Ace-Garageguy

Very simple: if you're getting the "imprint of the paper towel design on the roof of the model", your paint just isn't dry enough to handle safely. Fully cured paint will NOT fingerprint or take textured imprints from other materials. For final assembly, I'll often use the inside of old fleece sweatshirts on the bench. Just be sure you don't let any bits of plastic or metal contaminate it...or you WILL get scratches.

What are you using to thin your paint? Both the roof of the model and the spoon appear to have solvent crazing. A thinner or solvent that's too "hot" will attack the surface of the plastic, causing paint to go dull and "blotchy" as the solvents evaporate out during drying. The fact that you primered the hood more, and the problem isn't as severe, would be consistent with that. The additional primer blocks the solvent from getting to the plastic...but burying the model in primer isn't the solution, as it obliterates fine details. In general, the plastic that models are made from has been cheapened recently, and solvent resistance is poor. Many of us have noticed this, and it has been discussed at length. I would also respectfully recommend two things. 1) Practice your spray technique until you don't get orange peel. It's not necessary, and burying it in clear isn't really the right way to deal with it. 2) Make 100% certain of your materials and techniques BEFORE painting a model you care about. Another word of advice: spoons may NOT be the same plastic that models are made from these days, and what works on a spoon, though it's widely recommended by "experts", may very well NOT WORK THE SAME ON A MODEL. Once you get your technique perfected, your paint should look like this with NO clear or polishing.

I'll see your drums, laddie, and raise you some pipes...

Which is essentially what I said...just a little less flattering to the builder.

Wouldn't building the model square be more to the point? I can certainly see fastening a model to the bottom of a case for transport, as I've done it myself with light wire and holes...but it would never occur to me in a million years to correct a wonky build by gluing the tires to the case.

Yeah, the major talent in the Barris family was definitely Sam. A lot of customs are just different for the sake of being different, but they rarely are more beautiful than the cars they started with. Sam usually got it right...very very right. If that Buick roadcrusher had a forward-raked B-pillar, I'd give it 100 out of 100. Foose is also capable of making major mods to an existing vehicle, and making it look better than the original, while keeping the basic design intact.

Enamel over lacquer is usually safe (depending on several factors). Lacquer over enamel is asking for lifting, wrinkling, etc. Enamels also often have a "recoat window" that varies from paint to paint, and with temperature, humidity, etc. The general rule of thumb is that you can recoat enamel with enamel before 1 hour's drying, or after 48...but this needs to be verified experimentally for each paint you use. Shoot enamel over uncured enamel too soon, you'll probably get wrinkling too.

You are correct sir...it started life as the old Monogram Indy Kurtis nose...and thanks for the compliments. Excellent advice also. This was shot with the lens just about centered at the beltline... ...while this was shot at approximate eye-level of a scale human... ...and this was shot considerably lower.

Why? I didn't think Michigan was a likely area for earthquakes.

Very nice. Is it watercolor, or marker, or...?

Mo' debinately my kind of car. Proportions and stance are critical to get right on these things...and sometimes take lots of fiddling to hit the sweet spot.

If you're very good at laying things out on paper, and then cutting them accurately and cleanly, you can also make custom masking templates from "frisket" material. It is available to work well with different paint products, and avoids the problem of wrinkling and subsequent lifting with bleed-under you encounter with masking tapes. Another option, again only viable if you have very good fine motor control of your hands, is to use a "liquid mask" that is painted on, with a very fine brush used to sharply define edges.

All the above info is true and correct, but it's most important to remember LOTS OF LIGHT and USE A TRIPOD & THE AUTO-TIMER (to prevent jiggles)...no matter WHAT kind of camera you have. These shots were taken with a very cheap and "obsolete" ($15 used) 4.1mp "point-and-shoot" Nikon that only has "macro" and "zoom" extra functions. This is the el-cheapo lighting setup...three swingarm lamps with 100-watt equivalent compact-flourescent bulbs...

I've bought electronic parts from Chinese Amazon sellers (no US-made equivalents were available) and have never had to pay any additional import fees. I don't know about the situation with Chinese models, but buying them from Japanese sellers on Ebay, I've never faced additional fees there either.

Landed on my butt when I sat in a lawn chair that apparently had one back leg in a rabbit or gopher hole. Pretty well crippled right now, just about need a walker to get around the house. I haven't had back problems for several months, mostly due to losing some weight and doing targeted exercises. I'd forgotten how debilitating a bad back can really be. Bugger. I have work to do...

The 935-78 nose droops considerably more than the Ferrari, which is natural, as it follows the hood contours of the basic 911...and uses a 911-style hood as well.

A little reminder of how much fun gassers are.

Everything you said makes perfect sense. And your reasoning is why I almost always have a plausible backstory for anything I build. I almost never do models of specific cars, but I like to do what-ifs that get the tech right for the period and applicable class the model is supposed to represent. But there are a fair number of people who just don't care (and wouldn't catch AA/GS on a normally-aspirated Pinto four-cylinder ). We've had several 'discussions' of realistic gasser stance, for instance, with a few getting quite belligerent while arguing the opinion that these are just "toys", and that trying for technical and historical accuracy only takes the "fun" out of the hobby. I personally enjoy taking the extra effort to make a model believable and mostly technically correct, and consider it to be part of the "fun". PS. A thought about fiberglass panels...they wouldn't necessarily change the class a car would run in. A 'glass nose on a gasser, for instance, would have two effects. It would reduce the total weight of the car, naturally, but the idea isn't to go into a higher class. Rather, it's to get as close to the minimum weight for a particular class as possible. Getting weight off the front is the other point, so that the car could be ballasted up to minimum class weight (if necessary) with the ballast placed where it would do the most good for weight-transfer during acceleration. PPS. A further thought on other "hidden factors". For one example, the engine in the old Revell Stone-Woods-Cook Willys gasser represents a gen-one Olds OHV V8, introduced in 1949 and built through 1963. The engines came from the factory in displacements of 303, 324, 371 and 394 cubic inches, and all of them are visually almost identical...especially in 1/25 scale. A bored and stroked 394 can easily exceed 400 cubic inches, so obviously, for what appears to be the same engine, you could be in at least two different classes, depending on internal displacement. Again, that's why I usually build to a plausible backstory.

I'll be interested to see how you handle the conversion. I'm sure you can do it; just watch your dimensions, stance and proportions carefully. And avoid the temptation to get something stuck together quickly. Lots of careful mockup time and precision with cuts, fitting and symmetry will make it an outstanding accomplishment.

Very fine indeed. I started one of these years back, going with opening panels and engine / suspension details. Got mired in research and much scratchbuilding, as usual for me.

Yes, I agree with that too...though I wasn't referring to the actual updating process disrupting work. I'll often shut down the machine as a t-storm is approaching, having been zapped by a line spike before. Waiting for a damm update to do its thing in that scenario can be a little annoying too. HOWEVER... The most recent update has fooled with the functionality of several NON-Microsoft programs...somehow...which only became apparent well AFTER the update, like DAYS after, when I tried to use the programs.

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Microsoft updates. Lately, whenever Tinylimp updates itself, it destabilizes several other applications and creates odd behavior that can be maddening...especially when it occurs in the middle of actually trying to DO something on the computer. Occasionally the problem is so severe that only uninstalling and reinstalling the app in question will clear the problem.

I wish you luck. The nearest one to me closed years back due to safety, neighborhood noise (the strip was there first) and property "development" issues. Now I have to drive damm near 100 miles.