I am getting much closer to placing an order finally. I have been set on ERA (1075 in Gulf colors) but the Superformance car looks great and the quality looks outstanding. I know that the MKII is the only one they are offering at this point, but does anyone know when the MKI is coming? I know that I probably could not go wrong with either manufacturer but I need some help. The ERA looks very original unlike the CAV's. Something just does not look right with the CAV's, I cannot put my finger on it but I think that it has something to do with the windshield, gulf flares and the lower part of the fuel tanks (too square) that do not look right. I just hope that the MKI from Superformance will stay somewhat true to the orignal dimensions like the ERA. If they can at a better price than the ERA, they may have my order. Any suggestions or thoughts would be much appreciated. Thanks
ERA or hold out for Superformance?
- Thread starter Robotic1
- Start date
I'm told my Superformance MKI (#23) should arrive around March of 2006. I'm not sure how many are on the list after me, but they are supposedly working up to 3-4 per month. Not much update info is coming from South Africa. I think they might be concentrating on promoting their Daytona Coupes.
J
JOHNBGT40
Guest
Both cars are nice! However I looked at all the companies and the best choice I found was the Roaring Forties. This copmany uses a advanced spaceframe design that if you were to get into a accident it can be repaired easily...Cav and Superfomance uses monocoche one piece frame. Which means that if you wrecked it, the car will never drive the same. In the sixties,they usually just tossed the frame in the garbage when it was wrecked. In comparison, Roaring Forties Turnkey minus
engine and transaxle is 49,990.00. Look up the website and check it out..contact Jerry in Louiville Ky. He will anserw all your technical and ordering info. I have one on order and personally driven one. The quility of this car is awsome In addition to saving 15,000 compared to the other companies.
I not trying to promote this car, I just think you should look at this company.
regards
engine and transaxle is 49,990.00. Look up the website and check it out..contact Jerry in Louiville Ky. He will anserw all your technical and ordering info. I have one on order and personally driven one. The quility of this car is awsome In addition to saving 15,000 compared to the other companies.
I not trying to promote this car, I just think you should look at this company.
regards
ERA has long been the benchmark for GT40 replicas...and
IMHO still is. Competitors such as CAV or RF etc offer
consumers choices in price range with very little loss
in performance or "fun factor" vs the ERA. In fact there
are space frame cars which outperform most any ERA.
ERA's pitch is their superior authenticity compared to
their competitors, which SPF is now challenging.
The problem with SPF is that their development cycle
has been done in front of the world to see...and many
who thought the product would have been ready years ago
are still waiting.
Given SPF's track record, and seeing their MK II in person,
I think the SPF will be worth the wait. You gotta love
that steel roof. And unless you already have a deposit
with ERA.....their leadtime is typically a year (or more).
So who knows which one would be delivered first.
And given the fact that the SPF will be a turn-key...
the amount of time needed to be on the road could be a lot less. Of course for those that NEED to be part of the build process....the ERA may hold a special appeal.
Either vehicle is OUTSTANDING.
MikeD
IMHO still is. Competitors such as CAV or RF etc offer
consumers choices in price range with very little loss
in performance or "fun factor" vs the ERA. In fact there
are space frame cars which outperform most any ERA.
ERA's pitch is their superior authenticity compared to
their competitors, which SPF is now challenging.
The problem with SPF is that their development cycle
has been done in front of the world to see...and many
who thought the product would have been ready years ago
are still waiting.
Given SPF's track record, and seeing their MK II in person,
I think the SPF will be worth the wait. You gotta love
that steel roof. And unless you already have a deposit
with ERA.....their leadtime is typically a year (or more).
So who knows which one would be delivered first.
And given the fact that the SPF will be a turn-key...
the amount of time needed to be on the road could be a lot less. Of course for those that NEED to be part of the build process....the ERA may hold a special appeal.
Either vehicle is OUTSTANDING.
MikeD
I have not seen the SP GT40 in person but if is like their Cobra it will not be close to ERA. I have owned 4 ERA including a replica of 1075. ERA goes out of their way to please their customer. They are built in the USA which is easy to work. In my opinion the MK-I looks better than the MK-II. ERA has the capacity to built MK-II the problem is the gearbox and they alway want perfection.
Folks:
I'm not certain what the basis for the comment "In fact there are space frame cars which outperform most any ERA." is. I have yet to see any "tube frame" GT that I would trade in my ERA for!
