Fiat 806 -"Gangshow"- build album.

[Roy vd M.]

@sharknose156 It's easier for me to show it using a lens correction made in Gimp. I took the center of photo 5 as correction origin and rotated the photo slightly before correction. 

 

The photo probably can be corrected more accurately, but here my findings.

 

First step: I made sure that the vertical-meant lines on the photo are in fact vertical. 

 

 

 

Then I overlayed the amended photo 5 with the original photo 5. See here the difference:

 

 

Findings: the car is very slightly narrower on the distortion-corrected picture. 

 

6 minutes ago, vontrips said:

Sorry, but you are flogging a dead horse with that shot. I'd wager that the aspect ratio of that shot is at least 15% over on the x axis! Try stretching the y axis to 115% and check again? 

 

On the basis whereof do you think the picture should be amended? 

[vontrips]

25 minutes ago, vontrips said:

 

Roy, I mentioned it before! Stretch the height (y axis) by 115% for starters; or the inverse for the x axis (85% - off the top of my head). You'll notice the Bugatti looks correct and that the track staff no longer look like Smurfs!

 

The wooden post is another red herring as it was indeed, angled! Check the reflection on the track - you'll notice it reflects the angle of the post. Draw a line to extend the reflection and the post together. They will join with a slight v. (on its side). Your horizon line will be perpendicular to the v point!

[Roy vd M.]

This exercise ends here for me. To me the staff doesn't look like smurfs nor does the Bugatti look incorrect to me. Really trying to, but I don't see any proof that the photo should be stretched. What's more, to me the car in picture 5 looks compatible to the car in the other pictures.

 

That doesn't mean that I'd not be mentally accepting visual proof. If there are good arguments, based on visual evidence, that the picture has to be rescaled vertically, I'd welcome those conclusions and findings and would be very interested in them.

 

One more thing... take a look at Clerici's car, a Salmson Val:

 

 

The photo is near orthogonality to the car's front. Notice the great difference in height/width-ratio between the Fiat and the Salmson. 

 

Based on meagre research, the Salmson could be this car:

 

 

(Posted on Pinterest, see here, credits to the photographer, all copyrights reserved by the photographer, educational purposes only; picture will be deleted upon first request)

 

More / better (front) pictures of that car may help establish the correct height/width-ratio of photo 5. As far as I can estimate now, based on this photo, Photo 5 wouldn't need too much vertical stretching, if any. 

 

Let's leave it at that, as far as my input is concerned. Spending about 8 hours on this issue, not being my project, is already more than I should have reasonably done because my poor McLaren model has been beckoning me repeatedly  . 

 

I think I have broadened the discussion, which was my plan. The Gimp files are at your free disposal. This doesn't need to be the end of the quest, it can be a start. I welcome those interested to follow up that work. For those who do... try to look at the subject at hand as objectively as possible, not trying to come to a pre-desired result (=a shape as close to the kit as possible). 

 

Good luck to you all, back to 'thread following' mode (hope I can). 

Edited November 7, 2016 by Roy vd M.
Added last bit of info.

[krow113]

Gastonesque.

[Totally Mad Olivier]

On 05/11/2016 at 2:52 PM, Olivier de St Raph said:

 

Hi guys,

just a word to say I agree with John, the grille should be a bit more curved. It is obvious on this photo (I quote myself)... I won't redo my grille anyway, but if I had not yet done it , I would try to make better...

Best regards

 

[Totally Mad Olivier]

 

And now, guys, look at that photo that we all saw many times: would not you say the up of the grille is a bit wider than the low? we always considered the grille was rectangular (and maybe it is) but on this picture, it seems slightly trapeziform, no? (the red line decreases more and more going lower). Such a shape would help to get what John suggested with his drawing (thanks John, you finally did it! )

I agree with Roy, I think we must close this debate now, because IMHO, there are too many changes to do on the kit and you'll get mad if you dive on such an unachievable project. Most of you are in fact not working on the kit at this moment, but I can tell you it is full of traps. I tried to be as accurate as possible on many details, such wheels, tyres (thanks to John), grille (...), steering wheel, ignition wiring etc., and I think that it should be quite good, but I think going farer would be insane... 

