'26/'27 turtle deck T hot rod kits requested

[Spex84]

When I built my '30 with a DeSoto hemi, I cheated the water pump shorter, for fan clearance. I could understand Revell making little tweaks like that in order to shoehorn the engine in. But side-by side they look pretty close. The Buttera block is nowhere near as shrimpy as the new-tool Ala Kart's tiny hemi, that's for sure!

All quibbles aside, what I wanted to communicate in my original post  was that if Revell could deliver a '27 couple body with the fidelity, sharp molding, accurate proportions and body moldings of the '26 T, '29PU and '30 Tudor...I'd be absolutely over the moon!
As long as the body and wheels/tires were good, I'd happily set about bending the rest of the kit to my will.

 

[Dennis Lacy]

Over the years there have been several '27 T Roadster bodies offered in the aftermarket. Actually, I believed the original was by All American Models and has since been passed around by Hendrix, Flintstone and most recently Altered States (which featured a bunch of detail improvements and louvered deck lid.) Unfortunately, the body was proportionately WRONG from the get-go and therefor so has been each subsequent reproduction, Basically, the body is too short. The downward curve of the back of the body is too sharp and the upward curve of the turtle deck where it meets the back of the passenger compartment is way too sharp, too.

Below is a picture of a '27 Roadster that I built for myself 10+ years ago and below it a picture of a scale replica that my friend Jon (Rocking Rodney Rat) made me several years back from a Flintstone body. The discrepancies are very obvious. 

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Despite the discrepancies I have built two models myself using the recent Altered States offering because regardless of who's body copy you're using, they're the only game in town.

That being said, the '26-'27 T Roadster is one of my all-time favorite bodies for hot rod material and I would absolutely love for an actual kit to be produced. In the vein of the recent '29 Roadster / '30 Coupe offerings I think it would be killer to have sister kits. One a roadster kit with interchangeable turtle deck / pickup bed (as factory) and the other a coupe!

[Ace-Garageguy]

Over the years there have been several '27 T Roadster bodies offered in the aftermarket. Actually, I believed the original was by All American Models and has since been passed around by Hendrix, Flintstone and most recently Altered States (which featured a bunch of detail improvements and louvered deck lid.) Unfortunately, the body was proportionately WRONG from the get-go and therefor so has been each subsequent reproduction, Basically, the body is too short. The downward curve of the back of the body is too sharp and the upward curve of the turtle deck where it meets the back of the passenger compartment is way too sharp, too...

 

Yes sir, the discrepancies in proportion and line are very apparent when a real one is shown with the model.

A while back, I started a low-slung '26, and though I could get the look close, I could never quite dial it in...and shelved it pending further investigation into what was wrong.

Frankly, it didn't occur to me at the time that the aftermarket body was probably the problem.

That resin body misses the marks by miles, and spoils the flow of the car.

Now, thanks to that great profile shot of your car, using the length of the cylinder head and the height of a '32 rail as scale-referents in about the same plane as the main body lines, I can hack into my little shell and get it to look the way it should.

Vielen Dank.

PS. I'm not blowing smoke up your backside when I say that your real car is just about the most "right" '26-'27 on '32 rails I've ever seen. All the proportions are in the sweet-spot, and it's THAT EXACT LOOK that makes this such an iconic combination.

Edited November 14, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[tim boyd]

Over the years there have been several '27 T Roadster bodies offered in the aftermarket. Actually, I believed the original was by All American Models and has since been passed around by Hendrix, Flintstone and most recently Altered States (which featured a bunch of detail improvements and louvered deck lid.) Unfortunately, the body was proportionately WRONG from the get-go and therefor so has been each subsequent reproduction, Basically, the body is too short. The downward curve of the back of the body is too sharp and the upward curve of the turtle deck where it meets the back of the passenger compartment is way too sharp, too.

That being said, the '26-'27 T Roadster is one of my all-time favorite bodies for hot rod material and I would absolutely love for an actual kit to be produced. In the vein of the recent '29 Roadster / '30 Coupe offerings I think it would be killer to have sister kits. One a roadster kit with interchangeable turtle deck / pickup bed (as factory) and the other a coupe!

