1957 Oldsmobile Starfire.

I think all comments are valid and mostly on point. It might be the photo/ camera, but the headlights look strange. Also, even though clunky and less detailed, I prefer the original white metal, which I am going to update as best as I can. Now that I have seen the replacements I think Sergio’s white metal cars shows his creativity and have a hand made look, while the newer and more detailed models look less special to my eyes. IMHO

@chazy-r My 2 cents worth on this topic is that Goldvarg Models are excellent value for their price point.

@kenspear I saw that Ken. I'm sure that the folks making these models never saw a 57 Olds.

It is a beautiful 1957 Oldsmobile, so I definitely am delighted with this one in any scale ..... 1:1 to model replicas ! Currently, all my replica '57 Olds are great Highway 611/18 scale diecasts.

I am glad Goldvarg is doing this one, and, as always, the difficulty would be choosing colors and options. Each replica would certainly be a stunner in one's collection !

Posted by: @bob-jackman

↑

I'm sure that the folks making these models never saw a 57 Olds.

Right!  😉 

Nice!

Just to set aside confusion about what is the correct "Starfire" use acronym about the 1957 Oldsmobile line-up, here are some archives photos......

The Goldvarg model is a Super 88 Holiday Coupe and not a Starfire. The Starfire designation only applies to the 98 Series.

@jkuvakas 

Well said, John. Another thing that most people probably do not take into consideration is that a good photograph will magnify flaws tremendously; the smaller the scale, the more it accentuates any imperfection. On a computer screen you are seeing it many times its original size, so many of the things you are seeing will not be visible to the naked eye (which is how I believe these models should be appreciated anyway). Plus of course, you are usually looking at a 1 of 1 prototype that could have been whittled out a bar of soap for all you know.

Also, some details necessarily need to be exaggerated or beefed up in order to manufacture the model at all. These can look heinously crude in a photo, but look just right when you are holding the model in your hand. 

Unless you look at your models with a magnifying glass 100% of the time, I would like to suggest that you may want to hold harsh criticism on small details until you see a model in person.

Funny story...when the first gen Ford Taurus came out, the first one I ever saw was a car show. I was appalled at the poor quality, and tsk-tsk'd my way around the whole car. Then to my absolute shock, I realized it was a prototype! It wasn't on a turntable like a concept car, it was just on the floor for everyone to get close to. It must have been a production prototype with some dubious quality prototype parts that had to be modified by hand, but my attitude changed from disgust to awe when I realized that this car was just a "test shot". It sure had me fooled for a minute! It was that change in perspective that changed my attitude.

It is helpful that John puts the models that he reviews on a turntable, which gives us a little bit better understanding of its presence than a static photo. But nothing beats seeing it in real life!

@nickies Absolutely correct Richard. I'm amazed how many car guys don't know this.