Dyno Don Nicholson's 1967 Mercury Cyclone Eliminator II

[gtx6970]

23 hours ago, Snake45 said:

Are you going to do a Workbench thread on it as you work? If so, would you consider a "dual build" with me? It might be fun to watch two different modelers tackle the same subject at the same time in different ways. 

Snake,

thats gonna depend on just how soon your planning to start this .

Mine is at least 6 months away. If im lucky

 

 

PS, what or is there a difference in the Cougar frames from say one of the older Model king issues for the STP car , versus the current Dyno Don kit,,,besides decals ?????

 

Edited June 29, 2020 by gtx6970

[Snake45]

54 minutes ago, gtx6970 said:

Snake,

thats gonna depend on just how soon your planning to start this .

Mine is at least 6 months away. If im lucky

 

 

PS, what or is there a difference in the Cougar frames from say one of the older Model king issues for the STP car , versus the current Dyno Don kit,,,besides decals ?????

 

I wasn't planning on starting soon, but could if you were planning to. 

AFAIK, the plastic in all the recent reissues of the MPC Cougar FC is the same, only difference is the decals and maybe tires. Maybe Mark knows more. 

BTW, I haven't checked the wheelbase of the Cougar FC body vs the stock Cyclone body. Maybe I need to do that to see if it's even feasible. I do know that the real Eliminator II had a stock wheelbase of 116". 

[thatz4u]

On 6/28/2020 at 7:16 PM, Deuces ll said:

I would love to see this build!!!!.... ??

if all goes well hopefully by late Summer

[Mark]

Not positive as I haven't got the Round 2 Cougar, but I think they may have tooled a couple of new parts like fuel tanks.

I have a Model King Cougar set aside to drop a '66 body on...as I remember the wheelbase matched up pretty well between the two.

[Snake45]

On 6/29/2020 at 7:46 PM, Mark said:

Not positive as I haven't got the Round 2 Cougar, but I think they may have tooled a couple of new parts like fuel tanks.

I have a Model King Cougar set aside to drop a '66 body on...as I remember the wheelbase matched up pretty well between the two.

I just checked a Model King Cougar body against the "new" AMT '67 Cyclone. The Cyclone's wheelbase is definitely longer than the Cougar's. Maybe 3 scale inches max, but definitely not as much as the 5 inches it "should" be. We know that the real Eliminator I and II bodies were of stock dimension (116"), but I don't know if the Cougars were stretched. (Maybe a couple inches in the nose?) At any rate, since I'm planning to "un-alter" the wheelbase of the AWB Cyclone body, I can probably get away with fudging it a couple inches--it'll still look better than the WAY shortened wheelbase of the AWB body. 

It looks like the best way to proceed with my project will be to build the frame FIRST, and then set the Cyclone body up to match it. Remember, I'm doing one chassis for both cars, as Nicholson put a Cougar body on Eliminator II's chassis after his first Cougar was destroyed in a highway accident. (Others wanting to do Eliminator II might want to start with a different chassis.) 

Interesting trivia: I've been working on writing an article comparing the amazing similarities in the careers of Grumpy Jenkins, Dyno Don, Sox & Martin, and Dick Landy (all four were in on FX, went separate ways in 1966, but came back together at the birth of Pro Stock in 1970). Jenkins, S&M, and Nicholson all had very successful cars destroyed in highway accidents between 1966 and 1969. Landy didn't, but he DID break his leg in a motorbike accident 4th of July weekend, 1969. Interesting, no? 

Edited July 2, 2020 by Snake45

[Deuces ll]

I found another picture... Hope you guys don't mind...

[Snake45]

Don't mind at all, especially since this pic shows the blown engine, which means it's fairly late in its career. This is what I'll need to build If I also want to use the Cougar body on the same chassis. Thanks! 

[TooOld]

On 7/1/2020 at 10:29 PM, Snake45 said:

I just checked a Model King Cougar body against the "new" AMT '67 Cyclone. The Cyclone's wheelbase is definitely longer than the Cougar's. Maybe 3 scale inches max, but definitely not as much as the 5 inches it "should" be. We know that the real Eliminator I and II bodies were of stock dimension (116"), but I don't know if the Cougars were stretched. (Maybe a couple inches in the nose?) At any rate, since I'm planning to "un-alter" the wheelbase of the AWB Cyclone body, I can probably get away with fudging it a couple inches--it'll still look better than the WAY shortened wheelbase of the AWB body. 

It looks like the best way to proceed with my project will be to build the frame FIRST, and then set the Cyclone body up to match it. Remember, I'm doing one chassis for both cars, as Nicholson put a Cougar body on Eliminator II's chassis after his first Cougar was destroyed in a highway accident. (Others wanting to do Eliminator II might want to start with a different chassis.) 

Interesting trivia: I've been working on writing an article comparing the amazing similarities in the careers of Grumpy Jenkins, Dyno Don, Sox & Martin, and Dick Landy (all four were in on FX, went separate ways in 1966, but came back together at the birth of Pro Stock in 1970). Jenkins, S&M, and Nicholson all had very successful cars destroyed in highway accidents between 1966 and 1969. Landy didn't, but he DID break his leg in a motorbike accident 4th of July weekend, 1969. Interesting, no? 

Snake , don't  know if you remember my Eliminator II build from last year .  I used a stock Cyclone body on the MPC Cougar F/C chassis and merely moved the entire rear suspension/axle rearward to line up with the body .  Very easy and no mods were required . But the MPC chassis is a Stage I and I believe the Polar Lights is the correct Stage II chassis . 

