Ace-Garageguy

Thank you AK_Invader. I've heard only good things about R&M. Must be time for me to give him a try. Thanks again....that could really get this project steaming along.

Only time I got burned was when I sent some Revell '31 Woody wheels, tires and a hood assembly to a guy in England. Seems the people at the postal orifice / customs office there misunderstood the value I'd placed on the parts ( $.50) and interpreted it as $50. They charged him a pretty hefty import tax, so he stiffed me instead of taking the problem up with them. Ach well.

Very VERY nice. It is indeed one of the most challenging kits, and you've done a fine job. I recently bought 5 of these as gluebombs from one builder who just kept trying and trying and couldn't quite hit it.

I've been looking into this for some time, trying to get some to finish my '32 wedge-channeled roadster. The brushes I had in stock that seemed to have the best variety and no seam are labeled Aleene's. Though they DO have 2 ribs on the big end, a careful razor saw cut and cleanup would fix it. They don't look like expensive brushes, so a visit to Michaels or Hobby Lobby would most likely turn up something usable. I've also read of guys using the tapered nozzle from the super-glue tubes, though nothing much will stick to that particular plastic, and it's difficult to cut and shape clean. I've also thought of putting some aluminum tube in the lathe, and seeing if I could gently force a taper into it using a tapered mandrel, well lubed up.

That sounds like some great advice Art, obviously the product of much experience and experimentation. I'm not always happy with my own airbrush results and resort to rattle-cans much of the time, which I've pretty well mastered. I'm going to try your approach and really pay attention to the results. Thanks.

Thin-film photovoltaics are being used on some electric sport-aircraft, and have been incorporated into a few concept cars. The drawbacks to using them on production vehicles are currently 1) fragility....they won't last long enough in an environment that includes car-washes and people throwing briefcases and purses on the roof; and 2) they don't lend themselves easily to forming compound-curves. Though a car roof isn't heavily sculpted, it's curvy enough to preclude being easily covered by a material that is normally formed in very flat sheets. Some of the thin-films will happily flex in one dimension, but not 2 simultaneously. Here's a quick overview. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_film_solar_cell The technology is developing rapidly however, with paint-on solar cell material becoming a reality. Once the durability issues are solved, we will see it becoming common.

Pretty slick work, all around. I like subtle, and clean, and quality. This one has it all. Very nice. That red & black car by Scalemaster is really interesting too.

So, the rational, reasoned answer would be that there is some specific difference between the paint that works, and the paint that doesn't, right? Even though "Zero paints is specifically for the airbrush and thin enough, so that's not the problem" as you say, the viscosity of the paint may be simply too high to work correctly in your particular airbrush.They are NOT all exactly the same. If you haven't tried thinning it further, then I suggest you try that. Also make certain that the vent for the paint container isn't clogged. Are you using a gravity or siphon feed airbrush? Though Chuck's answer may seem a little harsh, there's truth in it, as it's your problem, with your materials and setup, and only you, with experimentation and practice can solve it. I have found that many hobby materials didn't perform to my satisfaction immediately, and it was my own error or lack or experience with the PARTICULAR material that was the actual problem. I wish you luck as to finding the cause, and bringing the enjoyment back.

PS. By the late '50s, dropped tubular front axles were becoming available and some guys made their own, so the '32 kit front axle can stay but the 4-link has to go. "Split wishbones" (or else "hairpins" like the option in the 5-window kit WHICH ARE ON BERNARD'S BLUE CAR) were common on cars with dropped axles, to correct the caster of the front end. Your '31 kit has acceptable wishbones, and to "split" them, you simply cut them apart in the center and mount them to the frame rails instead of under the engine, with ball-joints on the cut ends. Look it up on the HAMB. Bernard's first photo above has, I believe, a shot of the Revell '31 rear end under a fabbed rear crossmember for a Revell '32, and the I-beam front axle we've been yammering about. PPS. I still LOVE your little blue belly-panned roadster, Bernard. Now THAT's a hot rod !!!

This should be a good one. Like your screen name too....one of my personal favorites.

Front wheels are American Racing (nee Palamides) magnesium spindle-mount 12-spokes, from the AMT double dragster kit, with badly painted whitewalls on generic old AMT kit tires. Rears are Halibrand slots from I-don't-know-where, with M&H slicks from the first issue SWC Revell Willys. The slicks came in a lot of Revell drag-car kits.

