Gunze Cobra Daytona Actually 1/25 scale?

[afx]

Could be a wives tale or rumor but wasn't the chassis based off the 289 Cobras? There is a guy that built his own from measurement I think of one and used a Cobra chassis as it's foundation. Modified of course. It looked fantastic all in raw aluminum!

Paul

 

Yes the Coupes were built on modified 289 chassis.

http://www.carbuildindex.com/21398/1964-shelby-cobra-daytona-coupe-csx2287-makes-history-last-week/

Edited April 13, 2017 by afx

[afx]

I think it is Pete's fault.

 

Call Pete up Rex and get him to send you the original drawing so we can sort this out!

[vamach1]

Call Pete up Rex and get him to send you the original drawing so we can sort this out!

that may not be that far fetched.  My neighbor Charlie probably has his contact info.

Call Pete up Rex and get him to send you the original drawing so we can sort this out!

[Ace-Garageguy]

Call Pete up Rex and get him to send you the original drawing so we can sort this out!

The Superformance replica is supposedly very accurate (their GT40 clone is the best one out there, if I recall correctly). I've dealt with their engineering department in years past, and they were very helpful back then.

http://www.superformance.com/coupe.aspx

[afx]

Yeah, I know, but just wondering if they're related since they're both Japanese. 

The Sunny is a modified AMT kit.  No relation to the Gunze.

Sunny:

Gunze:

[Bill J]

In the thread about Bob Peeple's Cobra models, I mentioned a notebook that Bob put together. Bob had access for a few weeks to a Daytona Coupe and had access to various Cobras at various times. He took detailed photos, measured every aspect of the cars and compiled very detailed notes. You might ask Danno what was done with that notebook. Last I heard it was going to the GSL Museum along with the work in progress models and was supposed to represent the level of detailed reference compiled to make the detailed models. If that notebook is lost it would be a real shame and a serious loss to the model community.http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/122365-bob-peeples-cobras-at-gsl/

It would solve all of these questions and provide details of parts of the Cobras few people are aware of. The Daytona coupe was disassembled and being restored when all material was gathered. The notebook, if available, should be made into a pdf file and available to other modelers.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Bill J

[Brett Barrow]

Compare these two models. If they're both supposed to be in the same scale, somebody sure as hell made an "error" (length) and if they're NOT supposed to be in the same scale, there's STILL a significant "error" somewhere (width wouldn't be the same in 1/25 and 1/24).

 

According to JC's numbers, Scale Motorsport is both too narrow and too long for 24th while Gunze is within a mm both ways for 25th.    But Scale Motorsport was supposedly made with first-hand access to a real-deal coupe so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ .  Maybe they're right and the published numbers are wrong.  But I think it's safe to say Gunze is really 25th.  

[afx]

[vamach1]

I should take Pete up on his offer from his when he signed his book. As best I can tell he promised to help me if I was going to build a Daytona coupe.  I had built the 427 Supercoupe and he also signed it.  $100 was a lot for a book in 1996 but it is worth ten times that now.

[vamach1]

Gunze Sanyo and Mini Exotics.

[alan barton]

While I agree wholeheartedly with Bill's comments about "measurements is measurements" and the normal process of measure twice, cut once and then check just to be sure should guarantee accuracy, I would like to relate a story told to me by a fellow model club member here in Perth over twenty years ago.

Work commitments took him to Japan and he seized the opportunity to wrangle a tour of the Tamiya plant while he was there. After going through the plant his guide took him to a museum and gift shop area.  In one of the display cabinets were two large wooden masters for the Ferrari Testa Rossa kit, probably around 1/10th scale.  One of them looked absolutely magnificent, perfect in every detail, while the other was a bit funky and clunky.  Arthur commented that the wonky one must have been their first effort but it wasn't accurate enough.  The guide explained that the disproportionate master was, in fact, the dimensionally perfect one!  After they had created the first master, a draft if you like, they employed an artist to "fix it" and make it look right.  Apparently the human eye doesn't scale curves and angles too well and we usually look at a model from a considerably different angle to the real thing.  The master that was carved to perfectly match the photos and dimensions just looked odd.  Arthur also said that he saw a display of the reference photos they took and they were taken at about one inch intervals all the way around the full size car. They used the scale measurements to get the basic block and then used the photos to make sure it looked real.

Considering that Tamiya is a bit of a bench mark for accuracy I always found that a particularly interesting story.

