Cobra: CSX2009

RodKnock · #1 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John McMahon

But I think we all know that this car has provenance...who cares how many times its been rebuilt...many of these original cars were hacked up from the get go. I still like to shake that hands of the guys that still drive them...or race them.

Jeff, I think John expresses my thoughts the best.

2009's history is recorded, in detail, in the SAAC archives. So, whoever owns 2009 next may decide to restore it again, according to his or her tastes, which may in fact mirror your personal taste.

It's only about time and money.

jeffy · #2 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Jeff, I think John expresses my thoughts the best.

2009's history is recorded, in detail, in the SAAC archives. So, whoever owns 2009 next may decide to restore it again, according to his or her tastes, which may in fact mirror your personal taste.

It's only about time and money.

Rod-

A point none of the "experts" has raised is that CSX2557 sold for $1.6mm and did not have the race history of this car. If it didn't matter how the current owner chose to rebuild CSX2009, then why doesn't it command at least that amount and more?

BTW, my personal taste has nothing to do with it. The car is simply an inauthentic replica of a 1964 competition car with bits of a 1963 competition car thrown in. Those are facts, not opinion.

Jeff

RodKnock · #3 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffy

Rod-

A point none of the "experts" has raised is that CSX2557 sold for $1.6mm and did not have the race history of this car. If it didn't matter how the current owner chose to rebuild CSX2009, then why doesn't it command at least that amount and more?

BTW, my personal taste has nothing to do with it. The car is simply an inauthentic replica of a 1964 competition car with bits of a 1963 competition car thrown in. Those are facts, not opinion.

Jeff

I have no clue about what 2557 and 2009 have sold for, will sell for or about the their value at all. I'm not an expert.

But we all know that auction prices may vary due to time, place, people, etc. So, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on auction prices to form a complete valuation of each car myself. Just reading Keith Martin's Sports Car Market auction magazine, the variables at auctions are numerous including alcohol consumption.

Having said that, 2557 may just be a better and more faithfully original CSX, and I gather that from your statements on the matter. BUT, to say that 2009 doesn’t exist anymore, is a fantasy recreation or that your ERA is more real is just NOT correct IMHO.

jeffy · #4 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Having said that, 2557 may just be a better and more faithfully original CSX, and I gather that from your statements on the matter. BUT, to say that 2009 doesn’t exist anymore, is a fantasy recreation or that your ERA is more real is just NOT correct IMHO.

Rod-

It is fair to say that CSX2557 is an unmolested 1964 competition car.

BTW, I did not say my car was "more real". However, visually, it is a more authentic reproduction of a 1964 competition car than CSX2009, at least in my opinion. If anyone disagrees, please be specific.

With respect to these experts' opinions, I'm really not buying it. With each telling, it gets less credible. Just look at CSX2009 as it now exists: you are trying to tell me that is a "rebuilt race car" that just happened to wind up looking this way? It is obvious that it is a poorly conceived hodge-podge of CSX2002 and someone's idea of a 1964 competition car, that was built to be a trailer queen first and a racer a very distant second, if at all (there is no roll-cage, no race seat, no race mirrors, on and on). Obviously, that is why its value is significantly lower than CSX2557.

Jeff

csx4910 · #5 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 06:50 PM

Me thinks Jeffy suffers from CSX envy. If not why dedicate so much time to bashing it and trying to defend your position? Grow up and move on

jeffy · #6 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by csx4910

Me thinks Jeffy suffers from CSX envy. If not why dedicate so much time to bashing it and trying to defend your position? Grow up and move on

CSX4910-

First, I don't think I'm "bashing" CSX2009: I think I am dispassionately describing what it is. There is no intent to "bash" or "promote" (as others are quite clearly trying to do): just get at the facts. Really, whats the big deal? It is obvious what CSX2009 is and isn't. I'm not the one trying to bend the truth. Why should I? Makes no difference to me.

On your second point, I don't roll over. So long as there are posters that want to engage with me, bring it on. I'm game.

Jeff

computerworks · #7 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeffy

So long as there are posters that want to engage with me, bring it on. I'm game.

Game over.

John McMahon · #8 (**permalink**) 12-06-2011, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Jeff, I think John expresses my thoughts the best.

2009's history is recorded, in detail, in the SAAC archives. So, whoever owns 2009 next may decide to restore it again, according to his or her tastes, which may in fact mirror your personal taste.

It's only about time and money.

correct! Its a race car...regardless of its history...it was still raced...it was still wrecked...it was modified over and over...at what point in time do you then say..."THIS" is how CSX2009 should look??? it was used, abused, tossed away and then brought back from the dead.

Fact of the matter is...the current owner could sell this car with a steaming turd on the hood and it will still have some most of us will never have....this: