Ace-Garageguy

Exactly.

Man, I'm not getting any of that. What a gyp.

Thanks Ray. Trying to actually finish one is a whole new approach for me.

You can also use telescoping aluminum tube to make wheel "sleeves" similar to what is available commercially. Though without a lathe it's time consuming to cut and polish rings, it is entirely possible with a razor saw, a miter box, small files, and sandpaper of appropriate grit. A few sticks of tubing will make rather a lot of sleeves with very minimal cost, and when polished, they look exactly like polished aluminum...because they are.

UPDATE SEPT. 30 Not a huge amount going on, just plugging away at getting the bodywork as close to perfect as I can live with prior to paint. Somewhere along the line, I radiused the wheel openings on the front clip I'm using, and I didn't, apparently, get them even. I don't recall why or when or what the project was, but I noticed a problem on this car with the shape of the left side relative to the right side. Only way to correct it properly is to add material back in, and reshape it using a template from the other side. Actually, I'd already added material in to get the openings rounder and more in line with the tops of the coves, but not quite enough...and I didn't notice the mismatch. Yeah, who cares, and you can't see both sides at the same time anyway, so nobody will ever know. But I'll know.

Though the Packard Hawk had a kinda catfish thing going on, I always kinda liked them 'cause they looked like a customized '53 Studebaker...which of course they were. While it's hard to improve on the '53 Stude, it's interesting to see what people come up with when they try.

You have a bunch of fine looking work there, sir.

I'm curious about which boards and clubs you hang out at. I'm just not seeing that depth of deviltry anywhere I go, and certainly not here. And yeah, some of us who are really familiar with a particular car may criticize a glaring error that somebody got paid pretty respectable money to get RIGHT. But in the end, most people I see agree to disagree, and even the most harsh critics often buy poorly-rendered kits and do their own corrections...and then post their results so that those who like their models to look like the subject they represent might be inspired to work a little more out of the box, and be a little less accepting when mediocrity is IN the box.

I certainly agree with that. The whole internet thing in general too. I've learned more about modeling on the web in a relatively few years than I probably would have known in a lifetime without it. Add the to-your-door availability of anything imaginable (though I DO miss the old hobby shops), and exposure to a range of kits and products that no real "shop" could ever stock even a fraction of...yeah, it's pretty good times.

Yeah, that's kinda the point I was making when I mentioned that, for the most part, we don't see (on this board) those modelers. There are multi-hundred dollar 1/24 kits of very interesting subjects, beautifully done. People wish for a Cheetah kit. Well, I have a real beauty, but it's not cheap, and the number of people who even know what it is is, apparently, too small to justify ever tooling one for injection-molded styrene.

Very attractive model. The kit seems to miss the mark slightly on proportions, but you've done a fine job with it nonetheless. Nice work.

Here's something similar in action... http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/123481-1st-gen-bronco-leadsled-kustom/ Another general thread... http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/129285-digital-die-cutting-machines-and-model-building/ And another...

Interesting thread, this. Kinda inspiring too. As a result, I've been kinda thinking about some recent vehicles I'd like to have in the stash. The Toyota FJ came to mind, and low and behold, Fujimi makes one...and it's on the way to my hot little hands. Here's one I really love to see both Toyota and some model company bring to reality; I'd stand in line. Probably a snowball's chance, too.

Man, this is great. Thanks again to everyone who's posted photos and reference material. Not only is there a lot of stuff here in one thread, but it's a helluva jumping off point for anyone who wants to follow up with more in-depth research. I just wish the book Matt linked to wasn't almost $750. That's a little steep at the moment, though it looks like an invaluable resource.