Cheers

Alan

[afx]

Here is the Revellogram 427 comparison:

Gunze:

SMS:

[afx]

Not sure where you guys are but I am convinced the Gunze kit is 1:25 scale.

[Art Anderson]

Compare these two models. If they're both supposed to be in the same scale, somebody sure as hell made an "error" (length) and if they're NOT supposed to be in the same scale, there's STILL a significant "error" somewhere (width wouldn't be the same in 1/25 and 1/24).

Also consider, that probably none of the injection molded kits came from referencing an ACTUAL car, but more than likely photographs.  Having done a few models from both methods, and even developed several dozen diecast models from both, it can and often will happen.  And even with all the information that can be gotten from measuring and photographing the real car, in the end--so much depends on the person(s) who have to translate that information to 3-dimensions, in scale.  It's a far cry from say, using CAD files obtained directly from the automaker or race car shop.

Art

[vamach1]

I would say this is pretty official with the HVA seal.

[Ace-Garageguy]

While I agree wholeheartedly with Bill's comments about "measurements is measurements" and the normal process of measure twice, cut once and then check just to be sure should guarantee accuracy, I would like to relate a story told to me by a fellow model club member here in Perth over twenty years ago.

Work commitments took him to Japan and he seized the opportunity to wrangle a tour of the Tamiya plant while he was there. After going through the plant his guide took him to a museum and gift shop area.  In one of the display cabinets were two large wooden masters for the Ferrari Testa Rossa kit, probably around 1/10th scale.  One of them looked absolutely magnificent, perfect in every detail, while the other was a bit funky and clunky.  Arthur commented that the wonky one must have been their first effort but it wasn't accurate enough.  The guide explained that the disproportionate master was, in fact, the dimensionally perfect one!  After they had created the first master, a draft if you like, they employed an artist to "fix it" and make it look right.  Apparently the human eye doesn't scale curves and angles too well and we usually look at a model from a considerably different angle to the real thing.  The master that was carved to perfectly match the photos and dimensions just looked odd.  Arthur also said that he saw a display of the reference photos they took and they were taken at about one inch intervals all the way around the full size car. They used the scale measurements to get the basic block and then used the photos to make sure it looked real.

Considering that Tamiya is a bit of a bench mark for accuracy I always found that a particularly interesting story.

Cheers

Alan

Though it's a good story, I believe it's simply more apocryphal misinformation in support of the widely-repeated belief (a belief I personally find to be absolutely without foundation, and I'm one critical SOB when it comes to getting things looking right...which I'm still being paid to do professionally) that correct scale models don't look right.

I have been doing this kind of work, off and on, for over 40 years; all I can tell you is that I have personally designed cars in scales from 1/25 up to 1/10 and 1/8, and when the dimensions were blown up to full scale, the real product looked exactly like the little one in every curve and nuance. It works both ways.

Consider this little logic problem that would seem to refute the "scaling down requires 'artistic' interpretation to look right" and explain it to me in terms that anyone can understand. You photograph a real car with a non-distorting lens. You make a print of that photograph that's roughly 1/25 the size of the real car. The photographic print, in 1/25 scale, looks exactly like the real car. Curves and angles and perspective don't somehow magically change just because they're smaller.

I will go so far as to say this...when there are no good dimensions available, and scaling becomes a subjective rather than an objective exercise, a lot of "interpretation" can creep in and ruin the appearance of a model, or even of a full-scale "tribute" build. It happens frequently in the real world, but most people don't notice it, because they aren't cursed (or gifted, depending on your point of view) with hyper-critical SOB micrometer eyes that immediately register proportional mistakes and anomalies.

But in my own professional experience, the numbers don't lie, and a correctly-scaled model done from good full-scale dimensions looks correct when viewed from the same angles as one would view the real object. 

 

Edited April 14, 2017 by Ace-Garageguy

[mr68gts]

All the notes I believe went with the Cobras so if it was part of his cobra notes then Mark has it. I concure that it should be scanned in. Or at the very least someone take pics of each page! 

Paul

In the thread about Bob Peeple's Cobra models, I mentioned a notebook that Bob put together. Bob had access for a few weeks to a Daytona Coupe and had access to various Cobras at various times. He took detailed photos, measured every aspect of the cars and compiled very detailed notes. You might ask Danno what was done with that notebook. Last I heard it was going to the GSL Museum along with the work in progress models and was supposed to represent the level of detailed reference compiled to make the detailed models. If that notebook is lost it would be a real shame and a serious loss to the model community.http://www.modelcarsmag.com/forums/topic/122365-bob-peeples-cobras-at-gsl/

It would solve all of these questions and provide details of parts of the Cobras few people are aware of. The Daytona coupe was disassembled and being restored when all material was gathered. The notebook, if available, should be made into a pdf file and available to other modelers.

