GT40 Replicas in Mainstream

[Ron Earp]

I was just flipping through a car rag and noticed an article about the Pagani Zonda (incidentally, a darn ugly car if you ask me). The article went on about the "boutique" status of the marquee and mentioned that to date 60 cars had been delivered.

Now, 60 is far less than some GT40 replica companies, such as CAV, have delivered. And I'm sure there are more than 60 running CAVs around. So, I wonder if it would be possible to get a GT40 replica into a mainstream car rag to test? A CAV would be a good choice I think since there are a lot running ones out there, GTD would be good too but probably not for US rags and besides, the car really isn't available in the US any longer.

Some of the mainstream car rags have tested replica cars like the Superformance Daytona Coupe and the Factory Five Cobra replicas, but it always seems to go poorly. Engine breaks, car can't be ragged on, car won't perform, etc. etc. and the net conclusion at the end of the story is "cool, but not a real car". It'd be nice to see one of the US big three (R&T, C&D, or Motor Trend) test a well done GT40 and test it well.

Have we got any contacts here on the forum to start something like this? If we could manage it we'd need a car that was very well built (any currently available make would work), looked fantastic, and could at least match the Ford GT in straightline acceleration numbers as well as not break during the test!

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/driving.gif

Ron

 

[John B]

Ron,

My car as you well know and driven will be completed in febuary 2006. I will have a brand new Dart alum. 331 block. With cross ram induction conected to the zf transaxle. I would be more than happy too put it through the test with a major rag against the new Gt. Let me know if you can set it up.

Oliver

 

Hi Ron. Let’s do it, if it happens to be on the west side of the U.S.A. I’m in, www.vipclassics.com. I have just received 2 of the NEW FABULOS post 100 chassis from Autofutura, one of which is being prepped as my demo/driver/show/racer. 351/bored and stroked to 427 dart aluminum/scat/T.R.W. injection, approx. 560hp. RBT.ZF trans. New Autofutura design stainless steel chassis and suspension, 6 piston large Kenwood brakes. New improved vynealester body. New suede leather interior, over 50 new upgrades and improvements and the big one 6'5"tall…NO problem. Let’s give them a run for their money. They have new technology we are almost 1/3 lighter so hopefully should be able to put on a good show. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[Malcolm]

Just as a peice of history, GTD's have been tested a couple of times in some mags here in UK and come out favourably as supercars. Also some cars have been tested on TV, mine having been one of them. An issue seems to be that it is possible to make a replica better than the origional in certain aspects (here we go with a purists flame war!!!!) in the mind of the tester but for the mag or tv show to publicly say so would cause them real grief if they ever wanted to play with originals later. Real GT40's are fabulous. Real GTD's are also fabulous. Each car has its own purpose and that is different between the cars. They are not the same thing but both are welcome in my garage.

Trevor Legate wrote his GT40 book which I know a good number of forum guys have. He put a GTD on the front cover! And he got into controversy with book reveiwers for it. However it is an excellent book (and good Christmas present if you don't yet have it). It also has a chapter on replicas as they are part of the modern GT40 story as testimony as to how good the Ford GT40's are. Same as applies to the Cobra world.

Under the classic description of supercar, our replicas are supercars just not made by a factory. If I built 200 cars all identical spec under my own name that makes me a manufacturer. One car makes me a kit car builder! The mags and tv shows will treat me accordingly!

 

[Ron Earp]

[ QUOTE ]
If I built 200 cars all identical spec under my own name that makes me a manufacturer. One car makes me a kit car builder! The mags and tv shows will treat me accordingly!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true and comes up all the time in discussions about replicas of any type or cars of any type. I just recently read in Sports Car about the reviewers slagging off the Noble because "it isn't a real car", that is, not built by a well-known manufacturer. Same happens on the Cobra boards and even here - my XYZ comes from the "factory" complete, so it is a step above your ABC that you built. Maybe, maybe not.

Anyhow, what we need are contacts in the car publication industry to even get it started, or, someone to write some letters to the right people there. We can line up the GT40 later, and with all the subliminal (and not subliminal) advertising on the forum getting a car won't be a problem, I imagine selecting the car from the many offered will be the issue!

