Replica or real? [help request from Switzerland and Italy] - Page 3

maurice19 · #1 (**permalink**) 09-29-2014, 09:33 PM

KMP318 is stamped on the port tower, drivers left, with all the letters and numbers required by California dmv and 0318 on the door hinges.

Maurice

damage · #2 (**permalink**) 09-30-2014, 05:55 AM

Ok so I take it Kirkham swaps sides with the stamp. And mine is also stamped on the door hinges.

DavideG · #3 (**permalink**) 09-30-2014, 07:15 PM

...edit...

1ntCobra · #4 (**permalink**) 10-01-2014, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavideG

Little question about the engine:
You have told me that in the pictures there is a small block V8.
On the car Swiss Title there is written 7.000cc engine with 428 kW / 580 bhp.
Is it possible that a small block has that cubage and that power?
On a 427 replica, what's the best engine choice to have a perfect (and marketable) replica?

It is possible to bore and stroke a small block ford engine to 427 cu/7 liters and develop that kind of horse power, but isn't it more likely that your paperwork is just not correct in yet another way.

If your car turns out to really be a 1996 Kirkham that has an inaccurate title indicating that the car is from 1961 for the purpose of getting it registered in Switzerland, then perhaps the car may not really be properly and legally registered. And that might limit the countries in Europe that you could legally get the car registered in when you try to sell it.

DanEC · #5 (**permalink**) 09-30-2014, 07:43 PM

For some reason your pictures aren't coming up on my old computer tonight but from memory it looked like a 289/302 series small block. Might have me fooled however and maybe it's a 351 windsor block. Certainly not a 428 FE big block however. A 427 FE series engine would be the most desirable with a 390/428 FE next.

MOTORHEAD · #6 (**permalink**) 10-01-2014, 06:41 AM

Davide: The engine you have pictured is a Ford 260/302 engine, max displacement that I am aware of is 347 cu in. Next size up would be the 351 cu in ,also a small block with higher deck and wider intake. These can be bored and stroked to 427 cu in with an aftermarket block. A true 427 would be the correct engine for the car, and a costly change from what you have. I can understand why someone would put a small block in a car for europe due to the cost of gas and maybe gas-guzzler taxes ?
Is My estimate of current value ($75-80k US) close to what you have in it? If you wanted to put in a different engine you might lose money . Sell it as is and let the new owner put in what he wants.

Ted

DavideG · #7 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 04:21 AM

...edit...

DavideG · #8 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 04:36 AM

...edit...

LMH · #9 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:01 AM

I can't tell from the photo's but the engine could be a 351W, which could be bored and stroked to 427 cubic inches. So while the displacement could match, it's not an FE block.
Larry

DavideG · #10 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:12 AM

...edit...

DanEC · #11 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavideG

Thank you very much Larry, I will do more photos of the engine in order to understand what we have.

Is there any chance to know if it is a pumped small block instead of a original one? Only dyno power test or there are some external details that can reveal it?

You would have to measure the block deck height from the crank centerline to determine for sure that it's a 289/302 block or a 351 block. Mearsuring overall width at the valve covers could also determine which it is. Pretty sure it's a 289/302. After that you would have to pull the engine apart and measure the bore and crank stroke to determine if it's stock displacement or something larger. Do you have any means of contact with prior owners? They might be able to provide more details or even an engine build spec sheet.

DavideG · #12 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:09 AM

...edit...

DanEC · #13 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavideG

On CobraClub Forum they suggested me to see the tv show "Pawn Stars" season 2 episode 2, because there is a Shelby Cobra '65 and they show where is stamped the chassis number if it is an original one.

Since I cannot see it on Youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oeDEU8uNKQ due to Youtube Italian restriction, a friend of mine looked for it on Torrent and he found it.
I have edited it in order to reduce the show only to Cobra part. Here it is if you want to download it (I will remove it in a couple of days): VIDEO

It seems to be that our consolle is not strange, but it is only naked. Look at the body and chassis in the video, and look at our central consolle. It seems to be the same, so maybe our consolle it's only a naked one?

The Pawn Stars car was not an original (65-67 era) Cobra - but was a continuation Cobra by Carroll Shelby. I don't study it enough to keep all the details straight but Kirkham has been heavily involved with the Shelby continuation series at various times. Kirkhams are even included in the Shelby Registry. So that it looks very similar to your car is not unexpected as I think everyone is 90% sure you have an early Kirkham. Some more pictures of the suspension and frame would cement the conclusion. The console is definately different but wouldn't be all that hard to do (or reverse to stock) as it's just aluminum sheet metal and rivets.

DavideG · #14 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:44 AM

...edit...

1ntCobra · #15 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:31 AM

The pawn stars cobra episode was a bunch of fiction as discussed here earlier...

Pawn Stars Kirkham ?

Rick Parker · #16 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 08:52 AM

I work with California vehicle titles daily. I believe this one to be false. It doesn't have the correct border, watermark or other distinguishing features. Be careful.
As far as the car it is primarily Kirkham.

DavideG · #17 (**permalink**) 10-03-2014, 09:05 AM

...edit...

1ntCobra · #18 (**permalink**) 10-06-2014, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Parker

I work with California vehicle titles daily. I believe this one to be false. It doesn't have the correct border, watermark or other distinguishing features. Be careful.
As far as the car it is primarily Kirkham.

So 0469 is from 2006, but you have a non-correct looking title that says the car was titled in California in 1996, 10 years before it was manufactured. I bet Rick is right that the California title is fake.

DavideG · #19 (**permalink**) 10-06-2014, 06:37 PM

...edit...

RodKnock · #20 (**permalink**) 10-07-2014, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

So 0469 is from 2006, but you have a non-correct looking title that says the car was titled in California in 1996, 10 years before it was manufactured. I bet Rick is right that the California title is fake.

Rick is right. The CA title is fake.

License Plate #2UHN4--?
The end of the "2" series license plates was reached in 1992 and the plate series changed over to 3AAA000. Maybe the '61 Bristol's license plate was 2UHN4--?

The VIN is LAC017? CA won't register/issue a VIN# that short. My CA VIN# uses the Kirkham issued chassis#, which is 11 characters. So, the VIN number should be at least 11 characters long, if not longer.

Registration issue date is 9/28/96. Registration expiration date is two weeks earlier on 9/14/96.

And the biggest clue that the title certificate is bogus? FEES PAID NONE. Come on, this is California. No business transacted at the DMV is free. Seriously?