Ace-Garageguy

Yup.

Both are the "C6" version of the Corvette. The C6 was built from 2005-2013, so any of those years will provide correct donor mechanical guts. Air cleaners, some engine details, and interior bits MAY differ between specific years and trim packages, but they're ALL basically the same car...including the Z06, ZR1, and Grand Sport. PS. Some kits may have a manual gearbox, others may have an automatic. If that makes a difference, I don't know which one you'll want.

Michelle Dockery

Yeah, I'm older than dirt. I remember nickel candy bars, dime pay phones, "gas wars" with fuel as low as 15-cents-per-gallon, kids could make change from a dollar, and only sailors had tattoos. Cars had points, most people weren't hugely fat, they got dressed up to travel on trains and airplanes, steam engines were still in wide service, and there was a genuine but quiet sense of pride in being an American.

If you want a model of something representing anything in reality, it's a complete waste of time...unless you want to do a LOT of work scratch-building. The only worthwhile parts for kitbashing something that might actually exist are the body shell, engine, and wheels / tires, plus a few other bits. The chassis is a joke of a thing designed by somebody who knew nothing about cars. As a parts source, it's worth something. As a model to build as is...nah.

Many folks DO exhibit the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's real, and rampant. But I have NEVER singled out a specific member to tag with the label...and that's the point. I have corrected people who have posted factual errors, and I have made remarks that posting incorrect information is damaging (and people have occasionally corrected ME when I've made a factual error...which I appreciate and to whom I have always responded graciously...because I value objective truth over maintaining my ego). I DO NOT INITIATE THE NAME-CALLING, PSYCHOLOGICAL SLURS, ATTACKS ON QUALIFICATIONS, OR ACCUSE MEMBERS OF DELIBERATELY LYING...all of which have been done to me.

I am responsible for what I say. I am NOT responsible for how it makes you feel. If stating the facts of my background and experience to lend credence to the advice I offer is taken by any member as "degrading to others" it is a measure of THEIR insecurity, not any overt action on MY part. I have NEVER deliberately initiated a personal attack on another forum member, or engaged in the name calling and insults I've been subjected to. Yes, I have retaliated occasionally WHEN I'VE BEEN ATTACKED FIRST...and who STARTS the exchange is to blame, just like in any fight. Hit me, I'll damm well hit you back.

Not a bad resume, apparently reflecting a successful career. And though we went in completely different directions with our engineering talent and education, I feel no need to denigrate your achievements. Still though, you persist in attacking mine, calling me a liar, and making insulting remarks regarding my personality. Are you a clinical psychologist besides everything else? And what do you think gives you the right to insult me on a public forum in outright violation of the rules? Because you suck up to a moderator who himself violated the forum rules in his conduct towards me, you believe you can make derogatory remarks about me personally, simply because you disagree with my stated opinion that a vehicle that requires a $20,000 oil change is a joke, and anyone who pays it is a fool? I'm reporting your post as a deliberate inflammatory and abusive attack on me, personally.

You just gotta love this guy...also violating the rules against personal attacks while sucking up to a moderator. Impressive behavior for an adult man. And yeah, my remark also violates the rules. So ban me. I'm sick of the double-standard for behavior in evidence here.

I've bought from the guy, eons ago. I got a bunch of only slightly mangled C1 Corvettes for a decent price, and since they were only going to be hacked into race-cars anyway, no problemo. There has been speculation on this site for several years as to what the story is regarding his seemingly endless supply of models built to this standard, but I doubt anyone has ever asked the man hisself.

Yes. Absolutely. And it's one of the reasons that some automotive primers are now too "hot" for model use, at least when they're used as before on the more solvent-resistant styrene grades.

Oh my yes...

