SPF GT40 Genesis

[Seymour Snerd]

I ran across this comment from Mike Drew way back in early 2004:

"Here is what I have been told, by a CAV GT40 owner who is active on another GT40 forum....Apparently, Superformance purchased a complete, dismantled GT40 Mk II from a retired airline pilot who had bought it when it was relatively young, with the hopes of restoring it someday.

They shipped all the pieces to South Africa..."

Has anyone ever verified this story? If so, which Mk II was that, where is it now and what's its condition?

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

I will confirm this with Jim Price but I do not know of any GT40 the Hi Tech "bought". I am sure had Jim purchased a car, he would now either be driving it or have sold it off. Neither has happened. Also as far I understand, all MK IIs are accounted for so the likelyhood of this is low.

Before the SPF GT was released there were numerous stories, fables and some wishful thinking regarding the cars. There was even a poll here that asked if you would purchase the car if it cost a penny over 50K USD. As that figure was a target price that was not met due to the complexity and tooling costs, it was spun to insinuate that the intro pricing of over $60,000 was "inflated" and "userous".

Considering that the only other original type tubs available are rather more expensive than the SPF even if the they are slightly more authentic, the availability of a pressed steel tub chassised car for the price asked is rather a good value in my humble opinion. Can you purchase a 98% authentic car as opposed to an 85% car, yes. Can you do it for under $100K, not that I know of.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

...as far I understand, all MK IIs are accounted for so the likelyhood of this is low.

...the availability of a pressed steel tub chassised car for the price asked is rather a good value in my humble opinion. .

That first issue is what got me going... I was prepared to be amazed if there were some mystery Mk II in SA in parts...

But usually there's a germ of truth in these things. Is or was there an airline pilot who owned a Mk II? And more interestingly, how did SPF acquire the dimensions, details, etc, they needed to reproduce the thing?

I completely agree about the SPF GT40 value proposition. It took me about 5 seconds to decide to get one once I understood what it was. I actually went through the exercise of making a list of every single car I ever dreamed about owning (Miura, 250LM, P4, blah blah blah) and I could not think of a single vehicle within $100K of the cost of an all-up SPF that was more desirable.

 

[Jim Craik]

Alan,

I went through the same process with the same cars.............just add a Cheveron B16 to your list. I came to the same conclusion & could not be happier.

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

And more interestingly, how did SPF acquire the dimensions, details, etc, they needed to reproduce the thing?

Several hundred FAV drawings. You know, the ones "no one can get!!" Or the ones "I have, but you can't!!!!"

I was asked "How can they buid a car from only drawings?" Gee, it seems to me that Ford did it. I don't recall what GT40 Ford had to copy..................

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

There are several sets of the GT40 drawings out there. Note that access to a set was allegedly offered on this forum within the last year or two. My car's chassis was built from a set of drawings that David Brown has in NZ. He started from scratch; he did not have another car to measure or copy. Through his cooperation with Jay Cushman, who has access to quite a few original cars, he has refined his drawing files and work so that the chassis he is building now are even more faithful to the original Abbey Panels tubs.

Anything that one person can engineer, someone else can reverse-engineer, given enough time and effort. When you have the kind of resources and expertise that HiTech have, this is not difficult; it just takes time to do it.

If the original tooling had not been thrown away, manufacturing an accurate GT40 tub would have been even less difficult. Since it was destroyed, new press tools have had to be made. But, as far as I know, the SPF tub is made the same way that the Abbey and Tennant tubs were made- steel stampings pressed from flat stock and then welded together in a jig for dimensional accuracy and stability. The difference, I suspect, is that with modern technology, the welding is done by robots and some of the machining is done by CNC mills. This is the logical thing to do for volume production.

It also makes Brown's work that much more notable in that he does this all by hand. Having seen original tubs and my own, it is impressive that his chassis are so similar to a sixties' chassis- you would not know to look at them that the methods of making the panels were different.

 

[Pathfinder Motorsports]

I can shed some light on the Superformance bodies: The SPF GT40 MK I plug came from a set of molds made directly from GT40P/1010.

GT40P/1010 at the 1966 Nurburgring 1000km

The MK II molds also came directly from an original car; however, it's my understanding from the factory that the US owner requested that his chassis number not be revealed.