All the best to all and many thanks again to Roy for his very laudable effort and amazing work to search for truth!

 

Olivier

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2016 by Olivier de St Raph

[Roy vd M.]

Olivier perhaps you understood me wrong. Let me explain more in detail. It's not my opinion that the debate should be closed; on the opposite, I'd be very excited to see the research be continued and the facts fortified by more proof... and then see someone rebuild the kit's external shapes according to those findings (maybe Hannes or Vontrips?). I must admit all of this has been tempting me to buy the kit and give myself a good reason to dive into the research a bit more. But for you to understand how deep I go into a kit, you'd have to take a look at some of my projects. For example for the purpose of my Heinkel 111 build (currently stalled) I flew over to London to take pictures of the real plane (one of few survivors) after making an appointment with the RAF museum's curator. For a planned diorama I've made an appointment to fly to Russia to photograph a hangar and take its exact measurements. And for this Fiat I'd be willing to visit Fiat in Turin to search their archive if they would allow me. 

 

But I have to control myself here. I'm having a lot of fun doing the McLaren MP4/6 and there are only so many projects I can realistically focus on. I politely disagree that there would be too many changes to the kit. I think it's acceptable to keep the inner works and most of the cockpit of the car and recreate the external lines and tyres (thinner / front tyres off-camber). You only have to take a look at Roymattblack's 1/8 scratchbuilding threads to see it's possible (not that I, for one, could ever achieve results like he does).  

 

Now perhaps you understand better why I'd love to see someone perform some serious surgery on the car. That doesn't mean however that anyone should feel tempted. Each to his own and 99% would be much more comfortable using the (equally beautiful) shapes of Italeri's kit. And I'll repeat myself, I really -honestly- love and thoroughly enjoy every build of this remarkable model. That's why I started following this thread. No build is better or worse than the other. Where one build may be more historically correct than the other, which I enjoy seeing, it will always be very slow, regarding which aspect I'd prefer to see a 'regular' build. None is less worthy than the others. Conclusion: I have an equal amount of respect to all modelers, insofar they build carefully and thoughtfully. 

 

3 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

 

And now, guys, look at that photo that we all saw many times: would not you say the up of the grille is a bit wider than the low? we always considered the grille was rectangular (and maybe it is) but on this picture, it seems slightly trapeziform, no? (the red line decreases more and more going lower). Such a shape would help to get what John suggested with his drawing (thanks John, you finally did it! )

 

That's an awesome finding! Looking at it more closely, it seems the line at the bottom are curved slightly upward (from the center) while the line at the top are curved slightly downward. The same on the other side. The center grille lines seem to be straight. 

 

But take a look at the right side of the grille (on the photo: left side). There you can see that the bottom lines are LONGER than on the left side (photo: right side). On the top, the right side lines are SHORTER than on the left side. Isn't that strange! Until you check the two lines parallel to the large '1' mark on the radiator. Upon closer inspection, those lines make two bends. One approximately at the 10th spoke from the top, the other near the 7th or 8th spoke from the bottom. The latter seems to be the reason why your bottom red line is so short: some of it is hidden behind the grille strip (the white part on the photo). Comparing with the right side (photo: left), it seems that where the top spokes are curved outwardly, the bottom grille spokes are curved inwardly. A reason for this could be the position of the crank hole but I'm not sure. It appears this is the only photo where this is visible.

 

Very interesting! 

[sharknose156]

Totally agree with Roy @Roy vd M.  this debate also induces me to consider building the real car.  i have it in my stach and it can be the base for making a 1/12 'real' 406 ? Andy once said ' rip it open already' but i have been so fascinated by my Mephisto detailing that i decided to focus on the Meph first, so the car is intact in the box.

 

I am not sure i have the skills though... but i think it would involve making a new body we/I can perhaps make in 3D ?  am i wrong ?

also, it may be a long shot, but I have connections to a cutting edge airline industry player and i saw some 3D light aluminum small pieces produced by them.

It is a long shot, but since i have some business relation with them, perhaps i can try to ask for a light alu body if i had the right plans ? 

