|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 22, 2020 1:18:11 GMT -8
I'm just going to put them all in the one thread. I have 2 of these Indy Hall of Fame boxed sets, one of the Watsons I already built, and I'm going mental (OK, I already was) building that AM McLaren kit, so I needed a break. Starting with the awful AMT kit of Clark's '63 car. OOB with a few minor add ons. These are supposed to be "as-raced", not the perfectly restored show cars, which half the time are not the cars they are supposed to be. Example being the "Clark" car at the Indianapolis museum, which originally was Gurneys car or something like that. So Jimmy's 63 race car, close as is practical from what we have to work with. For all practical purposes it will be a curbside. The basic car:
I swear these things are NOT 1/25th scale!
And some more progress (I'm sure you've seen these built before):
(one of these days I'll get my daughter to show me how to get the depth of field right on this fancy camera)
It's Testors BRG with Indycals decals, more on them later . Except for the exhausts and roll hoop all the chrome was stripped and painted. The tub is industrial grey (every English race car I ever saw back then was painted), and yes, Jim's car did have a black seat, not a red one. The seat belt colour I'm not sure, but blue looked good, lol. It might have been black.
I am now fighting and losing with the decals on the upper body.........grrrrrr.
The plan is to build the other one as Gurney's '64 car with the 4cam, and I have one of the turbine kits somewhere.....
I'll post some pics when it's finished.
cheers guys
Paul
|
|
|
Post by shunter on Aug 22, 2020 4:28:04 GMT -8
Nice...
|
|
|
Post by pnance26 on Aug 22, 2020 5:15:41 GMT -8
Nice work, Paul! Are you saying they are smaller than 1/25th scale? Amazing how small those early racers really were! It's one of the reasons why the Ferrari 156 Dino has me so interested. I want to see it next to the cars from the 1970s just for size purposes! I have an AAR that looks tiny compared to other 1/25th scale kits!
|
|
|
Post by Chris K. Hale on Aug 22, 2020 6:24:06 GMT -8
I had a comparison of Indy cars somewhere but, being early in the morning , my mind cant comprehend where it is . So here is a similar comparison of F-1 cars 60's to 2020.. The cars have grown significantly in size over the years. Makes me wonder just how they navigate some of the older and narrow tracks? Chris
|
|
|
Post by tatocorvette on Aug 22, 2020 6:39:52 GMT -8
Nice Lotus! Bigger Depth of field -> smaller aperture -> higher number F22 is smaller aperture and more depth of field than F8
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 22, 2020 9:29:47 GMT -8
Nice Lotus! Bigger Depth of field -> smaller aperture -> higher number F22 is smaller aperture and more depth of field than F8 That was true with my Pentax MX, but this newfangled Canon digital requires you to have a masters in computer programming just to turn the effin thing on!
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 22, 2020 9:41:44 GMT -8
Nice work, Paul! Are you saying they are smaller than 1/25th scale? Amazing how small those early racers really were! It's one of the reasons why the Ferrari 156 Dino has me so interested. I want to see it next to the cars from the 1970s just for size purposes! I have an AAR that looks tiny compared to other 1/25th scale kits! Patrick, I don't know. My Watson I'm sure is smaller than 1/25th. I've seen these things up close and personal, I've sat in them, those roadsters were big cars. Yet the model is the same size as a F1 car? No way. The Lotus, it's a small block Ford, right? Well, this AMT motor is a lot smaller than any other 1/25th small block I've worked with. They should be the same size externally, so somethings out of whack, lol. But the car itself set beside a mid 80's March indycar looks about what you'd expect. Maybe it's just me, I need recalibrating or something!
|
|
|
Post by tatocorvette on Aug 22, 2020 9:46:50 GMT -8
That was true with my Pentax MX, but this newfangled Canon digital requires you to have a masters in computer programming just to turn the effin thing on! Canon: There is your problem... It still holds true. Does it have an aperture priority mode or manual mode?
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 22, 2020 10:34:27 GMT -8
A cool photo, just for fun - Gurney, with Clark and Chapman - note the car #:
And Gurney in his #93 - why is it green and yellow?:
Two of the best ever drivers (and really good people) in my humble opinion.
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 22, 2020 10:40:02 GMT -8
That was true with my Pentax MX, but this newfangled Canon digital requires you to have a masters in computer programming just to turn the effin thing on! Canon: There is your problem... It still holds true. Does it have an aperture priority mode or manual mode? It's a Canon EOS Rebel T5, a Christmas present from my daughter 2 years ago, and I still haven't figured it out. It's worse than my stupid smart phone.
(don't forget, I used to design buildings with a slide rule and a pencil)
|
|
darylh
Full Time Ride
Posts: 126
|
Post by darylh on Aug 23, 2020 6:22:22 GMT -8
Lotus entered 3 cars at Indy. numbers 91 for Gurney, 92 for Clark & 93 as Clark's back-up car. When Gurney crashed his #91 he moved into the #93. For race day it had been repainted in Gurney's blue and white on the exterior. Interior colors stayed the same as Clark's so the engine bay was BRG on race day.
I love that pic of Gurney. It looks like he's driving his qualifying laps in his head before he gets out on the track.
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 24, 2020 17:52:41 GMT -8
Thanks Daryl. That's pretty much what I figured, Gurney qualified it in green and yellow, no time to paint it first. Anyway, complete except for the missing fuel port. I'll either find it or make a new one.
Now a rant about Indycals decals. Normally I love them, but this set was junk. I've never had Indycals crack and tear before, but this set was so touchy as to be almost impossible. Also the green shows through the decal - I thought about ordering another set and doubling them up, but I just had sooo much fun with the first set......... I'm wondering has Michael changed something?
About the scale thing, when I look at the photo of it with the Watson, it's about right. Maybe they both are a little small, or I'm just going slowly mad.
They'd make a lovely couple if they were in focus:
Time to move on to something else, for the moment.
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by tatocorvette on Aug 24, 2020 18:25:36 GMT -8
It looks really good despite the problems! Can I play with your picture? Really like it! Do you have a tripod? where are you located? Thanks,
|
|
|
Post by arcticwolf on Aug 24, 2020 19:18:48 GMT -8
It looks really good despite the problems! Can I play with your picture? Really like it! Do you have a tripod? where are you located? Thanks, Thank you Ismael.
I'm about 3 1/2 hrs north east of Toronto, did you want to drop by? And yes, I have a tripod, and an 18-55 zoom and an 80-210 zoom, auto and manual focus, and enough program modes to choke an elephant. What I really want is some film for my Pentax and a colour processing lab, lol.
Oh, and play all you want.
|
|
|
Post by tatocorvette on Aug 25, 2020 17:14:51 GMT -8
I'd love to drop by, but I don't think it will be possible for a while. I ask because I can mail you a mini table tripod but if you have one already, you can try aperture priority mode with the camera. The resulting shutter speed may be slow so you'll need a tripod. Thanks, Ismael
|
|