Jump to content

Ford Mustang 1964 1/2 Convertible 1/16 from the Coupe AMT kit: the Indy 500 Pace Car


Recommended Posts

Back home, I made the necessary corrections (bed level fine setting, bed and nozzle preheat before printing) suggested by Daniel. And I printed with the same and  last Cura parameters the 0,5 mm thickness new file he kindly sent me. Look at that:

Ar6KdO.jpg

 

The comparison is merciless for the slots I very  patiently had created on the AMT polystyren... If we still had doubts about what 3D could bring to scratchbuild, there is imho longer anymore. And consider that such a result was got with an entry level (< 200€) FDM printer... I would be curious to see what a resin printer such the Anycubic or the Creality LD-001* (much better state of surface and resolution than a FDM printer) would work out...

 

* Anycubic Photon about 390€ today, Creality LD-001 about 500€. These are entry level resin printers

 

Edit a bit later: I had problems of printing with the 2 other files Daniel sent me, the rods between slots were not correctly printed (not at all with the 2nd one). But anyway, I ever consider the result shown above as a huge improvement and a great result.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starting to look really good, how bendy is it now that it is only 0.5mm thick?

 

About the slot width, in version 1 the slots and the area between are both 0.43mm, it is the inaccuracy of our 3d printers that make the slots too thin. Version 3 has the same setup but here the width is 0.4mm and the distance between each recessed area is wider. In version 2 I tried to counteract the narrow slots by making them 0.5mm and the area between the slots 0.3mm. This requires some changes in Cura otherwise the areas between the slots won't print properly as you said. I loaded the default settings for your printer into Cura and tried to get the area between the slots to slice properly, I changed the setting below and now it should print properly (compare the top to the bottom):

 

cura-wall-inset.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dbostream said:

Starting to look really good, how bendy is it now that it is only 0.5mm thick?

No problem of bending, Daniel, even in 0,5 mm thickness, thanks to the stiffness of the PLA. After, all depends on the way you intend to integrate the inlet slots.

With FDM, the best would probably be to cut just around the inlet, as I suggested above (post#469), to solve (partially) the problem of surface state (not easy to get a smooth surface with this material). With a resin 3D printer, because of the good state of surface, that may easily be still improved by sanding, the option below would probably be the best:

JQXmgG.jpg

 

3 hours ago, dbostream said:

it is the inaccuracy of our 3d printers that make the slots too thin

I am aware of this and I admire your persistence, that leads you to find solutions to counteract this relative inaccuracy. I suppose things would be more simple with a resin 3D print, not requiring such special settings.

I am gonna do new trials using these special settings you mention here.

As I said to you in our PM, I begin to think seriously to the 3D resin printer (being ware of the drawbacks of this choice), much better appropriated to our hobby, while the FDM printers suit well for decorative big objects.

Now the question is: would the resin be as strong as the PLA? It is obvious that polystyren would not be enough strong for 0,2 mm thickness, fe. 

The experience on that matter of a modeler like us  would be welcome. Antonio, are you here? 

 

Edit 1/2 h later, sorry, Daniel, but I made the correction you suggested above (Outer Wall Inset to 0,2 instead of 0,5) but though the rods are not well printed:

956L7p.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does it look good in Cura at least like the way it looks in the photo I posted? In your photo it looks like the nozzle is too close to the bed for the most part, it looks ok on the far right. Can you redo the bed calibration and lower the left side of the bed? It is very important to get the bed calibrated correctly, please take your time and get this right. I have spent a lot of time doing this on my printer as well. I usually use a standard A4 office paper and check that I can get it between the bed and nozzle with little resistance in all 4 corners.

Edited by dbostream
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dbostream said:

Does it look good in Cura at least like the way it looks in the photo I posted?

Here is how appears the inlet_3_thin file in Cura when I choose the layer view:

T5WaqR.png

 

If the rods appear, the pattern is very different from yours. Maybe this may explain that my print failed...

 

1 hour ago, dbostream said:

In your photo it looks like the nozzle is too close to the bed for the most part, it looks ok on the far right

I am a bit surprised if so, because I made a fine bed level setting yesterday, allowing me to get the good result of my post# 476 above? Should I check this level again??

 

1 hour ago, dbostream said:

I usually use a standard A4 office paper and check that I can get it between the bed and nozzle with little resistance in all 4 corners.

I did that too, but I have no resistance, the paper may just slide between nozzle and bed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

If the rods appear, the pattern is very different from yours. Maybe this may explain that my print failed...

