MPC 32 Ford America Graffiti Milner's car

[Junkman]

of course, in real life, that two lane black top Chevy with the big block (even in Graffiti form) would have thoroughly wasted Milner's coupe. oh well.. still enjoyed the movie

Milner did admit that Falfa's car is faster, remember?
He only 'won' because Falfa had a slight mishap.
 

[Greg Myers]

Girls ! 

[Junkman]

I hate it when I do research and my child hood memories are wrong. 

http://www.americangraffiti.net/the-cars/

Quick synopsis

[...]

'58 Impala - stock. 

[...]

Oh well, back to my "happy place". 

 

Steve Bolander's Impala was/is far from stock.

[Longbox55]

The '55 is actually probably more accurate to the concept of the movie than to the actual movie car. The movie car was essentially a car of the '70s with, among other things, a BBC of 427 or 454 inches (accounts vary). The Revell metal-body kit has stock(ish) front suspension and IIRC a W-block (348 or 409), which is more true to what you might actually see on the street in 1962.

As I mentioned, I was very favorably impressed with the '55 kit. If I were building it "seriously," I'd probably do something about the thick glass, especially the side windows.

I don't disagree with you on that. The other 2 replicas of it I have, a 1/64 Hot Wheels (packaged with the Deuce) and a 1/16 scale Ertl, also have similar inaccuracies to the real car, but are concept accurate to the time period. In the case of the Hot Wheels, it's basically a stockish body '55 with a supercharged small block in it. The Ertl has the body and suspension correct to the movie car, but has a W block in it with dual quads, in this case mounted on a tunnel ram type intake. I really do not have a problem with them being concept correct over actual car correct, though I would have liked to at least seen the Revell have the beam axle under it, since it is noticeable in the movie. As far as the engine, and this is just personal opinion, I would think that a 371 or 394 Oldsmobile would have been more appropriate to be period correct, given that both engines were very common in gasser type cars.

[Nova-ss]

The weight differences between the 55 and the 32.the engine sizes along with compression,cam lift,duration and other unknown possibilities make it possible the 32 could compete.though Milner was scated,worried that the 55 was a challenge.a he shouldn't have had the girl in the car..for the reason that lead to the accident.the 32 would have been lighter in weight.......Chris

[Greg Myers]

That's what I was thinking. 

[Greg Myers]

I would think that a 371 or 394 Oldsmobile would have been more appropriate to be period correct, given that both engines were very common in gasser type cars.

Maybe in "gasser type cars", but as I said previously, and from experience, people were running the Chevy 348 on the street, as evidenced in the early Revell Tri 5 kits as well.

Edited September 5, 2016 by Greg Myers

[Ace-Garageguy]

I have a question for anyone who could answer for me.  Is there any books not magazines that covers frame and suspension work in great detail on any and all makes of car's. I really would like to learn more about this stuff. Again, Thank you everyone.     Jeff 

Here's a start...a good introductory article on the functioning and setup of one of the most simple and basic front suspension designs, and one of the most popular for use under hot-rods.

http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Tech/suspension-solid-axle-radius-rod-design.html

I'll dig through my library and give you the titles and authors of some good reference books too.  

These are two of the classics, and though they're primarily concerned with tuning and racing, they explain how common systems work, so that the modifications make sense.

         

 

Edited September 6, 2016 by Ace-Garageguy

[louie]

Here's a start...a good introductory article on the functioning and setup of one of the most simple and basic front suspension designs, and one of the most popular for use under hot-rods.

http://www.speedwaymotors.com/Tech/suspension-solid-axle-radius-rod-design.html

I'll dig through my library and give you the titles and authors of some good reference books too.  

These are two of the classics, and though they're primarily concerned with tuning and racing, they explain how common systems work, so that the modifications make sense.

         

 

I can't Thank you enough for the info on the speedway website and books. I've Heard of Herb Adams and definitely will look for these books. I'm stuck in the 80ies  and that is why I tend to still lean towards books and magazines instead of the web on things that I like to learn and research about but I am trying to get up to speed with the Internet, just have a really hard time navigating it for information. Again Ace - Garageguy, Thank you.    Jeff 

[Bob Turner2]

A lot of inaccurate misinformation on using the AMT 32 Ford frame for a Milner coupe has been tossed about in this thread. Let me clear things up.

