Ace-Garageguy

Yup. I was primarily illustrating something very similar to the actual component layout and the reduction-gear setup, and how the power is transferred from the turbine shaft to the gearbox, since that was more-or-less the original line of inquiry. I'll stop now.

Today I got lied to several times, a bunch of grief, a bunch of BS, a bad check returned from a client and a cancellation of a job from another client. Does that count?

Think I'm going to hold off on the Dauphine until I can take a mold of the original shell, but put me down for a '57 Ford, probably injected FE powered.

I couldn't possibly say it any better, so I won't try.....except I disagree with "overdeveloped" as far as imagination goes. How about very active?

Although this is a diagram of the Pratt & Whitney PT6 (probably the most popular turboshaft engine ever, various versions being installed in helicopters, racing boats, production airplanes and retrofits, and automobiles) it's a pretty good depiction of what happens in the Continental TS325 as installed in the Howmet. This shows a PT6 with an output shaft offset from the turbine centerline by a reduction geartrain, similar to the TS325 setup in the Howmet. In operation the exhaust ducts would be rotated 90 degrees from what is shown here, to place them on either side of the gearbox, again as in the Howmet installation. The PT6 variants are often set up with an output shaft that is concentric with the turbine centerline, with a planetary-style reduction gearbox instead of the spur-gear reduction geartrain shown, and in some cases a torque-converter style liquid coupling.

Ditto the above, but just out of curiosity, what kind of primer did you use? Primer incompatibility can cause delayed drying too.

The '60 Ford chassis is beautifully detailed, is the same wheelbase and is the correct semi-perimeter frame design, but the rear overhang is longer than the '59, and it's a bit wider (both easily corrected). Chuck can tell you more about the Edsel. The Revell '59 Ford chassis detail is about the same level of detail as the AMT '57 Ford, with separate suspension but molded-in exhausts.

Another entertaining build, Chuck. I've got one of these I've been thinking of bashing into a Metro, then building it as a tuner with Honda or MR2 guts, mid-engined.

1) Work; 2) Other responsibilities; 3) Technical issues that need research or correction (examples: the right period Quick Change, or paint problems); 4) Taking too much time being entertained and posting, not enough time building; 5) Getting in over-my-head, skill-wise, and having to wait 'til my skills catch up to my ambitions; 6) Getting another great idea that I have to get mocked-up, at least; 7) Burnout on the "work" part of a build; 8) Too little self-restraint as to how many builds I have going at any one time, making it difficult to finish anything; 8) Pain; 9) Laziness; 10) Sometimes just not feeling like doing anything at all.

Great photo of the power-takeoff from the turbine, Casey. I had to look at it a while to see exactly what was going on, but it's now apparent the designers brought the output shaft between the exhaust stacks, so it would be concentric with the turbine main shaft. It looked in some of the pix I'd found like they brought the PTO through the left side of the hot section, which made no sense at all. Now I understand why they split the pipes the way they did. The bearings and seals in the top-end of the gear-train must lead a very difficult life. The large dark gray casting at the front of the engine probably houses the starter drive and adapter (pretty sure the end of the starter can be seen immediately to the right of the large vertical part of the engine stand, probably #7 in the instruction drawing), accessory drives, the drive for the fuel metering unit, and probably the first compressor section. This does not appear to be the same forward casting as the one shown installed in the coupe, but it's hard to be sure. It doesn't look much like the version depicted in the instructions either. I would tend to believe the electric reversing motor would be installed on the reduction geartrain housing.

Exactly !!!!

I do a lot of heavy bodywork and major mods, radical chops and restyles. I've found that for me, the 2-part polyester glazing putties ( like Evercoat or my favorite, USC Icing) work exceptionally well for building a shape or fairing together two completely different parts. Once I've got the work in primer, I'll use one-part putty (right now Squadron green), to correct very minor flaws after sanding. Sand the puttied area, primer again. Over and over, letting it all shrink in thoroughly between applications. So far so good, and I'm extremely critical of the final appearance of my own work.

