If Chevrolet would have said YES.... (Cobra Related)

[Cobra4Me]

This is how The replica (or Original) you own now would've looked like:

some interesting reading!

[Randy Rosenberg]

I saw one last month at the Blackhawk collection in Carmel. It's definitely a keeper!

I must say that it is amazing how foolish GM Management was with respect to factory sponsored racing. The Scaglitti Corvette and the GranAm both had huge potential, and both were nix'd by GM Management.

Thanks for sharing the link!

Regards,
Randy R...

[Cal Metal]

Homologation would have been a big problem. Those cars wouldn't have been cheap, either, probably in the range of a Ferrari. Beautiful beyond description but it made much more sense to go with an existing platform like AC.

CS was lucky GM turned him down. That bureacracy would have never given him the control that he would needed to make it a World champion.Remington, CS's top engineer, would have put up with GM's management for about six nano seconds. Without him, you might as well pack it up and just go home.

It would have been tough to be beat the idea of Chevy power, though, with all the aftermarket and development goodies available. In my estimation, the Scagletti "Cobra" would have gone down the path much like the Bizzarini. Interesting but not a world beater.

No way would GM ever upstage Duntov or compromise their investment in the Corvette program. It was never meant to be--AMA ban or otherwise.

It is a gorgeous car, nonetheless.

[Kputz]

Say what you will about GM's stupidity in running Carroll out of the building, but you must remember the times. Ford at the time was for the most part a private company, hardly resembling GM's vast shareholder base. Try taking a multi million dollar race program to the stockholders meeting with any number of insurance companies and mutual funds owning hundreds of thousands of shares. GM wasn't interested in anything that couldn't/didn't maximize shareholder value. What could CS have done for GM, aside from taking market share away from the Vette? Remember too that even Ford treated CS like the bastard step child he was, using his racing efforts only to tweak GM's noses. It was only later, when they could realize some market value from his name, did they allow him to "participate" in the other Ford Shelby ventures, however small his participation was.

[RACERAL]

I gotta say.. that thing is sweet......

[Cal Metal]

I don't know about that, Kputz. Ford was a public company, having gone to the public market in 1955 in an extremely complex offering. Much of the stock was in the Ford Foundation and, if memory serves, the ticklish issue was how to get shares in the hands of the public while not relinquishing control out of the Ford family. A hat trick that Goldman Sachs, I think, accomplished.

The issue for GM, I think, was the perception that racing was not in the public interest, and if you are in the business of selling cars to Joe Public, perhaps that wasn't the way to achieve that end. There was a big issue in the late 50s regarding safety. Ford, for one, really tried to promote that image with seat belts, padded dashes and threw a lot of $$$ into a public marketing campaign to promote that end. No one seemed to care.

In the final analysis, I think GM executives at the top of the food chain, felt there was no investment return, and perhaps a potential negative return, by casting an image that racing was good for the everyday "bread and butter" sale of its cars. You can't blame them when you look at the percentages. I don't think it was necessarily a case of potential pressure from Funds or Insurance companies. I think it was deemed to be outside noise that could only hurt their sales. When people like Frederick Donner are running GM, ultra conservatism wins the day.

They were wrong. It just took someone like Henry Ford II to discard that notion by kicking the AMA and its racing ban out of the Ford garage, and putting the proverbial pedal to the metal. GM would have done better by adhering to the famous quote by Bob Tasca of Tasca Ford: "Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday".

If you look at the millions Ford threw at the GT program, one has to really wonder about shareholder return on that, too. The Cobra program was probably the best investment they ever made in that arena. It had to be nickels and dimes compared to what it cost to win Le Mans.

I agree RACERAL, that is one sweet car.

[mr bruce]

Just gotta laugh at GM's racing ban in the 60s .Look thu Hot Rod, Car Craft and all the other car magazines of that time frame. More exotic parts and "back door" programs developed in that era than most folks realize.

[Cal Metal]

Mr. Bruce:

If you want the "whole skinny and nothing but the skinny" on GM's back door approach to racing, Read Paul Von Valkenburgh's, "Chevrolet----Racing? Fourteen Years of Raucous Silence 1957-1970".