Having owned one ERAGT and with another on the way, I'm not changing horses now. ERA has a 25 year record of providing excellent customer support and its cars designed to go together, engineered properly.
Having said that, I've seen the Superformance MkII at Carlisle and spoken on several occasions to a Superformance dealer about it (who supplied many of the molds, parts etc. to Superformance to be copied.) At the end of the day, there will probably be little quantitative difference between them.
I do like the fact that the ERA chassis is now stainless steel (and I have had my chassis powder coated besides.) I also like the fact that I can get in my car, drive an hour and one-half to New Britain, CT. and talk directly to the guy welding up the chassis, or running the brake lines, etc. There is no question that a completed Superformance "apples to apples" will probably be less expensive, but at least initially, it appears that there are few options available, whereas, with the ERA each is pretty much a custom build for each customer.
Frankly, if I were out shopping for my first "component car" I might consider the Superformance, but with twenty plus years of experience with ERA and its crew of merry men, I'm too old to start out with another company...
Jim
I'm not certain what the basis for the comment "In fact there are space frame cars which outperform most any ERA." is. I have yet to see any "tube frame" GT that I would trade in my ERA for!
Having owned one ERAGT and with another on the way, I'm not changing horses now. ERA has a 25 year record of providing excellent customer support and its cars designed to go together, engineered properly.
Having said that, I've seen the Superformance MkII at Carlisle and spoken on several occasions to a Superformance dealer about it (who supplied many of the molds, parts etc. to Superformance to be copied.) At the end of the day, there will probably be little quantitative difference between them.
I do like the fact that the ERA chassis is now stainless steel (and I have had my chassis powder coated besides.) I also like the fact that I can get in my car, drive an hour and one-half to New Britain, CT. and talk directly to the guy welding up the chassis, or running the brake lines, etc. There is no question that a completed Superformance "apples to apples" will probably be less expensive, but at least initially, it appears that there are few options available, whereas, with the ERA each is pretty much a custom build for each customer.
Frankly, if I were out shopping for my first "component car" I might consider the Superformance, but with twenty plus years of experience with ERA and its crew of merry men, I'm too old to start out with another company...
Jim
Ron McCall
Supporter
Have you looked at what RCR has to offer?
http://www.race-car-replicas.com/
http://www.race-car-replicas.com/
J
JOHNBGT40
Guest
My comment was for information regarding the quality of product and price. Yes! all these cars manf. are good. But why spend 15/20 grand more for a car when you don't have to. RF cars in my opinion, are just as high quility as ERA SPM. That was the basis of my comment.
regards
regards
J
JOHNBGT40
Guest
Again! RCR nice cars...Dont wreck it! you wreck it forget it
oliver,
In general, most cars on the road right now are not spaceframes. I don't know about where you live, but in LA they do wreck a few every now and then. After they are wrecked, some manage to get fixed and drive just fine.
I am guessing that the ERA or SPF or RCR or CAV are not throw aways and can be repaired depending on the severity of the shunt.
Regards,
Mike
In general, most cars on the road right now are not spaceframes. I don't know about where you live, but in LA they do wreck a few every now and then. After they are wrecked, some manage to get fixed and drive just fine.
I am guessing that the ERA or SPF or RCR or CAV are not throw aways and can be repaired depending on the severity of the shunt.
Regards,
Mike
Hi NSX,
I had to chirp in here, CAV windshields fit perfectly in the original cars, the flares and sills are as close as any manufacturer. True, there are subtle differences between brands, that doesn't make it wrong.
What is fair to say is that I believe each manufacturer is putting out the best product they can in an increasingly more competitive market. This is good for you, the consumer.
These are great looking cars, anytime, anywhere people see one it just freaks them out. Old guys can't believe their eyes, woman follow you off the road, kids love it and the tuner guys don't even think about running you.
If you want a car in the near future, please take a serious look at CAV. If you've got lots of time, there are choices...
I had to chirp in here, CAV windshields fit perfectly in the original cars, the flares and sills are as close as any manufacturer. True, there are subtle differences between brands, that doesn't make it wrong.
What is fair to say is that I believe each manufacturer is putting out the best product they can in an increasingly more competitive market. This is good for you, the consumer.
These are great looking cars, anytime, anywhere people see one it just freaks them out. Old guys can't believe their eyes, woman follow you off the road, kids love it and the tuner guys don't even think about running you.