[Art Anderson]

Though it's a good story, I believe it's simply more apocryphal misinformation in support of the widely-repeated belief (a belief I personally find to be absolutely without foundation, and I'm one critical SOB when it comes to getting things looking right...which I'm still being paid to do professionally) that correct scale models don't look right.

I have been doing this kind of work, off and on, for over 40 years; all I can tell you is that I have personally designed cars in scales from 1/25 up to 1/10 and 1/8, and when the dimensions were blown up to full scale, the real product looked exactly like the little one in every curve and nuance. It works both ways.

Consider this little logic problem that would seem to refute the "scaling down requires 'artistic' interpretation to look right" and explain it to me in terms that anyone can understand. You photograph a real car with a non-distorting lens. You make a print of that photograph that's roughly 1/25 the size of the real car. The photographic print, in 1/25 scale, looks exactly like the real car. Curves and angles and perspective don't somehow magically change just because they're smaller.

I will go so far as to say this...when there are no good dimensions available, and scaling becomes a subjective rather than an objective exercise, a lot of "interpretation" can creep in and ruin the appearance of a model, or even of a full-scale "tribute" build. It happens frequently in the real world, but most people don't notice it, because they aren't cursed (or gifted, depending on your point of view) with hyper-critical SOB micrometer eyes that immediately register proportional mistakes and anomalies.

But in my own professional experience, the numbers don't lie, and a correctly-scaled model done from good full-scale dimensions looks correct when viewed from the same angles as one would view the real object. 

 

Of course, this can be done from photographs, even correct scaling can be done from a photograph,  as long as there is a feature (such as a wheel and tire) clearly visible in a side view--all that takes is a bit of math.  However, when a model company that's really into their stuff goes at it--they might take 500 or so photos of the real thing, at all angles,  closeups of details, even such a simple thing as photographing the EDGE of an opened door to get a feel for the curvature (tumblehome) of a lower body side.  Along with this, dozens of photo's with an ordinary carpenter's rule placed so that the dimension can clearly be seen (I black out every other inch on my carpenter's rules for just exactly this!).

In addition, one can never have too much dimensional information, such as wheelbase (duh!), overall length and overall width (over the ends of those wraparound bumpers please!), stuff like that.

With the Cobra Daytona GT's however, getting access to one, back in the day when they were raced, and even today given their scarcity and museum exhibit status, it's even harder to get such access.  That's where "interpolation" begins, and those little discrepancies sneak in--some fairly obvious ones as well.

Art

[afx]

I would say this is pretty official with the HVA seal.

Using these dimensions we come up with:

 

	wheel base	width	length
289	2286	1550	3848
427	2286	1676	3962
Coupe	2286	1676	4206
1:25
289	91	62	154
427	91	67	158
Coupe	91	67	168
Gunze	90	70	167

[afx]

That confirms my gut feeling that the Gunze kit is a bit too wide (approx. 3 scale inches) but is otherwise accurate for 1:25 scale.

[afx]

Okay one last comparison, Gramps46 was kind enough to send me a Lindberg Daytona Coupe which is marked 1/24 scale.  Just more confirmation that the Gunze kit is 1/25 scale.

Edited June 5, 2017 by afx

[Greg Myers]

Little bit of interest here, seems like a styrene kit would be in order.

[waynehulsey]

Wonder what ever happened to that Lindberg tooling. Got a couple of them. Real simple, but beats nothing. Same for the K&B slot car body. Have one and according to Bob Peeples was one of the more accurate renditions. We'd talked about casting it, then his health started getting worse, and I was dealing with a lot of personal stuff, and ...... Like so many grand ideas.

[Greg Myers]

I have a K&B body new in box.

[socal76]

Well with all the discusions, references, opinions and people willing to have bodies possibly cast, why not find a reputable caster, have them do it and then just have fun building the thing instead of worrying about the scale. We all know it is not 100% accurate but just have fun building it. If you want to take the building to the extreme level make sure you post a WIP of it. Heck I am still waiting for Revell to make a CAD file to do all of their engines instead of having different sizes for the same engine. Compare some engines out of different kits by the same manufacturer, like Revell'e GM or more specifically Chevy, and see the slight differences in some. Could go on, but you get the point.