It doesn't look like the object is laying flat on the bed when you slice it. Did you rotate it correctly before slicing? Also it says you have 11 layers, given a 0.2mm first layer and the rest 0.1mm you should have a total of 4 layers. Or what layer heights are you using?

 

38 minutes ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

I am a bit surprised if so, because I made a fine bed level setting yesterday, allowing me to get the good result of my post# 476 above? Should I check this level again??

At one point I had to redo the bed calibration after every print because the objects were stuck on the bed so hard I had to use great force to get them loose and by doing so I ruined the bed calibration. Do you get the printed objects off of the bed easily or do you have a similar scenario? Now I print on a sheet of glass (covered by 3DLAC spray) that I can easily remove from the bed and then remove the printed object away from the printer, that way the bed calibration remains the same.

 

38 minutes ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

I did that too, but I have no resistance, the paper may just slide between nozzle and bed

If that is still the case now after doing the print you showed above then I find it strange. In your photo it looks like a typical case of the nozzle being too close to the bed for the most part. I have had the same with my printer many times.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Daniel,

I just sent you a PM with all my parameters in Cura for this print (video). If you don't mind, tell me if you think they are OK please.

About the numbers of layers, currently, I don't understand. I didn't take care of that point up to now. 

About the bed, it is true that my prints are uneasy to remove from the bed, I will check again the level as you suggest. If I keep this printer (not sure), I will do the same as you, using a sheet of glass, to improve that.

Thanks in advance

Olivier

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have just found Bernard's answer to measures I had asked him in last 22/11(my post# 351). He had replied by sms but probably my wife saw it and forgot to tell me I had a message... Here it is (I have added the matching at 1/16):

4iezPO.jpg

the values in brackets are the current ones on my build.

I will try to do the necessary corrections in order to be as close as possible from the good values.

Notice too that this drawing suggests that the step on which the front seats are set is flat (something I wanted to confirm), while there is a slope on the AMT kit and also on my build for now (see fe my post# 453). I will correct that too...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent a lot of time (helped by Daniel in PM) to get a better result, using his modified files, but unsuccessfully up to now. The 3D printing is for now, and for the very challenging (such these slots) goals we have as modelers, a very difficult and tricky method, at least with FDM printers (I have not experienced resin printers).

So, I tried to improve my part got before (my post# 478 above):

 

Q49luh.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion (being just a man’s opinion of course) this sanded version is not an improvement to what the printer produced. 

 

If you won’t be able to get better print results I would leave it be, if I were you. The print looked very neat, be it perhaps a bit grainy. 

 

I do enjoy watching your progress regarding 3D-printing. With patience you’ll get very far.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if you can get the bed leveling perfect or near perfect on your printer then you will be able to get wider slots directly from the printer. And with my other versions of the model possibly an improvements as well once you have figured out how to print them. As Roy says the printed one looks pretty similar to what you already have but the printed version has the advantage with recessed areas. Once I get back home to my printer I will try to print the thinner versions as well.

Edited by dbostream
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Roy vd M. said:

In my opinion (being just a man’s opinion of course) this sanded version is not an improvement to what the printer produced. 

 

If you won’t be able to get better print results I would leave it be, if I were you. The print looked very neat, be it perhaps a bit grainy. 

 

I do enjoy watching your progress regarding 3D-printing. With patience you’ll get very far.

 

It is true that less is sometimes more, and that, by increasing the width of the slots, I also lost what made the quality of the previous version: a neat and regular look (take in consideration though that this is a merciless close-up and that a "normal eye view" gives a good perception). And on the other hand, I go on thinking it was not a bad idea to use the liquid cement to improve the grainy state of surface. I will probably decide to finally go on for a resin printer that should avoid this grainy aspect and - I hope - to get better slots too. 

9 hours ago, dbostream said:

I think if you can get the bed leveling perfect or near perfect on your printer then you will be able to get wider slots directly from the printer.

I made many trials these last days, adjusting parameters and leveling the bed as well as possible, but I never got a better version than this one. And I hope I will be able to get the latter again after all these changes. But I overall look forward to see what you will get with these new files on your own printer. You are much more experienced than me, and if you get a fine result, I will ask you - if you don't mind - to send me one (I will pay the  postage, of course). One thing is sure, only the final result matters. 

Thanks to both anyway for your help and encouragements.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 new infos:

- Anycubic Photon 3D resin printer just ordered on Aliexpress (381€ free shipping). I should get it within less than 8 days, probably less. Of course, you will be the first ones to get my first review and tests... For now, I keep the MP select v2 FDM machine.

- I have signed up in a french Ford Mustang enthusiasts forum, asking if a kind member could help me by precising the measures I am still expecting (front and rear seats, tunnel). I hope this path will be better than the previous ones...