Personal attacks against forum members are not allowed. If I had posted the remarks you did, highlighted in red, I'd be chastised and told that my remarks, at the very least, bordered on "abusive". But I guess when you're a moderator, the rules of conduct don't apply. There's a syndrome that encompasses that type of behavior, most definitely. But maybe we should let Gregg decide. I don't really care if I'm banned at this point. I've offered hundreds, maybe thousands, of helpful bits of fact-derived advice here, on real cars as well as models, BASED ON THE VALIDITY OF MY OWN EXPERIENCE. Denigrate it all you want if it makes you feel better. I stand by my statements. Anyone who designs and builds a bridge that collapses before it's even finished is an idiot. And anyone who designs a car that costs $20 THOUSAND for an oil change is an idiot as well. There are many MANY things in the world that I think are just dandy. But these two instances are NOT among them. And putting other people down by patting myself on the back? Get a grip. Your straw-man arguments lead nowhere. It's YOU who started attacking my professional qualifications to be allowed to voice an "expert" opinion regarding sound engineering practice. I simply countered your assertions with some of my background and experience. And ANYTHING I post regarding my accomplishments is simply to establish the value of my information, contrary to the legions of the inexperienced and uninformed on the internet who voice and endlessly repeat useless opinions unfounded in fact. When you're in a position to hire me to design or build something for YOU, I'll consider sending you a complete resume. In the interim, here's one of my clean-sheet-of-paper designs done under my own name: https://contest.techbriefs.com/2010/entries/transportation/871

I don't fault anyone for BUYING a multi-million dollar vehicle. More power to 'em. It's people like that who support an industry that comes up with some incredibly beautiful machinery. The ONLY gripe I have is poor serviceability. I see it EVERY DAY on grocery-getters and mommy-vans, but I'd like to think the guys who design the top-of-the-line stuff were a little better. Extremely high performance and decent access to regular service items ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE GOALS.

Thing is, I'm hardly a "weekend warrior", and I resent the implication. I AM an engineer, fabricator, machinist, and designer. I've been deeply involved hands-on in extremely high performance vehicle design (including aircraft), repair, modification, and restoration for my entire professional life...almost 50 years. I AM in a position to criticize stupid design. And the issue isn't whether an "owner" can do the oil change. Designing something that takes trained professionals apparently MANY hours to change the oil on is ludicrous. I also seriously doubt this overpriced monument to insecurity and the need to show off could do 24 hours flat-out, like the cars I referenced above could.

Maybe the Bugatti "engineers" should have had a look at the way Porsche (and others) managed it in 1969-'71. Designed to be quickly serviceable, too (and could withstand brutal flat-out racing for 24 hours straight). (Of course, the 917 was only good for 240 )

I can certainly understand that...

In 1987, Andres Serrano put a plastic crucifix in a jar of urine, photographed it, and for the effort was a winner in the Southeast Center for Contemporary Art's "Awards in the Visual Arts" competition (sponsored in part by the U.S. government in the guise of The National Endowment for the Arts). The guy who is offering the OP mess for sale has often included bug parts, spider webs and rodent feces (from storage) as no-cost extras. Sounds like "art" to me.

Yeas, Barbara Eden. Definitely in the top ten.

Which is a testament to the stupidity of anyone who'd pay that... How does anyone that far removed from rationality make enough money to afford the car in the first place, let alone the oil-change?

Spectacular. I've always liked the old Z-car, and love the Ford and Chevy Z hybrids. This is really great.

Did any of you actually read WHY it costs so much to change the oil on the thing? The excuse is that it has a dry-sump oiling system, and you have to remove all kinds of stuff to get to the drain plugs. MORONIC DESIGN. Pure and simple. My Porsche 911 has a dry-sump system, as do many of the race cars I've built and crewed on over the years. You remove TWO plugs...TWO...one from the sump, one from the tank...and they're BOTH ACCESSIBLE without taking the cars apart. The $20k oil-change looks like another case of clean-hands "engineer" dwerbs who rarely seem to realize MACHINES NEED TO BE WORKED ON OCCASIONALLY. AND...the oft-repeated comment from the peanut gallery that goes something like "controlling development and production costs needs to be paramount over any other criteria, in order to bring the product to market at a competitive price" or some such drivel make NO sense in THIS particular instance. A few extra hours spent by the design staff THINKING THROUGH how you'd change the oil would have impacted the price of this vehicle by exactly 0.000%. By the way...real Bugattis (from the original company), and I've had my hands on a few, are indeed different from most of the vehicles manufactured at the same time in history (and demand rather more expertise and finesse to work on). But I don't recall anything that was just plain stupid about any of them.

Any of you real-car guys old enough to remember warming synthetic enamel just before shooting it?

Usually If I buy online, I'll buy several to save on shipping. Good rationalization for buying more than I need, right?