From the wikipee entry Howmet TX: "A two-stage setup used an internal power turbine to drive the rear wheels through the use of reduction gearing. Due to the wide variable output of the turbine and the high level of torque, a standard gearbox was not necessary, leaving the Howmet TX with only a single gearing speed. However, the gearing ratios were able to be quickly changed in the differential, allowing the car to be adapted to various circuits. Due to the use of a single-speed transmission, there was no gearing for reverse. Although Heppenstall initially wished to do without reverse, the FIA mandated its use and a small electric motor powered by the turbine was installed, allowing the car to move in reverse. " There doesn't appear to be a lot of data on the engines themselves, or the power takeoff design, because apparently they were prototype helicopter engines that never made it to production. BUT, in the photograph, there is a cast-aluminum unit that appears to be a differential. On the rear of the differential, there appears to be a bolted-on housing that more-or-less lines up with the rear flange of the turbine hot-section. This housing most probably is for the reduction-gear-train coming off of the mentioned "internal power turbine". The reduction gearbox has to be #4 and #5 in the transmission instruction sheet. And I was thinking of the Howmet closed version, the earlier body style.

Looks like it had Mini banana arms for the rear suspension too. I had no idea the Surfite was based on old Mini guts.

Tubular style shocks (referred to as "aircraft style" back then) began showing up on hot-rods in the late '40s. Houdaille lever-style hydraulic shocks and the old lever-type friction shocks were still widely used.

This isn't much help, but in '64 both pushbutton and floor shift configurations were available on the production automatic gearbox cars. Given a choice, I would THINK the race car would have used the floor shift, as it's more direct and simpler, but I do not know for sure. I don't think normal lever-style column shift auto trans linkage was available on production cars 'til '65. PS. Funkster hit it. The Ramcharger Candymatic used automatic gearboxes, hence the "matic" in the name. I'd still guess the race car would use a floor shift.

Aha !! It's apparently based on the turbine in the first Howmet turbine car (of which there is a kit also), a Continental TS325.

Casey, right off hand I don't know what engine the Can Am is supposed to be. The PT6 has the power takeoff on the exhaust end, and the Huey output shaft goes through the air filter. The ST6 in the Lotus used a chain-drive transfer case to get power to the 4WD, but it didn't look like what you have there.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1-25-Revell-Parts-Pack-Turbine-Engine-/200795082950?pt=Diecast_Vehicles&hash=item2ec051d0c6#ht_500wt_1413

There is also a gas-turbine automotive engine kit, quite highly detailed, available as a vintage Revell Parts Pack. It doesn't seem to be in very high demand, and I've seen it pretty cheap on ebay. The Huey Lycoming engines were rated from about 700 to 1400 shaft-horsepower, while the Lotus indy ST6 was a development of the Pratt &Whitney PT6, and was rated at only around 400 shaft-horsepower, if I remember correctly. It is also much smaller that the Huey powerplant, so that may influence your choice. For what it's worth, the Johan Chrysler Turbine Car has an entirely different turbine design (which was rated at only about 150 HP), but it comes complete with an automatic gearbox.

Again, thanks for the interest and feedback. I've decided to keep it a 4-door, so I'll raise the lower door cut-lines and reshape the rear wheel wells. I'm looking for a front axle with a lot of drop to avoid doing IFS, as I have a set of drilled radius rods for both ends I'd like to use. I'm thinking the interior will be AMT phantom-Vickie based.

The one I favor is the POWDER that comes in the round container. You can use BonAmi, or any of the other similar products, even the generic one if your store has it. It's just a cleaner made for scrubbing bathtubs and the like. With bleach is okay, and it works great on the porcelain tubs too. The LIQUID is usually a finer grit, and it is really good for cleaning NEW parts that don't have old paint or stripper residue on them. It also works well on fiberglass showers and tubs that the powder will make dull after a while.

This is going to get moved to the "how do I " section pretty quickly, but for now, the answer really depends on how low you want to go. Just as in lowering a 1:1 car, the BEST way to do it on ANY independent front suspension is to RAISE the front stub axle relative to the spindle or kingpin. It's pretty easy. Simply CAREFULLY cut the stub axle off the kingpin and raise it the amount you want to drop the car. If it's a fairly THICK stub, make sure it's square with the spindle and glue it back on with something like Tenax liquid cement that has a lot of penetrating strength and dries pretty fast. Like I said, make sure it's square and you do both sides exactly the same. For a THIN or small diameter stub, what works best for me is to cut it off, drill a hole in the spindle to accept a piece of styrene or metal rod the same diameter as the stub, but raised the same amount you want to drop the car. Glue it in, and again be very sure it's square, and that both sides match exactly. A more severe drop takes surgery to raise the control arms relative to the chassis.

I'm much liking the heavy mods and the look already.

What they said. Just over-the-top too-cool. And that metalflake really makes it.