Carroll Shelby vs Factory Five Racing
- Thread starter Bill D
- Start date
Jim
I do not know where to begin. Shelby American was a separate company from Ford and I am sure that Ford's seed money put a lot of pressure on Shelby to perform but at the end of the day it was Shelby's decisions that created it all.
The drivers were hired by Shelby American.
I do not think that Hot Rod magazine is a legitimate automobile manufacturer the way Shelby was. Last time I checked they were in the magazine business. I stopped buying their mag when they started featuring japanese imports.
427 Cobras had their first peak as bonafide collector cars in the late 70s
when there were no replicars around and suddenly all the magazines featured them. Most people had probably forgotten about the cars.The replica manufacturers sure helped to popularize the Cobra image. They also popularized the Bugatti and Auburn Speedster....
I do not care whether somebody has a replica or an original. I've never used the word "fake" to describe a cobra kit car and this whole argument is borne out of being at car shows where invariably some loser asks whether your car is a Fake and even if you know better it still hurts.
So I guess since we as a society are trying so hard to eliminate Christ from Christmas and call it a Winter Giving Day, People are also trying to eliminate Shelby from the Shelby American legacy. Hey they are doing it to Henry Ford and Walt Disney also.
Did I just compare Carroll to Jesus? Oh, Oh I hope you guys get my tongue in cheek comment. I do not want to get into that discussion.
On this note
Merry Christmas to you all
Mike
Coming a bit late to this party but wanted to put in my .02$. I have met CS on numerous occasions and have spent much time with him just sitting in a motor home talking. As with many things it is not easy to simply paint with broad strokes and label the man. I have seen him be a very gracious and a caring at times, although I have always come away from these moments knowing that I wouldn't trust the man farther than my line of sight. I also wouldn't take my wallet out of my pocket until he was long gone. I am sure that my personal bias is coming into play here as well. I have spoken to far too many people that I respect very much that have felt the burn of trusting the man.
As to the Daytona Coupe fiasco with Factory Five. Lets never forget that the Coupe was actually designed by Pete Brock. Of course he designed it while employed by Shelby American, so it is their intellectual property. My greater point is the character of CS. For decades now CS has been dragging Mr. Brock's name and efforts in designing the coupe through the mud. After their relationship went south (which I believe was because Brock handed him his ass on the racetrack in Japan) CS has done everything to destroy Brocks contribution to his legacy. He has done numerous articles stating that the Daytona Coupe was garbage and that only through his brilliance was it made a winner. The funny thing about this is that it is a one sided fight. I have spoken with Pete and he has no dog in this fight. It is simply CS carrying on a personal vandetta.
The latest evidence of this is the Superformance Brock Coupe. As you may remember Pete Brock designed this car from the ground up for Superformance. It is a beautiful and very capable car and a nice tribute to his talent. Well old CS couldn't stand for that. He strong armed Superformance into an alliance with him through threat of lawsuit and Tada! There is no longer a Brock Coupe! It is now the Shelby Superformance Coupe or whatever they are calling it now days. Go on the website, no mention of Pete Brock anywhere. Who designed the car? Everybody seems to have forgotten at Superformance.... So if CS is really so interested in protecting the rights of those that supposedly did all of the hard work in designing these icons he finds a funny way of showing it doesn't he?
As to the Daytona Coupe fiasco with Factory Five. Lets never forget that the Coupe was actually designed by Pete Brock. Of course he designed it while employed by Shelby American, so it is their intellectual property. My greater point is the character of CS. For decades now CS has been dragging Mr. Brock's name and efforts in designing the coupe through the mud. After their relationship went south (which I believe was because Brock handed him his ass on the racetrack in Japan) CS has done everything to destroy Brocks contribution to his legacy. He has done numerous articles stating that the Daytona Coupe was garbage and that only through his brilliance was it made a winner. The funny thing about this is that it is a one sided fight. I have spoken with Pete and he has no dog in this fight. It is simply CS carrying on a personal vandetta.
The latest evidence of this is the Superformance Brock Coupe. As you may remember Pete Brock designed this car from the ground up for Superformance. It is a beautiful and very capable car and a nice tribute to his talent. Well old CS couldn't stand for that. He strong armed Superformance into an alliance with him through threat of lawsuit and Tada! There is no longer a Brock Coupe! It is now the Shelby Superformance Coupe or whatever they are calling it now days. Go on the website, no mention of Pete Brock anywhere. Who designed the car? Everybody seems to have forgotten at Superformance.... So if CS is really so interested in protecting the rights of those that supposedly did all of the hard work in designing these icons he finds a funny way of showing it doesn't he?
Mike,
Shelby was paid by Ford to put this motor in the car. Yes it was his idea. AC built the cars and shipped them to the US. So Hot rod had the idea to put the v8 into the Solstice. So if they start a genaric car Co. and sell them do they have the rights to the car?
As far as not liking imports, was not the AC an import? Actually the GT40 was designed by Lola. So it was imported.
Jim N
Shelby was paid by Ford to put this motor in the car. Yes it was his idea. AC built the cars and shipped them to the US. So Hot rod had the idea to put the v8 into the Solstice. So if they start a genaric car Co. and sell them do they have the rights to the car?
