View Full Version : R3 Factory Prototype 7 Pictures

09-03-2010, 09:30 AM
A few picture of the possible R3 prototype (MULE) that I recently discovered. Owner is considering selling. What is it worth ?








09-03-2010, 09:35 AM
Would a mule have the later headlights?

09-03-2010, 10:01 AM
Driver her home Kevin !

Bill Pressler
09-03-2010, 11:48 AM
Would a mule have the later headlights?

That's a good question, Dave. I always thought I remembered hearing that Egbert's personal car (which sold at auction earlier this year, I think) was the 'prototype' for all the '64 changes and the R3 engine...although I could be wrong.

09-03-2010, 12:07 PM
Did anyone else notice that the hood lift is on the left - not the right as on production cars?

Also, the vacuum gauge is not production and the heater vent controls are 63 not 64. Hard to tell if the dash is painted or has an overlay but either way it is not production.

In the last picture, it appears that the original glass bowel fuel filter is replace with an after market but in the other engine pictures it looks like the original was inverted and fastened to the block.

09-03-2010, 08:29 PM
>>>Owner is considering selling. What is it worth ?

Since no one else has taken a stab at it yet, allow me be the first:

IF ...it starts, runs, moves on its own power AND still has an open & clear US title = $15K USD tops. If it doesn't = $12K USD tops.

OK, who is next???;)

09-03-2010, 09:11 PM
I see a number of changes under the hood that must post-date the conversion of the car to an R3, if indeed it is an R3, and not an R2 dressed up. Looks like Mopar electronic ignition conversion; that has to be mid-'70s, and the radiator expansion tank has been replaced by an in-line filler neck, and a separate puke tank provided. There are aluminum water pump pulleys, and a Ford cover with a dipstick has been installed on the steering pump. None of these are necessarily bad things, but with the possible exception of the pulleys, aren't the work of Paxton Products, AFAIK.

But if you can buy the car right, why not?

09-03-2010, 09:29 PM
Interesting...it has the red painted block, extra breathers and cold air induction for the air cleaner,all part of the R3 engine. It also has the R3-style 8,000RPM tach.

09-03-2010, 09:47 PM
Of course, I'm just dying to know what the serial and body number is of this car, but I can understand if that information is not posted right away, before etc etc. That info alone could start several threads ;);) like the EX saga(s)

09-03-2010, 09:56 PM
Would a mule have the later headlights?

Supposedly the "EX" test cars were updated to '64 specs before being sold. That would account for the square headlight bezels, walnut steering wheel and tilt column, the woodgrain dash and console inlays and different gauges (at least some of them), but anything could have been changed at a later date by someone other than Paxton or Studebaker. It does have an 8 grand tach like a good R3 should. The hood strut and inner body panel for the 3EE battery could simply have been left original. I don't see a battery...it could be relocated to the trunk or simply might not be installed.

It sure looks like an R3 engine from the color, the five vented oil fill caps, etc., but it would take getting the numbers off the engine and heads to verify what is actually sitting in that engine bay.

The car certainly needs a good clean up, but if the frame and hogs are in good shape, that car could be a real steal. It doesn't look like it would take too much to make it right, even if it is an R2 dressed as an R3.

09-03-2010, 10:20 PM
The regulator on top of the engine is a Paxton part. This one has been bypassed, and the glass bowl is missing. Mounted this way, the bowl would act as a pressure dome, smoothing out pulses from the pump; rather than a sediment bowl. The return line would have come off a "T" at the pump; if there was one. There are pictures of similar regulators on a Paxton prepared speed record R3 Lark and Egbert's car; but those are the type without the bowl. Because the fuel line isn't steel, a bracket is needed to support the regulator. It forms a shelf for the regulator. None of the pictures I've seen show where it attaches to the engine. I think it must have a kind of "Z" shape; and bolt to the block off plate for the oil fill stack. I'd love to see a good picture of the bracket. The regulator and bracket are Paxton parts, not shown in the Stude Avanti parts book.
I think the regulator was connected directly to the supercharger port that normally fed the boost signal to the fuel pump. The regulator simply restricted fuel to the carb unless there was boost. I think it was used with a 9# pump, without boost reference. That could have been simply a Ford diaphragm and spring assembly in the Stude pump.
Mike M

09-03-2010, 11:41 PM
Another interesting point is the cowl vent shows the car started out life as an early '63.