 

in any case got to rush out and we can discuss this later on a new thread perhaps. 

 

Am also game to go to Turino for this.

[Hannes]

I also completely agree with Roy that it is possible,to alter the car´s shape without endless Problems.Anyway,some difficult alterings Need to be made.

The following list Shows the measurements and possible consequences of my own plannings so far.

1)Altering the Radiator case into a realistic shape.Consequences:new grill,new Radiator,adaption with Bonnets.

2)Altering the bonnet´s lenght by shortening the bodywork.Consequences:new Supports,elongation and Adaption works.

3)Altering the frame´s rails height.Consequences parts below exhaust System and Bonnets Need to be adapted.

4)Shortening of the bodywork in horizontal direction.Consequences:altering of the costruction,that holds the steering column,adaption of wind shelter,maybe shape of rear(not sure),seat box and tank.

5)Altering of the frontal axis (correction of height and distance between the wheels.

6)Altering the steering System.New Levers at right places,new steering rods.

In my opinion  the main Problems as I can see now are shown above.

Some of them are easy to solve,others Need contemplation,planning and skills.

Many greetings to all!  Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

Hannes I strongly suggest that first my preliminary views / findings will be elaborated on / continued on, because it's just the beginning and my new front drawing is just a sketch and cannot be used for making the final model. If you want to do it right, much more visual research has to be done. If you won't do that you're going to perform major surgery on the kit without knowing for sure whether any or all of it is correct! 

 

That having said, to add to your list: probably thinning the wheels and tyres... and recambering the front tyres. All photographs (and also Drawing 2) show the front tyres extremely off-cambered (for better cornering during the race). In all finished kit models I've seen so far this was ignored, although it makes a great visual difference on the end result of the build. You get something like this:

 

 

Beside angling the front wheels I also moved their centers closer to each other, thus reducing the width of the car (be it 4 pixels only), to make it look closer to photo 5. And I'm convinced that there's a lot more to be found after thorough research using photogrammetry. I'm also convinced that eventually it can be done, using the 8 available photos. But who will do it; who will have the time and energy to commit himself to do this research?  

 

 

 

Anyway, another example of a subject needing attention: take a look at the end lining of the car and the different interpretation made in Drawing 1 and Drawing 2. 

 

Things each one of you can do even if you're not good with computer image procession software: compare Drawing 1 to Drawing 2. The first drawing was probably used by Protar to base their kit on, the second drawing seems to be more correct (although not perfect). Checking out the differences, compare them to the 8 photographs. Then you can start making a list of those differences and the probability of the kit parts needing modification (again, only if you want to go all the way). 

[Totally Mad Olivier]

So sorry Roy for this misunderstanding. I did not want to discourage anyone, I read your post diagonally yesterday because very busy with my pro activity. I will go seeing your previous works as soon as possible, but I understand you are an ace with an outstanding will. I will follow with a lot of interest your thread the day you build the Fiat 806.

Waiting for that, I will see Hannes's one...

Best regards

 

[Little Andi]

Everyone, as some of you might know, the administration does not like any thread to extend beyond forty pages, you might like to think about winding this up now?

[Hannes]

Dear Roy,I am Aware that more plannings are needed before RealisationIf you take a look at my Mefistofele(Fiat Mefistofele Protar+Italeri,wettringer modellbauforum.de) you´ll see that Iam  Aware about the cambering of the front wheels.Using my old protar 806 in combination with the new Italeri kit also allows me to use the Protar tires.

I just wanted to Point out,what possible consequences could follow,if  some plannings get real.

I´m really greatful for your deep thoughts  and Iám sure,,that other members see this the same way:  Many greetings!  Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

1 hour ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

So sorry Roy for this misunderstanding. (...) I read your post diagonally yesterday because very busy with my pro activity. (...) but I understand you are an ace with an outstanding will.

 

No problem, a lot of text in this topic lately and some details are easily misread. 

I am not an ace but I do have a lot of patience and a strong will to search for facts. Call it autism (should have myself diagnosed one day haha). 

 

I will follow with a lot of interest your thread the day you build the Fiat 806.

