[ddimick]

I have heard one or two people claim that the aluminum panels add significantly to the structural integrity of the vehicle, but I've never heard FFR claim this. I believe the frame is equal to any other on the market. There are, of course, significant differences between the Mark I and Mark II frames. I didn't experience any feeling of flimsyness with the body. Perhaps you have not looked at a FFR closely in the past year or two?

I've never seen real evidence that the FFR frame is either superior or inferior to anyone else's. I'd be interested in actual proof, if anyone has any, otherwise it's just more rhetoric.

I agree about the bolts behind the pipes being a bit of an eyesore. There are methods of hiding those if it bothers you.

Anyway, I think what you are saying is that FFR is a poor replica for your needs/desires. I can't argue with that, as I don't think any one car can meet everyone's needs/desires. We both agree that Kirkham makes a fine replica, but it doesn't meet my needs because it costs far more than I can afford to spend on a hobby. For someone with a lot more disposable income than myself, it might fit the bill nicely. That doesn't mean I go around saying Kirkham makes a poor product because it doesn't pull my trigger, dig?