Ace-Garageguy

Really, the builder of this hideous mess seems to have done pretty fair quality work. It's just the design sense that's totally and completely lacking. See...not everybody who can MAKE a part has the eye and judgement to make a PRETTY part.

Four of the engines were repopped...the Potvin-blown SB Chebby (there is another SB Chebby not reissued), 427 Ford, Pontiac 421 and Caddy gen-one OHV V8 (wrongly labeled a "354"...no such animal). The market was apparently flooded with them, and I bought literally dozens when they were cheap and plentiful. Prices are going up now, and the supply seems to be dwindling. The TOOLING appeared to be in excellent condition, though there were noticeable sink-marks on the reissues, probably more to do with slight short-shotting or lower-pressure molding than old tooling. The Buick and Hemi kits seem to have been repurposed into the Ivo 4-engine car and the Tony Nancy Buick-engined car, while the Hemi went to the Miss Deal, and were never reissued in stand-alone format (as far as I have been able to ascertain). The other really excellent frame and accessories kits frequently show up on Ebay, for stupid and stupider money. I stocked up on many of those also, years ago, before the interest in old-timey building styles got going. The tooling on all of the old kits I have appears to have been in top-notch condition when they were made, and I've never seen ANY evidence to the contrary...though I have several of the (now) very expensive Revell double kits as well. The success (or lack thereof) of the recent AMT reissues of their also excellent engine kits would be a good indicator as to whether Revell might consider re-releasing any of their parts-pack line...if the tooling even exists. I'd GLADLY pay $70, or more, for a repop of any of the double-dragster kits made up of the old parts-pack trees, but I believe I'm in a small minority.

Another thing to consider...outstanding designs are RARELY (if ever) the work of committees. The BEST design work is always largely the work of one man, or one styling team leader who has strong ideas and a clear vision. Group-input results usually end up something like this. Even teams of "professional designers" often squeeze out turds... Amateur efforts where there's no design experience or taste usually run to this...

This angle is probably the least offensive, but really...yuck. Just yuck. ...and stand by by for the "don't judge, every taste (no matter how awful) matters, he's just having fun" barrage.

That's a lot of effort to expend just to take a good looking old car and turn it into a steaming pile of excrement.

I much prefer your original modified version.

Yup, what he said.

Excellent advice. Maybe the extra-cost deluxe MkII unit comes with a "receiver" you place under it.

Great idea, Tim. Probably nobody has built as many good-looking hot-rod models as you have over the years, and you know all the kits inside out. Lots of info to share in one place.

Overall I like what you've done, and understand the reasoning behind it. But the '32 Ford is very close to perfect as is, as David already mentioned, and it's hard to improve on something that's so 'right' to begin with. Also as previously mentioned, proportion and line are absolutely critical to get right, no matter how many reworks it takes. One important thing to remember when doing re-design work is that subtle, sometimes VERY subtle changes can be the difference between the initial reaction being "wow !!!" and "hmmmmmm....". Something to remember on this particular restyle is that the '32 Ford is a much smaller car overall than the "classics" your design echoes, so widening it would really need to be done to get the 3/4 view proportions to work well. Specifically, it looks to me as though the radiator shell could benefit from being dropped maybe a 1/2 inch or so, as the hood line appears to be climbing towards the front of the car on the rework. This is an effect of the p-shopping, but needs to be addressed. And raising the front fenders a bit to accommodate a larger diameter front tire would be good. It's too small visually even on the original photograph, and it seems to be overpowered by the additional visual mass of the lengthened front end. Also, the centerline of the front wheel could stand to be moved forward a tick, as it appears to be too far to the rear relative to the arch of the fender line. Otherwise, as I said, I like your work here. Something like a classic Jag DOHC inline six would be perfect for it. I'd also leave the chop as you have it. It becomes a quite 'formal' looking roof in your version, and introduces some visual tension into the design, which tends to make it more interesting than if it were even slightly higher. For my own re-design work, I'll often spend many hours with 3-dimensional models tweaking the proportions and lines, sometimes only a matter of a few thousandths of an inch (working in 1/25 scale) and moving all around the project, photographing from every angle, and analyzing the photos on the computer screen, before I get something I'm really happy with.

