Another newbie here...

[Larry L.]

Gentlemen (and Ladies too, if applicable!),<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<o:p></o:p>
Since I’ve been poking around your site for a while (explained below), I thought I might as well say “hi”! <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I’m thisssssss close to having an SPF Heritage (MKI) built. In fact, lose the S.E.V. Marchal decals on the rear fenders, change the "6" to an "8" and the Heritage on your webpage looks like a clone of what I plan on having built. Because of the likelihood of the build, as I mentioned above, I’ve been ‘perusing’ your site for a few months now trying to get a basic grasp on some of the pros and cons of GT40 ownership before going off the deep end. The only real “con” ‘far as I can tell is the one I already knew about from day one – the darn cockpit is awfully t-i-g-h-t…especially on the passenger side! One almost gets the impression Carroll and the guys designed the car specifically for racing or something…<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Anyway, for various reasons, I don’t want to buy another Ford GT…however, I prefer the looks of the GT to anything else out there these days…so, since the Ford GT and the GT40 MKI share the exact same silhouette - guess what! Realizing things are what they are, I’ve sort of put the cart before the horse and have been in contact with Mark Yagelo @ Roush about having a ‘one-off’ 427IR built, and with Lloyd Butfoy regarding his 5-gear RBT. The only thing I haven’t been able to do yet is see what a current SPF roller looks like from a ‘build quality’ standpoint…and I’ve been trying to do that for about a year. I’ve seen, sat in, and/or ridden in a couple of 7-yr-old (or so) MKIIs…but, I understand the newer cars are supposed to reflect more attention to ‘build detail’. But, like I said, I haven’t been able to get with 3 light years of a new one yet. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Therefore, I'm wondering if there's anyone on this board who’s located in the Seattle/Pacific Northwest area who has an SPF '40 MKI that was received as a 'roller' from SPF in the last year or so that I might take a look at in person? I don't need to sit in it, or drive it, or anything of that sort ('already done all that!)! I'd just like to take a look at a current SPF factory build so I know what to expect regarding their finished product these days. (I realize SPF's build quality isn't the equal of, say, a new Benz or what have you! I just want to know what to expect.) <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Thanks in advance to anyone who might be able to oblige.

Larry<o:p></o:p>

</SPAN>

[Jim Craik]

Larry,

Welcome!

It sounds like you have come to the right place. My car MKI P2264 is a few years old now, and nothing is perfect, but I am very happy with the build quality.

I think a lot of this comes down to expectations. If you are expecting a modern super car, then you will be disappointed. If on the other hand you are expecting a 1960s British race car, then this is a very very good one.

I know there are a few MKIs in the Pacific NW, hopefully they will chime in.

I'm a fairly large guy, 6' 250 on a good day, but I fit just fine.

One thing to keep in mind, "Carroll" (RIP) had absolutely nothing to do with the design of the GT40. It was designed by Eric Broadly of Lola Cars with much input (perhaps too much) from Ford engineers.

[Larry L.]

Thanks, Jim.

Yes, I realize no '40 will equal a modern exotic in the build quality area and I'm truly not expecting that! (E.g.: I know all GT40s leak no matter who makes 'em...and what they call "door seals" won't keep out any wind noise either (!)...they're loud...they tremble, vibrate and shake (yeessssssss!!!)...and no one will never mistake a GT40's interior work for that of a Veyron, etc., etc.) While I'm not "looking for perfect", what I am hoping to find is at least 'decent' panel gaps and paint/body/upholstery work that I'm not going to have to 'fix'.

With regard to the latter, an older MKII 'roller' I looked at in 'Vegas a bit over a year or so ago, for instance, had several runs in the paint on the passenger door and a couple other places...and the hinge area of both door jams looked like they had been shot with rattle cans...in semi-gloss BLACK ('car was red) - complete with an orchard full of orange peel. That's the kind of thing I'd really rather do without! Serious question: Is that expecting too much???

And, yes, I'm also aware C.S. (God rest him) didn't design the '40...but, the average guy in the street (in this country anyway) considers him to be 'thee man' where the '40 is concerned and associates his name with it more than any other, hence my "Carroll and the guys" comment. ('Guess I'm going to have to be a little more 'precise' around here from now on, huh!)

Again, thanks for the welcome and the reply, sir. ('Hope you're right about those PNW members, BTW!)

[Rich Roy]

Larry; I live in the PNW area although on the North East side just North of Spokane. I have a CAV GT40 MK I with a Gulf style wide rear. It has the ZF Transaxle also. The car has plenty of room inside, more so than the SPF version that requires popping the steering wheel off to get your legs in and out of the cock pit. I spent hours one day comparing the two makes literaly side by side (20 feet apart) on display at the Reno Cobra Bash a few years ago. You are welcome to see, feel, and fit your self in this car to see how you fit and how it fits you. Hell! We can even take you for a spin. I bought a SPF Daytona Coupe new as a roller back in 2005 and can tell you a long sad story about quality that will make your eyes roll back in your head. I will NEVER buy another of their products ever. Forever Ford!

[Larry L.]

Hi, Rich,

The "tight fit" issue with the SPF isn't on the driver's side, the pblm is the passenger side (pass. seat is narrower due to the offset console). While I have no real problem getting in & out of either side, my wife finds it difficult to get in - and a bear to get out - on the passenger side...mainly due to the microscopic foot well in combo with the 3 foot wide 'sill! So, maybe the CAV might prove to be the way to go from that standpoint. Is the CAV's interior designed to be physically wider inside than the SPF, or what? Or is it the fact that the 'console' on a CAV is 'centered' rather than placed off toward the pass. side (on a LHD car, of course) that makes the diff...or maybe that the 'sills are not as wide? How is the extra room achieved?

The main reason I'm thinking SPF is because they're virtually identical in all respects to the 60's cars. Depending on whom you believe, something like 90% of the parts (I forget what the actual % is) on an SPF are supposed to swap with a 60's car. I'd like to have a '40 that's built as close to the originals as possible...and the SPF is the only one that's built that way 'near as I can tell. The fact it's 'Shelby blessed' (God rest him) would seem to support that.



"You are welcome to see, feel, and fit your self in this car to see how you fit and how it fits you. Hell! We can even take you for a spin."

I appreciate the offer, sir! Thanks! I might just take you up on that if I decide to abandon the SPF idea in favor of the extra room!

Thanks for your input!