Ace-Garageguy

Thanks. No real reason this one got sidetracked, no particular build problems, but looking at the dates of my last posts, it seems it was about the time my personal life went kinda off the rails. I really like this one, so she'll be moving as soon as I actually finish at least one of the builds on the bench at the moment.

I really appreciate your interest and comments on this old girl. The most recent problem has to do with the proportions and slope of the windshield. I started to try to get a little too tricky with it, and haven't been happy with the results yet...so I let her rest for a while. Looking back over the photos here, I'm pretty sure I know the way to go now, and as she's never left the "short term" storage next to the build-bench, she'll be back as soon as I finish a couple of others.

I agree completely. Checking the "sold for" prices and waiting patiently can save you a bunch of money on something "rare" and unusual...which is why I haven't been in a hurry to spring for the $175 for a virgin, almost-perfect-box version of the old kit I'm after at the moment. It's a screw-bottom, and clean built-ups have been moving for well under $100.

And I don't understand blowing models up with firecrackers. I never understood the desire to pay a dollar to hit a fine old running '53 Buick with a sledgehammer (to raise money for my high-school football team), to shoot holes in old cars, smash the windows and instruments in old airplanes, or to deface other folk's property with graffiti, either. And...anything is "worth" exactly what somebody else is willing to pay on the day. Pretty simple.

Another thought on this...building from gluebombs works for me because I almost never build stock. If I get a body that has the basic shape I'm after, cheap, it's usually OK if everything else is trash. If I built stock or "box-stock", I could see where a gluebomb could certainly be a lot more trouble than it would be worth. That said, I'm currently searching for something I've wanted to do a replica of a particular '60s GM full-size custom, and I just might be willing to pay for the clean unmolested kit I've found. One more thing comes to mind...I've been inspired several times to build something I had no prior thought of or interest in simply because a gluebomb that arrived on my doorstep as part of a larger mixed parts purchase just seemed to speak to me. Such was the case with this one, which looked so sad...kinda like an abandoned, sick kitten that "everyone" knows will die, and that turns out to be a wonderful cat.

Still incredibly modern because for all our technology and smart-phones and driverless cars, we ourselves (most of us, anyway) haven't really changed emotionally.

Some kind of fun.

They're called "AN" fittings, for "Army-Navy", and were originally developed for military aircraft use. In the beginning, they were supplied in a greenish chromate finish, and were highly sought after in the post-WW II surplus market. One of the leading WW II-surplus resellers, Earl's Supply, went on to become a major manufacturer of these components as the surplus stores began to dry up, along with other names like Aeroquip. In fact, "aeroquip" has become the generic term for these fittings...kinda like "kleenex" came to be generic for disposable snot rags. They're now used on almost all aircraft, and most racing cars. Though they're extreme overkill for street-driven cars (even those that are occasionally raced) they've become a performance-car "fashion statement" (and can be had as fakes, too, for less cost but sorta the same look). Here's a good general overview. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN_thread

I didn't hear any mention of hard-chromed, centerless-ground framislator pins. Maybe that was a later development? Hmmm. Nothing about nitrided Kniffler bearings either. How odd.

Thanks. It's great seeing somebody else taking the time to save an old model that really needs help. An easy way to lower the nose if you use the kit axle is to just remove some of the top of the front spring. That saves a lot of the work of making a new front crossmember. The AMT '32 Ford Victoria and phaeton have a frame without a molded-in rear suspension. The sedan may have (just got one in that I need to check), but the 5-window coupe has the same blobular frame as the roadster. Here's another one of my old AMT '32 gluebomb-salvage threads that shows a fairly easy way to modify the blobular frames for separate rear suspension.

Yes, thanks for letting us know he wasn't alone.

Snagged one of these, pretty much just because I've never seen another one. Not complete, but certainly enough there for what I want. To the best of my knowledge, the only other AMT kit to have a '32 sedan body was the now rare double with the Willys drag car (of which I have several) and that one couldn't be built stock. Of course, the AMT sedan body suffers from the same dimensional difficulties as all their other '32 Fords (the cowl height in front is way too short, as though the body had been sectioned).