All the skunkworks for the world to see. A very good read.

[mr bruce]

Fact is, lots of that stuff developed by the likes of Smokey, Mr Hall, Jenkins, Traco,Thomas, etc. is still killing other cars all over the racing world . Hate to say it ,but it's a Chevy world at the race track.(ps, what is the real story on the 2speed"automatics" in the Chapparalls?Big Bob?)

[Kputz]

You make my point eloquently regarding the differences in the two companies Hal. GM was/is a behemoth compared to Ford. Much easier to assuage bruised shareholder feelings about the state of the bottom line when you're Hank the Deuce knowing you can vote your shares at any time.

[Excaliber]

Assuming GM had let Shelby "run with the ball" and took a BIG hands off approach (never would have happened, but suppose it did) would the Vette have done as well as the AC Cobra in racing?

I'm not so sure! I suspect the weight difference was substantial between the two cars. And if there was ONE thing that gave the AC Cobra a HUGE advantage, it was weight! The Vette was some 400 pounds lighter than a 1959 Vette. So what DID it weigh in at? I THINK the AC Cobra's were around 2000 pounds or less.

Another consideration would be the suspension. NIETHER car was exactly "advanced" in that department! I find it interesting that the FIA Cobras handled as well as they did, frankly! They were high off the ground and had a LOT of body roll. But for their "time" they were as good or better as anything out there!

The Vette had a live axle, (solid rear end) in 1959 with drum brakes. In comparison to that, the AC Cobra was light years ahead in design. What was it, 1963 or so before the Vettes got IRS? When DID they get disc brakes?

Ernie

[Cal Metal]

The Corvette, whether it be pre '63 or post '62, came in at around 3,000 lbs. plus or minus. Big problem with the Stingray was the aerodynamics. It had none. Pretty looking shape but unstable above 150 mph. Not a contender against the Daytona.

IRS in '63; disc brakes in '65 for the Corvette. The Chevy advantage was the SB engine. I love the 289 but the SB Chev in 327 form was a better engine, hands down.

[Excaliber]

Google is a great tool!

1959 Vette curb weight, 2975 - 400 = 2575

,,,yup, a little "piggy" for a "race car".

$3875 for the "base" car. You could EASILY spend another $2K on options like "big brakes" and more powerful 283 engine. Man THAT was an EXPENSIVE car!

Ernie

[Turk]

I am proud to announce that GM management of today have not evolved much beyond their earlier days.

With the exception of some new blood like Bob Lutz, most of the old guard is still there making the same decisions today.
I know some are dead and gone by now but they still show up on occasion.
Hello Harvey!

TURK

[G.R.]

This is only the 3rd "Ford" I've ever owned--Ford in the 60's and '70's had a reputation of "Fix Or Repair Daily"--Chevys ran and ran strong at least on the street and drag strip--Camaros w/302's would often walk all over the Mustangs, Fairlanes, Falcons with the GT options. And yes many of us did street race back then--so Don't start the "irresponsible " put downs--

I've always liked hot Chevy's from the 60's and early '70's Camaro, Chevelle Malibu, El Camino, Nova SS, never really liked the Mustangs, Fairlanes, or Falcons(other than the 63 1/2 Sprint Coupe).

Haven't really liked any of the cars from GM or Ford since that time and today--yuk --Chrysler seems to be the only one with a design team that has a clue--damn hard to tell a Ford from a Chevy, KIA, Honda, Toyota, or damn near any other marque without the badges--except for the European imports like BMW, Jag, Mercedes, Audi, Mini( )--

Oh well just my " 'af pennys worth, Sir"

[Excaliber]

The Coupe (a clear winner) wouldn't be a fair comparison to the Vette but the Cobra would be!

Aerodynamics were not so hot on the Cobra either at speeds of 150 or so, lol.

No question, the old Ford 272-292-312 Y blocks were pathetic!Chevy hit a home run in 1955 with their SB 265-283. By the time Ford got their act together with the 260-289, Chevy had a HUGE lead in research, public acceptance and after market parts!