 

Dennis.....I also have inventoried at least five or six different resin Turtledeck bodies.  I'm doing this from memory, so don't kill me if this turns out to be incorrect, but I believe that most of the resin offerings descended from the Ron Cash master.  The All American Models version was somewhat different, at least the one I got.  Again, from memory, a version from Tim's Resin Rods (out of NorCal) was one of the best in terms of proportions, but the quality of the resin and casting was not as good as some of the others.  Yet again from memory, one of the issues with the Ron Cash derivatives was that when viewed from the top, the curvature of the rear passenger bulkhead/interior cutout at the rear had an inconsistent sweep from side to side.  Yet another resin body offering came from Randy Frost in Canada; I recall that one as being very sharp but since it was designed for a Fuel Altered application instead of a Traditional Rod, it wasn't really usable in this context. I took a picture of all these bodies together a while back for a future magazine article; if it ends up being used it will be an interesting adjunct to this topic.  So yes, I fully agree, we need a truly accurate '27 T Turtledeck body from the kit manufacturers!  

I have been advocating (for years) for a Turtledeck/Roadster Pickup combo with a certain kitmaker, but the idea of an additional (five window)oupe variant is fresh thinking and that might be enough to push the idea over the top.  I will included it in my future discussions on this topics.  

BTW, really like both the real car and the model in your post above!  TIM  

 

[tim boyd]

This is one of the most memorable '27T Trad Hot Rods I've seen in the last few years.  These images were shot in the Autorama Extreme basement at Cobo in March, 2015, poor lighting and photography angles notwithstanding....

AT least 15 more images (mostly closeup detail shots) here.....TIM 

 

 

[Ace-Garageguy]

 

...if the '26T  289 is undersized, is the '32 Ford 302 also undersized? 

One of the shops I currently work with has several smallblock Ford powered vehicles in various states. I'll measure a real one before the week is out.

Regarding the fit of the Revell '32-sourced engine in the T...I used a poorly built but fully assembled version to do my test-fit last night. Only the same kinds of minor mods to it (the same accessory relocation, using stock exhaust manifolds or block-hugger headers, etc.) that you would do on a real one are required to get it to snuggle happily in the little T engine bay.

And there are many things on the T body as well that could be very slightly modded to ease installation, again just like real. The ledges inside the front fenders can be clearanced somewhat, the steering box can be moved .5 mm, the dish in the firewall can be made a hair deeper, etc. It's just what one does day-in day-out to make things fit other things that were not originally intended to work together.

A kit designer with some real-world knowledge of how one actually builds a hot-rod would be at a great advantage here.

 

[Dave Darby]

Bill got me going here...it's always (at least for me) risky to trust my memory of a kit I built 42 years ago (this one was a "clear the desk/first weekend you could buy the kit" start to finish build back in '75). 

Here are some photos of the engine in the engine compartment.  The engine compartment (including the steering column extension into the engine compartment on the driver's side, and the alternator on the passenger side, just barely clear the hood sides.   You can also see that from underneath, this is a very tight fit.  Any added width to the engine would have made it not buildable.  Added length to the engine might have worked - possibly - although pushing the front cover/fan belt forward would have probably caused interference with the alternator/hood side.  

But what really intrigues me is that I pulled out a Revell '32 Ford 302 Windsor V8 to compare.  I don't have a Revell '26T 289 complete engine as a stand alone build, but comparing the 302 to the 289 short block only, the dimensions appear essentially identical.  Which leads one to speculate - if the '26T  289 is undersized, is the '32 Ford 302 also undersized?  Guess I need to do a full build of a new full standalone build of the Revell '26 T 289  and compare it to the 302 W in the last photo....

 

My bigger issue with the Buttera 289 is the oddly shaped valve covers. The overall scale doesn't really jump out at me. That said, we are way overdue for a 26-27 T Roadster and a 30-31 A roadster. When John Mueller told me about the Model A hot rod project he was working on back in 2013, I was really surprised they didn't do the 30-31 A Roadster. After all, there's already a 29 out there that to me is still the gold standard. But they still have time. Could be another variant on that tool. Love your T, Tim!

[Ace-Garageguy]

... I believe that most of the resin offerings descended from the Ron Cash master...

This is an original signed Ron Cash resin body. I'm sure he was a great guy and well known in the hobby, but that doesn't make the body "right". Underpinnings here are the MIA Revell '29 frame, and various vintage Revell and a few AMT bits.

