Ace-Garageguy

Most likely considerably faster. Though a great deal of research was done in wind tunnels and water tanks to reduce float drag in the air and while taxiing up through 1931, when the Schneider trophy was permanently won by England that year, much of that research stopped. "Land planes" shortly afterwards went on to set higher speed records, in large part because they didn't have huge draggy floats to slow them down. Again, drag is the most important single factor in going really fast. Drag increases proportional to the square of speed, so when you go twice as fast, for example, you have to overcome 4 times as much drag. Three times as fast, nine times the drag, etc. But the power to overcome that drag varies with the cube of speed...which essentially means that to go a little faster, you need a LOT more power. (NOTE: The relationships above are perhaps overly simplified, but in general concept, they're close enough for our purposes here.) Looked at another way, this is a large part of the reason Danny Thompson's twin-engined LSR car was significantly faster than his father Mickey's four-engined car...Danny's car had vastly reduced drag because of a much smaller package. (NOTE: Mickey Thompson realized this, as he initially built the skinny two-engined car Danny would drive to a record in 2018...in 1968.) And this is one big reason you don't currently see prop-planes going faster than the speed of sound. The propeller disc, besides providing thrust, also creates massive drag...not to mention the other insanely complex aerodynamics going on with a prop at those speeds. http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0031b.shtml

I'm confused by the meaning here. The "left field" examples I posted are ALL examples of a mounting flange cast integrally with a crankcase (note: other than the single shot of the completed model necessary to refute an assertion the model represented a side-valve configuration). This was a perfectly valid way to illustrate visually different but functionally identical versions of what the OP realized he wanted to achieve to make the model appear rational. Nothing more, nothing less. Where's the "left field" come in?

Dancing pretty close to the edge there, aren't you boss?

Couple real world problems though. Hummer's claimed range is 350 miles, but the 800V recharging stations that can almost fill the thing in 30 minutes just aren't on every corner. Other thing is how much of that total vehicle weight is batteries? Lead zeppelins don't fly all that well.

You guys are killing me. Every time I think I have everything I could possibly want, something that I'd never seen before shows up here, or somebody reminds me of one I'd forgotten was on the hunt list. Saw a guy here doing a Mad Max ('73 Australian Falcon) Interceptor, reminded I'd been after one long ago, found a Blue Fin (Chinese market Aoshima) version for not horrible money. Relatively simple kit, but what's there is a little better than I'd expected.

You guys are killing me. Every time I think I have everything I could possibly want, something that I'd never seen before shows up here. Saw a guy on another section making castings from a diecast '54 IH pickup, and just had to get one. Nice model really...much better than I'd expected for the price.

I'd pay a dollar to see that.

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. Electric drive systems lend themselves nicely to high-torque output over a relatively short time period, with no relatively huge drag-inducers like air intakes for engine induction and cooling. At LSR speeds, aerodynamic drag is enemy number one. I don't know what the rules are regarding two-way runs for electric LSR records, but if a fully charged battery pack could be quickly swapped (legally) for the return, the numbers just might work really well. EDIT: Electricity has the potential to power faster aircraft record-breakers too...but the problem for a practical electric aircraft, much like that for cars, is range on a charge. A Cirrus SR22, for instance, has a maximum range of 1150+ nautical miles, a maximum cruising speed of 210MPH, and a useful load of 1300+ pounds. Probably not quite there yet for an electric...

It's a sad situation when there's no one close who appreciates the value, both sentimental and monetary, of meaningful things people collect during their brief time here. I'm lucky to have a very old friend who will probably outlive me, and who understands how much a part of me all my much-loved "stuff" really is. I probably need to face the unpleasant thought about what will become of my "junk" if she departs first. There ARE viable solutions to our respective dilemmas.

I'm reasonably sure the AMT rear ends...with good one-piece axle bells that still need thinning to look right...can also be found in the double-dragster kit, and the double T kits as well. Photo below shows the referenced nicely detailed AMT unit, LEFT, with the rear face "machined" flat to receive the "change-gear" cover from a Revell assembly, and the axle bell flanges thinned to look more like the real deal. For more on adapting it to chassis it wasn't made for, see page 3 of this thread:

Great to hear. And though discussion of this topic is for the most part verboten, I would strenuously recommend that everyone research primary sources of information, and try to avoid swallowing whole the media's predominant position without educating yourself enough to make a well-informed judgment as to which version of the "truth" comes closest to reality. There is "science", and there is actual science. They do not always agree.