More soon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I recall that the value in brackets is the matching at 1/16 scale:

rN8gIr.jpg

 

pAeOOc.jpg

 

For the lower part of the door, things remain not totally clear for me: the measure below suggests that its thickness doesn't exceed about 75 mm, what seems to me a low value. I need a confirmation... HELP!!!

8ofpl8.jpg

 

On the kit, this lower door thickness is about 9,1 mm,

CTs7x3.jpg

 

which would mean 145 mm on the real car: I am sure this is way too much, but I need precise infos. I have ever decreased it to about 7,25 mm (matching to 120 mm)

TJNQ4z.jpg

but before going further, I need precise infos, to check on any Mustang of that period... 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot John! For Christmas, I was a bit ill (a very bad cold) but now, it's getting better and better.

About the build, yes, I am persevering, even if sometimes a bit discouraged because despite my big efforts, I couldn't get the accurate infos I need about the seats and the tunnel up to now.

The 3D printing was a bit discouraging too, because I spent a lot of time trying to improve my results and that I didn't expect it would be so difficult. I hope settings will be easier with the Anycubic machine to come soon.

Another reason for being a bit discouraged is that I don't feel a big interest for my project, despite all the efforts I do to explain with photos and comments. I am probably primarily responsible for this lack of interest, and I also know everyone is focused on his own problems and builds. Things would be probably different if another member was building the same kit. Then we could share hints and solutions, even if each one has his own approach and philosophy of work. I remember with nostalgy the first weeks of the "Fiat 806 research" thread when, with an incredible energy, each one tried to contribute, without any second thoughts. It was even sometimes too much, I had to choose between the thread and the build... 

I could add to all that of course the big challenge that getting a faithful replica from a so poor kit is, but finally, it is not worst. It is sure that my progress is very slow, and that the new 3D approach requires a lot of this precious time. You can't at the same time do research for accurate infos, try to learn CAD/CAM, post photos and comments and go on fast with your build (especially this one!) without mentioning the pro work and the personal life considerations. In fact, in a perfect world, such a challenging project should be a collective work. If some of you, Juan Manuel, Antonio, John, Roy, Daniel,  Harvey, Hannes, Thierry (CC), Bernard (and his 1965 Mustang), Jeroen etc. (sorry for the ones I forgot) could move to St Raphaël (a very nice place to live!!), things would be much much easier (but on the other hand my wife would certainly ask for a divorce :D). Well, finally, it is maybe better like that...

Well, this build will last as long as it lasts. I must be patient and save myself.

But one thing is sure: I am still as motivated for this project, and it's the most important.

I wish you a happy, peaceful and healthy New Year too, John.

 

All the best

 

Olivier

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Olivier de St Raph said:

Another reason for being a bit discouraged is that I don't feel a big interest for my project, despite all the efforts I do to explain with photos and comments. I am probably primarily responsible for this lack of interest, and I also know everyone is focused on his own problems and builds.

 

Olivier I think you and I have encountered the exact same thing here so I know what you mean. I have made five vlogs now and have spent a grand total of some 50-60 hours on those alone. Because of that energy I put in them I decided to post the vlogs to several forums but the number of viewers has gone down to 45 (that's the total of viewers of the 5th vlog from six forums and Youtube). There are 31 subscribers. Two days ago I gave this a good thought and I came to the conclusion that the small interest for my drawing efforts in Fusion 360 should imply that I'd be better off spending my time doing the drawing instead of vlogging about it.

 

Think about it: scale modellers are awaiting the real modelling, whereas car enthusiasts (I posted the vlogs at one vintage car forum) probably think my explanations are far too detailed and complex. And CAD designers are mostly busy on their own projects. Their forums are mainly used for problem-solving. 

 

I don't blame anyone and to think about it like this makes much sense. I'm still not sure what to do next... either stop vlogging entirely and posting on the forums like I did (the ones with the most interest)... or making much simpler vlogs containing just video and no explanations... or posting images to share progress, or... I'll still have to think about that. But I'll definitely change my original plans, that's a certainty.

 

So you're not alone in your thoughts. I think most modellers who make great efforts of illustrating their build sometimes feel frustrated about interest by fellow modellers, but if you just ignore that and go ahead there are often rewards too. Perhaps in your case you could try combining your posts (waiting a bit before posting something). I know I post too irregularly in my topic (sometimes there's nothing for months) but it might be that people think you post too often in this topic. Then they won't sign in at every single update, at one point perhaps ignoring the topic altogether. Perhaps one update-post per day would be ideal. But this is just a thought without any scientific base of course... moreover it's your topic so I certainly would not want to tell you what to do.

