Ace-Garageguy

Wow and then some. Wow. Wow.

Great looking purposeful Cobra. No silly bee-ess, just clean go-fast. I like it.

Another beautiful bug build. The camber on the rear is a nice touch.....exactly how these look when lowered hard on stock swing-axles. I'd also like to know how you did the folding roof insert. I've got a Ford rat I'm wanting to do something similar on, and yours is perfect.

Absolutely beautiful job on this completely obsolete kit, by far the nicest build of this I've ever seen. I notice the spun alloy moon discs, the rear knockoffs, better taillights I think, a filled grille insert (instead of the ribbed kit part) , tubing headers ( the right number too, 3 instead of 4 per side) and carb stacks, a push bar and it looks like a rolled rear pan. Plus of course plug wires and much better rad hoses coming out the center of the heads. What am I missing? Beautiful job on filling the body seams too, the paint, and on making the hard-plastic two piece-tires look tread-worn. This shows conclusively that a careful builder with an eye for detail can make an outstandingly attractive model from the simplest of kits. Great work. PS....nice job on the taped headlights too, instead of the kit decals.

Wow, that's really cool. Certainly one-of-a-kind. A freight train indeed. Great imagination and build.

Exactly. And weather control too, so you can drive around with your engine hanging out in the breeze. Bubble tops, pedestrian spears on the front fenders....sounds pretty good to me.

More good info, Rob and Bob.. I personally prefer the square eyed cars. The AMT kit has both versions, by the way. Interesting aside is that a lot of guys seem to think the 289 engine was a Ford, because of the similar displacement. It was in fact all Studebaker, though the auto-trans was Borg Warner and had a lot in common with the Ford O Matic, other than the shift sequence. I'm pretty sure the factory top-line supercharged cars were referred to as R-3, and they didn't make many. The car was built on a modified Lark convertible chassis (X-braced to add rigidity to the 'glass body), which was itself a modified (shortened) '53 design, so the underpinnings were a little dated. The Bendix disc brakes were a first for American production cars, but several European makes had had discs for a while. Another interesting thing here is that if you want to do a full-detail Lark from the old Johan kit, the AMT Avanti chassis makes a good donor. Man, this has me wanting to add a couple of Studebakers to my to-do list,

This thing really has some sweet lines. It takes some talent to integrate all these design elements and have it actually work, and you're doing a fine job. Looking forward to seeing it slicked out. This is definitely something that would be worth building in 1:1.

This thing looks great, whatever version you finally go with. I really really like them all. What were the wheels / tires on the original version from?

Yup, Georgia clay. Where'd you source the WWII military tires? Maybe a 1/35 6X6? Great truck. Love your impressionist cammo.

You know, that was the world I always thought I'd grow up to. Must have taken the wrong alternate-reality turning somewhere along the line. How to get back.........

A Mommyrari......mommyvan + Ferrari? Very interesting. Or maybe Carrrari? Ferraravan? Super nice work, whatever you decide to call it.

Absolutely beautiful work. Thanks for the update.

Wow, you're a brave man. I've never seen anything ilke that, all opened up. Fascinating.

Great job on the engine mounts, crossmember and driveshaft hoop. love the twin-blown Hemi in this too.

.....Here's a very fine entry by Marcus Jones, with an exceptional scratchbuilt frame, and it also appears to have won nothing. He may be too humble to post it here himself, so I'll do it for him. This model is certainly worth looking at for any of you who haven't seen it before. The lack of recognition of this build is another reason why I'm interested in the EXACT interpretation of the rules concerning 50% content in the unlimited class, and what the judging criteria were. Personally, I would have to give this one top marks. http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=58199

All I can say is ....wow. I'm really impressed to see someone actually debating the relative morality of a small issue like this. I certainly wish it would happen more often. So many times, people tend to sweep a small windfall under the rug (like getting an extra $10 in change at the store and not saying anything about it), in the hopes no one will notice. How nice to see someone who actually wants to do the right thing. Bravo.

