Kirkham vs Shelby

[sgianino]

Haa! I remember back then meeting Walt Senior and the son...I think Junior was spraying back then but i could be wrong.I think my car was done around 2005 and has held up well...If i was to do it again i would eliminate the Heating system being i never have used it and maybe would of considered a Borla EFI webber look instead of Carb...

[Chaplin]

Yup, I'd go ERA all day every day too, but then again I am a little biased having owned my ERA 427 since 2003. My ERA has been flawless since day one.

ERA has a well-earned reputation in the market for a reason. They make a fantastic product and their customer service is second to none.

I haven't seen the SPF sladside in person, but I am sure it is nice. But I guess my question is this:

Since it is a replica, is the original buggy style suspension of the SPF really a selling point?

IMO, I'd rather have a well built, well engineered car that visually looks like the real thing but with the best possible suspension under it The ERA will be a better driving and handling car because it doesn't have a buggy style suspension.

At the end of the day, no one is going to look at your replica slabside and say "Gee, that's a beautiful, well built car that handles and drives great, but too bad it doesn't have the buggy suspension on it."

But some people are OCD when it comes to originality of their replicas (and we shall not mention their names here). I guess the question for the OP is this: Is having a car with an original style suspension more important than having a car with better suspension and handling? If the answer is yes, then the ERA is not the car for you.

[RUFdriver]

Since we’re showing baby pictures, here’s my UCC Cobra fresh out of the mold in Texas!

[nkb]

Originally Posted by Chaplin

Yup, I'd go ERA all day every day too, but then again I am a little biased having owned my ERA 427 since 2003. My ERA has been flawless since day one.

ERA has a well-earned reputation in the market for a reason. They make a fantastic product and their customer service is second to none.

I haven't seen the SPF sladside in person, but I am sure it is nice. But I guess my question is this:

Since it is a replica, is the original buggy style suspension of the SPF really a selling point?

IMO, I'd rather have a well built, well engineered car that visually looks like the real thing but with the best possible suspension under it The ERA will be a better driving and handling car because it doesn't have a buggy style suspension.

At the end of the day, no one is going to look at your replica slabside and say "Gee, that's a beautiful, well built car that handles and drives great, but too bad it doesn't have the buggy suspension on it."

But some people are OCD when it comes to originality of their replicas (and we shall not mention their names here). I guess the question for the OP is this: Is having a car with an original style suspension more important than having a car with better suspension and handling? If the answer is yes, then the ERA is not the car for you.

I have already crossed this "originality" bridge before when restoring (restomodding) my Lotus. I took a "time-capsule" original car (original owner of 52 years) and upgraded the car throughout including suspension, engine, transmission, etc. Many would howl at this in that I did not heed the mantra: "the car is only original once". But, my goal was to make the car that much more enjoyable, better looking, and with enhanced performance. But, still true to the original.

The difference I suppose with my Lotus and the discussion here on building Cobra replicas is that most everything I did was done with a period correct modification (usually borrowed from the racing Lotus 26R). So, no third party parts (except for what Lotus originally borrowed from). Except for the upgraded "racing" parts, the car is largely still original (body, no flares, original interior, ...). So, the car while not original, as delivered to me at the factory, it is still "correct".

In any event, I take your point about having a more modern and better performing suspension with ERA. I can see a possible advantage to the ERA in this respect. However, this fact alone is probably not a deal breaker either way at the moment in my thinking between SPF and ERA.

What is coming to the forefront, after reading through the extensive ERA manual, is the attention to detail and level of support provided by ERA. When I embarked on my research into building a Cobra one of my objectives was to have a "project" as a follow-on to the extensive restoration and recent "completion" of the Lotus. I like the idea of being able to build the ERA and be familiar with its construction just as I have done with the Lotus. The ERA seems to “feed” my hobby in more depth than the turnkey-minus SPF might. A lot of potential owners probably just want to get their car and drive it. While I also look forward to the driving, it is the process that is also very important.

On the Lotus I know the car intimately, throughout. Not only useful for maintaining and repairing the car on my own but also providing a great sense of satisfaction that the car has been rebuilt by me.



I have an near-term rendezvous with a local ERA FIA owner that will further inform my looming decision.

[cycleguy55]

nkb:

I can't speak for you - this decision is yours and it appears you're weighing the various choices to make the decisions that are right for you. Best wishes for that process as well as the car you'll eventually receive. I suspect either will be quite enjoyable.

Regardless, I'll provide my thoughts if I were facing the same decision, even if it runs the risk of enraging fans of either (or both) marque.

I've heard nothing but praise for ERA, but Superformance has its supporters as well. Both manufacturers have made changes over time but it appears to me that Superformance remains more committed to retaining the original lineage and legacy, perhaps due to their licensing agreement with Shelby as much as anything else. ERA appears to be more inclined to maintain the visual originality while evolving more when it comes to updating and improving key elements like suspension.

