The seasons have changed. Here in my part of Australia, we seem to have only about three weeks of transitional weather between summer and winter. Year after year it happens like that. Summer stretches on into March, gradually it gets colder then – bam! No more nice days. I wrote a lighthearted poem about that.
Does the season need a reason
For to start you off a-sneezin’?
Or do seasons just go do as seasons do?
For if seasons don’t need reasons
Then why am I a-sneezin’?
“Nothin’ personal” says Autumn, “It’s not you.”
“But the times they are a-changin’
And the weather’s rearrangin’
It’ll keep on gettin’ colder now, mind you.
You’ll need to find a jumper
For there’s gonna be a dumper,
These clouds of mine have got an inch or two.”
So I went inside to shelter.
No longer would I swelter;
Put the shorts away, the summer T-shirts too.
Close the window, turn the heat up,
Watch the rain come down and beat up
All my earthworks in the garden, turned to goo.
Most of our garden here is native plants, so there are no drastic colour changes to be seen. But the fruit trees in the orchard are dropping their leaves, so there are some bare trees to provide a visual reminder of the season when I look out the window. We don’t usually get cold enough here for snow; it’s happened once in 25 years.
Less than a month ago I had the air conditioner going, today I need the heating. Then most days had been 30-35C, rather a cool summer for us; now the mornings are about 5 and we’re lucky to reach 15. Okay, that’s not winter as most of you guys know winter, I totally get that. But today rather than braving the (subjective, relative) cold outside, I thought we’d have more of a look around inside, where it all happens.
Here’s my main display area. I’ll cover the bench in detail another day. Thirty-odd cars and associated vehicles and machinery. Plus a few more off to the side. I’ll break this up in four parts, over several weeks. We’ll do the front row first, and we’ll follow a few side-tracks along the way. Digressions are always interesting around here. Variety, and all that.
The first car we come to is a Hudson:
You know I have a soft spot for Hudsons, especially the old Step-downs. I showed some of them in my Independents’ Day story. On display I have the ’52 convertible. I’ve also built three ’53 coupes. Here are two;
And a ’54 sedan;
Love Hudsons!
Next up is another recent Moebius kit, and another fine design, the 1955 Chrysler 300;
Only available in white, black or red for the initial year, but I thought a pale creamy-yellow would be a good but still tasteful addition to the range. The interior had to be tan, of course. There’s something conservative about this design; it conveys the idea of prestige without being gaudy. Except for the tail lights. There’s almost something of a European vibe about it; after all, Exner had been on quite a Euro kick in the early fifties. Maybe I ought to try building one of these with a Mercedes grille. And more conservative taillights.
And here’s another of my favourite Fifties designs, the 1957 Ford;
In this case it’s the del Rio Ranch Wagon, by Revell;
But you want something in a sedan? Sure, we can do that;
The one flaw that bugs me about the 1957 Ford, not just this kit, is those headlights; they always make me think of exophthalmic goiter. Or Graves’ Disease. Sorry, pathology background there; I won’t show a photo of an unfortunate person. It’s amazing what comes to mind sometimes. But that ‘bulging eye’ look also infected the Edsel. For this model I left the headlights alone; sometimes I ‘correct’ them. Well, improve them, to my taste, like on this AMT kit. Thin chrome rims look nicer, I think;
Think late fifties fins, and you come to Mopar. Naturally;
And again, I’ve built several of these ’58 Plymouths. No Christines though; I instinctively shy away from ‘(in)famous examples’, as everyone and his dog tends to build those. Different drummer, and all that. Sometimes way different. Alarmingly so.
A Pearlescent pink Plymouth? No? There’s a green one in the back;
Maybe orange is more your taste?
No? Maybe just a plain metallic blue then. And let’s jazz it up with wires;
I didn’t set out to create a display of fifties classic Americana; there are plenty of other designs that appeal to me. I just put these here as I built them, so these are all from the past five years or so.
Moving on to the 1960s, we have this white Ford. I usually tend to think of white as a primer colour, a blank canvas for conveying graphics, or as an accent colour. But a slightly creamy white paired with a strong green interior, it works;
I do like the ’60 Ford design, and have built numerous others. But this is already getting out of hand, so I’ll show them another time.