 

Ah... you are making things difficult for me... maybe, very maybe Santa Claus will be kind to me. The project has started to interest me more and more.

 

Waiting for that, I will see Hannes's one...

 

So do I!

 

48 minutes ago, Little Andi said:

Everyone, as some of you might know, the administration does not like any thread to extend beyond forty pages, you might like to think about winding this up now?

 

I hear you Andy and I respect your opinion not alone as topic starter but also as builder of one of the top models seen in this thread especially as regards weathering. I have read that you used to over-detail and rivet-count your models but that it sucked the modelling joy out of you. So I understand your point of view.

 

Is it not a good idea, as suggested by Larchieveng here, to start a separate thread? First I interpreted Larchieveng's comment as a wish that Olivier started his own private build topic, but upon reading it a second time it struck me that he could mean a second, general purpose, detaillist and scratchbuilding topic. And that's not a bad idea at all it seems.

 

In practice: the current thread could be split between those posts dealing with building of the kit 'out of box' as well as regular improvements. The new thread could feature all research, photogrammetry, scratch building and stuff like that. References between the two threads could be made for those who are interested. Those who have contributed to the 'lab show' thread could post their painting and weathering in the original 'gang show' thread. Perhaps this way more people become interested in this kit again and we might see some more updates from you, Andy, which updates I have missed lately. People in this original thread needn't be bothered by all theory and endless scratching, while the rivet counters (who should be treated equally respectfully) have their own thread to play in.

 

36 minutes ago, Hannes said:

Dear Roy,I am Aware that more plannings are needed before RealisationIf you take a look at my Mefistofele(Fiat Mefistofele Protar+Italeri,wettringer modellbauforum.de) you´ll see that Iam  Aware about the cambering of the front wheels.Using my old protar 806 in combination with the new Italeri kit also allows me to use the Protar tires.

I just wanted to Point out,what possible consequences could follow,if  some plannings get real.

I´m really greatful for your deep thoughts  and Iám sure,,that other members see this the same way:  Many greetings!  Hannes

 

I'll take a look, thanks for the link. 

 

10 minutes ago, gfadvance said:

The last 4 or 5 pages of this thread have been some of the best I have ever read in highlighting how to totally suck the life and joy out of our hobby. I mean measuring the thickness of paint or producing yet another photoshop  pic with lines on it .... For goodness sake, get a life ..........  whilst not a lover of "rivet counting" I am happy to admit that there is a time and a place for it, but it ain't here !! 

 

If you want to go into this sort anal detail then start a new thread, do not just gate crash an existing to push your pet theories on the rest of us ..... Apart from being rude it's boring the pants of me ......... And I would hazard a guess a lot of other people 

 

Except for the (in my view) disrespectful way I feel you introduced yourself to this thread by that post, discrediting all of those participating in this thread who have done their best to get to a better model presentation (ironically, including Andy who to my opinion did a great job correcting the air vents) , I think you are right that a separate thread should be opened. I refer to my reply to Andy above. 

 

Nobody in their right mind would ever think that this kit was a correct and accurate scale representation of the original car, but and its is a huge BUT

all parties acknowledge there is such a scarcity of accurate information that it is impossible for either a manufacturer or even a lone scratch builder to produce an accurate representation  which could be backed up with proven data.

 

You're wrong there. I for one do think it's possible to achieve a result that's way better than Italeri's kit would suggest. And I think I'm not the only one here. We're using new methods and new technology (rather than 'pet theories') to gain knowledge and come to results that were not possible at the time this kit was moulded. 

 

______

 

 

Now who'd vote for a separate detailing and scratchbuilding thread started on this kit?  

[Hannes]

I was about to leave this thread.Of Course I would like to join a new one if there are enough interested members who like to find new ways and who like new challenges..Hannes

[Roy vd M.]

 

2 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

I will follow with a lot of interest your thread the day you build the Fiat 806.

 

 

Okay okay I bought the kit. 

 

Won't be starting it soon though... 

[CrazyCrank]

Just now, Roy vd M. said:

 

 

 

Okay okay I bought the kit. 

 

Won't be starting it soon though... 

 

And I've planned to buy it too....but do not tell it to my wife !