The AMT 32 Ford frames are indeed completely inaccurate for any 32 Ford highboy, & not just due to the lack of a molded in reveal on the frame sides. The frame is also too narrow to build an accurate highboy from, as it was deliberately designed & tooled up to be able to build a fenderless channeled lowboy rod from back years ago. In the early 90s, the late Ron Cash, once of the better resin casters of his era, took the time to cast up corrected 32 Ford frames based on the ancient AMT tooling. Besides adding the missing reveal, (which is also needed for a full fendered car to be accurate, as it follows the sweep of the front fenders), Ron also discovered he had to widen the frames to make then correct & accurate. Once Revell brought out their 32 3W coupe in 1996, such issues became moot, as the frame's dimensions were correct for an accurate 32 Ford street rod of the era, Plus, it's far, far easier to simply adapt a buggy spring crossmember, (or make one using styrene C channel), to the Revell frame, (along with using whatever buggy spring & rear end you choose), instead of grinding out reveals on the AMT frame. In the latter, you're merely creating more work for yourself than needed, you also run the risk of screwing up the frame, plus you still have to address the issue of the AMT frame being too narrow to be correct. Use a suitably modified Revell frame as your starting point, you'll find it much easier.

The MPC kit does have mostly correct fenders, (though as suggested looking into the front cycle fenders from the AMT 25 T kit might be a better option there), & a properly sectioned grille shell, but the body of that kit leaves much to be desired in terms of accuracy, buildability, & overall looks once finished, given all of it's issues from the era it originated in. Yes the top section is chopped, but it's ill fitting to the lower body section at best, requiring a lot of adjusting, bending to fit, (as I recall, the back of the top section is flat, & where it attaches to the lower body is curved, which leaves a noticeable & not easily filled gap), & shimming to get things lined up correctly. Even with all that work, the body doesn't really capture the look of a 32 Ford all that well. The SAE article that was mentioned is full of  great info on this, but with the easily available Revell kit, you would be better off using the MPC chopped roof part as a guide & chopping the top of the Revell body instead.

On to the engine. Since it's based virtually 100% on the old Switchers kit, the intake & carbs are indeed wrong. In fact MPC's graphic artist of the time merelt air brushed the dual 4 BBL intake, carbs & air cleaners onto a photo of the 1/1 car! As mentioned the Revell Parts Pack Cadillac has a somewhat more accurate four carb intake in it, along with carbs that resemble the 1/1's Man-A-Fre carbs as closely as you'll find in scale.

 

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

... As mentioned the Revell Parts Pack Cadillac has a somewhat more accurate four carb intake in it, along with carbs that resemble the 1/1's Man-A-Fre carbs as closely as you'll find in scale.

All good advice regarding building an accurate model of the movie car. One caveat: if you elect to use the Cadillac parts-pack manifold, bear in mind that, being for an engine that has a different cooling layout than the smallblock Chevy, it has no provision for the Chevrolet's forward coolant crossover that's cast into the Chevy manifold, or the thermostat housing. Photos I've found of the Milner car also show the engine to have a front oil fill tube, which comes up out of the manifold as well. A Chevy manifold also functions as the valley cover, and seals the top of the engine lifter gallery. 

To make an accurate manifold, you'll need to graft the front of a correct Chevy manifold on to the Caddy manifold. You'll also need to 'seal' the bottom of the manifold  to represent the integral valley-cover function of a part made for a Chevy. Not too hard, but if you want accuracy, it's necessary. 

Milner car:          

Caddy mill:      

 

   

This may be less confusing. A smallblock Chevy manifold (above) almost always has a water passage and thermostat housing cast into the front. The manifold itself also acts as the valley cover, and includes a hole in the rear for the distributor drive shaft.

A Cadillac manifold for the engine represented by the parts-pack (below), has no integral cast water passage or t-stat housing, and it also requires a separate valley cover.

    Making the Caddy manifold look right on a Chebby takes some work.

 

Edited September 12, 2016 by Ace-Garageguy

[Greg Myers]

Check out this thread, http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/104641-cars-of-american-graffiti/ I mentioned another alturnitive using the bottom half of an early Corvette fuel injection unit.

[Snake45]

The original AMT annual '67 Camaro kit had the 4x2 Man-a-Fre manifold and carbs (SBC), so there's the possibility that someone in the aftermarket has repro'd it.

[Ace-Garageguy]

The original AMT annual '67 Camaro kit had the 4x2 Man-a-Fre manifold and carbs (SBC), so there's the possibility that someone in the aftermarket has repro'd it.

Now THAT'S a useful piece of info. I'd really like to have a decent looking setup like that without having to do all that work to convert the Caddy...which is one reason I don't use more Chebby engines in hoodless hot-rods.

[Snake45]

Now THAT'S a useful piece of info. I'd really like to have a decent looking setup like that without having to do all that work to convert the Caddy...which is one reason I don't use more Chebby engines in hoodless hot-rods.