Although it doesn’t fit the era, we’ll finish up today with a 1966 Falcon. This one has a special meaning for me, as I learned to drive in Dad’s ’67. This was the car that spurred me to buy my own; my alter ego has told that story before. It’s an old AMT kit from 1966 that I bought as a built-up model and converted to Dad’s car.
Well, sort of. I left the grille alone, as we adopted this one for the Aussie ’68. I didn’t convert it to four doors, or alter the rear fenders (trivia: ours had the mid-body crease all the way to the tail) otherwise it would never have got done! I did upgrade Dad’s old ride to a 289 rather than that smooth 200 six. The kit came with a big block, ostensibly a 427, but an FE block in one of these was just too much, even for my imagination.
We’ll resume our tour next time with a wander through the back row. Back lots are always interesting, aren’t they? See you then!
The Stig just doesn’t know what to think of these ‘50’s Detroit sleds. “People raced these? On dirt tracks?”
Yeah, I sometimes wonder what he’d make of some of the stuff on my bench!
WOW! Such amazing precision with all the tiny details, it’s difficult to believe these are not real, full-size cars.
Glad to read your approval of ’60 Ford styling which stands apart from the ’59’s and the ’61’s (at least below the belt line). It was a brief foray into uncharted waters for Ford which I think caught the public a bit off guard. As a kid, I thought it looked clean and tastefully put together compared to the overall wildness going on at the time.
Thanks Stuart. The detail is in part because I am extremely short-sighted. I’ve always striven to make my models look as realistic as I can. Well, body-wise; I can’t do the fine wiring some guys add to their contest models – that is a skill I am in awe of. But then, some of those guys are in awe of what I do. There is always more to learn.
I’ve always loved the ’60; it’s just so clean and ‘right’ (sedan rooflines aside). A quick count shows I’ve built about six of these. Ford Australia kept producing ’59s, so we never got these here; that’s probably part of the fascination.
I love the ’60 Fords too, especially the way the fins flowed through into the rear parcel shelf. We got RHD 1960 Fairlanes in NZ, albeit rare, great looking versus the overwrought ’59s, such a shame Ford Australia didn’t import them too. The one below is for sale here at the moment, and even though the sedan roofline is an acquired taste, it’s still interesting and unique. PS, great assortment as always Peter!
Hey, thanks Scott! Yeah, they’re sort of like a Falcon blown up by 30% or so. That really shows in your photo, almost the same colours as Dad’s XL. As I understand it, Ford Australia had tooled up for the ’59 about the same time as the economy dived, so they had to keep producing it to get any sort of return on their investment. Also, they probably took one look at the dimensions of the ’60 and thought ‘No, that definitely won’t fly here’, especially when the ’59 was being pretty much ridiculed for its sheer vastness – Aussies didn’t call it the Tank Fairlane for nothing!
I’m also a modeler (1.72 aircraft), Occasionally various sites I’m on have “show us your workspace” sets and I’m so sick and tired of the pristine workbenches, like the bench is for show and the models are built elswhere.. Thank you for showing us a working man’s workstation.
Thanks, Kim! Many car sites have a weekly ‘WIP Wednesday’ standing for Works In Progress, and I too have to wonder that some guys can ever get anything done! Some have a separate workshop diorama to display what they’re building, which I guess you could do in 1/72 – though as I say that I’m trying to imagine how much space you would need to replicate an accurate aircraft repair facility. At least you can fix a car almost anywhere! One friend, who does amazing workshops, keeps challenging me to build a diorama. But equally I’ve had some guys wonder that I ever get anything done, or how I manage with so little apparent space!
OZ didnt have 57 Fords, we had em in NZ and the lights always looked odd, didnt affect sales though there were plenty of them on the roads, Nice collection of models.
Thanks Bryce. Yeah, I can understand why Ford Oz kept building ’56s for the next few years, and was always intrigued by NZ getting ‘the real thing’ for ’57 and ’58.
