Please help me identify this Cobra!

[Garydee]

Thanks for your help!

[Garydee]

Thanks for your help!

[CHANMADD]

That is a Mustang based kit by the looks of it....there were quite a few around.

[mrmustang]

Looking at the size of that main rail



I'd walk away from this one, no matter how good a deal you think you are getting

[Dangerous Doug]

That low-hanging oil filter will rip open, spraying oil and bursting into flames should the passenger front tire go flat or the wheel ever comes loose, I would think. Also, who mounts a transmission cooler (on the left, I think) where it can be punctured by a rock?

There are some scary things on this machine----such as those seats!
DD

[Garydee]

Thanks again!

[joyridin']

Is the floor on the drivers and passenger side actually steel? It looks like the whole bottom of the car is welded together.

[Garydee]

Thanks everyone!

[DanEC]

Possibility you have an RUCC kit. Not sure why you deleted your posts and photos but if you are still around you might compare what you have to some of the details in this.

Cobra from the 1st state (pics and video))

I think their main frame rails were 2x4 inch which appeared light compared to other ladder chassis cars - but they used a backbone frame design which was very beefy and had good cowl and door structure. Seems that I remember from your deleted pictures that they have the same wide door threshold and the same hood latch detail. I could be wrong.

[desgros@vtlink.]

If the rest of the car is like the placement of the oil filter it not very well thought out!

ERA #3010 289 Slabside

[Garydee]

Originally Posted by DanEC

Possibility you have an RUCC kit. Not sure why you deleted your posts and photos but if you are still around you might compare what you have to some of the details in this.

Cobra from the 1st state (pics and video))

I think their main frame rails were 2x4 inch which appeared light compared to other ladder chassis cars - but they used a backbone frame design which was very beefy and had good cowl and door structure. Seems that I remember from your deleted pictures that they have the same wide door threshold and the same hood latch detail. I could be wrong.

DanEC, Thanks for getting back to me. I deleted the past info for a couple of reasons, very little input coming back about opinions on the manufacture and since the deal has not yet been made yet for the Cobra (if the seller and I feel the trade is worth making), I was trying to keep some privacy for the seller.

I checked out those pages (thank you) and see many things similar; Door latches and hinges, hood pin placement, inner engine cowl, floor pans and trunk that are the same as the pictures of RAW’s and first state sites. Unless other manufactures had these same combinations (and from my hours of searching I have not found any) I have surmised this may have been a early RC Car Crafters. Things different from the pictures may have also been the builders choice.

I have highlighted the similarities below.

My reason for trying to find the manufacture is to get an idea of the Cobra reputation and build quality. I need to know I’m getting a decent “base” cobra – all those little things like the oil filter relocation, seats, carpet, gauge layout etc can be made the way I want them to be (with the costs being taken into consideration).

If any of you guys have owned a RUCC kit I would like to hear your constructive thoughts on the frame and fiberglass.

I will be going back to the owner in the next couple of weeks for another inspection and test run of each others “rides” before I make a final decision.

[mrmustang]

Originally Posted by Garydee

I need to know I’m getting a decent “base” cobra

No offense, but this is the first smart thing you posted to this thread from the beginning.



To answer it, after reviewing everything you originally posted, the answer is NO!!!! this is not a quality cobra, base or otherwise. Way too many things wrong with the basic build, some of which you have already addressed above. Many you have not, as you removed the pictures and the additional data, privacy or not, it's important o take it all in to perspective. In this case, the car was poorly engineered and built, do not allow yourself to think you are getting a great deal and that you'll be able to fix everything inexpensively, as in this case, you need to start with pulling the drivetrain, suspension, and body off the frame. You'll then need to re-engineer the frame, front suspension mounting points, new upper and lower control arms for the same, new coil over shocks, new springs, new brakes front and rear to balance out the short wheelbase and the light weight of the car as a whole.


There is much more, just from your limited information and poorly taken pictures, so I'll stop here, as any sane human being will walk away from this money pit. The live you save just might be your own, or that of a loved one.


Bill S.

[Garydee]

Originally Posted by mrmustang

No offense, but this is the first smart thing you posted to this thread from the beginning.

No offense to you Bill, but this your first smart explanation you stated on this thread. I'm looking for specifics, not a one sentience opinions.

The points you have made bring to light some of the shortcomings of this build I overlooked. Specifically the front suspension setup you seemed to focus on. It does look like a Mustang 2 setup - not the most ideal setup for a handling car. Suspension upgrade costs alone may add up quick on this one.

I am also curious why the 11"F / 10.5"R disk brake combination would not work on a light car like this (non-competition) - something I will read up on.

Thanks...

[jayhawk261]

Are you personally familiar with one of these "junk" cars? Have you reviewed the actual chassis layout and how it is put together? What do you feel is wrong with the front suspension?

Just curious if you have first hand knowledge of this specific car or the manufacturer, or if you are basing your statements directly on the pictures (no longer) shown here. I have not seen them, so I can't comment.