And though the old AMT '29 Ford body looks great and is what we were used to seeing for 50+ years, Revell actually did a much better job of getting the curves and sweeps of the rear of the body in the aforementioned MIA kit. Again, I'd had difficulty getting the right "look" from a model of the Eddie Dye roadster using the old AMT body. I did some intense measuring and research, and voila, all of a sudden, my mockup of Dye's car actually LOOKED like Dye's car with the Revell body.

Let's hope they do as good a job on a '26 / '27 should this come to fruition.

 

Edited November 14, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[Dennis Lacy]

Dennis.....I also have inventoried at least five or six different resin Turtledeck bodies.  I'm doing this from memory, so don't kill me if this turns out to be incorrect, but I believe that most of the resin offerings descended from the Ron Cash master.  The All American Models version was somewhat different, at least the one I got.  Again, from memory, a version from Tim's Resin Rods (out of NorCal) was one of the best in terms of proportions, but the quality of the resin and casting was not as good as some of the others.  Yet again from memory, one of the issues with the Ron Cash derivatives was that when viewed from the top, the curvature of the rear passenger bulkhead/interior cutout at the rear had an inconsistent sweep from side to side.  Yet another resin body offering came from Randy Frost in Canada; I recall that one as being very sharp but since it was designed for a Fuel Altered application instead of a Traditional Rod, it wasn't really usable in this context. I took a picture of all these bodies together a while back for a future magazine article; if it ends up being used it will be an interesting adjunct to this topic.  So yes, I fully agree, we need a truly accurate '27 T Turtledeck body from the kit manufacturers!  

I have been advocating (for years) for a Turtledeck/Roadster Pickup combo with a certain kitmaker, but the idea of an additional (five window)oupe variant is fresh thinking and that might be enough to push the idea over the top.  I will included it in my future discussions on this topics.  

BTW, really like both the real car and the model in your post above!  TIM  

 

You're right, it did all start with Ron Cash and went down the line from there. All of these bodies clearly have the same basic shape and features as they've just been duped by everybody over the years. 

Back in about '91 in Modelers Corner you featured an incredible 40's period perfect '27 Roadster built by (if I remember right) Steve Catron. Your article talked about how he made his own bucks and vacuum formed the body and turtle deck. To my eye and intimate familiarity with the real subject his body was dead-nuts. Occassionaly I go back and read those old articles and every time I see his T I think "If only!"

I think doing roadster and coupe sister kits is a natural. There is probably almost an equal interest in having a later T coupe body. Just like the sister A kits the T's could feature interchangeable options. It would be amazing!

For what it's worth, Altered States does offer a pair of pretty nicely done '26-'27 Coupe bodies, one mildly chopped and the other heavily chopped with full inner structure detail. I imagine whoever mastered the latter was a big fan of Aaron Kahan's "Bad News" T Coupe from the SoCal car club Burbank Choppers. It's a dead ringer! If you've never seen it take a moment and google it. Probably my favorite T Coupe ever. 

[tim boyd]

Dennis...ah yes, Steve's '27T Turtledeck. 

I believe that Mark Gustavson did a full article on that model as it was a big winner at one of the GSL's.  As you said, Steve made a wood master, vacuformed the body from that, then detailed out that body by adding moldings and details to achieve the final appearance.  The remaining build content/style was somewhat out of step with late 1980's/early 1990's hot rod design sensibilities, but from today's "traditional hot rod" point of view, it wast totally spot-on,.  Last I heard, Steve still did not have email capability so he was/is not contactable in the digital world for any follow-up questions.

But yes, that was a spectacular model at the time.  Thanks for reminding us about it.    TIM  

PS - thanks for the hint on the Bad News coupe...I'll look that up.   

.   

 

[Kit Karson]

'27 Coupe Atlered States

 

[Spex84]

I've had my eye on the Altered States bodies for a while now, in fact, there's an order form filled out but unsent sitting on my desk right now!

Thanks for the photo Kit, it's clearer than most I've seen to date.

Not to spam this thread, but...here are a few of my favorites, including "Bad News":

[Richard Bartrop]

Revell doing a stock T to the standards of say, their '40 Ford would be something to see, but even a reasonably stock body would be fine.  If you really have to have a stock '26 or '27 roadster, you could always stick it on AMT's '27 touring chassis. 