 

[Dan W]

Ron, may I suggest when you get to the point of selecting a car when and if a mag wants to do a comparison, choose a "off the shelf " latest version of either CAV(Auto Futura),Roaring Forties , RCR or Superformance. That way they will have the latest standard brakes, susp. etc. Then I would also choose one that had a fairly typical engine setup and gearbox. Any one eventually can throw enough money and development and beat a large manufacturer with a good platform to start in different test areas with so whats the point? Why not something that represents what is out there and available.So let the chips fall as they will.I don't know what the final weight of the cars are stacked against each other , I would use that as a measure also on selection favoring the lighter car.
One other thing I would suggest is the person owning the car should have a character that represents the community well, since they are "our " representative and he will be dealing with the press .A full knowledge of the vehicle, GT 40 History, Replica development , and a good understanding at what it took to create the car he owns and drives or built it himself.
I my self am exempt from this since I do not have the latest offering from RF and am not as versed as 90 percent of the members on the board on the history and roots of the GT 40 ,,, so try to take my opinion as unbiased . Regards, Dan /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/driving.gif

 

[Ron Earp]

Hi Dan, good point. And, also, I wasn't looking to compare GT40 replicas, just a good replica and the Ford GT.

I don't think we need a "ringer", but fact is most folks are using stroker motors in their GT40s nowadays. Used to be a lot of standard 302s, but you don't see very many of those anymore, even in England where Ford SB stuff is a little harder and more expensive to come buy.

Personally I'd favor a lighter cars - light makes right, and we'll need a newer cars from any manufactuer. If we get this setup in the next couple of months CAV would be the only car choice. It isn't the lightest car for sure, but it is available unlike the others since RF has no new runners available, RCRs are being built but not up and running, and I don't think any of us has any idea on Superformance.

I am going to try and draft something up to get a test started but I'm not sure how far it'll go. My guess is that Superformance will get a full-on magazine test and article with their conections and clout, as they did with the Daytona Coupe, once they have a car(s) available.

 

[Jim Downard]

I'll volunteer my car, but the only problem it, we'll need to get a few strong guys to pick the car up and carry it, then we'll also need a whole lot of guys who can push like the wind. Remember, those who volunteer to be pushers need to be able to run faster than a Ford GT.

 

[Mike Dozier]

I may be wrong...but depending on the reporter involved,
ultimate perfomance may not be as important in generating
good impression/press as fit, finish, comfort, ergonomics,
reliability, etc.

What I thought we are trying to impress here is how close modern well constructed replicas come to "real" cars
in all these categories. A bullet fast GT40 that is not
user friendly will quickly be revealed as such.

To me the most impressive GT40 is either Peter Ransome's
DRB or Hershel's RF...why? Because they are obviously
reliable and comfortable to have racked up un-godly amounts
of mileage on real streets..plus have competed well in
track events.

MikeD

 

[Ron Earp]

Hershal's RF would be a good choice in the US, for sure, but it is not the latest RF effort. Is Peter's car in the US? It'd be good too I'd think.

I think you'd need both the performance and the fit and finish to compare well. Reporters and folks in general are a nitpicky group and will have a tendacy to say things like "It goes like stink but....." or "It looks great, but looks aren't everything..." or "for a kit car, it is pretty good, but....". It'll be hard to get a 40 that can stand up to the press. I know they exist, but getting a pressman or woman to admit it will be a hard road.

Ron

 

I would agree that an all around package is better than just pure grunt. I was watching a TOp Gear review of TVR Sagaris and they imeadiatly went on about the smell of GRP even though they thought it performed well. But then again someone like Clarkson has a preset view on Kit cars already and I do not think we could change it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/bash.gif

But it would make a good show. They did a coparisson this year of old technology verse New. We could suggest a simular approach Kit vs real.

Now who knows Clarkson or Hammond?

 

[Ron Earp]

Personally, from watching Top Gear and reading some of the Brit car rags you guys are much more receptive of "odd" cars and more objective in evaluation of a car for merits instead of "its a replica" or "its a kit car".