Originally Posted by mrmustang

No offense, but this is the first smart thing you posted to this thread from the beginning.



To answer it, after reviewing everything you originally posted, the answer is NO!!!! this is not a quality cobra, base or otherwise. Way too many things wrong with the basic build, some of which you have already addressed above. Many you have not, as you removed the pictures and the additional data, privacy or not, it's important o take it all in to perspective. In this case, the car was poorly engineered and built, do not allow yourself to think you are getting a great deal and that you'll be able to fix everything inexpensively, as in this case, you need to start with pulling the drivetrain, suspension, and body off the frame. You'll then need to re-engineer the frame, front suspension mounting points, new upper and lower control arms for the same, new coil over shocks, new springs, new brakes front and rear to balance out the short wheelbase and the light weight of the car as a whole.


There is much more, just from your limited information and poorly taken pictures, so I'll stop here, as any sane human being will walk away from this money pit. The live you save just might be your own, or that of a loved one.


Bill S.

[mrmustang]

Disclaimer: I'm going to be blunt with my response below

Originally Posted by jayhawk261

Are you personally familiar with one of these "junk" cars? Have you reviewed the actual chassis layout and how it is put together? What do you feel is wrong with the front suspension?

Just curious if you have first hand knowledge of this specific car or the manufacturer, or if you are basing your statements directly on the pictures (no longer) shown here. I have not seen them, so I can't comment.

I have seen similar cars in my travels, spent enough time working in the race/speed business to have a good understanding of what front and rear suspensions work, and what do not. This particular car had a front suspension that was a combination of Chevy Chevette, and over the counter control arms, a combination that upon looking at the pictures, was not well thought out, same goes for the brake set up from what we could see in the pictures. Rear suspension was more set up to "tub" the rear possibly with drag racing in mind, more than it was to actually drive the car safely and comfortably on the street (forget the track for this car). The frame rails were not substantial enough (for outriggers they would have been fine, but not as a main rail and screamed homemade/home designed) to safely support the front to rear subframe tie in, and would have needed to be replaced. The flat plywood (roughly 2 feet by 5 feet in size)filler panel between the two main rails was part of that critique. Then again, the more I thought about it, the more it screamed home built/home engineered chassis, with someones 3rd party body on top of it. Again, a money pit in the making as the new owner (if he bought it, which it appears he may have) will have to sink a lot more money into it to make it safe for the track or the street than it would have cost to buy a better designed and built car as a turn key. Of course this was all based on some poorly taken, not well lit pictures, but enough of the details were shown that to me at least it said RUN, FOREST, RRRRRRRRRRUUUUUUUNNNNN!!!!


Hope you find this helpful.


Bill S.

PS: Just because someone can weld, does not always mean that the can properly engineer a chassis.

[Winchester67]

Late to the party so I missed the pics, but it certainly sounds like this car is one of the reasons that so many kit cars are held in such low regard by the car community. And why so many people lump them all as kit cars, not replicas.

[jayhawk261]

No worries on blunt MrMustang. Blunt I can handle.

A few pictures of an RUCC car for reference. Hopefully this will show that what RUCC has built is a pretty nice product. Theirs is not in the "original" category, but it is purpose built, and proven, to run around a road course very efficiently.

[jayhawk261]

Couple more

[Garydee]

These are not argumentative points, just observations on this Cobra. I do appreciate the discussions. I appreciate fact over feelings. My original post was to try to figure out the manufacture.

Originally Posted by mrmustang

will have to sink a lot more money into it

I have not stated the sellers price or the car being traded of this Cobra - not certain how you derive cost vs worth - yes, it will need some work recapped below.

Originally Posted by mrmustang

combination of Chevy Chevette, and over the counter control arms

Looks more like a Mustang II setup with strut arm to me - not certain of the differences between this and the GM setup.

Originally Posted by mrmustang

The frame rails were not substantial enough (for outriggers they would have been fine

Unless I missed something - the picture you commenting on about this is a outrigger in front of the steering cross-member.

Originally Posted by mrmustang

The flat plywood (roughly 2 feet by 5 feet in size)filler panel between the two main rails was part of that critique.

Not certain how you surmised that was plywood - it's actually a steel floor.

Originally Posted by jayhawk261

the pictures (no longer) shown here. I have not seen them, so I can't comment.

I have re-posted the pictures I have below. These pics are all I have now. I will be looking at this Cobra again and digging a bit deeper into it again the next couple of weeks and will get more pictures. You are looking at a stripped interior covered with what looks like DynaMat style of sound deadenner.

Look beyond the seats, lack of carpet, oil filter, dash setup and wider than desired rear axle / pandhard bar. For me, these are easily changeable and taken into consideration for the total cost of the deal.









Looking from the front toward the rear - the H channeled steel is in-front of the rack cross-member and is a out-rigger.









Personal observation - I don't have too mush of a issue with the 4-link setup (I am familiar on what they can do and not due) - Not comfortable with the "panhard bar" and it would have to be changed / modified.



Rear to front

[jayhawk261]

100% NOT RUCC car.