Ace-Garageguy

Coast downhill with the clutch in to save gas and wear on the engine, if you have a manual gearbox.

Sport fishing from a boat offshore always looked like something I'd like to try.

"Shocking" may be the most currently overworked word in the clickbait arena.

So, ummm...how often do you go way beyond the minimum necessary to do the job you get paid for? Just curious. I'm far from lazy, but I only do professionally what I'll get a return on these days, having learned the value of time and the futility of going above-and-beyond what's realistic...for free. Business decisions require careful analysis of things like "how do we get the maximum return on the minimum investment?", and if you don't think in those terms, you don't remain viable.

I have to agree, that looks great... ...but maybe this will help to illustrate some of the inaccuracies:

"Look here" said the blind man, "and tell me if this is a rope or an elephant's tail I'm holding".

I've thought the same thing, but haven't measured yet. I've worked on stretching the too-short nose on the Revellogram snapper, but haven't tried raising the chopped top yet. I've also been working on modifying the kinda OK body from the otherwise awful AMT 3W kit, and that's promising. And out in my very limited shop in Az., I started a swap of the Revellogram snapper, sans hood, on to the AMT 5W. But AMT's pretty OK 5W, with a new-tool 3W body shell...it just seems like a slam dunk to get some geezer bucks while we're still kicking. Strike while the iron is hot...or at least before we're all back to room-temperature.

Here, There, and Everywhere is a Beatles song from 1966.

Stick the palm of your hand to your lips with superglue for a low cost weight loss program.

I think a good 3-window would be the real hot ticket to get a little more mileage out of the old tooling. There's never ever been a good 3W in 1/25. They all have serious proportion issues. Tool a stock 3W body shell, throw in a louvered extra decklid like Revell did with their 5W coupe, and I'd buy a case of the things.

Several possible reasons, depending on the model in question. Here are two. 1) Some of the earlier kits had extremely accurate bodies, because when they were the basis for promos, they were developed from OEM blueprints and had few measurement and scaling errors we often see today, or the creative "artistic" interpretations of proportions. 2) A significant expense incurred in tooling design is the layout of parts and runners, injection points, the need for sliding elements in some cases, and other esoteric things directly involved in the molding process. Scanning a known-good sprue eliminates a large part of this design and development labor. We could hash out the relative benefits and drawbacks of doing things several ways, but we have to assume the tooling and design guys know what they're doing, and will make the rational tradeoffs between accuracy, cost, potential market size, etc.

Forsooth, sore tooth.

Looks really good, and it's great to see a vintage kit built instead of "collected". Very, very nice.

"Away team, assemble in transporter bay three immediately!"

Here there be monsters, or dragons, or something equally unsavory.

Learn to lay your paint down slick, and you'll save many hours of needless sanding and polishing.

Better post late than never, if you can.

Paint can make or break a model, or a real car build.

Scales from fish have been used to make "metallic" paint pigments.

Hurt feelings trump logic and facts every time...said no-one with a brain ever.

Wait...WHAT? SNOW??? I thought New York would surely be a barren desert waste by now. And isn't Manhattan supposed to be under water pretty soon?

Nekkid cast iron is the consensus among most restorers. Do you have Testors metalizers in your stash? They're out of production and most stocks have been bought up. But despair not. Most car parts stores have a "cast metal" rattlecan product that works great, and is enough to last for years. The diecast aluminum bellhousing would best be represented by Testors "aluminum plate" buffing metalizer, if you can find it.

Here's a brief overview of emerging carbon-neutral hydrogen electrolysis technologies, with improving efficiencies and cost-effectiveness. Hydrogen as a fuel appeals to me primarily because it works just fine in IC engines, so I can keep driving my rorty old dinosaurs with a clear conscience. Bear in mind that these are early-days yet, and the efficiencies will inevitably get better as costs come down. PS: Disregard the 400% click-bait thumbnail.

Well, since the whole EV thing is ostensibly about "saving the planet", some related digressions are inevitable.

Is that a gun in your pocket?