OK...I'll stretch the point and concede you could read it either way, but again, not ALL 50-year-old car kits are "badly engineered". Granted, some of the best-detailed kits out there, like the vintage Revell stuff, are referred to as "fiddly" and hard to build, when in fact it's a lack of skill and patience on the part of the builders that keep them from turning out great models. Yeah, I know, a certain segment wants zero effort in a hobby that's supposed to be relaxing...whatever that means...and seem to want everything done for them. So why not just buy a finished diecast? Or a pre-painted snapper? And frankly, I just really get sick of hearing that everything old is crapp and everything new is wonderful. It just isn't true. There's plenty of poorly engineered new cars and plenty of poorly engineered old cars. And there are poorly engineered and scaled models on both ends of the timeline as well. There's also design and engineering excellence on both ends, real and in scale. There are kits (and real cars) that get some aspects done brilliantly while making a dog's breakfast out of others. But if things keep going the way a large part of the populace seem to be pushing, in 20 years, I just don't see anybody building models of Uber-esque self-driving silent soulless transportation modules, any more than we see people building models of refrigerators and home air-conditioners today. Anyone who denies that America's love affair with the car is dying just isn't paying attention to reality...or refusing to accept it. Here's a parting thought: this is America, the land of limitless opportunity. No matter what segment tries to deny it, it still is, and that's one reason why so many people are trying to come here. There is nothing, repeat NOTHING, to stop anyone who's really concerned about the future of the hobby from starting a company and showing everybody how it should be done.

It's already being done where it's cost effective. But on a vehicle like my '89 GMC with early EFI, the "reasonably priced" aftermarket support parts are substandard offshore garbage. After having multiple back to back failures, I finally retrofitted the thing with a carb and an old-school HEI distributor. Hasn't missed a beat since...several years now...though I was supporting the local wrecker service prior. Cheap old electronically-encumbered vehicles will be junked, because the average owner of a car valued at $1500 can't afford a guy like me to keep it running when parts aren't available. Yeah, when they finally make it to collector status, the very few that do, some enterprising fellas will do what it takes to keep 'em going...once it's worth mucking with. We're already seeing non-repairable multi-speed automatic gearboxes. No internal parts available, no documentation. Buy a new box that can cost almost as much as the car is worth, or junk the whole thing. Same thing in many cases with engines. Sure, you can buy a low mileage engine or gearbox out of a wreck, but used electronic components are a risky buy at best, and are usually non-returnable if they're no good. So yeah...you can fix this new stuff when it gets old...like I said, by re-engineering it (which includes substituting mechanical bits and hardware / firmware / software that's no longer available). Re-engineering of cars that are today 40 or 50 years old is not necessary, and it's easy for any competent mechanic to keep one operating, as new, indefinitely. Keeping older computer-dependent cars on the road in the future is going to be difficult at best. But the way the car is seen by more and more folks as nothing but a disposable appliance, like a toaster, it's probably not going to be a problem that affects anyone but the lunatic fringe anyway. GM is working towards getting away from the "selling cars" model, and instead partnering with something like Uber to supply "transportation on demand", probably driverless too. Yuck.

By whose definition? I was with you right up to that point. I have 50 year old cars that will be running when this generation of tin-box, overcomplicated, in many cases poorly-thought-out, nightmare-to-service appliances is unrepairable without being re-engineered, because the electronics and software won't be supported anywhere on the planet. The new stuff works great until it doesn't. When it's out of warranty, good luck. And yes, I'm in the business.

While there is some visual similarity, the 908 is in fact very different...

Definitely my kind of engineering...

Thank you sir. Much appreciated.

Unfortunately, I can't accept Quatloos at this time (unless they are in metallic form, subject to assay of random samples). Paper or digital representations of Quatloos are quite out of the question, as we haven't been able to establish an exchange rate between Quatloos and any Earthside currency since the subspace data link with Triskelion went down sometime around 1998, and Triskelion does not maintain any diplomatic or banking representatives on Earth. I will, however, consider Carbon Credits, another useless, pretend medium of exchange, and subject to a wide variety of influences and Machiavellian mathematical machinations whenever anyone tries to pin one to an actual dollar value. My people can work with your people to establish a mutually acceptable cash equivalent, as I'm sure there's no shortage of intellectually impaired fools I can trade them on to for gold.

Thanks Dave. I appreciate your interest and input. Your work on that shell looks great. If I ever decide to do a street version, I'll most likely follow your lead there.

That was pretty much my experience over 50 years in the business. The last SnapOn guy we had wasn't great, but he was retiring and was trying to coast out the door on as little effort as possible. His replacement is like the rest of the good ones.

In particular, look at the 917 LH and the 917/20 Pink Pig. The noses of those two are very different from the 917K.