Certainly the original Mark 1 and Mark II (rack and pinion steering) Cobras used the leaf spring 'buggy' suspension and there are many who appreciate cars that replicate the original design - warts and all. Mark III (or Mark II according to some) cars not only changed the body and chassis design, but also the suspension. There were reasons for that and, like many other aspects of evolution, I appreciate the benefits that offered.

The net of this rambling is that I'd go with the ERA if it were me. YMMV.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

...even if it runs the risk of enraging fans of either (or both) marque.

...

The net of this rambling is that I'd go with the ERA if it were me. YMMV.

You have only enraged the SPF owners... and only a few of them.

[6TNCRZY]

All things considered, pretty much everything you can see without going under the car looks the same on a ERA and SPF. I would take the much stiffer ERA frame and much better suspension every time, a far superior driving experience. Just my opinion.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by 6TNCRZY

All things considered, pretty much everything you can see without going under the car looks the same on a ERA and SPF.

Uhhh, windshield wipers parking on the wrong side, radiator slant looks funky, pedals aren't coming up from the floor and more.... But you didn't hear that from me.

[nkb]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Uhhh, windshield wipers parking on the wrong side, radiator slant looks funky, pedals aren't coming up from the floor and more.... But you didn't hear that from me.

Can you clarify your comment on the pedals? Looks to me that both the SPF and ERA slabsides have the clutch and brake hinged from the floor. Not sure about the gas pedal. Just looking at pictures.

[1795]

Both the SPF and ERA 298 cars have the clutch and brake hinged at the floor. I cannot speak for the ERA 289 from first hand knowledge, but the SPF 289's have the Gas pedal hinged at the top like the originals.

People sometimes get mixed up between the SPF cars and think that they are all alike frame and suspension wise like the ERA cars. The 427 cars are similar to the ERA with a box frame and the 289 cars have the 3" tubular frame.

What ever decision you make, will be the right one for you. Both are very good cars. Good luck.

Jim

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by nkb

Can you clarify your comment on the pedals? Looks to me that both the SPF and ERA slabsides have the clutch and brake hinged from the floor. Not sure about the gas pedal. Just looking at pictures.

No, I was speaking generically about 427 cars.

[NROTOXIN]

Originally Posted by patrickt

No, I was speaking generically about 427 cars.

What's your point? The OP opened up this thread about a small block genre.

[twobjshelbys]

I still don't understand how a topic that is titled "Kirkham vs Shelby" transformed in to SPF vs ERA

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by twobjshelbys

I still don't understand how a topic that is titled "Kirkham vs Shelby" transformed I to SPF vs ERA

It seems Kirkham was much much more expensive than originally thought. He wants a 289 slabside. The SPF slabside is extremely similiar (if not identical) to the Shelby version, so why not consider it. Even in the first post he mentioned considering the ERA slabside. So this seems like a perfectly normal progression to me.

[peterpjb]

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

It seems Kirkham was much much more expensive than originally thought. He wants a 289 slabside. The SPF slabside is extremely similiar (if not identical) to the Shelby version, so why not consider it. Even in the first post he mentioned considering the ERA slabside. So this seems like a perfectly normal progression to me.

it is not,

Kirkham vs Shelby is about original specs of chassis and body and about the question if the csx tag and the fact that the car turns into a genuine “ Shelby Cobra” is worth some ten thousand bucks

SPF vs ERA is about which lookalike is better

complete other discussion

[twobjshelbys]

The down side of shifting the discussion is that it had just as well been posted in Alpha Centauri. (Only old people will get the reference.)

Some searches may discover it, but there is lots of good information on both paths here, but only the Kirkham/Shelby info will bubble to the top in a year or two. So then we can come back and have a brand new topic about the merits of SPF vs ERA. But that's OK, this forum thrives on lather, rinse, repeat.

[cycleguy55]

It's unfortunate that threads can't be re-titled. Perhaps "Small Block Cobra Comparison / Recommendations"

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

Perhaps "Small Block Cobra Comparison / Recommendations"

... or instead, "Why I'm Right and the Rest of the World is Wrong."

[twobjshelbys]

Originally Posted by patrickt

... or instead, "Why I'm Right and the Rest of the World is Wrong."

But then that would be the title of every topic.

[Harpoon PV2]

While researching the small block ERA cars, and backdating one to 260 specs, I stumbled on a English company Hawk Cars. They make kits of the small block Cobras, plus the 2.6 Ace, which is the car that became the Cobra , plus the Barchetta 166M Ferrari Mustache AC Ace cars. Like the ERA, they all have coil over suspension. I then discovered a sight where an enthusiast is building an Ace, and going over board trying to make it perfect. Below is an article on adding dummy leaf springs, which might also be used on the ERA, so when you pop the bonnet, you will see the correct springs! Oh, and don't forget to wrap your leaf springs with Drevo tape, like the original cars. https://aceac.weebly.com/dummy-leaf-spring.html https://www.vintagecarparts.co.uk/pr...evo-denso-tape