A few picture of the possible R3 prototype (MULE) that I recently discovered. Owner is considering selling. What is it worth ?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
R3 Factory Prototype 7 Pictures
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by barnlark View PostWould a mule have the later headlights?Bill Pressler
Kent, OH
(formerly Greenville, PA)
Currently owned: 1966 Cruiser, Timberline Turquoise, 26K miles
Formerly owned: 1963 Lark Daytona Skytop R1, Ermine White
1964 Daytona Hardtop, Strato Blue
1966 Daytona Sports Sedan, Niagara Blue Mist
All are in Australia now
Comment
-
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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kmul221 View Post>>>Owner is considering selling. What is it worth ?
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???Last edited by Welcome; 09-03-2010, 05:33 PM.
Comment
-
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 Looks like Mopar electronic ignition conversion; that has to be mid-'70s, and the radiator expansion tank has been replaced by an in-line filler neck, and a separate puke tank provided.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?Gord Richmond, within Weasel range of the Alberta Badlands
Comment
-
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.Eric DeRosa
\'63 R2 Lark
\'60 Lark Convertible
Comment
-
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)
Comment
-
Originally posted by barnlark View PostWould a mule have the later headlights?
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.Poet...Mystic...Soldier of Fortune. As always...self-absorbed, adversarial, cocky and in general a malcontent.
Comment
-
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
Comment
-
Another interesting point is the cowl vent shows the car started out life as an early '63.Jim
Often in error, never in doubt
http://rabidsnailracing.blogspot.com/
____1966 Avanti II RQA 0088_______________1963 Avanti R2 63R3152____________http://rabidsnailracing.blogspot.com/
Comment
-
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.Bez Auto Alchemy
573-318-8948
http://bezautoalchemy.com
"Don't believe every internet quote" Abe Lincoln
Comment
Comment