If you want a car in the near future, please take a serious look at CAV. If you've got lots of time, there are choices...
Attachments
Ron McCall
Supporter
[ QUOTE ]
Again! RCR nice cars...Dont wreck it! you wreck it forget it
[/ QUOTE ]
Why would you say such a thing?! If Fran can make it,I'm sure he could repair it .I'm sure that a replacement tub could be had as well.the thought that a monocoque chassis can not be repaired is absolutely obsurd! I guess I better not wreck my Pantera either!And why would a aluminum chassis be harder to repair than a stainless steel one?Please explain yourself.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Again! RCR nice cars...Dont wreck it! you wreck it forget it
[/ QUOTE ]
Why would you say such a thing?! If Fran can make it,I'm sure he could repair it .I'm sure that a replacement tub could be had as well.the thought that a monocoque chassis can not be repaired is absolutely obsurd! I guess I better not wreck my Pantera either!And why would a aluminum chassis be harder to repair than a stainless steel one?Please explain yourself.
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Hi Ron,
Hard to be politically correct all the time, however it's generally accepted that monocoque is the way to go and RCR is helping to move that process along.
I suspect most tube frame manufacturers plan to introduce monocoque chassis as soon as production cycles and retooling costs allow.
Goes back to my earlier comment, everyone is trying to put out the best product they can.
GT40 replica tube frames are very good, not as good as a monocoque but let's not rain on anyones' parade by saying monocoques cost more to repair or are automatically written off if you have a shunt.
You buy the car to drive and enjoy, if you're concerned about bending it or getting hurt (heaven forbid) then buy a Hummer.
Hard to be politically correct all the time, however it's generally accepted that monocoque is the way to go and RCR is helping to move that process along.
I suspect most tube frame manufacturers plan to introduce monocoque chassis as soon as production cycles and retooling costs allow.
Goes back to my earlier comment, everyone is trying to put out the best product they can.
GT40 replica tube frames are very good, not as good as a monocoque but let's not rain on anyones' parade by saying monocoques cost more to repair or are automatically written off if you have a shunt.
You buy the car to drive and enjoy, if you're concerned about bending it or getting hurt (heaven forbid) then buy a Hummer.
Ian,
I hope that you did not take my comments about CAV's the wrong way. They are extremely nice, especially yours. You have done a great job not only visually but mechanically as well. The wider rear track looks great, especially with the tires fitting just right in the rear fenders. My choice also comes down to the type of transmission which I would prefer to be a ZF. Thanks
I hope that you did not take my comments about CAV's the wrong way. They are extremely nice, especially yours. You have done a great job not only visually but mechanically as well. The wider rear track looks great, especially with the tires fitting just right in the rear fenders. My choice also comes down to the type of transmission which I would prefer to be a ZF. Thanks
CAV can use a ZF or Audi Getrag-No problems either way! There are many CAV members on the forum using ZF's. I simply preferred newer transaxle technology. It was a bonus that it came with a lower price.
I don't care which frame you prefer but there is one thing I know from experience. I have repaired unitized bodies and they ain't no picnic. The technology in repair tools has made it a bit better but they still have difficulies depending on the severity of the damage. I would much rather repair tube chassis than a Unibody any day. Far easier for me. As far as cost of repair goes..If both types recieved the same damage my money is on the space frame getting repaired quicker and with less cost.
With todays engineering space frames can acheive rigidity figures that equal a unibody or a monocoque.The space frame may by slightly heavier but it will be nominal.
There is probably only five or six people on this board that can drive either type and tell the difference. I know I couldn't and to me it doesn't matter. What does matter is that I bought the car that I see as the best out there for my needs. To go out and be a Walter Mitty and feel the excitment and experience the thrill of a roadrace. I know I could never drive like the pros but I sure can get the same feelings.
I do know that regardless of which car this guy picks he will be happy. Then he's gonna crow about how good his car is just like we're doing. Every guy that posted here had a good reason for buying what they bought. Some bought because they were built in America. Some bought because of economics and otheres bought what they did because they wanted something as close to original as possible.
Bottom line... check out all the manufacturers and do your research. With the tools such as the internet it make the reseach alot easier. You can e mail people on the forum and get private responses about their car. Don't let your wallet dictate what you buy..sometimes the most expensive isn't the answer.