A LOT of information has been posted on the forum about 3D printing, and several people are becoming proficient with it. This is the thread with the most info, but there are others that deal with specific issues. FIRST thing you need to do is to learn how to do a 3D rendering of your part that can be converted into printable file format. Google SketchUp is a FREE 3D modeling program that you can learn on your own to do the basic design work. http://www.sketchup.com/ You can efficiently search the forum by following the instructions posted here:

The Revell engine kits do seem to be drying up (I bought bunches of all of 'em when you could buy a 4-pack for $6 plus $2 shipping) but they're still available on Ebay for what I consider reasonable money. Here's a 427 Ford AND a SB Chevy for $13, free shipping. http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-V-8-ENGINE-MODEL-KITS-1-25-FORD-427-CHEVY-283-REVELL-1998-NO-LONGER-MADE-MINT/371842297744?_trksid=p2047675.c100010.m2109&_trkparms=aid%3D555012%26algo%3DPW.MBE%26ao%3D2%26asc%3D40791%26meid%3Dfd8963658651479f906f7f646277c7cb%26pid%3D100010%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D6%26sd%3D122309069636

Depends on whether you're using it as a floor wax or a dessert topping. http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/shimmer-floor-wax/n8625?snl=1

I'd be interested, absolutely and positively. Have you already posted some how-tos? If so, I missed them.

I'll cast a vote for Wipe Out...

That's pretty funny...and reminds me of a somewhat similar story. A fella I knew who did Porsche restorations (and painted them in lacquer outdoors...which you can get away with if you're real careful and real lucky) shot a 356A cabrio in a turquoise metallic, covered by several coats of clear. The gloss was exceptional after it was color-sanded and polished, but the metallic had some blotches in it, UNDER the clear, due to poor spray technique. I overheard the guy explaining to the client why it looked a little funky in places, and his reason...and I'm not making this up...was that he shot the clear on an overcast day, and the blotches were reflections of clouds trapped in the clear. The sad part is that I think they BOTH believed it.

Yeah, I know a guy who's a pilot and thinks "tarmac" sounds cool for what I call aprons or taxiways or runways...depending, of course, on what they actually are. He also likes the phrase "out of pocket" meaning he's unavailable, and the word "penning" for writing. I think his brain may be diseased. Speaking of aprons, that used to be the predominant term in limeland for "front inner fenders", but it's made inroads over here. I don't know if anyone's posted that yet. Sue me if they have.

Let's not forget "accident". And in the US at least, cars seem to crash into things of their own volition...running a body shop, I've heard countless times "the car wrecked". Hmmm...reminds me...paint-job over here is "respray" over there.

Interesting. I was thinking of what holds up a woman's stockings, but the US "suspenders" hold up a man's pants, and in the UK it's "braces". All very confusing when one is disrobing.

A "thrust bearing" is the same either side of the Atlantic, and controls the end play in a rotating shaft. The US "throwout bearing" in UK-speak is usually "(clutch) release bearing". Not car-related (well, sometimes actually) is the US "garters" and the UK "suspenders".

Ah yes...now that you mention it, I recall some Aluma Coupe tires that did just exactly that. Annoying to mount them to rims for a mockup, then come back a year or so later and find they'd split.

Nice job on that chrome. Very reflective, and not easy to get right.

For anyone who loves steam locomotives, this is definitely worth an hour out of your life.

I don't know if it's crept into the model car section yet, but the trend in HO scale train stuff seems to be almost insanely low starting-prices on some lots (to get the bidding going) with equally insanely high shipping costs (that a fair number of bidders apparently don't notice at first). I'm seeing a fair number of "won" lots get re-listed a couple of days later, too. Also, a fair number of sellers do seem to be refusing to combine shipping. Creeping greed, everywhere.

Exactly. It's a rather unusual pump design, as dry-sump pumps go, which is why I posted something much more generic that represents a wide variety of other installations. But now we have a great source for the BDA unit plumbing too. And for the benefit of those who may not know, the more typical dry-sump pump is made up of multiple sections 'stacked' together, usually several scavenge sections and one pressure section. This style pump is usually mounted externally, driven by a small Gilmer belt.