I think the 289 proved itself to be a worthy opponent! Problem? It took a LOT more money to build a good Ford 289 than it did to build a good Chevy 283! THAT problem has persisted until just a few years ago!

I don't think the 283 offered enough of an advantage to overcome the other drawbacks on the Vette, and the "potent" 289! But that 327 might have tipped the scales in favor of the Vette by 63 or so.

Really, no prejudice either way, that just the way I see it. I wonder...........

Ernie

[Cal Metal]

The 327 was introduced in 1962. That was before the introduction of the 289 and the 260 cid was just beginning to emerge. The Comets were running the 221 "thin wall" block that morphed into the ones just mentioned.

Even the hot set up in the Mustang in '65 was the K Code 289 with 271 h.p. The '65 Corvette had a SB option of 375 h.p. as well as the 425 h.p. 396 cid motor. As early as '63 the Corvette had a fuel motor producting 360 h.p.

Ford was really behind the curve in both development, cubic inches, and horsepower with regard to the SB. Do remember, though, that these companies had differing philosophies on where they would carve their niche. Ford was primarily devoted in the late 50's and early to mid sixties to a BB philosophy. Chevy, on the otherhand, being the performance wing of GM, had committed their R & D to SB performance; the Corvette being the vanguard for those engines.

Remember the 348 and 409 motors from GM? Not much to talk about. But the 390, 406, and 427's by Ford were pretty potent.
Chrysler, as we all know, was BB from the very beginning with their great wedge (383, 413) and Hemi engines (426).

[bmalone]

Cal, that is right on the money. Ford was years behind on SB development--they made no distinction between BB and SB like Chevy did. Witness the hipo 390 w/ 401 HP in '60, shortly followed by a pedigreed race motor, the 406. And finally the 427. All pretty much ahead of the curve at the time.

The 289 was a very reliable motor but in either K code form (271 HP) or the SHelby motor at 312 HP, it was no match for a 365 HP fuelie 327 or 375 HP 327. But, as you said, the 327 was years ahead from a development standpoint.

Later, the 302's from Ford and Chevy competed on more equal terms--both made 290 HP and revved like gamgbusters.

And, Gary, shame on you.

[rdorman]

....... I could live with it. Gorgeous. Some one do up a replica will ya? Way to much hassle replicating Ferrari. Shame to. A california spyder would look great sitting next to my Cobra. I would repaint the car Ferrari red just so they would match!

You want to talk succesful racing motors. Top the Ford Cosworth!

Rick

[misfit41]

it is my understanding that shelby never approached gm for help on the cobra as is often said,the corvette based sports car was a totally different project a few years before the cobra was a brain child,according to the shelby registry which explains it pretty clearly,
I grew up in the ford versus chevy war,,in the late 60s early 70's a stock small block chevy with a mild cam,intake,carb and headers was hotter than a comparable small block ford,but if you wanted to get where you were going ,you drove a galaxie,lots of over heating and front end problems in the gm cars,since 1955 ford had the edge in suspension,{nascar still uses the basic desgn,ALL winston cup cars from the early 60's thru the mid 90's were 1955 ford design front ends.
My take is,and I am sure many will dissagree,gm seemed more in tune to the public and gave up a lot for style and speed,Ford was more traditional,although much better engineered and stronger built,better paint,bodies,suspension,electrical ,you name it.as far as chrysler,they were and are still 3rd in comparison,some of the motors ran well,like the hemis,but ever wonder why you never see any one drive one ? they wont hold together,rotating assembly is much to heavy in those cars,the racers mostly stuck to the 413 wedge for durability.
Chevy power was easier to come by,the family car could easily be made fairly fast,ford usually had the baddest of the bad,but not everyone had them,like someone said the 390s and 406s,my dad had a 375 hp 390 in a 61 galaxie that was fast even compared to lighter cars,and bullet proof,the 427 was king,but most folks never saw one,they only compared them to a 352 and 390 which is pretty far from accurate,there were just way fewer fast,cool fords than chevys.maybe thats why I liek them so much,,hot chevys come to easy,a wicked for takes work and thought,,but it is sweet when you get there,,Tk