Ace-Garageguy

Yup, that's how we set up a lot of cars. And I'm a Luddite too. Far as real heads-up displays go, in current fighter aircraft there's a huge information load, including targeting, so HUD makes perfect sense. In a car, it's just a Walter Mitty toy. About as actually useful as "rolling coal". Anyone who should be driving should also have the ability to wait for a clear road and glance down at the instruments occasionally. Of course, anyone who "should be driving" eliminates about 50% of those who are driving.

Great photos. Was your father flying those?

Your model looks great. Far as the kit itself goes, that's exactly what's in the original issue kit, though it's not labeled as a snapper. Frankly, I bought my hardtop intending to pull molds from the front clip and build a pickup. But with the scale discrepancy, it's getting doubtful that I'll even bother. Time seems to be slipping away, and it's becoming increasingly necessary to pick my battles with more care. Doing masters for a scale-correct hardtop and pickup had some appeal, but there are other things I'd really rather do at this point.

Agreed. Best of both worlds, if you just HAVE to be all whiz-bang techie, might be to have each instrument programmed to illuminate if a predetermined upper (like temp) or lower (like oil pressure) threshold is exceeded. For normal driving, a line-of-sight HUD representation of speed might be nice...at least so you could argue more convincingly with the cop when you get pulled over.

...That is precisely what most of this thread is about. Allow me to recap. 1) The original question was "Chassis upgrade for Johan '62 Lark: any ideas for THIS one???? " 2) Joe responded that the AMT Avanti chassis should work, as in reality, both cars shared the same wheelbase. 3) Mark responded that the scale of the Johan Lark is larger than the indicated 1/25, and therefore the Avanti chassis won't be a drop-in, but will need heavy mods. 4) I responded that because of the scale discrepancy, the chassis from the AMT '53 Stude was an easier swap for a "better, more detailed" donor, as it has the same wheelbase as the Johan Lark, but that the '53 Chassis would still require addition of the X-member from the Avanti, and a revised firewall crossmember to appear more correct. 5) Dan wondered if a course of action to obtain a scale-correct stock Lark body might be to start with a different Studebaker shell. 6) I stated that I had been considering shortening, narrowing, chopping, and sectioning the Johan (larger-than-1/25) Lark body to get a 1/25 scale-correct stock Lark body 7) The next few remarks discussed the commonality of basic body shells between the older sedan and the Lark, and considered the differences. 7) The referenced snap kit came with stock wheels and tires, as it was released WAY before the big wheel trend. EDIT: In conclusion (new material), I believe the best way to get "a better more detailed chassis" would be to shorten the AMT '53 unit just ahead of the firewall, as the Lark chassis was constructed in reality. Add the X-member from the Avanti, and modify the firewall crossmember to the Lark configuration. This would also require the Lark body shell to be shrunk down to a reasonably accurate 1/25 scale representation of the real car also. Lots of work, but the scale discrepancy drives me nuts.

I fondly remember the Kaman H-43 Huskie, both the early recip powered and the later turbine-powered (as in your photo) ships. They functioned well in the crash rescue / firefighting and general utility roles they were intended for. Interesting design, with no tail rotor required because the counter-rotating main rotors canceled out any helicopter-typical tendency towards yaw-axis rotation of the airframe due to torque.

Though the Lark was based on the full size Studebaker shell, with the wheelbase shortened ahead of the firewall, and as Joe mentions above, none of the exterior skins are shared. I've been looking at my Lark from the standpoint of narrowing it, shortening it, giving it a light top-chop and body sectioning, and re-scribing the rear door shut-line to get the initial impression closer to what it would be if it was correct 1/25 scale. With very careful measuring and cutting, I think this might not be as hard as it seems at first glance. It's odd that the scale is off, as Johan was usually very good about getting the outer appearance of their models spot-on. I'm wondering if the somewhat larger scale wasn't a concession to Studebaker's marketing department, concerned by the diminutive size of a promo if it had been scale-correct.