[Roy vd M.]

@CrazyCrank There are still a couple for sale on Ebay for around 115 euro, here's one for 113 euro + 10 euro shipment costs from Germany. That's even less than I just paid, apparently I hadn't looked right. Don't pay Italeri's website price ('discounted' from 175 to 150 euro). And especially, don't pay 265 euro... lol!

 

I am looking MORE than forward, and I would be more than honored, to start building this kit simultaneously with you, having enjoyed and admired your incredible work on the Bugatti. Obviously, as you are all aware by now, I'm also looking forward to building this kit simultaneously with all other talented contributors in this great thread.

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Hello guys,

well, I didn't know threads had to stop at 40 pages, as Andi suggests. Personally, I think it would be a pity. I don't mind scratchbuilders like Roy or Hannes create a new thread (I would go and see it) but I wanted to finish my kit before this thread stops. Is it possible to go on or really the administrator does not allow this?

I totally agree with CC about the button "I don't like"...

All the best to all (with an exception...)

 

Edited November 8, 2016 by Olivier de St Raph

[Roy vd M.]

@Olivier de St Raph Andy is referring to this thread. It turned out to be a misunderstanding, Mike said that closed down threads (of about 40 pages) would be reopened. I understand Andy's remark as one of slight annoyance of the way this thread has turned (extreme detailism) and I understand his sentiment very very well. Where there are out-of-box builders there will always be builders who will want to go further, and where there are builders who want to go further there will always be builders who find that disturbing and joy-breaking. It has been like that on every modelling forum I've seen and it's very difficult to make all modelers happy. Larchieveng and my proposal to open up a separate thread is an attempt to make the Fiat 806 kit build reports more enjoyable to all involved.

 

Quote

(I would go and see it) 

 

 

I think your astonishing detailing of the steering wheel should be in there!! 

 

The idea: research and scratch-detailing in thread 2, general build process in thread 1. So as an example, you're working on heavily amending the steering wheel for 1 week and you post all of that in thread 2. Then you start painting and weathering it... that update should be posted in thread 1. When you start scratchbuilding something again, use thread 2. When you have found a new picture of the car, use thread 2. When you're filling some gaps, use thread 1. Et cetera. That's how I see it. 

 

Sounds difficult, but it really isn't. Give it a thought... 

Edited November 8, 2016 by Roy vd M.

[sharknose156]

3 hours ago, gfadvance said:

Apart from being rude it's boring the pants of me

 

That's exactly what i felt as soon as i was reading the first lines of your judgmental post... if only it were respectful of others, it would perhaps be acceptable.

 

it is a PITY you don't have a small scale build to show us ( even a mediocre one ) or an interesting technical comment to contribute.

 

This is the noble mission of this Forum ( by the way).

 

Gladly, i will take criticism from you if i can only see what kind of modeler you are.

 

The technical evolution and quality of scale modeling products today, from many great brands, worldwide, in many scales, the quality of paints, the precision of modern accessories, the realism of after market improvements, the meticulous documentation available for modelers, Forums such as this one ... ...

ALL demonstrate one BIG CONCLUSION, SIR; modelers increasingly aspire to technical and historical accuracy and they spend endless hours for this passion and enjoy discussing it as FUN...

 

Therefore, as far as i am concerned, there is only one conclusion from your post:

 

In the face of this very evident wind change, it is your kind of 'sour grapes' attitude that seems to "lie down and die"...  hahaha.

 

As for defining yourself as a  "lurker", 

( additional negative contribution  ; Lurk : be or remain hidden so as to wait in ambush for someone or something. )  it implies a lack of action... unless you have a medical or mental condition as an excuse....again what a PITY ....when there is so much more joy in the real action.   In fact there is another word for that. Also 6 letters. Also ending in "ker".

 

Now, for telling me to "get a life: because i find history discussions interesting;

 

i beg your pardon Mr Self-described Lurker, 

but you do not know anything about my life; 

 

If i may say Mr Lurker....get a life yourself Sir !!  