 

[Rich Roy]

I was at the Reno Cobra Bash in May, 2006 where a new out of the box SPF GT40 MkII was on display as a "roller". It was a very low number car, bright red in color, delivered to Dynamic Motorsports' Reno outlet. Just 20 feet away was a complete CAV GT40 MkI being displayed by The CAV import dealer from San Diego, Ca. I was tending to my car doing an early wipe down about 6:00 A.M. With no one around except a few Resort guards I took the liberty to get up and close with the SPF car, having waited more than a year to finally get to see one. I opened the rear engine bay cover to find out it was colliding with the frame extensions at the far rear as the body work had not been molded correctly to clear upon opening. Once fully open, I actually climbed in and was down on my knees looking forward into the tunnel checking out where all the plumbing went and was taking note of all the poor quality welds. Suddenly an abrupt voice called out from above! "Hey! What are you doing down there"? I looked up and It was Peter Brock. I replied that I wanted to see it up close on how it was built. Peter went into about a half hour on particulars about the design and build of the car that he and Jim Price discussed when he was in Port Elizabeth on his last visit regarding the SPF Daytona coupe project. He showed me where they missed on the curvature of the top of the front fenders and also the shape of the door skins vertical angles. The biggest issue he argued with Mr. Price on was the cockpit size. As with the original Daytona coupes, the Gt40's were designed for little fellers to drive back then. The small drivers were lighter with their weight advantage. Today most of the buyers of these cars are a bit larger in more ways than one. Jim stuck to the original size /shape motto, where Peter strongly disagreed, stating it would affect sales for the percentage of larger buyers. (the OFB club "Old Fat Bastards") of which I belong. So how close is it to an original in actual shape, or "correct" shape? As with many things made in short numbers back then, there is a lot of variance, but it's still considered correct/original/or close enough.......................it got the job done!

 

[Tim Kay]

Peter went into about a half hour on particulars about the design and build of the car that he and Jim Price discussed when he was in Port Elizabeth on his last visit regarding the SPF Daytona coupe project. He showed me where they missed on the curvature of the top of the front fenders and also the shape of the door skins vertical angles.

For clarification, was Brock refering to the Daytona Coupe or the GT40 fenders and door skins. If in reference to the GT40 can you elaborate a bit more on that discussion?

 

[Grady]

When I had a place in Bolder, Colorado, I would visit the SHELBY AMERICAN museumon on Saturdays. In the back right hand corner, up hanging on the wall were body molds for a GT40. When I ask about them, I was told they were used for Holman Moody cars. I don't know if that is true, but the molds were real. I can find a picture if needed.
If you have never seen the place and can get there on a Saturday, make the effort. MkIs, MkIIs, a MkIV...and oh the COBRAS and the one Daytona Coupe (Wilmette).
Grady

 

[David Briggs]

How authentic the SPF is will be debated forever but it is an excellent car, the build quality is very good, with useful mods to make it streetable.
It is mostly ready to go out of the box, requiring very little fiddling or re-engineering,to be driveable and has correct and very strong suspension components and a metal roof.
I think that Hi Tech does a great job on these cars, especially at that price point.
But, even so, it is not a Lexus and I think that a lot of folks buy them expecting something other than a loud, thinly disguised race car.
I do think that is captures the experience of driving a car from that time period very well.
IMHO, Dave

 

[Seymour Snerd]

Duplicate post deleted.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

How authentic the SPF is will be debated forever but it is an excellent car, the build quality is very good, with useful mods to make it streetable.....

I agree completely, although I've never seen a point-by-point dicussion on authenticity; as opposed to the somewhat meaningless "65 vs 85 vs 90% interchangeable parts" assertions. I'd be interested in having one. It's a tricky discussion in that for example, there are variations among real GT40s, obviously.