Hershals car is fantastic and is a driver, driven a lot, and performs well. Looks fantastic too. But I bet in Car and Driver's hands it'd not fair too well on review simply because it was built by Hershal (no offense meant!). Now, take the same car and tell them it was built by a factory in Australia and it'd get a better review. Wish it was different, but lots of folks, especially ones slightly older than myself, have a strong stigma in the US about "kit cars", "self built cars", "non-complete cars" and I think it goes back to the insanely bad kit cars from the late 60s and 70s built on VW pans that looked horrible.

In fact, I think to have a chance at a large car mag review the car will have to be "factory" built, that is, arrive in the US as a roller. I can't recall in 25 years of reading main US car rags them specifically and knowingly reviewing a "self built" or "one off" car, except when it has been a mis-represented original or mis-represented original built from a burned out chassis or a 2ft section of frame that all the new bits were welded back onto.

R

 

Ron, I think Peter Eagan built a westfield XI and did a cross country trip in it as a review for Road and Track back in the 80s. Came out pretty good, I used to have a link to it. I will post it if I find it.

Is he still around and writing?

Might be an interesting suggestion letter to him.

 

[Ian K]

About 10 years ago, either Road & Track, Car & Driver, or,
more likely, Automobile, did an article about Ray Mallock's
RML GT40 replica. IIRC, the writer gave it a very favorable
review.

Ian

 

[Ron Earp]

Peter is still writing for Cycle World and R&T - fantastic writer. Also writes for a plane rag I can't remember. He's my idol - perfect job, writing about planes, cars, and bikes. His books are excellent and I highly recommend him. He'd definitely give a fair shake, but he doesn't review anything anymore, just writes. Automobile is more favorable to these sorts of things sometimes I think, little more Euro flavor to that rag. If you have that article we should get it up here.

Ron

 

Let’s hope none of the reviews will be anything like what I have in front of me right now! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/flamer.gif

Car & Driver, May 1993 Testing a FACTORY BUILT ERA.

“In short, this is a race car that needs more development. It is difficult to drive to its limit and is as nervous there as a badger up a rotten birch sapling.,,,,,,,,and keep in mind that this particular kit was assembled by its own manufacturer. You think you’re going to do any better? If you can live with that, we’ll see if Gaudette can find Stephanie Seymour’s phone number.”


Car & Driver, June 1967 Testing Ford GT-40 MK III.

“changing gears is a joke. As mentioned, the clutch and transmission linkages were hopelessly out of whack. Just as the clutch is about to bite, a return spring goes over center, and ruins any attempt at smooth engagement .,,,,,,,Once inside, despair at lack of accommodation, lack of workmanship, lack of hardware, lack of planning for practical street application. The workmanship and most of the hardware in this, the most costly Ford of all, are miserably below the standards of meanest Falcon”

I am sure lots of things have changed since 1993, I HOPE.

 

[40 Bud]

Unfortunately the1993 evaluation of the ERA was probably right. Some of the early builds of these cars were twitchy and the suspension set up was not well understood by many. I remember that particular review and at about the same time there were two cars being set up in northern Calif. that had similar problems. They all looked pretty but didn't handle for squat. Now that a number of builders have gotten envolved and sorted things out I think the opinions would be different. Does anyone recall a test by Car and Driver of a GTD? I thought Ray once mentioned pulling 1g on a skid pad in test for them.

 

[Malcolm]

You speak of mags not interested unless there is an angle reminded me of when I was in Boston and Brian showed me a magazine (can't remember which one) with Rick Mertz's car on the front cover and lead story. How it got there went something like this.....

Ordinary car journalist walks into editors office and says, "I have the opportunity to review and test Rick Mertz's GTD40."

Editor hears "I have the opportunity to review and test Rick Mears's GT40"! and so replies "fabulous, we'll give it the cover and lead story in the next issue".

When journalist comes back with the story and pictures and shows them to the editor he gets balled out as no pictures of Rick Mears. But it is too late to change the plan and so Rick Mertz gets the hero slot!

But it was a favourable write up.

 

I have that magazine, it is KIT CAR ILLUSTRATED.

 

Here it is,