As far as not liking imports, was not the AC an import? Actually the GT40 was designed by Lola. So it was imported.
Jim N
Jim - I did specify JAPANESE imports
I think that the Generic Car Company if it had purchase agreements both with Pontiac and the V8 manufacturer would and should have the intellectual right to their product. After all they would also be responsible for the warranty and spare parts supply. I am sure that Pontiac would also see it that way.
I really do not care whether anybody loves or hates CS. I also do not defend mercenary type business decisions but as a lifelong entrepreneur I just hate the injustice of badmouthing the original creator.
What would you say if GT40 Fran got a bad rap 30 years from now. We are witness to his company growing from replica manufacturer to automobile mfg. to a concept car partner of the big three.
Let's hope he succeeds and in thirty years is a major player in the automotive world. Do you think it would be right to smear his early efforts by shifting the credit to anybody except him?
It used to be that in this country we admired and applauded success.
The big hillside home and a new Cadillac Biarritz was admired as a sign of this success.
Nowadays we badmouth the people that made it happen and both the home's and the Cadillac's carbon foot print are too big. A captain of industry's reputation is now measured not by his achievements but whether he once used an "offensive" word in a speech. ( strangely they haven't done that yet to Shel. Since his language is known to be colorful he would be a prime target for these attacks on a person's reputation)
So like I said before, I wish Mr. Shelby the best and hope that he is with us for many years to come and if FFR has to make a forced donation to the Children's Fund so be it. I am sure they can afford it.
Mike
BTW - The Shelby / Brock dispute saddens me too as I met Mr. Brock and he struck me as quite the gentleman.
I am sure that once CS passes away there will be a whole slew of autobiographys that will let us look deeper into the wonders of the Shelby Universe.
It's not material to the lawsuit, but as an interesting fact, I think Ford owned the majority interest in the Shelby cpmpany quite early on, as early as 1963, unless it was a limited parternship of some type both Shelby's corp. and Ford owned jointly.
Does anyone have any facts on this.
Does anyone have any facts on this.
Interesting. Your impressions seem to go along with the business practices we see from the company.
BTW, I thought Mallet was the first one to put a V8 in a Solstice. They have made quite a few, and they are supposed to be a hoot to drive.
Ron Earp
Admin
Interesting viewpoint Mike, and I do mean that courteously.
You agree that Shelby is a rather disreputable business man. You think that his business decisions aren’t sound and might even go so far as to say you don’t trust him. And you think the credit that Shelby tried to take for the coupe is unfounded at best and maybe even dishonorable.
But you still defend Shelby rather strongly.
If I thought that Shelby was “the creator” I might also share your views. But, I do not agree that he is the creator of the Cobra shape and don’t think he can lay claim to it. He didn't create the GT40 shape, the Cobra shape, or the coupe shape. Certainly he can lay some claim to making them successful on the race track, but in my opinion that is different from designing the shape.
At any rate it is an interesting discussion and very civil. Lots of these sorts of things on forums really get the flame wars rolling!
You agree that Shelby is a rather disreputable business man. You think that his business decisions aren’t sound and might even go so far as to say you don’t trust him. And you think the credit that Shelby tried to take for the coupe is unfounded at best and maybe even dishonorable.
But you still defend Shelby rather strongly.
If I thought that Shelby was “the creator” I might also share your views. But, I do not agree that he is the creator of the Cobra shape and don’t think he can lay claim to it. He didn't create the GT40 shape, the Cobra shape, or the coupe shape. Certainly he can lay some claim to making them successful on the race track, but in my opinion that is different from designing the shape.
At any rate it is an interesting discussion and very civil. Lots of these sorts of things on forums really get the flame wars rolling!
Ron - I do not think that I tried to imply that. Maybe you meant the dfreeman95 post?
At any rate I think we started with Shelby suing the kit car folks and there is not one kit car cobra in America that is specifically offering a street model Cobra let alone an AC as it appeared in England.
Hell if you ordered a coil spring cobra (427 chassis ) from AC you got a 289 engine, narrow rear fenders and 185-15 tires.
Shelby American created the image of the 427SC and the image got expensive very fast. In stepped a bunch of entrepreneurs who copied the image and cheapened it down, making it affordable for the average Joe. So Shelby complains about it and makes them at least pay some money in royalties for making money of his ideas and endeavors.
I have not heard about him suing those that actually pay tribute to a real Cobra. Kirkham and ERA are never mentioned in all of this.
Maybe it is about pride too. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery - wouldn't that mean that if a manufacturer does not even get the bodyshape right it would feel like an insult?
Unfortunately the fact that the Superformance has a different shape than a CSX 4000 and that both are endorsed by Shelby/SPF does indicate that the old man does not have such idealistic views.
Truthfully I think it is about money and trademark protection though......
Still - he is Shelby American and through his licensing division should be allowed to protect his brand without people complaining about it.
I defend Mr. Shelby because I feel that there is a certain injustice and bias against him that may originate largely in rumour and envy.