09-04-2010, 12:21 AM
Build sheet with info on{ IS THIS A R3) thread sent in by JDP VIN # 63R5650 engine # EX2132 It's real proto type

09-04-2010, 08:50 AM
It is my understanding,(I have been known to be wrong), that Studebaker "NEVER MADE A SINGLE R3 ENGINE".
They suppilied the sonic checked blocks and parts to PAXTON, who then built the engines with various parts ie: sometimes different cams, not all had R3 heads at the last.
Never the less they are true R3 engines made by Paxton.
After Paxton built the engines they wwere shipped back to Studebaker to be installed in very few cars.
The R3 I'm working on has every bit a much provenence as Paxton did the conversion in thier factory. They (Paxton) even had the time to add extra gauges and "dyno tune" the car to get it right.
This wasn't built last year.
It was done on a car less than 1 year old.
So this makes it worth 50K less????
I humbly DO NOT agree.

09-04-2010, 09:19 AM


Inquiring mind needs to know...what are these wheels off of...do you have any other shots of them. Thanks, Junior

09-04-2010, 10:36 AM
Owner said they were early 90's rims but he did have period correct Craiger Mags for it.The garage was so crammed it would seem impossible to locate some items.He claimed to have a new short block but I couldn't see it.I believe the to be a VERY rare Avanti with history

09-04-2010, 01:05 PM
Build sheet with info on{ IS THIS A R3) thread sent in by JDP VIN # 63R5650 engine # EX2132 It's real proto type

Here's the build sheet again, clearly showing it equipped with a EX2132 R2 when sold in 1964 I have that build sheet in my file.

09-04-2010, 01:18 PM
[QUOTE=kmul221;485774]A few picture of the possible R3 prototype (MULE) that I recently discovered. Owner is considering selling. What is it worth ?

As you might know by now, I'm skeptical about it being a R3 prototype since the build sheet shows it was sold with the original EX R2 engine. It may have had all the R3 stuff added later, since Paxton sold many more R3 crate engine than were factory installed. It's a interesting car in many ways, built in early 62, converted to 64 and sold after the SB shut down, than losing the EX R2 at some point. If it's a real Paxton R3, that's a 10-15K engine alone, so it should be a 25-35K car even in it's present condition.

09-04-2010, 01:35 PM
Appears to be an early '63 body with a '64 front clip. The left inner front fender panel has the inset for the type 24 battery. The front clip could have been changed at the factory, but then why not the hood, to allow the hood prop to be placed on the right side. The battery has been placed in the trunk and the overflow bottle put in the battery well. Everything else looks good for an R3 conversion. No extra tunnel cooling though. Is the rear axle the flanged R3 type?

The cutout for the air induction hose on the right fender apron looks crude and definitely not factory. The R3 conversion would have been post factory sale, as JDP indicates.

09-04-2010, 03:35 PM
If the engine is a true R3 (looks like it is) and it is "free" (turns), then, to me, the car, in its present condition, is about $18K-$20K.

09-05-2010, 08:53 AM
It's dirty and dusty. I think the owner should just give it to me!!

09-06-2010, 09:47 PM
Its not worth much at all .. I wouldn't waste your time with it. Totally unrelated
to that, whats the guys contact info?? ;)


09-07-2010, 05:06 PM
BUY IT, ship it to me and I will dust it for Granatelli fingerprints.

09-07-2010, 06:08 PM
What's with the 140 mph speedo?

09-07-2010, 06:17 PM
All early R2 Avantis had 140 mph speedos. The basic body is an early '63 unit as is the hood with the cross brace.

09-07-2010, 06:23 PM
Thanks for clearing that up! can'nt figure why? 160s were around prior to that!

09-07-2010, 06:45 PM
I don't think so. The 160 speedo was added to the R2 in the fall of '62, certainly after mid Sept. 62. The specific date is a question mark. My guess is that the change occurred with or after the 1st Bonneville runs.

09-07-2010, 06:46 PM
What a neat find.

I am amazed how many cars that left the factory wearing a color (i.e., metallic red) wind up wearing no color (white). I have owned many, many cars over the years that came to me in sickly, putrid, dead white - Barney included. I dunno why people do that.

09-07-2010, 06:53 PM
Prior to, as with Speedsters and Golden Hawks.just kinda seems they went backwards in that!

09-21-2010, 08:36 PM
What a neat find.

I am amazed how many cars that left the factory wearing a color (i.e., metallic red) wind up wearing no color (white). I have owned many, many cars over the years that came to me in sickly, putrid, dead white - Barney included. I dunno why people do that.

The putrid white hides the fiberglass flaws.
Quite a find in any case.