Yeah, you can see it at the link below. I might or might not still have my original from 1967 in my old parts box, but I'm pretty sure the carbs are long gone. Couple years ago I bought an original '67 Camaro off eBay that came with the Man-a-Fre on the engine, but only three of the four carbs. Assuming I can find my old one or get the "new" one un-installed, are you interested in pulling molds and making a few of them yourself?

http://public.fotki.com/drasticplasticsmcc/mkiba-build-under-c/amt-instructions/automotive-cars--pi/chevrolet/1961-1970/amt-1967-chevrolet-/amt67camss3501.html

[FordRodnKustom]

The aforementioned diecast kit has a fairly accurate manifold and carbs. They're still around and look pretty good with a little detailing.

 

Edited September 12, 2016 by FordRodnKustom

[Dennis Lacy]

 

On to the engine. Since it's based virtually 100% on the old Switchers kit, the intake & carbs are indeed wrong. In fact MPC's graphic artist of the time merelt air brushed the dual 4 BBL intake, carbs & air cleaners onto a photo of the 1/1 car! As mentioned the Revell Parts Pack Cadillac has a somewhat more accurate four carb intake in it, along with carbs that resemble the 1/1's Man-A-Fre carbs as closely as you'll find in scale.

 

 

A Cadillac intake manifold looks nothing like a Chevy small block but Bill already addressed that. Also, the carburetors in that Parts Pak engine are mid-30's Stromberg whereas the carburetors on the AG car are Rochester 2GC. 

I think Greg's suggestion above about starting with a Chevy fuel injection bed plate would be the best starting point for the guy who has nothing (unless it turns out that the 67 Camaro intake is available in the aftermarket.) The layout geometry of the 4 plenum flanges is very similar to the Man-A-Fre and with a little rework of the flanges to mount carburetors could be quite convincing.

[Snake45]

Yeah, you can see it at the link below. I might or might not still have my original from 1967 in my old parts box, but I'm pretty sure the carbs are long gone. Couple years ago I bought an original '67 Camaro off eBay that came with the Man-a-Fre on the engine, but only three of the four carbs. Assuming I can find my old one or get the "new" one un-installed, are you interested in pulling molds and making a few of them yourself?

http://public.fotki.com/drasticplasticsmcc/mkiba-build-under-c/amt-instructions/automotive-cars--pi/chevrolet/1961-1970/amt-1967-chevrolet-/amt67camss3501.html

Okay, I checked my box of old engine parts and I don't have my original '67 Camaro manifold anymore. I do have the one on the eBay glue bomb but I'd have to try to "harvest" it off a finished engine. And as I mentioned it only has 3 carbs.

[Ace-Garageguy]

 Assuming I can find my old one or get the "new" one un-installed, are you interested in pulling molds and making a few of them yourself?

Okay, I checked my box of old engine parts and I don't have my original '67 Camaro manifold anymore. I do have the one on the eBay glue bomb but I'd have to try to "harvest" it off a finished engine. And as I mentioned it only has 3 carbs.

Definitely interested in copying it, and would be happy to do a careful job of "harvesting" as part of the deal, returning the original and several copies to you of course.

I have a pile of unusual period parts I'm getting around to doing, so this one could very possibly supply the tipping-point where I actually spring for some more silicone and casting resin. 

[Snake45]

 

Definitely interested in copying it, and would be happy to do a careful job of "harvesting" as part of the deal, returning the original and several copies to you of course.

I have a pile of unusual period parts I'm getting around to doing, so this one could very possibly supply the tipping-point where I actually spring for some more silicone and casting resin. 

Okay, PM me your address.

[Greg Myers]

Can you show us a picture?

[Snake45]

Can you show us a picture?

I don't have a half-hour to set up, take, and upload a pic of thing. But you can get an idea from the instruction sheet link I posted above.

[Greg Myers]

The only good looking manifold ( bottom half fulie) that I could find was the Revell '57 Nomad. All the variations of this kit has the part. 

Edited September 15, 2016 by Greg Myers
more

[Ace-Garageguy]

The Man A Fre manifold in question (on the right in the first photo) with small-flange Rochester 2G series carbs, as noted by Dennis Lacy. The bare manifold is very similar to Greg's FI lower half.

                

Next question: which kit has a good Rochester 2GC in it? Aftermarket? Would be kinda nice to make the manifold fit an existing carb that's not a simplified blob.  

Edited September 15, 2016 by Ace-Garageguy

[dodgefever]

Revell '66 GTO?  There's the Monogram '64 GTO as well, but 1/24 and I can't remember how good the carbs are.