 

[tim boyd]

Revell doing a stock T to the standards of say, their '40 Ford would be something to see, but even a reasonably stock body would be fine.  If you really have to have a stock '26 or '27 roadster, you could always stick it on AMT's '27 touring chassis. 

 

Exactly.  Rightly or wrongly depending on your own modeling POV and preferences, the buyer appeal of such a kit in today's market would be the hot rod angle, uncompromised in its execution.  But I would advocate for a stock body shell (at least for the Roadster and Roadster Pickup versions), so that a kitbashing builder could use the AMT'27 T Tub chassis/engine/suspension as the basis for a showroom stock build.   A stock roadster interior might require some kitbashing, but it could be achieved by a moderately experienced modeler.  Believe it or not, the manufacturers, particularly Revell in this case (with their '29 Roadster/'30 Coupe Model A tool) do design some of their kits with kitbashing by their customers in mind....TIM 

[Art Anderson]

Exactly.  Rightly or wrongly depending on your own modeling POV and preferences, the buyer appeal of such a kit in today's market would be the hot rod angle, uncompromised in its execution.  But I would advocate for a stock body shell (at least for the Roadster and Roadster Pickup versions), so that a kitbashing builder could use the AMT'27 T Tub chassis/engine/suspension as the basis for a showroom stock build.   A stock roadster interior might require some kitbashing, but it could be achieved by a moderately experienced modeler.  Believe it or not, the manufacturers, particularly Revell in this case (with their '29 Roadster/'30 Coupe Model A tool) do design some of their kits with kitbashing by their customers in mind....TIM 

Tim, you mean like this?  I did this stock '27 T Tudor Sedan back in 2001, using the AMT '27 Touring for everything below and in front of the body.  The only puttywork on the body was the cowling, as the Buttera kit was of a car on which the fairly thick "hood shelves" were omitted, making a stock hood on a stock fender unit from AMT fit about 1/32" too high.

[Spex84]

Very nice work, Art. The '27 Tudor is darned good looking no matter what way you slice it (or don't slice it!)
I agree that a stock-height roof would be ideal, were a '27 coupe to be kitted. It would provide stock builders with something to combine with the existing stock Touring frame, and hot rodders the freedom to do their own chop. The '27 T coupe is probably one of the easiest bodies to chop anyway.

 

[horsepower]

Unfortunately, the Buttera engine block scales out to be a full inch shorter (length) than the '32 kit engines. The heads are a full 1.5" too short.

The height from the oil pan rail to the top of the block is about .5" (scale) shorter on the Buttera engine than the '32 versions.

The oil pan itself is about 1.5" short (front to rear) in the Buttera kit too.

This isn't a deal breaker to the garden variety modeler, obviously, and I don't go around measuring these things just to stir up trouble.

But the fact is that I've been looking at greasy bits and fast things professionally for the better part of the last 50 years, and immediately, the engine in the Buttera kit looked wrong to me...just as the underscale "new tool" Ala Kart engine did, the exhaust-port spacing on the nailhead engine in Revell's '29, and the discrepancies between two of Revell's representations of the exact same 6.1L Hemi engine in two contemporary kits, the Magnum and Challenger. It probably doesn't help that I'm also a designer and artist, and have a well developed sense of proportion.

And inevitably, when something looks wrong to me, my apprehension is borne out when I put the calipers to whatever it is.

Funny story...I once walked into an aircraft hangar to look at a brandy-new Cirrus SR22. I immediately remarked that it was longer than the previous version of the airplane, and I thought the difference was in the cowling. The owner disagreed vehemently, so I suggested we just measure the damm thing. Sure enough, it WAS 3/8" longer. I had instantly been aware of a 3/8" difference...on an airplane that's 26 feet long.

Like I said, I don't do it to stir up trouble, but I also believe that accuracy matters...in every field...and if part of a kit designer's job description includes "measuring", he can damm well be expected to get it right.

And WHY the underscale engine? I have no clue. Just as in the "new tool" Ala Kart, the correctly scaled engine WILL FIT in the engine bay. It's tight, just as it is on a real one (in both cases) but it DOES fit.

Maybe the powers that be should just hire me to look at their first 3D-printed pre-tool-cutting models. If I like the proportions, being the prickly anal-retentive SOB I am, you can be pretty sure nobody is going to have any hairs to split on down the road.