I’m not an enormous fan of 1950s American cars, but that Chrysler 300 is one of the exceptions. I think you hit the nail on the head with your explanation: conservative and classy, but not gaudy. That’s my recipe for a pleasing design regardless of the decade..
And the tail lights don’t even bother me much.
I agree with you on the bulging eye look, though I’ve resisted the temptation to Google exophthalmic goiters.
It’s great to have a look around your place as well. Here in the eastern US it’s been a sporadic spring – seems like on any given day the temperature could be anywhere from the 40s to the 80s. I think I’ve had my heat on later this spring than I’ve ever done before.
Thanks Eric. Yeah, Aussie tastes always used to be more conservative than Americans back in those days. That Chrysler styling would probably have gone down well here, except for the car’s size; the regular Plymouths, Plodges and Plysotos were already regarded as large cars, and it would have been prohibitively expensive for our market. We still tended to look toward Britain for our prestige cars back then.
I hear you about having the heat on later. We find the seasons are changing later than they used to, about a month out from when they ‘should’ change according to the calendar, but there’s still that sudden sharp cutoff rather than a gradual transition from summer through autumn to winter. Occasionally now we touch 20C/68F, but the 80 degree days you mention are long past for us. A fond memory…. Enjoy them!
Nice bunch of models! Are you allowed to have models in the main living area of the house? I’m not. I have models in my office area, in the garage, and even a couple in the toilet room of the master bath. But I am not permitted to have any models in the main communal areas of the house. And I’m OK with that.
I built that 58 Plymouth kit and like you, I resisted any urges to make a Christine even though the car looks really good in red. I did it light 50’s-style non-metallic turquoise and white. I’m only human, though, so I did do a 69 Charger in Dukes Of Hazard livery as well as a 67 Mustang fastback in Bullitt style.
I get the revulsion some have to the 57 Ford’s exophthalmos (nursing background, I understood and was entertained by your medical term immediately). For some reason, it has never bothered me, though the styling was clearly designed with dual headlights in mind as the 58 version had, though everything about the 58 besides the headlights looks worse. Plymouth had the same issues, but their 57 had a slightly more gracious headlight appearance. The otherwise minimally changed 58 looks better, though.
Jon, with my progressing disabilities I live mostly in a special part of the house that’s easy for me to negotiate, and can set up things pretty much as I like. Before this became a problem I could have a few models on display, in a dedicated showcase, along with a small table to work on. When the children were young I got used to keeping things out of their way. My son took an interest in what I was doing and applied it to trains; my daughter is more of an artist and musician rather than working in 3D. Nowadays it’s the grandchildren, but they’re used to not touching Dad’s HO train models, so they don’t touch mine. My grandson (9) will often want to see what I’m working on and want a closer look. I’m glad to oblige.
I’ve never taken much interest in movies or TV shows, hence the lack of desire to replicate movie or TV cars. I did once build an orange Charger, and a white VW, but left the identifying graphics off, leaving the design to speak for itself.
Yeah, I used to work in a pathology lab before I went into the ministry, and the stuff you see in some of those textbooks made me shudder – I feel sorry for the sufferers, even if they gave permission for their photos to be shown. Nearly fifty years ago, and it still stays with me. Over-sensitive? Maybe.
In the Ford’s case, it might have been different if I had grown up seeing them on the street; as I didn’t, and never even saw photos of them until my teen years, that aspect of the design came across as over-exaggerated, hence my analogy.
Thank you, Jon.
Peter, your home and garden are lovely. A modeller’s dream, and theme park. lol
Just amazing stuff! As always, I’m really impressed how all your models are so well presented. You don’t make flubs with colours, wheels, or detailing. Or else, you aren’t showing us those models. lol
Always a treat when you share your work. I really do enjoy coming back, and appreciating your thoughts and work. A humble guy too. So glad, you chose to take the leap, and show us all your talent and skills. Your latest examples are great. Really, is so nice to enjoy!