Scott Colmer I think the fork things are friction shocks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Exactly. They usually get removed and replaced with later-style tubular shocks on hot-rods.

Same reason some of us build real hot rods from junk (I don't mean "rat rods" either), or restore and modify old cars that have been monkeyfied and unloved for years (all of which I do for a living). But it's kinda one of those things that, if you have to ask, you probably wouldn't ever understand anyway (which is perfectly OK...it doesn't HAVE to appeal to everyone; I've just always had a soft spot for broken and abused things). It's a challenge, and a satisfying one to me, to make something nice from something somebody else has given up on, buggered hopelessly, or just thrown out. Gluebombs can often be acquired for pennies, literally, and you will sometimes find subjects that you wouldn't necessarily want to modify heavily if they were pristine virgins. So far, this is the worst one I've brought back...a '61 Dodge Dart (Johan). Build thread here... This one was built from somebody's unsuccessful attempt to chop a top, after they gave up when they found out it was a little harder than it looked and sold it on. I think I paid less than $5 for the basic mess, cut into pieces, with obviously no clue as to how to put it all back together. And I NEVER would have bought this kit if I hadn't got it so cheap, anyway.

I seem to recall he did Harry Truman and Harry Belafonte too. It's hard to really believe he's gone. Damm.

LOVE it. That's a great old classic kit, and I've hacked up a lot of 'em. And man, is that one rough. I'll be following, for sure. Here's one of my own projects involving reworking a gluebomb of the same kit.

Thanks, Tom. Chris Drysdale's (Spex84) remarkable talent took my stalled idea and turned it into something a lot cooler than what I originally envisioned. The hardest part will be putting together a funding package or syndicate of backers. I've already worked out some of the more obvious technical bits and have found sources for major components, even have several major parts in stock (Jag 4.2 XK engine). If it's the only way I can get this one done, I'll sell off some of my 1:1 cars. But the first step is getting together a 1/12 scale curbside model with a decent finish. and staying true to the proportions of the sketch. A lot of customs lose much of their impact going from concept to 3-dimensions.

I went ahead and sprung for a fairly complete and unmolested 1/12 AMT Cord kit to use as a basis for a presentation model to help sell a full-scale project. After seeing Chris Drysdale's sketch based on a quick mockup idea I posted here a few weeks back, I've been working towards making this one come to life as a full-scale car. Though my original idea was based on the old Pyro kit, that kit has several proportion errors, so, as the real car will be based on repro Cord parts that are dimensionally identical to the originals, I need to base the model on a kit that has as few proportion errors as possible...and the big 1/12 scale is more impressive to a prospective backer than a little 1/24 model would be.

The great majority of my kits are '60s-'70s that I bought after 2005 with the specific intention of building, one way or another. They're predominantly kits I had as a kid, or that I wanted and never got. Most of my work involves heavy modifications, so I'm perfectly happy to start with a bodged gluebomb or a complete wreck if I'm building something fairly radical (just like with real cars), but if I want something close to what the kit was intended to build, I'll usually start with a clean, unbuilt original. I'm a builder, not a collector, and I figure there are plenty of collectors saving pristine kits out there already. As investments, I just don't see it. They'll only ever bring chump change, so why not enjoy them by building them? There are, however, a very few kits in my collection that are non-builders, with almost perfect boxes, 100% complete, most of the parts still on the trees, etc. These few have particular meaning to me, and I have builder versions should the desire arise to hack one up. As far as rebuilding goes, I probably enjoy making something nice from somebody else's trash more than any other aspect of the hobby. Before... During the rebuild... Before... Rebuild almost complete...

Actually, it was Bob Taber who dug this up and bumped it...though shortly prior to Harry's passing, I did suggest to the moderators that making a pinned section remembering Harry's models and contributions might be a nice thing to do.

Always a pleasure to see your beautiful, clean work progress and finally come together.

Great colors and paint, beautifully clean model and fine photography.

Very nice. The added details really bring it to life. Exactly what I need for an HO setting I'm designing.

Very nice. I love seeing unusual heavy equipment models. This is really something special.

One of my personal favorites in Harry's collection of absolutely outstanding models.