Edited July 3, 2020 by TooOld

[Snake45]

2 hours ago, TooOld said:

Snake , don't  know if you remember my Eliminator II build from last year .  I used a stock Cyclone body on the MPC Cougar F/C chassis and merely moved the entire rear suspension/axle rearward to line up with the body .  Very easy and no mods were required . But the MPC chassis is a Stage I and I believe the Polar Lights is the correct Stage II chassis . 

Of course I remember your outstanding build! Have even referred to it several times in the last couple days. The problem is that your solution of moving the rear axle back to stretch the wheelbase won't work for me, as I want to ALSO use the Cougar body on the chassis. Maybe the Cougar wheelbase needs to be stretched--my next step is to research this and see if I can find out what the wheelbase of the (funnycar) Cougars was, or if DN had a special stretched Cougar body made to accomodate the E2 chassis, or what.......

[Snake45]

Just found a ref that said the wheelbase of the '67 STP Cougar funny--which became DN's first Cougar Eliminator, the one destroyed in the road wreck--was 117". The plot thickens....

[Mark]

I would suspect that the front wheel openings were moved forward on the Cougar body.

[gtx6970]

7 hours ago, TooOld said:

Snake , don't  know if you remember my Eliminator II build from last year .  I used a stock Cyclone body on the MPC Cougar F/C chassis and merely moved the entire rear suspension/axle rearward to line up with the body .  Very easy and no mods were required . But the MPC chassis is a Stage I and I believe the Polar Lights is the correct Stage II chassis . 

Thats nice and is EXACTLY what I want to build

 

I have most of a Cougar kit and a stock wheelbase AMT  Comet kit I will part out.

[Snake45]

4 hours ago, Mark said:

I would suspect that the front wheel openings were moved forward on the Cougar body.

Hmmmm, dunno. Found a couple fairly good profiles of the Rupp & Steffey car (which became the first Eliminator Cougar). What do you think? Looks to me like the rear wheel openings have been extended rearward a bit, but I'll have to compare these with good stock Cougar pics to tell what's going on.....

[Mark]

Or just compare with an AMT body.  I've got a couple of those, but after a half day at work, riding a bicycle 23 miles, then mowing the lawn and throwing the laundry into the washer, I'm sitting down with an ice cold hard lemonade...

[Deuces ll]

Cheers!..... ??

[Snake45]

30 minutes ago, Mark said:

Or just compare with an AMT body.  I've got a couple of those, but after a half day at work, riding a bicycle 23 miles, then mowing the lawn and throwing the laundry into the washer, I'm sitting down with an ice cold hard lemonade...

Well I have an AMT body, and the FC reissue body, but comparing them doesn't really tell us anything about if or where the REAL fiberglass Cougar FC body was altered. Lord only knows what liberties MPC took when designing and tooling it. 

[Mark]

I'd suspect the MPC body is at least somewhat accurate to the Rupp/Steffey car, since that was the first version issued.  The chassis was shared with other kits, but was issued in different lengths for each.  The MPC body has the front wheel openings in stock location and the rears stretched to the rear as you observed.  

What gets me is how close to stock the MPC body is.  If I didn't already have three '67-'68 Cougars, I'd be tempted to try converting one to stock just for giggles.

[Snake45]

13 minutes ago, Mark said:

What gets me is how close to stock the MPC body is.  If I didn't already have three '67-'68 Cougars, I'd be tempted to try converting one to stock just for giggles.

Yes, it's very close to stock except for the oversized (and possibly repositioned) rear wheel openings. I recently bought (in a junkyard lot) a glue bomb AMT '68 Cougar that's got great glass, interior, and even stock wheels but is missing the hood, grille, taillight panel, and front and rear valences. I'm watching ePay for parts but might end up sacrificing an MPC FC kit for the missing bits. I'm pretty sure they'll fit, or could be made to. 

How I miss Modelhaus! 

[Snake45]

Okay, looking at pics in the DD book, there are several where the front wheel openings look stock (although the wheels themselves seem to have been pushed forward an inch or two inside them), and others where the front wheel openings are clearly moved forward and the rear wheel openings don't seem to have been enlarged rearward, if at all. These would seem to be the first and second Cougars--very different. 

The MPC DD Cougar kit would then seem to be (mainly) of the first car. 

Doesn't bode well for my plan to put both bodies on that chassis, hmmmmmm. To really do it RIGHT, I'd have to obtain a Polar Lights chassis (assuming its wheelbase is somewhere in the 115-117" range) and then alter the MPC Cougar body. And then there's the fact that neither the kit nor the Slixx decals would be set up for the altered body. 

So much for a "quick and easy twofer" build. 

[TooOld]

6 hours ago, Snake45 said:

Well I have an AMT body, and the FC reissue body, but comparing them doesn't really tell us anything about if or where the REAL fiberglass Cougar FC body was altered. 

According to the text the body was stock except for the rear wheel wells .

[Lance Lawson]

The AMT Eliminator II is horribly inaccurate.  I'm using the body from the normal 67 Comet kit on the Funny Car chassis.  I'll later use the original body to make a Comet Cyclone Funny car that won't be the Eliminator II.  That way the short wheelbase won't be historically wrong.  Its a pity AMT botched the Eliminator kit so badly.

Edited May 10, 2022 by Lance Lawson