You do not get very far by singing Kumbayah and holding hands. Sometimes there is collateral damage and Shelby undoubtably went through life without a rear view mirror. As a customer I could not have asked for better treatment. As a competitor I am sure that I would be meeting another side of Shelby American.
But one thing am I am sure of. He does not care about whether a guy in a fiberglass mustang likes him or not. His mind is still focused on the bigger picture.
OK - I'm done.
You are all beautiful
Mike
BTW: I also always defend George Barris. Another guy who constantly gets a bad rap. Same story: No Barris-No Batmobile. And plenty of lawsuits.
You know, I reckon it all comes down to this little document-- If you had sold these cars at these prices back in the sixtys & had to look at yourself in the mirror each morning knowing what their current values are-- do you not think that after you had called yourself a stupid *****, your next thought would be who can I skin today!!
Last edited:
You know, I reckon it all comes down to this little document-- If you had sold these cars at these prices back in the sixtys & had to look at yourself in the mirror each morning knowing what their current values are-- do you not think that after you had called yourself a stupid *****, your next thought would be who can I skin today!!
JacMac you hit the nail on the head. I am sure that Shel kicks himself for not keeping all the Daytona Coupes.
He did however sell his Cobra for Cadillac Eldorado money in the sixties and I think that I read somewhere that an engineless AC was invoiced to him for only around $1500.
Shelby did cash in on the big money for csx 427 though. In the mid eighties he had McCluskey build him the first of the continuation cars, the ones with the "rediscovered and csx serialized chassis numbers) Although the price of these cars was never disclosed rumour has it that they were a half million dollars each....
Mike
Chris - You are you thinking what i'm thinking.
Read this thread before jumping to any conclusions;
FFR Suspends Coupe Production - FFCobra.com - Factory Five Racing Discussion Forum
I'm sure Dave Smith is a good guy and all, but I don't always believe what CEOs say publicly about the reasons for some set of corporate circumstances. Witness Alan Fishman's (departed CEO of Washington Mutual) statements seven days before the collapse of WaMu indicating that Washington Mutual is "well capitalized, profitable, and your money is in a safe place." CEOs are always selling - selling the message which has been agreed at Board meetings and elsewhere internally as that which is desirable to telegraph to the world of investors and customers.
Frankly, I would guess that the behind-the-scenes situation is that FFR estimated the cost of a continued/ongoing legal battle with CS (primarily this is legal fees) to continue production of the coupe as-is, and decided that this incremental cost was high enough that it made it a low margin or loss-making endeavor overall and, consequently, decided to cease production once the current inventory of parts is used up.
Just my (cynical) guess.....
Frankly, I would guess that the behind-the-scenes situation is that FFR estimated the cost of a continued/ongoing legal battle with CS (primarily this is legal fees) to continue production of the coupe as-is, and decided that this incremental cost was high enough that it made it a low margin or loss-making endeavor overall and, consequently, decided to cease production once the current inventory of parts is used up.
Just my (cynical) guess.....
Hi guys,
interesting development.
Just how close to original is the FF Coupe, or indeed the Superformance Daytona ?
We get the Superformance one in the UK via Rod Leaches 'Nostalgia', but not seen a FF version.
Just interested, as the price sounds entertaining enough to think about having a punt at one
yeah, I know I need to go ask on the FF forum, but I'm not registered - yet, and besides some of you guys already know the answers
interesting development.
Just how close to original is the FF Coupe, or indeed the Superformance Daytona ?
We get the Superformance one in the UK via Rod Leaches 'Nostalgia', but not seen a FF version.
Just interested, as the price sounds entertaining enough to think about having a punt at one
yeah, I know I need to go ask on the FF forum, but I'm not registered - yet, and besides some of you guys already know the answers
John,
According to some information that I have read, the Superformance coupe was redesigned by none other than Brock Yates, the origional designer of the car. It's overall size dimentions are slightly larger (93 in. wheelbase vs 91" in orgional coupe) but Yates supposedly wanted a 93 in. wheelbase from the start. Who knows?
Someone else on this forum will need to comment on the FF version as I have not seen it. Come on you guys (you know who you are) let's have some more info please.
Garry
According to some information that I have read, the Superformance coupe was redesigned by none other than Brock Yates, the origional designer of the car. It's overall size dimentions are slightly larger (93 in. wheelbase vs 91" in orgional coupe) but Yates supposedly wanted a 93 in. wheelbase from the start. Who knows?
Someone else on this forum will need to comment on the FF version as I have not seen it. Come on you guys (you know who you are) let's have some more info please.
Garry
Neither are close , mainly due to the use of a different windscreen which dictates the upper cockpit size & shape. Even the 'originals' all have their individual differences when you look at some of the early group photos. Front area of door shape/cutout, 'blisters' @ rear lower wheel arch, rear spoiler,radiator air exit,roofline,w/screen angle are a few of the more obvious ones.
Last edited:
Hi guys,
Just how close to original is the FF Coupe, or indeed the Superformance Daytona ?
yeah, I know I need to go ask on the FF forum, but I'm not registered - yet, and besides some of you guys already know the answers
Maybe Bill Hough, A.K.A. FRPGUY, will chime in. He developed the coupe body for FFR.
Charlie