Ace-Garageguy

Exceptional. Perfect color, perfect stance, perfect parts choices.

If this thing is going to go for a year, I'll give it a shot. Early '50s Studebaker, either a bullet-nose or a Loewy coupe, or maybe a '60s Lark.

Geez...half my kingdom for a woman who not only isn't terrified of "excessive" speed, but who can wring a machine out all by herself. I didn't know they ever made those... EDIT: well, 'cept for Patty Wagstaff and Danica.

Or this...

Indeed.

That's what choo get when you lock 12 tool-wielding monkeys in the barn for a month with a junk Jag, some random parts, and a 55 gallon drum of bondo.

Most of the news media and most of their subject matter... EDIT: And the emotional and intellectual age of a large part of their audience...

Interesting thread. They're running It's a Wonderful Life here at a restored 1935 theater all day December 21. I went a few years back, will probably go this year. 'Bout as close to time travel as you can get at the moment...

On the inline 2X4 manifold, the threaded hole for the brake booster vacuum line fitting is to the right, which is the rear of the engine, passenger side runner. Single 4bbl manifolds have the port in the same place:

Not if it remains free of gossip, conjecture, and general negativity.

Which intake manifold? On a 2X4 inline manifold, it's a fitting at the inboard end of the last runner on the passenger side:

Ummm...do we have to be vaccinated to play?

Yup, I've had that happen too. In most cases though, it's been an obvious ditz who's just a little out of their depth selling online.

Just FYI... TEXTING SCAMS are one of the newest methods to steal from you. They pretend to be from a legit business, and they'll often offer a "free gift" you get by visiting a link provided in the text, and go from there. ------------------------------- Possibly your text was working a variation of the "you can't cheat an honest man" game: Guy who wants something for nothing and thinks the "account" is some windfall or "computer error" he'll get free money from gets directed to a fraudulent website, enters his name, DOB, SS number, address, etc., and two hours later the scammers have run up $20,000 worth of bills on his credit...or have taken out a mortgage on his house. Happens all the time.

Today's "irk" #1 is an eBay seller who posted a kit had been "opened for inspection", with a photo that obscured the obvious fact it had been substantially started. While the workmanship isn't terrible, there are glue smears and fingerprints that will have to be corrected. And that's not what I bid on. I have a message to the seller, and will go to arbitration if necessary...but I'm so dammed sick of sellers who either mislead bidders intentionally, or are just too stupid to recognize a fact when, literally, a blind man could. Irk #2 is an aftermarket fuel pump specified by a DeLorean specialist firm that can't even make the threshold pressure required to open the injectors on the CIS system. And as usual, I get to re-do the engineering some "professional" already got paid well for.

Yeah, it's "free", but when builders like you post their work, you're "paying" far more than you think. YOU, and all the other builders ARE THE CONTENT THAT GIVES THE SITE ITS VALUE. It's not like you're getting the contents of the magazine for free, where SOMEBODY ELSE does all the work, and you reap the benefits.

Speaking of which...HOW CAN ANYBODY BE STUPID ENOUGH TO LET GOOGLE HAVE THEIR PASSWORDS? Browsers constantly ask if I want them to "save" my passwords...and I decline. And every time I log in anywhere, google asks if I want to use a "saved" password. Nah, I don't think so. I need to find out if they've saved any without my permission, and boy if they have...class-action suit, anybody?

TEXTING SCAMS are one of the newest methods to steal from you. They pretend to be from a legit business, and they'll often offer a "free gift" you get by visiting a link provided in the text, and go from there.

Yup. Also remember that 16" mags were fairly common in this period too, as lotsa slicks were still capped on 16" carcasses. Which is why I mentioned my judgement as a caveat concerning the accuracy of my numbers.

If the car below is the one in question, it's possible to extrapolate the wheelbase from known dimensions in the photograph. On my screen, measuring the wheel diameter and length of the valve cover shows the image I have here to be approximately 1/27 scale. Measuring the wheelbase on the screen and multiplying by 27 gives an approximate real-car wheelbase of 130 inches. Not exact due to a variety of factors like parallax effects and my own judgement, but PDC (pretty damm close).

My originals don't.

Just FYI, my go-to tool for that kind of work has become the Tamiya scriber handle with a selection of tips. Not cheap, but worth every penny:

Yeah, please. The life you save may be mine. Last year, a good friend's perfect Caddy CTS-V coupe was totalled by some fool woman slamming into it's tail while texting. Year before, a dumb little girl ran a light in front of my truck, also texting. If I hadn't been paying attention, I'd have plowed into her door and popped her like a zit. GET OFF THE DAMMED PHONE AND DRIVE.

The control system is apparently directly descended from small drone tech, as evidenced by video shot during development of the flying prototype, which uses what looks to be an RC drone joystick module for control inputs. I imagine the hardest part was either finding or developing the motors and props that had the requisite performance for such a relatively heavy vehicle. The rest of it is straightforward aircraft-quality fabrication. All of which implies that, with a little reverse-engineering, there's really nothing now stopping a skilled tinkerer from building a one-off for a small fraction of the cost of this one. Hmmmmm...

Looking good. Nice mods. Always liked this particular car and the period it represents, and have enough of the originals to keep me busy for some time. Is the apparent warp in the frame actually there, or is it an image artifact caused by one of today's crop of lenses apparently designed by folks who generally seem to have no understanding of the concept of "optics" in the word's original context?