Right off the top of my head: 1) The Tommy Ivo Showboat has two very nice "big car" championship units, appropriate for a higher horsepower car. 2) For a normal street rod, the old AMT dragster chassis parts pack has a nice smaller one. Good for the "V8" version of the Halibrand unit, it responds well to additional detailing, and it's similar to what's found in a lot of the old AMT kits (the '41 Willys drag car comes to mind). One caveat...the axle bells in the parts-pack are two-pieces, not my favorite, though the center-section is good...and in the other AMT kit versions, the flanges on the well-detailed one-piece axle bells are way too thick for scale, but are easily modified. And some may be slightly out-of-register from not-perfectly-aligned molds, so that's something to watch out for, particularly if you want to cast copies. 3) There are 4 slightly smaller ones in the Micky Thompson Challenger kit, probably better for an earlier, lighter 4-banger car or a midget. The best part of this particular version is the separate rear gear cover, and some shorter axle bells you might need if you're building an old-school "slingshot" dragster. The gear cover and bells have nice bolt-head detail and can improve the appearance of many of the others. IIRC, it's the same one that's in the recent Mooneyes dragster kit. There are more I can't call up to memory at the moment, and lots of the kits I'd usually check for verification are already either packed or moved.

When I was a kid, plastics were the hot-happening-great-new-opportunity. I recall some of my father's less visionary peers sneering at one of their friends who invested heavily in the emerging industry. Some folks made millions, some lost their shirts to scams, mismanagement, and incompetence. Nothing much really changes...just the particular tech and the names of the players.

Just want to echo Snake's "good luck", and to advise you try not to worry too much. The reason I've been on this site so often recently is due to a bout with the latest variant keeping me at home, but not much worse than a nasty cold. I'm pretty old, but in generally decent shape, so that helps I suppose. I had the first variant back at the beginning, and it was like a very odd flu; I haven't required medical intervention either time, and I do test positive for antibodies. Though it can potentially be serious, don't despair; if an old geezer like me can come through two versions OK...

^^^ That's the spirit.

Cool old machines. My mudder had a Singer about the age of your Pfaff 130 that folded down into a table...apparently like your Pfaff does. I didn't keep it when she died, as I figgered it would be too light to do upholstery and tops. Kinda wish I had now.

Yes sir. Looks good.

Agreed entirely. Still, I have a few that are a little "more favorite" than others. One of 'em is an old wood-box set (like this) of X-Actos that were my father's. Though I have lotsa newer ones, these are kinda special. Small number drills and a pin vise, most definitely. Another go-to, constantly, is my Mitutoyo digital caliper, like this. I keep a set of cheaper ones in every toolbox, in every shop. Steel triangles and squares rate high too. But the number one favorite is my vintage Unimat lathe, like this, that converts in seconds to a vertical milling machine. As I'm always collecting more tooling for it, there soon won't be anything it can't do...except run itself.

Thanks again. We managed to connect off-site, and I've received the files via electronic transfer.

There's really no philosophy addressed here, other than the moral and ethical obligation of anyone who presents himself as an "expert" or "authority" to make damm sure he's regurgitating actual facts and truth, gleaned from primary sources, and not just mindlessly spreading manure he got from a "consensus" of the poorly-informed, the intellectually lazy, or the willfully-ignorant who really don't know what they're talking about but are content to rebleat what their peers say. Unfortunately, it's an idea whose time seems to have passed...particularly among those who style themselves as "journalists". EDIT: One more point...presenting false information or telling a lie, once or 10,000 times, does not make it true; billions of people believing a lie does not make it true either.

Always enjoy seeing the effort you make to get the stance and everything else about a car's "look" right-on. Your work has been an inspiration to me from the first time I saw it here on this board.

The old Riv still has to be one of the best looking cars ever built, and those wheels absolutely work on it.