I haven't measured them but I do know that the 331 in the real Ala Kart IS smaller than the 354, and 392 Hemi's that some think was the hemi in the Ala Kart. That's why the 331 got the nickname of "the baby hemi". There is virtually nothing that fits the other hemi engines that will interchange with the 331 parts wise, except possibly the transmission's.

[Ace-Garageguy]

I haven't measured them but I do know that the 331 in the real Ala Kart IS smaller than the 354, and 392 Hemi's that some think was the hemi in the Ala Kart. That's why the 331 got the nickname of "the baby hemi". There is virtually nothing that fits the other hemi engines that will interchange with the 331 parts wise, except possibly the transmission's.

Thanks for your input. This has been covered in much depth by me and others. Still, it's good to remind people.

The engine in the Ala Kart is a Dodge "Red Ram" hemi, and as such, is entirely different from and smaller than the Chrysler (as you state)...which is why it was chosen for the real Kart.

I HAVE measured them, and the Dodge Red Ram hemi in the ORIGINAL Ala Kart kit is correctly scaled. The Dodge Red Ram in the "new tool" Ala Kart is pathetically underscale.

And again, it makes no sense whatsoever why the kit designer came up with that stupid little engine that's useless for anything in 1/25 scale.

I HAVE tried the original correctly-scaled engine from the original kit in the engine bay in the "new tool" kit. It fits.

[tim boyd]

Just to add fuel to the fire here (now I would never do that, would I???), I have been told by executives of at least one company that I recall, and possibly another, that it was standard kit development practice to increase (not decrease) engine size by 10% relative to the rest of the model. 

This was to done to deliver, in their judgment, a more realistic appearance for the model builder and observer.  Obviously, in cases like the Buttera kit, this would not apply due to space considerations. 

I was further told that due to material stackups (again, the issue of the thickness of model car hoods in styrene vs much thinner metal in real cars), as well as the 10% size increase, these same engines were then sometimes sectioned (horizontally, like the body of the "Polynesian" Olds built by Valley Customs in the early 1970's), to fit into the completed model's engine compartment.  

Again, I can't recall all the specifics, but I do believe that this applied more to muscle car era model kits and drag racing kits, than it would to hot rod kits where space is a big constraint.  Let me caution again that, I am familiar with one or (perhaps two) product development staffs that took this view, but I would not suggest that it was an industry-side practice, nor that the staffs in question applied this philosophy to every model kit that they developed.    

The take away from this is that the modeling companies and their product development staffs had very strong views about what constituted an accurate appearance in a completed model, and they were not shy about departing from precise scaling of components if it led (in their minds) to a more desirable end product.  

As the modeling world has changed over the last 30 years or so (i.e., the adult modeler became the majority source of kits sales), the leading edge of the hobby (represented in part by the participants of this forum) have become much less accepting of products that do not scale exactly to the cars they are intended to replicate.

Having said that, the late Racing Champions era AMT/Ertl engine faux pas such as the second gen Ala Kart engine, and the Y-Block engine in the 1956 T-Bird American Graffiti kit (which is so woefully misshapen to the point where one does not need calipers or rulers to document the mistakes), remain a mystery for all of us, other than they point to the mistake RC made when they laid off all of the remaining, highly experienced Ertl model kit development staff just after the turn of the century.     

TIM

   

[Ace-Garageguy]

Just to add fuel to the fire here (now I would never do that, would I???)...

 

   In my mind, the benchmarks for accurate representations of many of the classic V8 production engines are the 50+year-old Revell parts-pack versions. I've had occasion to measure real ones and compare the dimensions (admittedly not ALL dimensions of EVERY engine), and have come up with only trivial errors, way too small to be noticeable in 1/25 (even to an anal-retentive jerk like me). The accuracy even extended to the exhaust-port spacing of the Revell parts-pack Buick nailhead (which is correct, but the port spacing on the nailhead engine in the MIA '29 Ford is not).

Your remarks above may very well be the reason why some manufacturers' kits' engines supposedly scaled in 1/25 were identical dimensionally to others labeled 1/24.

[Dennis Lacy]

I haven't measured them but I do know that the 331 in the real Ala Kart IS smaller than the 354, and 392 Hemi's that some think was the hemi in the Ala Kart. That's why the 331 got the nickname of "the baby hemi". There is virtually nothing that fits the other hemi engines that will interchange with the 331 parts wise, except possibly the transmission's.