Hersh /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
With todays engineering space frames can acheive rigidity figures that equal a unibody or a monocoque.The space frame may by slightly heavier but it will be nominal.
There is probably only five or six people on this board that can drive either type and tell the difference. I know I couldn't and to me it doesn't matter. What does matter is that I bought the car that I see as the best out there for my needs. To go out and be a Walter Mitty and feel the excitment and experience the thrill of a roadrace. I know I could never drive like the pros but I sure can get the same feelings.
I do know that regardless of which car this guy picks he will be happy. Then he's gonna crow about how good his car is just like we're doing. Every guy that posted here had a good reason for buying what they bought. Some bought because they were built in America. Some bought because of economics and otheres bought what they did because they wanted something as close to original as possible.
Bottom line... check out all the manufacturers and do your research. With the tools such as the internet it make the reseach alot easier. You can e mail people on the forum and get private responses about their car. Don't let your wallet dictate what you buy..sometimes the most expensive isn't the answer.
Hersh /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Hersh,
I completely agree with your buying recommendations, and if I run into somebody who bends his tube frame GT40 I'll give him your name
As they used to say on NY PD Blue, "be safe out there".
I used to race Formula Fords, so I've seen a few bent tube frames. I'll go along that a simple bent corner might be quicker to repair on a tube chassis than monocoque, however if the chassis gets wacked hard enough to trapezoid it, then you're into a whole lot more work than a monocoque taking equal impact. The whole tube chassis should be stripped bare, depanelled and straightened. All welds inspected, chassis repainted, repanelled (most likely involving new rivet holes and panels too) and then reassembled. Whew!
As a stressed skin chassis, a well designed monocoque of equal weight will distribute the impact over the entire chassis resulting in less localized damage than the greater concentration of forces that occur in tube frame cars. "logical" says Spock...
With the CAV in particular we can feed the panel dimensions into the computer and get perfect replacement panels. Corrosion is also a non issue with the stainless steel chassis (says the guy with snow drifts in the picture behind his cars!).
It's a good thing to have choices and price ranges to suit most budgets. The GT40 enthusiast market is big enough to support all the manufacturers and competition always improves the breed.
I completely agree with your buying recommendations, and if I run into somebody who bends his tube frame GT40 I'll give him your name
As they used to say on NY PD Blue, "be safe out there".I used to race Formula Fords, so I've seen a few bent tube frames. I'll go along that a simple bent corner might be quicker to repair on a tube chassis than monocoque, however if the chassis gets wacked hard enough to trapezoid it, then you're into a whole lot more work than a monocoque taking equal impact. The whole tube chassis should be stripped bare, depanelled and straightened. All welds inspected, chassis repainted, repanelled (most likely involving new rivet holes and panels too) and then reassembled. Whew!
As a stressed skin chassis, a well designed monocoque of equal weight will distribute the impact over the entire chassis resulting in less localized damage than the greater concentration of forces that occur in tube frame cars. "logical" says Spock...
With the CAV in particular we can feed the panel dimensions into the computer and get perfect replacement panels. Corrosion is also a non issue with the stainless steel chassis (says the guy with snow drifts in the picture behind his cars!).
It's a good thing to have choices and price ranges to suit most budgets. The GT40 enthusiast market is big enough to support all the manufacturers and competition always improves the breed.
Hi NSXR,
No problem and thanks for the compliment. It's you the customer that has to be listened to. Arriving at or evolving to the right balance between absolute authenticity, ease of fabrication, tooling costs, accomodating todays larger drivers and passengers, plus hitting a price point that secures your business is no small task.
Depending on your intended use, you may find the original cars and carbon copies of such more appropriate for track use than cruise nights, wine country tours or a cross country hop. For that you need a rationalized car, more interior space, strong A/C, comfortable yet controlled ride and maybe even some room for luggage!
No problem and thanks for the compliment. It's you the customer that has to be listened to. Arriving at or evolving to the right balance between absolute authenticity, ease of fabrication, tooling costs, accomodating todays larger drivers and passengers, plus hitting a price point that secures your business is no small task.
Depending on your intended use, you may find the original cars and carbon copies of such more appropriate for track use than cruise nights, wine country tours or a cross country hop. For that you need a rationalized car, more interior space, strong A/C, comfortable yet controlled ride and maybe even some room for luggage!
Attachments
Similar threads