( even a mediocre one )  

Edited November 8, 2016 by sharknose156

[Totally Mad Olivier]

Thanks for your compliments Roy. Has this original solution ever been used on this forum or another? in theory, your suggestion seems good, but in some situations, I am afraid this separation between level 1 and level 2 will break the fluidity. More, I think most of the modelers on this thread are very good ones, and   so are not so much interested in basic approach of the build. For me, the interest of a forum is to create emulation between modelers and to share skills and experience. 

So, I don't know in fact, but maybe we could try???

How could we decide this all together?

P.S: Sam, I just read your post. The"comments" of the "lurker" recalls me a tale of Lafontaine: "le coche et la mouche".

I can't dare these people who, like the fly in the tale, instead of bringing a positive contribution (it may be a positive criticism) just start some poo-poo (sorry). I invite you all, if you don't know this tale, to read it (I suppose there are english translations).

Edited November 8, 2016 by Olivier de St Raph

[CrazyCrank]

1 hour ago, Roy vd M. said:

@CrazyCrank There are still a couple for sale on Ebay for around 115 euro, here's one for 113 euro + 10 euro shipment costs from Germany. That's even less than I just paid, apparently I hadn't looked right. Don't pay Italeri's website price ('discounted' from 175 to 150 euro). And especially, don't pay 265 euro... lol!

 

I am looking MORE than forward, and I would be more than honored, to start building this kit simultaneously with you, having enjoyed and admired your incredible work on the Bugatti. Obviously, as you are all aware by now, I'm also looking forward to building this kit simultaneously with all other talented contributors in this great thread.

 

I agree with this new challenge Roy, and i would be honoured too, starting that with you, but, to moderate our enthusiasm :

- It's not for tomorrow: You are, and I am, very busy with our actual builds, and personally, I want to achieve the entire chassis of my Bugatti before dedicating me to another build. I think it's probably the same for you

- Furthermore, i do not wish to interfer with Olivier's or Andi's builds (to mention just a few) , capturing / diluting reader's attention with other parallel/concurrent builds,  and I think we must let them finish their  work before beginning our.

- it should be  a semi- (at least) - scratch build, starting from the box, and trying to give the alternative shape of the legendary car, regarding the last discussions about it on this thread.

 

What do you think about that ?

 

PS: I apologize Vontrips, i've forgotten to mention you with Andi and Olivier.. Wish you'll pardon me 

Edited November 8, 2016 by CrazyCrank

[Roy vd M.]

9 minutes ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

in theory, your suggestion seems good, but in some situations, I am afraid this separation between level 1 and level 2 will break the fluidity.

 

In case of doubt the modeler could discretionarily choose in which topic to post his update. 

 

Quote

More, I think most of the modelers on this thread are very good ones, and   so are not so much interested in basic approach of the build.

 

Personally I'd love to see Andy resume posting his weathering progress. 

 

Quote

How could we decide this all together?

 

We could vote?  

 

I agree with this new challenge Roy, and i would be honoured too, starting that with you, but, to moderate our enthusiasm :

- It's not for tomorrow: You are, and I am, very busy with our actual builds, and personally, I want to achieve the entire chassis of my Bugatti before dedicating me to another build. I think it's probably the same for you

- Furthermore, i do not wish to interfer with Olivier's or Andi's builds (to mention just a few) , capturing / diluting reader's attention with other parallel/concurrent builds,  and I think we must let them finish their  work before beginning our.

- it should be  a semi- (at least) - scratch build, starting from the box, and trying to give the alternative shape of the legendary car, regarding the last discussions about it on this thread.

 

What do you think about that ?

 

That sounds like a wonderful idea, I completely agree. Maybe we could exchange resin copies of modified bonnets / wheels etc. etc. 

 

Let's discuss it at the time! I'm looking forward to it.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Roy vd M.

[Hannes]

I want to respond to Olivier:As much as I know, nobody ever tried to build the real car.So we are pioneers and some Kind of scientists.It´s like finding the skull of an ancient king and reconstructing his face with scientific and artistic measures. It´s only a microkosmos,but inside it´s a terra nova  and this can be very exciting.

It doesn´t matter,if you want to build the original car or not..Your love regarding the Details would be a great contribute for all of us . Many greetings to belle France!  Hannes