peteski

Yes, that tread (specifically its subject line) can be interpreted as more of a question than . The "looking for" the actual kit statement is buried in the post. The subject line shows "I will try again-not much info first time . . ." That sounds more like a question than anything else. It it was me I would have made the subject line something like "Looking for a resin kit of 63-65 AWB NOVA fastback". Very clear and direct. Then, in the body of the message placing the "lookign for" statement on the top would make it very clear. Like: Looking for 63-65 AWB NOVA fastback resin kit. New, built or rebuilder. Speed City use to make one but no longer does. Thank you-Larry Any info deeply appreciated.

They low end economy cars and the make didn't last very long. I occasionally see restored ones at local car shows. Here is some info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosley I agree with others that the model looks great (and both the model and 1:1 car are rare).

I guess it depends on how fastidious of a modeler one is, but sand looks to me nothing like gravel. Even in 1:64 scale. I dug up some of my N scale ballast, and photos are worth a thousand words. No more guessing and speculating. Here we have a 1:64 scale Mustang on Woodland Scenics Medium size railroad ballast. Has a look very similar to the gravel in the 1:1 photo I posted earlier. It is actually still a bit too coarse. Fine size ballast would be even closer to scale, but all I had was medium size. Also, the shapes of the grains are similar to what gravel looks like. And like Mike S. posted, here's a thumb photo. Some of the smaller grains are about 0.64mm in size, but on average the grains are around 1-1.5mm. My ballast was purchased over 30 years ago, but I suspect the ballast currently sold by Woodland Scenics is very similar in size and color.

I don't know about post #5, but I mentioned N scale ballast material for 1:64 scale gravel in post #4, and still preaching that.

I have been always thinking of doing something like that. Bet me to it.

This is mainly model car forum, but I read FineScale Modeler Magazine which is more into other types of models. I have seen reviews of that brand of aircraft models and they usually get good reviews.

Looking at the size of that gravel compared to the thumb, as I see it, thise will be good size stones in 1:64 scale (not gravel). Maybe I'm seeing their scale differently from others? EDIT: I was looking over another thread on the forum and there was a perfect photo there showing gravel driveway. The average size of the gravel looks to be about twice the size of the lug nuts. In 1:64 scale that will be quite small. I would still recommend N scale ballast from Woodland Scenics.

I don't have a laser cutter/engraver but I'm always curious how things are done. Did you create the digital artwork for engraving from scratch, or did you use some existing vector images for the logos? How about all the other small lettering? What graphic software did you use? Something that came with the laser unit or some other graphic program? Also, did you mean 50,000 mm/sec? That seems awfully fast. That would be 50 m/sec or roughly 50 yards/sec.

I suspect that many original Palmer execs or employees are no longer with us. Here is a trip down the memory lane:

To have separate sections for car brands in addition to the vehicle type (cars, trucks, racers, etc.) would make the forum way too fragmented. But if members used tags for their threads (to identify the car maker for example) this is even currently possible. Problem is that most members do not want to be bothered with tags.

Back in the days that kit was made car manufacturers weren't contacted for permission or licensing to make a model. Some kit companies did engage car companies to assist with the model's development (and that is often mentioned in the kit's instructions to imply the model is accurate), but a kit could be made without any input or knowledge of the car's manufacturer. Things are quite different today.

That little ship came out really nice. Your modification made it so much better than the stock kit!

Unless the model is tied with a string to the base, it will not hover. It will fly away in some direction (if balanced perfectly) or just crash into the ground. Hovering requires complex stabilization mechanism.

I like the idea of using motorcycle license plate for the base. Looks good! The entire model is very monochromatic (silver) didn't the 1:1 engine have maybe touch of color in it, or it also looked this plain? Also how was the rear wheel mounted on the real bike? Seems that the exhaust pipes would not leave enough space to mount the wheel.

Perfect illustration showing the very apparent difference. While the brushed-on chrome finish looks decent, it is duller and less "chromey" than the typical kit's factory-applied "chrome" finish on the wheel cover. Some modelers actually prefer the duller look, saying that a scale model should not have a very bright and mirror-like chrome parts. I disgree. That is just my personal preference. Regardless of size or scale chrome should be chrome: Bright and reflective.

If you are talking about the photos in Olle F, which he posted 17 years ago (!) and KT EASTMAN (19 years ago), those images link to Imageshack addresses are likelys long gone. This shows the problem with older archived threads losing their usefulness when images were hosted externally. Of course back in 2006 and 2008 the forum did not allow for local image hosting, but I'm glad that they do now, and I would hope that every member uses that feature, if not for anything else, but for the info in the threads to remain useful for as long as the forum remains online.

I love it. On most kit tires where the sidewall detail is present, the lettering protrudes from the sidewall much more than it should. It is way out of scale. These laser-etched examples look perfect. Not overstated at all (since they are actually depressed into the sidewall). Actually I looked at the Continental tires on my car and the lettering is not raised but debossed, just like what is done with the laser etching, so for some brands or types of tire this would actually be accurate.

I'm still wondering what the black engine block and transmission in the bottom of the box are for.

Yes, that is the best and quickest way to catch the forbidden word. If the half you tried fails, divide that in half and try again. Keep dividing and trying until you are down to where you can pick out individual words. This is a bit of a pain to deal with, but I find this forum enjoyable end useful enough to put up with this "problem".

True, but try to find the very thin insulated wire (like 0.007" OD) Detail Master sells. Even if you locate an industrial source I bet they only sell it in large quantity (like a 1000 feet). Yeah I know, make a group-buy for others on the forum then divide it into smaller pieces, ask for payment, package and mail it to the individuals involved in the group purchase. That sounds like what Detail Master is doing.

You can be pretty sure that some word triggered the error. Actually I wish some forum administrator ( @Dave Ambrose ? ) would post a complete list of the forbidden words in some sticky thread, so we could deal with them. That would make composing our posts much less frustrating. Since the forum software is filtering them out, there has to be a list of them available somewhere. As we are now, we have to try guessing which is the "bad" word. Even better, instead of the generic "Page cannot be found" error, there should be a page stating that the post was rejected due to a restricted word, and also have the list of words below the error. That would make sense. Maybe this will be one of the new features which are being planned.

I don't really see any semblance to an air-cooled boxer 4-cyl engine. Could the engine parts be from another Palmer kit, and they just got mistakenly put into the Porsche 356 box? I also see more parts (black plastic) in the box which look like an engine block and transmission.

Bill, this is getting silly. Please reread my original post. Where exactly have I contradicted your statement, or called it wrong? I simply mentioned that all the pill bottles I have dealt with were #5 plastic. Why are you insisting I'm arguing with you? I'm done!

Looks like we were talking about apples and oranges. You mentioning Polystyrene bottles should not exclude me being able to mention Polypropylene bottles. My response did not dispute your pill bottle experience - just added my experience. But I apologize for adding my modeling experiences to this thread.

As Dave explained, if there is some text along with the photos, if some verbotten keyword are detected (like the word s e l e c t, or others) you will see that error. There is a post in this section of the forum where Dave mentioned some other words which will trigger the error.