 

Finally, remember that -just like I- you're currently treating a subject that relatively few modellers are interested in. Of course after the 3D-parts are drawn, printed and implemented there will be oohs and aahs but the way toward that can be expected to be less crowded. 

 

Quote

I could add to all that of course the big challenge that getting a faithful replica from a so poor kit is, but finally, it is not worst.

That is why I have decided that if I really want to build a nice and rather serious replica of any model (after I'll have finalized the Delage in 15 years) in principle I won't use a kit anymore. They are often so inaccurate, especially the older ones like you use now. 

 

Good luck and happy new year to you and all the other builders on Britmodeller, especially the car section :) 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Roy, I fully agree with you:

1) Both of us is very motivated and puts a lot of energy to share and try to make live our passion. I remember how frustrated we could be in the "Fiat 806" thread when, despite all our efforts, we couldn't get any help (or so few) from associations, museums etc that should have been concerned by our quest for truth. Today, I feel a bit the same, even if Bernard has been very helpful (and I thank him again). Though, for important details such the seats and the tunnel, I am dependent of the good will of Mustang owners (all would be much more simple if I had bought one, but my wife doesn't agree).

2) Model making - especially in vehicles section - doesn't interest many people, we have to deal with that reality.

3) Most of us (waiting for the retirement ;)) have few time. Myself, I would be very interested by your Fusion 360 tutos on YouTube, but I don't find the time to watch them, while I am precisely at the moment in which I am concerned. I am a suscriber, though... But I will always prefer a tuto in french, more easy for me.

4) You are probably right, I should combine my posts, instead of posting very low progress, that finally discourage the best wills. I will try to do so, going against my natural tendency for sharing.

5) I want to precise that I am not depressed at all, the very frequent neck pains and the recent bad cold I got prevented me to go on faster while I was in holiday and at home (to be honest, the 3D trials, for which I want to thank again warmly Daniel for his patience and help, didn't help too)

6) I understand very well that scale modelers are awaiting for real modeling. I admit I have myself much more fun doing the latter than spending hours with a 3D printer. But if you consider the perspectives 3D offers for scratch building, I think it is worth the effort. And the fun will probably come when I will be able to create my own objects and get the best from 3D printing.

7) I don't feel ready today for 100% scratch, and many models are quite or even very good, especially recent ones. Pity, not necessary the ones we want to build...

It is obvious that if a good kit of a 1st generation Convertible Mustang did exist, I'd have jumped on it.  As I said above, I feel I am better as improver of a kit than as a 100% scratch builder. In a few years, maybe... 

Roy, I wish you and everyone on Brit (and especially the followers of this thread) a happy new year and happy modeling (with 3D or not ;)).

 

Olivier

 

N.B: I have edited the post# 455, changing the diameters (alu 0,6 mm/ 0,4 mm/ Nickel Silver 0,2 mm) of the antennas 3 sections, because 0,1 mm for the last one seemed to me too thin. This means oversizing them a little bit, but not so much, and for a result that should be good imho.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olivier,

Happy New Year to you and your family!

I would like to say that although I'm not a frequent contributor, your posts are the first thing I look for in the mornings.

It is inspiring to see someone take great pains to achieve accuracy; to set a high standard and commit themselves to reaching their goals.

I'm working on a 1964 Accurate Miniatures Corvette grand sport - working on it off and on for the past two years.  Recently retired from work, so now I can spend more time each day towards finishing.

Watching your progress and the work of people like Codger has inspired me to adapt the "model within a model" approach.

I does add more time  ( which I have now) to a build, but it also exercises my mind in finding creative solutions move forward.

New techniques are often one step forward, two steps back - but it's nice to see that I'm not alone!

Those of you that share your work  drive me to strive for higher levels of quality and detail that I may not have considered previously. The methods shown indicate a path to our goals. That path may also open up variations that work to solve particular issues or overcome impasses that arise in our work.

In short, please keep the posts coming - even if only once a day.

I'll try to chime in when any words of wisdom come to me.

Les

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the post# 455 above, I could determine precisely the antenna 3 sections lenghts and diameters. I tried to be as close as possible these values and here is the result. Of course, I will have then to scratch build the support... 

U3fvYG.jpg

 

N.B:

1) on the photo, the wires look nearly white, because of the light, but in reality, of course, they have a good metal look. 

