Misconceptions

[REAL 1]

Originally Posted by Tommy

I was at a local cruise-in Saturday when I met a nice guy who showed up in a Superformance Cobra replica. He described it as a 15 year old car that he had acquired from the original owner about four months ago. The original owner seldom drove the car, preferring to trailer it to car shows, so it was in very good condition despite its age. He described the drivetrain as a 427 Cleveland backed by a Tremec 5-speed..

The owner was a very talkative guy who plainly enjoyed telling people about his new toy. And he had apparently heard a lot from the original owner as well as others. Unfortunately, he was either misinformed or misunderstood some of what he had learned. Without overtly declaring his brand of replica was better than others, here are a few of his beliefs:
- His Superformance was not a “kit car” because it came complete from the factory with engine, transmission, wheels and tires.
- His Superformance was the only brand approved by Carroll Shelby because it was a nuts and bolts accurate reproduction of the original cars from the 1960s.

I tried to explain that all Cobra replicas are “kit cars” in the sense that federal law prohibits manufacturers from selling complete cars that do not comply with all contemporary safety rules, so even the most complete kits lack engines, transmissions, wheels and tires. I also expressed the opinion that Shelby’s company would give its blessing to any brand or product that paid enough.

My point in sharing this conversation is to express the opinion that many of the misconceptions about Cobra replicas are being fed by the comments of replica owners (and sellers) who want the uninformed public to think that their particular replica is for some reason better than most of the others. In the early days of Cobra replicas (i.e., 1980s), when a Cobra shaped car of any kind, real or replica, was rare, I suspect there was an element of pride in the hearts of those who had the courage, skill and determination to build a replica. But as the number of replicas has boomed, the aura of skill required to build one has diminished. It began to look like anyone with a garage and some cash could do it.

When I first joined this forum in 2002, it felt like most of the people who posted regularly knew something about how cars work. People understood things like brake pedal ratios, corner weights and the dangers of working around a car with quick jacks. But the success of companies like Superformance and Shelby has changed the demographic of Cobra replica owners. I sense that many new owners know little more about their cars than the typical owner of a new Corvette or Mustang. For them there is comfort in believing that their cars were built by a factory worker rather than some unknown guy in his home garage. And that comfort has led them to believe that their cars are inherently superior to other brands.

I suspect it is human nature for most of us to think that what we have is better than what you have, and I doubt this post will change any of that. But I will encourage all to keep in mind that anytime you start believing your car is better than all others because of its brand, someone will come along to prove you wrong. Somewhere out there is a home built Cobra replica we can all laugh at, but there is also one better than any mass produced car.

The public is by and large ignorant about Cobras and replicas thereof compared to the knowledge base of many here (except those that still think Chevy power belongs in a Cobra replica). The owner of the Spf that Tommy is talking about is obviously still ignorant in many respects and hasn't educated himself on Cobras or replicas or their history. He sounds like he has a superficial knowledge base as does much of the public.

What is "better" is subject to many interpretations. What does "better" mean? You tell me what "better" means in any particular case I tell you whether I agree your car fits that definition. Is it based on objective factors or subjective and/or intangible factors?

"Kit" has a different definitions. Are you using the dictionary definition or commonly understood meaning of Kit or SAAC's definition? If original cars were being made today in the same fashion they would be "kits" according to some definitions.

Bottom line. There is nothing wrong with thinking your car is better than others. You obviously would have bought something else had you thought otherwise finances permitting. Even if finances don't permit some cars are better than others depending on the measuring stick being used. Sometimes it is better because of brand because that's what's important to you.

You can think your car is better than mine. Chances are I think mine is better than yours. Thinking your car is better is a different issue than mis-representing what it is.

Where's the issue here?