The engine in the Ala Kart is a first generation Dodge Red Ram which was produced from '53-'54 at 241 inches and in '55 as the Super Red Ram at 270 inches. Yes, they are physically smaller than the first generation Chrysler's which came in 331, 354 and 392. Externally, those 3 Chrysler's are the same size.

Regardless, the engine in the modern-tool Ala Kart is grossly undersized. 

[garagepunk66]

Just to add fuel to the fire here (now I would never do that, would I???), I have been told by executives of at least one company that I recall, and possibly another, that it was standard kit development practice to increase (not decrease) engine size by 10% relative to the rest of the model. 

This was to done to deliver, in their judgment, a more realistic appearance for the model builder and observer.  Obviously, in cases like the Buttera kit, this would not apply due to space considerations. 

I was further told that due to material stackups (again, the issue of the thickness of model car hoods in styrene vs much thinner metal in real cars), as well as the 10% size increase, these same engines were then sometimes sectioned (horizontally, like the body of the "Polynesian" Olds built by Valley Customs in the early 1970's), to fit into the completed model's engine compartment.  

Again, I can't recall all the specifics, but I do believe that this applied more to muscle car era model kits and drag racing kits, than it would to hot rod kits where space is a big constraint.  Let me caution again that, I am familiar with one or (perhaps two) product development staffs that took this view, but I would not suggest that it was an industry-side practice, nor that the staffs in question applied this philosophy to every model kit that they developed.    

The take away from this is that the modeling companies and their product development staffs had very strong views about what constituted an accurate appearance in a completed model, and they were not shy about departing from precise scaling of components if it led (in their minds) to a more desirable end product.  

As the modeling world has changed over the last 30 years or so (i.e., the adult modeler became the majority source of kits sales), the leading edge of the hobby (represented in part by the participants of this forum) have become much less accepting of products that do not scale exactly to the cars they are intended to replicate.

Having said that, the late Racing Champions era AMT/Ertl engine faux pas such as the second gen Ala Kart engine, and the Y-Block engine in the 1956 T-Bird American Graffiti kit (which is so woefully misshapen to the point where one does not need calipers or rulers to document the mistakes), remain a mystery for all of us, other than they point to the mistake RC made when they laid off all of the remaining, highly experienced Ertl model kit development staff just after the turn of the century.     

TIM

   

Yes, I have noticed this in several instances. The 426 wedge in the Revell Tony Nancy dragsters kit is (ironically) one example. The assembled block is sectioned approximately two scale inches. Ironic, since there is no hood clearance issues as the engine is exposed. The lower block section of the engine has been "fudged" considerably, as the angles of the "Y" shape of the block as viewed from the front are wrong. The 1 to 1 angle is far more obtuse. The Revell Nailhead in the same kit and the Parts Pack and the Ivo Showboat dragster have quite a different problem....the block decks have been tipped in at the top, so they are no longer 90 degrees apart as they are in 1 to 1. I would say it's probably close to 100 degrees. The valve cover surfaces, which should be dead flat, tilt visibly inward on an assembled engine. In addition, the upper block section is shorter as well than it ought to be.  I presume this was done first on the Ivo kit to make header clearance less of an issue, then all subsequent tooling used the same "fudged" masters.

Edited November 16, 2017 by garagepunk66

[Ace-Garageguy]

 The Revell Nailhead in the same kit and the Parts Pack and the Ivo Showboat dragster have quite a different problem....the block decks have been tipped in at the top, so they are no longer 90 degrees apart as they are in 1 to 1. I would say it's probably close to 100 degrees. The valve cover surfaces, which should be dead flat, tilt visibly inward on an assembled engine.

I've built many of these engines. I've never had that problem...and I'm one picky SOB.

It's not a scaling issue, though there IS some tolerance stack-up on both the heads and the block, and the locating pins can be too high, all of which makes a less-than-careful assembly look that way, but as I always deck the block, and surface the heads, it's easily corrected to look just like it's supposed to (I have a red Ivo engine and a chrome parts-pack version on the bench as I write this, and checked carefully to verify the accuracy of my statement).

[Rocking Rodney Rat]

Built from resin '27 turtledeck T bodies...bring on the styrene!!!! -RRR

[unclescott58]

Whoa! The two posted by RRR above, are beautiful! Very, very nice!