several parts of the latest release, which shares zero parts with the original version. There are proportion and stance issues with the original kit, and styromaniac's mention above of combining the two to make a more-correct model than either alone will produce is definitely worth considering. I've actually measured a real 1:1 Dodge Red Ram engine and '39 Ford 3-speed gearbox (and you know, divided by 25?) as represented in the kits, and the first version is pretty close, the newer version is a joke.....it's so badly underscale. I have both versions on the shelf, multiple articles from 1958 onwards about the car, my own reference numbers and photos of a real Red Ram and gearbox and have spent (wasted?) considerable time contrasting / comparing the two. Pretty amazing that in this day of digitizing everything and the ability to have a computer do the scaling and design most of the tooling, that the dimensions could be so far off, but it is, period. The decals are not great in the newer one either, but aftermarket was available. I've also been involved in several online arguments about the correct scaling of the newer-release engine, all of them apparently with folks who have never actually measured the engine and scaled it themselves. Measure it, divide by 25, and the numbers don't lie. The popular argument is that the Red Ram is the "small" hemi, and that therefor the tiny motor in the newer kit is correct. Uh huh. A real Red Ram is almost exactly the same width across the heads as the bigger early hemis, but a bit shorter in overall length.....which is why Barris used it....to fit in the engine bay lengthwise. The original issue engine WILL fit in the later issue car, by the way. All that said, either kit builds up into a good looking model, and the Red Ram and 3-speed in the early kit are cool swaps in anything, though the Hilborn FI detail is a little light. The newer kit has some nice parts for bashing, most notably probably the best "dropped and filled" front axle available for building a period rod.

More than I can remember.....E-types, Minis, Jensen Interceptors, a Mercedes gullwing for $10k and a Ferrari Daytona Spyder for $15,000. I was either a day late or a dollar short on all of those. I most miss my '62 VW crew cab pickup, which got sold for $150 by someone "looking out for my stuff" while I was out of town. And a '58 Karmann Ghia, same story. I narrowly missed another VW, an old split-window Beetle. After having paid $50 for it, I went back with a tow bar to get it and was told it had just gone to the crusher.....a little comm problem between divorcing parties. And when I was at Ga. Tech, I drove a hot-rod VW with a Porsche 356SC engine (which I built with money I earned working summers). A used car lot downtown offered me $1500 trade-in towards a 427 Cobra for $6500. I couldn't convince my dad it was a sound investment. Then there were multiple Corvairs and Fiats, 2 Vegas, a pair of 240Z Datsuns (one of which was the world's first convertible Z, stolen from a friend/s house), a '65 Mustang notchback 289 auto that was horse-shoed by a drunk, a Porsche 356 B-roadster, an A coupe, a B sunroof-coupe and a '67 911 both stolen from my own driveway......geez.....I wonder where they all are now. Not a nickel of insurance ever collected on any of the losses, by the way. No wonder I have a bad attitude.

My handle is Ace-Garageguy because I own and am trying to re-launch Ace-Garage.com : https://www.ace-garage.com/Home_Page.php My avatar is a vehicle I designed as a project for my last company, W.Engwer and Co. Engineering and Design. I designed it in 1984-5, got funding to build it in 1995, and ran out of money and health in 1997. It is still an ongoing project, but I don't have the time or funds right now to work on it. Here's more about it, if anyone is interested. http://contest.techbriefs.com/transportation-2012/2250

My all time favorite trucks are the '53 thru '56 Fords. Don't know why, but I have to stop and stare whenever I see one.

Assuming that the digital design files for the tooling still exist ( a pretty reasonable assumption) it wouldn't take a small team of competent people much time at all to modify said file, convert it to CNC instructions, and mill new tooling, like it says, "based on Revell's very nice '32 Ford". These are detail changes and don't necessitate re-measuring an entire '32 Ford. That approach WOULD NOT necessitate ANY changes to the existing tooling. Has anybody here ever worked in CAD and seen how FAST you can rework something in it? And has anyone ever watched a 5-axis CNC mill go to town on a part? This ain't like building the space shuttle. It is literally a few weeks worth of work for a competent crew. What's the big hold up?

.......a mere child. "Life begins at forty", so it's been said.

From looking at the 1:1 car, I'd almost tend to think it was built intending to kit it, using Revell's existing body and chassis tooling and adding a new interior / seat sprue, plus one or two others of various details to finish it out.

That's pretty funny, and sadly so very very accurate. Maybe more than "a couple of dozen", but it's an excellent point. I also tend to think the lack of engaged parents teaching children to tie shoes, communicate in basic English, and to tell time has little to do with the space program, but a lot to do with laziness and ignorance, which is still voluntary on the part of the lazy and ignorant.

This is truly an art form..........amazing effects.

Yes, I know.....manufactured and assembled under contract by Mercury Marine..........BUT designed and engineered by Group Lotus, which was purchased by GM during the course of the program. I should have been more specific. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.

I think you got a sweet deal. While there are some issues with the '32 (like the body being a little not-tall-enough, and the front of the frame rails being shortened to fit under the fenders, and also lacking frame side-stamping detail (which is a trademark of the '32), and having a molded-in rear axle and exhaust system, you CAN build a very nice model with some effort. The Wagon Rod I've always seen as a source of parts for street-rods, as Casey pointed out. As George52 mentioned, it DOES have an LT-5 (the 4-cam Lotus-built smallblock Chevy that was a Corvette option), and a nice custom grille and fenders for a '39 Chevy, which is what it's based on. It could make a cool mashup with the Monogram '39 sedan delivery to build a chopped custom. The '34, if it's the 5-window coupe, I think is a very nice kit. I've actually measured it against a 1:1 we currently have in the shop, and it's close, not perfect, but the general proportions are good and far FAR better than AMT's '34 3-window. Greg's pix above speak for the good proportions. This is one I've had in progress for a while. All in all, I'd say you did good for $25.

In keeping with usually making my models represent driveable cars, I rarely channel bodies lower than the bottom of the frame rails, and I give reasonable ground clearance which is what is depicted here. The rocker is also parallel to the frame rails, and dropping the front of the body just wouldn't be my style. I generally try to align the engine in profile with the frame rail, and the rear face of the block with the firewall if possible (taking into consideration the pinion angle, and the angles on the U-joints). I find that, for my taste, a lot of lines going in different directions to be distracting, and the look to seem un-planned.

Whaddya mean, fat? I'm gonna have the rest of the box of jelly donuts I started on this morning, and sit in front of the computer some more...........maybe a big juicy burger on the grille, with fries and ummmmm....baked beans. Yeah, that sounds good. Then a couple of beers and some chips-n-dip while I watch a movie. Then some ice cream. How could I possibly be fat? I'll work it all off going back and forth to the kitchen.......

Hey, I just remembered Fred's Resin Workshop makes a '33 Plymouth body only, no fenders, part #BOD35. Though the lines aren't really right, it might save you some time. I've seen them on ebay occasionally too. Though it's had the windows opened up as a "modified" race car, that looks like a pretty easy fix. Just a thought.

Don't ASU and the U.of Az. both have really fine astronomy and space-related programs?