But to kick things off from memory, here are the deviations I can think of, starting with the incredibly-obvious and obviously-intentional ones and without getting into rationale or value judgements:

1. Wilwood brakes with drum-type parking brake, cables and center lever vs. Dunlop or Kelsey-Hayes
2. AC evaporator box where oil tank or spare tire might be, AC condenser in front of radiator; reciever-dryer, hoses, etc., AC compressor on motor vs no A/C
3. Ventilated seats simulated out of carved foam vs. webbing-suspended parachute cloth
4. Cable shift in center-shift cars vs. rod shift on RHS or at center in Mk IIIs.
5. Fuel tank crossover by flexible hose across engine bay vs. (this seems to vary among originals)
6. Stainless steel fuel tanks vs. form-fitting bladders
7. Pedal cluster welded steel vs. cast aluminum
8. Sponson ribs slightly different (see other thread).
9. Bilstein shocks vs. whatever
10. Aluminum wheels (vs. Magnesium?)
11. Aluminum uprights (vs. Magnesium?)
12. MK II exhaust in carbon steel, vs. stainless
13. Muffler vs. straight megaphone
14. Engine variations (eg, Windsor. Listed for completeness, although technically not under SPF's control)
15. Ford interior mirror vs. Lucas
16. Galvanized frame (I think Mk V's did as well, but then they have their own set of differences).
17. ZF vs T-44 transaxle in Mk IIs.

Well, hmmm, that's a shorter list than I expected. Who's got more? I'm particularly interested in items with a high combination of "significance" and "difficulty in correcting" such as the earlier assertion about fender curve and door profile. For example, Racing Icons shows a "front clip insert" (hood, bonnet, lid) formed from aluminum sheet, not fiber glass. Was that typical among originals?

 

[Jim Craik]

There is one fairly small thing that still irritates me, the shape of the wheel well openings. As viewed from the side, the upper part of the SPF wheel well opening is round (I mean an even arc), where the original cars the wheel well opening is slightly "squashed" sort of like the Lola T70 only much less pronounced.

I know this is a small thing, but SPF went to a lot of trouble and expence to "copy" the original cars, why would they get something as easy as this (and obvious) wrong?

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

Alan,

You are correct about the uprights. only the MK III uprights were done in aluminum. The MK Is were magnesium but the half life of mag on the street is not good so that is a change made to improve the roadability of the cars. Likewise the wheels mag to alloy.

Obviously SPF changed some thing based upon the perceived use of the chassis. Other item were changed to allow a selling price point that would generate sales and investment amortization.

Could the chass be almost 100% "original"? Sure, but then you are in the Gelscoe price range. Some changes were needed to allow a saleable price.

The "percentage" of interchangability depends upon what you count. If the metric fastners vs. SAE are counted the percentage is probably less than 50%. If the ability to bolt on suspension, lids, windscreen, etc. is counted the 85-90% figure becomes realistic.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

... the shape of the wheel well openings.

Front, Rear or Both?

 

[Pathfinder Motorsports]

This is always a fascinating subject, particularly for Pathfinder as we are working with customers who are intent on having as-close-to-original details on their GT40Rs. Picking up on Alan's list of deviations, I thought you might be interested in how they compare with a Pathfinder GT40R (indicated in BLUE).

1. Wilwood brakes with drum-type parking brake, cables and center lever vs. Dunlop or Kelsey-Hayes. Pathfinder is using FIA-approved Girling brakes for their FIA cars.
2. AC evaporator box where oil tank or spare tire might be, AC condenser in front of radiator; reciever-dryer, hoses, etc., AC compressor on motor vs no A/C. Pathfinder GT40Rs do not have a/c installed (although it is a rarely requested option) so this is as per the original.
3. Ventilated seats simulated out of carved foam vs. webbing-suspended parachute cloth. Pathfinder builds its own seats, both racing spec and original style, using either original-style black parachute nylon material or Nomex to comply with some racing regs.
4. Cable shift in center-shift cars vs. rod shift on RHS or at center in Mk IIIs. The Pathfinder GT40R comes with right hand steering and right hand rod shift linkage like the originals.
5. Fuel tank crossover by flexible hose across engine bay vs. (this seems to vary among originals). Working with Fuel Safe and Olthoff Racing, FIA approved fuel cells replace the SPF tanks.
6. Stainless steel fuel tanks vs. form-fitting bladders. Some original equipment would not pass scrutineering today, including the fuel tanks. For this reason, Pathfinder decided to go with FIA FT-3 spec fuel cells. Given the fuel tanks' location and the danger they potentially create in the event of a side-on collision, this is the only reasonable solution.
7. Pedal cluster welded steel vs. cast aluminum. Original magnesium pedal box is available as an option.
8. Sponson ribs slightly different (see other thread). There are actually variations among the original cars in the sponson ribs. I'm not sure there is a single correct style.
9. Bilstein shocks vs. whatever. Original shocks available as an option.
10. Aluminum wheels (vs. Magnesium?). While very expensive, original magnesium wheels are available as an option.
11. Aluminum uprights (vs. Magnesium?). Original upright castings in aviation-spec magnesium available as an option.
12. MK II exhaust in carbon steel, vs. stainless. Original and custom exhaust available as an option.
13. Muffler vs. straight megaphone. Pathfinder GT40Rs have straight megaphones with customer option of 3", 4", or massive 5" outlets.
14. Engine variations (eg, Windsor. Listed for completeness, although technically not under SPF's control). FIA-eligible 289/302 engines built by Holman Moody are standard on the Mk I; FIA-eligible 427 FE engines by Holman Moody are used for the Mk IIs.
15. Ford interior mirror vs. Lucas. Please note the photos of our GT40Rs: Unless specified otherwise by the customer, we use genuine reconditioned Lucas 608 mirrors.
16. Galvanized frame (I think Mk V's did as well, but then they have their own set of differences). Rustable frames may be available by special order.
17. ZF vs T-44 transaxle in Mk IIs. T-44s can be built by Holman Moody as an expensive option for the Mk II - figure about $35,000.

One item Alan left out was that most original GT40 Mk I's did not benefit from a roll cage inasmuch as the monocoque was accepted back in the day as being sufficiently safe. No more. Several original GT40s have had roll cages retrofitted into them (Holman Moody was adding them to their Mk IIs back in the mid-'60's). All Pathfinder GT40Rs come standard with a six-point roll cage with side intrusion protection. If you plan on racing your GT40, you'd be crazy not to have a roll cage - period.

Also, many of the less-than-usually requested features are offered as options to keep our prices competitive. For example, unless you wish to enter FIA sanctioned racing events in Europe, there is little reason to specify magnesium components over aluminum, especially given their short operational life. Our standard GT40R is ready-to-race, and meets HSR and several other sanctioning body technical requirements for about $129,000. That said, we are preparing an FIA-spec car for Europe that will include all of the required bits to achieve an FIA Historic Technical Passport (HTP).

When you consider that a Gelscoe GT40 costs an extra $325,000± over the cost of a standard Pathfinder GT40R, that 5-10% difference in accuracy works out to cost a buyer between $32,000 and $64,000 per percentage point. My suggestion? Buy a Pathfinder GT40R, and with the money saved get an Ariel Atom and a Ferrari 458 Italia to boot.

Just a thought ...

 

[Rich Roy]

From what I recall of the coments from Peter Brock, the vertical arc from the bottom window edge to the bottom of the door was incorrect. As well as the top surface curvachure of the front fender over the wheel opening. This was on the GT40 MkII not the Daytona coupe. And as far as build quality from SPF I will not EVER purchace another one of thier products. I can go on for days why. Not to take anything away from Lance at the distributorship who was very helpful sorting out a few major problems. I'am very glad he took over the American outlet. I still love owning/driving the Daytona Coupe very much, but wish I would have waited and just got the GT40 first.

 

[Seymour Snerd]

I'm impressed by Pathfinder's ability to "reverse" so many of the deviations (notice I said "reverse" not "correct"); but to me that's kind of the second part of the dialog, or a separate thread altogether. I was also thinking of the non-R vehicle when I started the list.

I want to collect as many deviations as we can. BTW, again, I don't consider "deviation" to have a negative connotation, and I don't think anyone should. As I've said before, I don't disagree with any of the deviations that I am aware of. If I were SPF/Hi-Tech I would have made all the decisions the same way they did.

But knowledge is power so let's keep the list going....

 

[Seymour Snerd]

... the vertical arc from the bottom window edge to the bottom of the door was incorrect. As well as the top surface curvachure of the front fender over the wheel opening. ....

OK, then the next question would be "incorrect in what way?" That is to say, if one were going to "fix" this what would one do? (And yes I now that would be a lot of work for a small benefit but then you should see some of the stuff I've been doing to mine lately....) If you can give a hint then I can figure out what photographs to go looking for....

It sounds like you and Jim Craik may be talking about the same issue with the front fender. A complicating issue there is that the Mk I and Mk II front fender profiles are very different, so in discussing this we need to be very clear about which one were describing. I assume Jim is referring to Mk I since that's what he owns (??).