Thank you Daniel. I take a lot of comfort from being surrounded by so much (1/2 acre) greenery and space. And the birds; we have Rainbow Lorikeets in some of the taller gums. Hearing their angelic calls and seeing the sudden flash of colour never fails to give my heart a lift. And the Crested Pigeons which come down for some wheat when I’m feeding the chooks and ducks, giving a soft ‘coo’ when I throw some their way. Such pretty feathers, iridescent in the sun.
Nature. Colour. There’s a theme here.
As to not making flubs, here we could get all philosophical. Taste is subjective, no? And yet, I would like to think there are some things to which any rational person (and maybe many irrational?) would instinctively say no; yeah, even colour combinations. If that be so, then taste is not fully subjective – hmm…..! I’m not aware of making any major colour flubs – but then I wouldn’t be from inside my head, would I? 🙂 Okay, okay, I’ll back off! My thought processes are slowing down nowadays so I’m no good at the quick riposte; but given time, I get there.
But no, I’m not cherry-picking what I show. There will be faults. I just haven’t gotten around to even showing the half of it yet. And we’re almost a year in to this journey. That’s kinda frightening.
I have the same issues with the ’57 Ford’s eyes. Wasn’t exactly familiar with exophthalmos, but I referred to them as Graves eyes. And then there’s the ’69-up fuselage Chryslers microcephalic 2-door hardtops. We should come up with more medical diagnoses for other cars.
Love all the stepdown Hudsons, and the original 300. This is a big American car at its best. I am not a fan of where Exner took American cars in ’57.
Agreed, Paul. To my eyes, good design isn’t an ethnic thing but can be recognised as such anywhere.
I can see how a newly arrived Austrian kid would be smitten by those Hudsons, they were an act of genius. The first time I saw one in the metal was when a teenage friend got one going – after a brief ride I was left wondering how these cars weren’t better-known. I asked around and learnt the sad history.
The original 300; again, classic good design. I imagine it would have looked good in Europe too; impractically huge, but impressive. The right shape at the right time. I remember reading in a local magazine around 1960 referring to an American design as having ‘the thundercloud look of a goutish American business tycoon’ – stereotypical as hell, but you know what they were getting at. American design seemed to become increasingly naive during the fifties, becoming preoccupied with superficial flash and chromium adornment while relegating practicality and function to secondary consideration – and yes, the later Exner cars copped their share, though I quite liked the basic ‘dart’ shape.
The microcephalic Fuselage ’69 – that’s great descriptor. For the second-gen Seville, I nominate kyphosis….
(I replied earlier, but it got lost somewhere between my keyboard and the trash.)
‘Microcephalic ’69 Chrysler’ – somehow I can’t see them using that as an advertising tagline. More medical diagnoses, eh? Maybe kyphosis for the second-gen Seville? 😉 This might make an interesting QOTD, but maybe too obscure.
I can well imagine a car-mad Austrian kid being quite taken by his first sighting of a stepdown Hudson, or the 55 Chrysler. I was when I first saw my friend’s Hudson. So clean and purposeful. Intelligent design, with unexpected solutions, not last year’s car shotgunned with a superfluity of chrome in lieu of New.
I particularly enjoy seeing the Ford Wagon. My uncle had one, but not two-tone. I remember the rear side windows sliding, which stuck the 7 year old me as very odd. It was also the first car that I was in that had seat belts. I don’t know if they were a Ford option or if my uncle added them. He was an aeronautical engineer, so he would have been familiar with them. I really liked its being a station wagon. For some reason my dad never bought a wagon. He had some roof racks and seemed to enjoy the challenge of tying large things on the roof of the car.
Thanks MIke. Ford went onto a short-lived safety kick with the ’56s, so those belts in the ’57 may have been a factory option. As a kid I always thought wagons were cool too, but Dad always valued lockable invisible storage for his sample. For holidays he’d spend ages packing the trunk ‘just right’, and any overflow would be around my feet in the back.
I really like how you bring these cars to life .
-Nate
Thanks Nate. I’m always giving it my best shot, and always learning. Gotta keep the mind and fingers active.
These are simply beautiful. What talent and patience.
I did a few dime store models way back when I was younger (there were still discussions about whether or not cars would ever be a thing, old) and truly had fun.