My Photobucket account is in good standing, functional, and paid up. All the photos appear correctly from my end at the present time, 9:31 PM EST, Friday, Dec. 27, 2019. However, Photobucket has occasional operating glitches, and sometimes photos are not always available. Check back.

Sorting day...

A slightly different spin on Floyd...

Contrary to what a certain element is trying to shove down our throats these days, "morals" and "profit" are not mutually exclusive. The only thing that shouldn't be for sale at any cost is personal honor. But sadly, it's often traded for peanuts.

Came home to pick up a tool, and this '50 Olds wagon conversion was waiting for me. From eBay seller bestmodelcarparts, it's the second piece I've bought from him. The other was a Corvair rampside pickup, and they are both in the "about as good as resin gets" category. VERY nice quality.

I first saw those crazy things in Japan in the late 1980s. Seems like some were actually being used as trucks at the time...without the silly airdam/cowcatcher and rockets, anyway.

Over the years, there have been several threads here and elsewhere about "how do I replicate factory shrink wrap?" There was at least one instance of an eBay buyer opening a "rare factory sealed" kit and finding nothing but scraps and sprue. There is, at the moment, a seller listing a "factory sealed" kit and making a big deal out of stating he's "not responsible for the contents of sealed kits". Draw your own conclusions.

I appreciated your response, went back looking at the same area on mine, then started pulling up other images of the same kit wherever I could find them. Another problem with that body shell I haven't seen addressed is that besides it having that unfortunate curl down on the top of the windshield frame, when viewed from the side, the roof climbs towards the front, unlike the real cars. Somewhere in there, the discussion around "I don't see the problem" popped up. Again, I appreciate your taking the time to post the photos of your corrective work. I'm glad I didn't pay much for the thing...though the chassis is a fair starting point to replicate the custom frame under the real one (a very expensive hot mess built 12 years back by somebody in the Northwest with a whole hell of a lot more ego than knowledge...and the primary reason I've been on the dammed car so long...WAY beyond what my original contract called out). At this point, I rather doubt I'll bother with doing a reasonably correct chassis for the models, and just get the "first impression" close enough so I don't cringe every time I look at it.

Hi Bill, and glad to have your input. The more I look at the Lindberg body, the more convinced I'm becoming that some heavy file work to lower the forward-most ends of the front fender character lines, and possibly strategic cuts to lower the tops of the front fenders as well (assuming there's just not material there to file them down enough), will at least get the thing to the point where the first impression isn't nose-climbing. I can live with a model that looks pretty good, but to my eye, this thing is immediately jarring. I'm tempted to buy another one, do side-by-side comparisons of what I consider to be minimum necessary corrections, then fix the second one to match it.

Mine are "he, him".

Excellent point. Also why different music appeals to different people, no matter what they were raised around, and why music is just random noise to some folks (yes, I've actually met one of those). But one would hope that the people who are employed to design the real ones, and those who are employed to render full-scale vehicles as scale models, would be on the end of the spectrum that's most sensitive to this kind of thing. Sadly, that's not always the case.

The little bugger is obviously based on the Opel Kadett B, the progenitor of the badge-engineered Vauxhaul mentioned above...but try as I might, I couldn't find a South American derivative. It occurred to me to look for a Vauxhaul derivative, but I didn't follow through.

Sounds like another woke-fest to me, the final nail-in-the-coffin-for-the-franchise. I'll wait 'til it's on the DVD clearance table for 99 cents.

^^^ That's some good schmidt.

Mark and Snake...thanks for the input. Mr. Snake...how much work did you put into the front of that roof? I went cheap and bought a gluebomb of that flipnose kit, and the upper part of the windshield frame is bowed down so much, the poor thing looks like it has a forehead. The glass fits it, so I assumed it was made that way...but yours doesn't look anywhere near as bad as mine.