2) now that I see again the period pics, it appears that the antennas were never deployed completely (especially the left one). Maybe I will reconsider the lenghts (that won't necessary be the same left and right), for a more realistic look. This would have another good consequence: they would be less fragile, more resistant to bending, especially if a good portion of 0,4 is inserted in the 0,6 and the same for the 0,2 in the 0,4 (stent effect).

 

P.S: thanks to a member of the Ford Mustang forum I mentioned above (post# 488), I could have the confirmation that the door thickness is 100 mm (6,25 mm). I recall it was initially 9,1 mm on the AMT parts (see my post# 489 above). This confirmation is a very good new for me, because it means that when I will have got this value of 6,25 mm, a small portion of the door sill will be visible door closed on my build as it is on the real car, the door sill width being right (about 6,3 mm) on the AMT kit:

4bWVub.jpg

So I won't need to use the Evergreen angle part, the angle will be given by the AMT door sill (that I will have to round on the main portion, see the 3rd pic in the post# 446). I will reglue the 0,1 mm Brass plate, on which I will probably apply an Ultra Bright Chrome Bare Metal Foil.

Well, the year finishes on a positive feeling: the proportions and shapes of my interior, without being perfect (perfection...), are quite good. Considering from where I came, it is a good new. 

Now I hope I will get soon the precise dimensions for the seats and the tunnel, from a 1st generation Mustang Convertible owner having the classic upholstery and no central console. If I can't get this info from the french Mustang forum, I will try with an American one... A real quest!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Olivier,

Is tubing with a .1mm wall available?

That is something I've been trying to find for myself.

The other alternative is to turn down the diameter of the very end of the smaller section to fit into hole of the slightly larger tube below it. Creates its own bump stop in the process.

Have you considered beveling the end of a small brass tube to make a punch to create the disk/button at the top of the aerial.

In real life they are almost flat..

Les

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lvp said:

Is tubing with a .1mm wall available?

I didn't try but I suppose that the Albion Alloys 0,3 mm brass tube allows to insert a 0,1 mm rod. It was my first intention to proceed and I had decided to order the Nickel Silver A.A 0,1 mm (I only had the 0,2 mm one in stock). But 0,1 mm is really very very thin (even 0,2 mm is so) and I have decided to change for 0,6/ 0,4/ 0,2 to represent the 3 sections of the antenna wire.

Did I reply to your question?

7 hours ago, Lvp said:

The other alternative is to turn down the diameter of the very end of the smaller section to fit into hole of the slightly larger tube below it

this is veery difficult with 0,2 mm Nickel Silver, this metal beeing very hard and the wire very thin...

 

7 hours ago, Lvp said:

In real life they are almost flat..

It is not so on the Bernard's Mustang antenna, that seems to be an original part. Look at the 2nd pic in my post# 455, at the top, there is a ball. Now if you can show me that on a period Mustang, the end was flat, I will modify it of course.

 

Olivier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Above all, I wish you all a very happy, peaceful, healthy and brotherly New Year!

And to begin the year, a new small update:

Kg41U7.jpg

 

9lwXWU.jpg

 

8tPb96.jpg

 

N.B: 

1) a tip about mixing and applying the Brown Stuff: mix in quite hot (about 40°C) tap water. The material will become much softer, easy to mix and to apply.

2) a comment about Roy's one below :

On 30/12/2018 at 12:56, Roy vd M. said:

Perhaps in your case you could try combining your posts (waiting a bit before posting something). I know I post too irregularly in my topic (sometimes there's nothing for months) but it might be that people think you post too often in this topic. Then they won't sign in at every single update, at one point perhaps ignoring the topic altogether. Perhaps one update-post per day would be ideal. But this is just a thought without any scientific base of course...

Roy, as you can see, I can't help posting my progress, even slow (I know this was just a point of view you expressed here). I will add something about that: posting often leads me to have a critical and step back point of view on my own work - like for the antenna wires, fe (that I won't represent completely deployed) - and so, helps me to get the most convincing result.

 

Cheers to all, and happy modeling in 2019!!

 

Edit a bit later: the Brown Stuff being long to get hard, I had to check that my window slot was preserved. In the same time, I wanted to determine precisely the width of this slot. I had not measured it itself with Bernard, but I could, using the rule of 3, say that it must be 1,6 mm at 1/16:

VkTRGh.jpg

 

9J0duj.jpg

 

I precise that for now, the 2 panels are not glued, only gathered by the pieces of Brown Stuff. Indeed, it will be easier to represent the different coats inside the slot (I will probably use the felt for the joints) by working on separate elements. Because the Brown Stuff adheres strongly to the polystyren, it is highly advisable to avoid leaving it get totally hard:

 

Kgu7gD.jpg

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...