I distinctly recall doing a 1965 Thunderbird which I ended up buying a real one.
Thank you for sharing these
Thanks, Chip.
It has been a lifelong obsession. From the earliest days I wanted to make them as realistic as possible – put the right colour in the right place. It was a small step from there to ‘that doesn”t look right, let’s check’. Nowadays with the internet checking is much quicker (and cheaper), but finding the truth often isn’t. Somehow I seem to have a lot more patience with plastic than I do with people. If I strike a problem I can put the model aside for a while; people tend to get upset if you go to do that with them! 🙂
Just excellent, excellent work. I love the 300, an understated design that really excels.
that 1960 Ford looks to have been a difficult car to build, in real life let alone as a model. All those crevices and special corners.
I enjoy and admire your work.
Thanks Lee.
The 300 – what can I say that hasn’t been said? Just yesterday I looked at the ’56 kit in my stash; a marvellous updating of the ’55 shape, though I can’t help thinking that anywhere else in the world that ’55 shape would have been good for a few years yet.
What I remember most about that ’60 Ford was how well engineered the kit was. So often things just don’t fit together properly, or you find something that’s wrongly proportioned or just doesn’t look right somehow but you can’t put your finger on it. Not here. The one tricky part was doing the chrome on the horizontal fins over the taillights. It must have been a real nuisance doing the tooling for that section. But the parts breakdown made assembly easy.
Love the poem (made me want to take an antihistamine), the garden picture, and this new assortment of scale models. About the ’58 Plymouths and your avoidance of famous / infamous models, I get it. I’m usually more interested in models that don’t necessarily have a backstory that’s easily recognizable.
Too hard to pick a favorite from this batch. I was going to go with the ’55 Chrysler 300, and then the Plymouths appeared as I scrolled…
But wait, there’s more….. 🙂
Glad you liked the poem. Just a fun bit of light relief. The local paper picked up the poem and ran it a few weeks back, after a friend submitted it. They do that now and then. The small-town writing group I’m in has published anthologies of our work every few years (pic); we’re overdue for another one. This year, maybe.
When I look at a model, I look for difference, for originality, for evidence of creative thought. And yes, possibly for inspiration. I would never copy another person’s build, but I look for ideas or techniques I haven’t used, always with the aim of increasing reality. It’s comparatively easy to follow the painting guide in the instructions and build a replica of ‘car X’, but my eyes will instinctively move on, looking for something I have not seen, something new. Even if it’s rough compared to the ‘car X’ next to it. Looking for the new – basic human nature?
Thanks Joseph.
Great models and beautiful garden, now that looks like a nice place to be in the winter sun, has the vibe of the John Williamson song, Cootamundra Wattle.
Years ago I sold off my collection of diecasts, I tend to have a critical eye and always used to notice wrong details and proportions.
Except this Ertl 58 Belvedere, it was only a cheap model but it is amazingly correct to look at, it even creaks and groans when you pick it up, much like the real version probably did when driven !
The 300 is gorgeous, the creamy color really suits it.
I have to ask about the ancient locomotive in the third pic, is it a plastic kit ?
Thanks Jonco. Love that song, especially with this afternoon’s sun shining on the flowers. We have a few smaller wattles scattered around the place, wrong time of year for them to be showing off of course.
You’d have noticed the Big Flaw on AMT’s ’58 Plymouth then. For everyone else, it’s the arched contour of the side trim, compared to the ruler-straight trim on Jonco’s diecast.
That loco is indeed a plastic kit, from Airfix’s Museum series of quite a few years back. It’s the Trevithick Penydarren of 1804, in 1/32 scale. This was the 2012 release, but it’s been around a few times, and dates back to 1968.
Another interesting and impressive selection, Peter. Looking forward to more. I agree the 300 is well proportioned without being over decorated, but after that things went a bit wild. Then again car styling still goes through cycles like that.
Like your garden too. I’d love to get mine more colourful like ours used to be back in the 1970s, but for now it’s mostly grass with a few salvaged flowers:
Thanks Bernard. Plenty more coming up.