Another couple of pennies worth from me regarding Scale-Master's remarks above...... I've only recently got to the point in modeling where I have the skills necessary to finish some of the more ambitious projects I've started over the last few years I've been back in the hobby. I tend to push my limits and got in a little over my head on several, but now that I've stayed with it and finally finished one (with many flaws I see but no one else seems to mind), it's a lot easier for me to dive back into the ones that have been tucked away waiting for my skills to develop sufficiently. I'm not talking about perfection, but I DO have a clear limit as to the level-of-quality and workmanship I can be satisfied with, and if I know I can't achieve it, I'll stop the build until I can.

No problem, man. Sometimes I need a boot in the backside. It's boxed, addressed and will be winging its way to you tomorrow AM.

Geez, I guess I'd better get that engine on the way quick-like, eh? I'm going to box it right now............

Well, since this is now labelled the "official" Revell / Gearz thread, I'll post my own entry one more time. I know, I'm a jerk, but I'd really like to see the judging sheets. I'm wondering if my entry was received (again no confirmation email), and if so, if it was disqualified for some reason, maybe the 50% rule. I'd sure like to know how to do better next time. While we're at it, I frankly think the 50% parts rule in the "unlimited" class was vague and open to several interpretations (50% of the parts in the box had to be used? 50% of the parts on the model had to come FROM the box? 50% by weight? 50% by counting individual parts on the completed model?). Anyway, I sincerely congratulate the builders of the cars that had what it took to win and place. 4" scale top-chop, flush-fitted windshield. Chevelle kit-chassis center-section with Corvette C5R ends, rails and suspension. Chevell kit engine, modified with front mounted blower and magneto. Scratch-built hood gills, upper roll cage, through-frame exhausts. Chevelle kit optional wheels with turned alloy rims to fit the C5R tires. Opened deckild. Through-deck vintage Indy-car fuel filler. Full custom rear panel with Corvette C5 taillights. Filled, narrowed and painted front bumper. Chevelle kit instrument panel, modified to fit cage. Testors Flaming Orange and 3 coats of clear lacquer. Lots more, and nowhere to list any of it on the entry form. PS. I'm really glad this contest came up. I hadn't finished a build in years, caught up in that "perfectionist" trap. The competition gave me something to shoot for, time-wise. Finishing one and having it to look at on the shelf plus the resulting inspiration to finish some more....well, it's a lot more important to me than winning anyway. One of the better quotes from racing: "you can't win if you don't finish". Yup.

The Avanti body tooling (it was fiberglass) and design rights went through several hands, and the car was produced by several companies after Studebaker's demise. Some versions were equipped with small-block Chevy engines. The last incarnation of the Avanti II was being produced in very limited numbers not far from my home in Georgia as late as 2007. The company went under, and I haven't followed developments since. Raymond Loewy, a very sucessful and well known industrial designer (he did much beautiful work, from steam locomotives to pencil sharpeners) is widely credited with the design of the Avanti, as well as the other groundbreaking Studebaker, the 1953-4 Starlight / Starliner. There have been several slippery Avantis built for Bonneville, which makes an interesting basis for a model. There were also some Stude-built supercharged cars. The AMT kit has opening doors, and some elements of the interior are somewhat under-scaled.

Absolutely perfect weathering. Looks like all my 1:1s now.

Great looking build. There's a lot about this model that really appeals to me. Sure wish they still ran cars like this every weekend.

I just looked at my Monogram '56 'Bird chassis, and the only part of the exhaust system molded in on miy issues is the mufflers and a section of pipes inside the chassis X-member. It would be relatively easy and straightforward to remove only this section of floor and replace it with sheet styrene. If you happen to have a Monogram Predicta kit lying around, it also has an appropriate chassis (based on a '57 'Bird), and the molded-in exhausts are outboard of the frame rails so it MIGHT be easier to modify, but I'd go with the original chassis. While the Mustang chassis might fit sort-of, it is for a unibody car, and the 'Bird is body-on-frame. If you care at all about engineering accuracy, it would be a tremendous amount of work in 1:1 to mate the 'Bird to a Mustang. Still, it is possible and might make for a very interesting updated concept.