Thanks for all the interest and comments, guys. I'm really leaning towards the big Offy, but as Offies came in several displacements and outside sizes, and as I have several, I'm having to do some research as to which one would would be most appropriate. The one in the 1/25 AMT Watson Indy roadster looks tiny, and the one in the 1/24 Monogram Indy Kurtis roadster looks too big. In 1:1, the normally-aspirated engine from the Kurtis should have plenty of grunt, with a little less cam and a six-speed, to give decent acceleration in a very light car, so I'm looking for correct outside dimensions for that engine. It may get Indy-roadster style front torsion-bar suspension too, just to be different and to tie in the Indy-car thing a little tighter.

Yes, we touched on that earlier....and this car is having something of an identity crisis. I had considered just changing the cut lines on the doors to deal with all the clearance issues, or lengthening the fronts to make it a 2-door, and even doing scissors doors ala Lambo for something different, and to mix genres. I'm really beginning to enjoy mixing elements from different periods and styles in an effort to come up with fresh looks.

Great reference pix. I will certainly save these. Many thanks. Also notice the Ford alternator, and remember that the "polished guard" on the plug wires is electro-magnetic RF (radio frequency) radiation-shielding to prevent radio interference, similar to what is on the same period Corvettes and un-necessary on a steel-bodied car. Casey, it sure looks like you're right in thinking the hood bulge is there to clear the brake unit, but there's really no good engineering reason (or obvious one, anyway) why the unit couldn't have been located lower. Interesting question.

Because they can get it. Pricing consumer goods can be complex in it's explanations and rationalizations. Limited production things cost more because they have to make more jack on each one. High quality things cost more because you get more quality, or content. New things cost more because some people are willing to pay stupid money to be cool and hip. Things made by inefficient companies with too much overhead, middle management and other expenses cost more because idiots have to eat too.

Exactly !! I'm also going to have to raise the sills to clear the ladder bars.

Tasty color and love the fins.

The AMT '53 Stude also has a stock V8.

This is another anti-burnout quickie creative exercise. AMT '32 Phaeton body shell, Zeed Revell '32 frame, AMT '34 grill shell and an injected DeSoto Hemi. Most likely a Ford 9" rear in this one, on coil springs with ladder bars outside the frame rails. Kinda stuck on a solution for the front suspension right now.

Every so often I get burned out on all the fiddly details and actual work involved in bringing some builds closer to completion. That's when I find it helpful to take a creative break and throw together some fun concept stuff, to get the juices flowing again. This is the body shell from a gluebomb Revell Orange Crate, going on a heavily modified AMT '32 blob chassis. The rear end will be Jag, from an Aurora gluebomb XK-E. Front suspension will be independent from the Testors Aluma Coupe. Wheels and tires are Revell Dodge Sidewinder, and nose is vintage Monogram Indy car. Power will probably be small-block Chevy, injected, or maybe a street-ized big Offy.

Although this is one of the venerable AMT '32 frames, the modifications to the Revell unit will be similar, and if you have the '31 Tudor kit to pirate parts from, you're halfway home. As these are scale models of real cars, the procedures are identical to what's encountered when you set out to build a full size '32 based hot rod. ( Just as an aside, I currently build 1:1 period rods at a nationally known shop for a living, so I'm telling you the real deal.) In this shot, the rear crossmember and floor area have been replaced with scratchbuilt pieces to allow this car to utilize a '37 Ford rear end. This is more-or-less what you'll have to do on your Revell '32 to get somewhere to hang the rear buggy spring. This is the Revell '37 truck axle in place. Wishbones from the '32 will be added shortly. The '37 wishbones couldn't be used because they're too long, too wide and interfere with the frame rails. This sort of mix-and-match is, again, exactly what you encounter building a real one. It's important to remember that although the model-T all the way through the '48 Fords had similarly designed rear suspension, there were differences in the placement and width of the wishbones, the spring hangers and the spring design and height. As you do your mods, you will have to make note of what these differences are and how they will effect your wheelbase and ride height. NO two hot rods will ever be exactly the same, especially period cars that were built from junkyard sourced items rather than catalogs. This shot shows the raised center of the model-A ('28-'31) rear crossmember and spring. This is necessary to install a quick-change rear end in a '32. Though this is again an old AMT '29 kit, you already have this crossmember and spring in your '31 Tudor kit, and the swap into the '32 is straightforward. It requires considerable careful measurement and fitting however, being aware of the things I mentioned above...wheelbase, ride height and wishbone location. Also included in your '31 Tudor kit is a Model-A rear axle. This is very similar in appearance to the '32 and later, though they are entirely different in reality. Same look but different parts. This is an acceptable unit to use for a period-look car. You may have to adjust the length of the driveshaft to fit your engine / transmission of choice. Remember too that the earlier cars (4-cyl and flathead powered) had "closed" driveshafts with only ONE universal joint in the front. All forward driving force was taken out through this driveshaft and then through the trans, engine and motor-mounts. The trans that comes behind your flathead will probably be correct for this look, to hook up as in reality with the '31 driveshaft/axle unit. The correct brake backing plates can be sourced from a number of kits. The Revell '40 and '48 Fords have them, as well as the Monogram 1/24 '32 roadster street rod with the small-block Chevy. There are nice ones in the Monogram 1/24 woody, with spindle details that can be used to work in conjunction with the working steering of your '31 Tudor axle as shown here. Glad to see you taking such an interest in doing a little more to get a correct car. Though it certainly is more work, I think you get a real feel for what the early hot-rodders did by taking the time and making the effort to get the details dialed in.

Just narrowing and shifting the rear seat a bit, and modifying the side panels a little to make room for wells for the top bows, I would think. I don't THINK there would be much exterior bodywork. I could be wrong.

I guess I'm not understanding the gripe, as converting a hardtop '57 Chevy to a convertible must surely rank as one of the easier hacks.

All the Revell '32s have the same issue with the suspension, but at least one kit ( the '32 5-window coupe, for sure ) has optional "hairpins" for the front axle, which are more correct for a traditional ('40s - '50s ) rod instead of the 4-link setup. A real traditional rod would most likely have an I-beam front axle instead of the tubular style, as well. The optional dropped front axle (with wishbones) in several of the excellent Revell Model-A kits is perfect, and has working steering with drum brake backing plates. (The model A backing plates aren't really right if you're being picky, as most fast '32 Fords got converted to '39 or later Ford hydraulic brakes. The backing plates from the Revell '40 can be made to work and look right.) The '32 kit discs aren't traditional. The rear end in the '32 kits will look fine from the side and top, but if you want the correct look from the bottom and rear (for a '40s -'50s period car), you will need to convert the rear suspension to transverse leaf and radius rods, or split wishbones. The rear axle from the Revell '40 Ford is a good starting point (it also has the correct period drum brakes) but the rear crossmember will have to be modified to make it work. You can splice in the '40 crossmember. A quick-change rear end looks even better, but it takes a model A or T spring and crossmember (just as in a real '32) to get the clearances you'll need.

Have you done a google image search for "frenched headlights" to get an idea of all the possible looks you can get from frenching? Okay, in that case I'll give you an illustration. The object, for the most part, is just like on a real car. You want to strip the chrome from the stock headlight rings and mold them into the fenders. The headlights themselves will appear tunneled into the fenders, and are mounted from behind. One of the easiest is the AMT '49 Ford. Using a razor saw, CAREFULLY cut the reflector portion off of the back of the chrome headlight rings. You will reuse them, and you will use the rings, so be CAREFUL. CAREFULLY sand the cut edges of the rings and reflectors flat with 400 grit paper, and paint the cut area of the reflectors silver, Alclad or buffing matalizer. I try to preserve the factory chrome inside the reflectors if at all possible. Strip the chrome from the rings. I use Easy Off, and then scrub with Comet. Square up the front of the fenders where the headlight holes are and cement the rings to the openings, making sure they're in line with each other and parallel. When fully dry, mold them in with your putty of choice. Make the holes ROUND and SYMMETRICAL. Decide how deep you want the headlight reflectors to be in the fenders, carefully offer up the reflectors from the back of the holes in the fenders, and see if they are just a light press fit. If not, you can build up the outside diameter with putty or gel superglue until they are. DO NOT GLUE THEM IN. Make sure when you have the buckets (reflectors) fitted that they're both the same depth in the fender openings and parallel to each other and the fender ends. Now take the buckets back out. Finish your molding in of the rings, primer and paint as you want. Make sure the insides of the fender openings are sanded slick and ROUND and painted too, as they will show when completed, obviously. Mount the clear headlight lenses to the reflectors with white glue that will turn invisible as it dries. Allow it to dry fully. Now re-install the completed buckets /lenses from the rear as you did during test fitting. You may have to lightly sand a little material off of the outer diameter to get them to fit correctly again, as the paint will take up some space inside the holes. Make sure the scribed lines on the lenses are going in the right direction, and that both sides match. A little white glue applied from the back with a toothpick will hold the reflectors in place. This is the most basic approach, but variations of this theme will, if done correctly, produce the frenched look on any car.