A Club Cobra first.
Someone asks which Cobra, and gets bunch of pleasant and factually helpful input without someone saying "Do a Search". Nice going guys!

Hey Ron! Maybe we don't need that F.A.Qs after all.

I still say ERA! If you don't believe me, do a search!

TURK
Former ERA owner

What a delight, Turk...civil conversation on a "What is the best..." thread!

Let me kick in a few bits here...

First, originals were not as all distorted from car to car as one would believe from legend. A lot of the "fun house mirror effects" are from those magnificent "restorations" and re-body jobs.

...but, it was a hand made car...so variances did exist.
The accurate splashing by Contemporary of an early 30xx car resulted in a nice 'glas replica with one droopy headlight. :-)

As is with the Kirkhams. Many folks quote the "digitizing" and the mirror image stuff about the KMP, claiming perfect symmetry.

Not so. The source 'drawings' of the KMP were from CAD, and that was used to make the forms, etc.

...but, Kirkhams are not popped out of a big stamping press... they are hand formed and pounded and welded just like they do ( and did) on all limited production aluminum cars.

The Kirkham body has about 17 discrete panels that are combined to create the car, pounded, welded and filed.

You will see difference on KMPs as well.

Ron,

Thanks for the clarification, and I defer to your considerable expertise. But, I'm surprised you didn't make some reference to the "droopy vs. perky butt" issue.:rolleyes:

brian,
This question is posed every now and then. The field is strewn with over 40 "builders" of COBRAs and eliminating the advice based on personal favorites, quality versus quality, whether from an enginners viewpoint or an architects, and so on. To narrow the field by a big slice you need to decide on a true detailed "CSX3XXX" replica car verus a "hot rod skinned" COBRA 427 bodied kit car.
The first hurdle you must ask and solve will not be the money you spend totally but;

A. Originality
1. replica of original 100% accurate
2. FGRP skinned replca 90% chassis
B. COBRA shell on Hot Rod chassis
1. replica body on rectangular tube chassis with FORD driveline.
2. Kit body on rectangular tube chassis with assorted brand chassis and driveline parts.
C. Custom Cobra (do it the way I want)
1. Anything goes!

It's a matter of SAAC's interpertation, show judges, the prurists in the COBRA world, and viewing against the original design.
It's really not that hard to decide, who has a correct 4" tube steel chassis, who has the correct suspension, who has the correct body shape, who has the aluminum interior panels, the rest of the items to complete it will be supplied by you and your assembly or a "builder" to complete the process.
You can buy an original rolling chassis COBRA for less than most of the Hot Rod chassied versions, so it's not a matter of money to go to original specs.
If you go with a true "replica" COBRA of a known car there are great people on this forum that will keep you in line. If you pick a COBRA copy, then there a great many skilled others that will help you on the variety concepts and their completion.
Grumpy

Clay.. you can't speak badly about the "perky butt". With over 4000 FFR's out there, it has a very loyal following.

There are three things that contribute to the 'perky' posterior...
The way the rear of the body is molded, the 'attitude' that the body bolts to the FFR frame and the 'widow's peaked' trunk-lid that protrudes around the license plate.

The body mold for FFR and E-M (kissin' cousins ;) ) has some high hips; that gives it the 'shrug' look in the rear.

Several people have repositioned the body mounts on FFRs, lowering the rear an inch or two... and the whole side profile changes much more towards an original look... the perk gets to 'sag' a bit. :)

The trunk peak is just ...there.

Tristates makes an aftermarket body kit that resolves these three issues... but you can't order an FFR without the body shell.
Thus, it's an extra expense.

To many who don't have originality as a prime factor, the FFR look is more favorable than you might think.

Ron,

Actually, I wasn't thinking primarily about the FFR, but among the so-called "closest to original" cars we've been discussing here. For example, I've always thought my car was a little less perky (not much, and very subtle), than the ERA, Kirkham, and Shelby bodies. I've always thought it looked very close to the Contemporary.

First off, thanks everyone who has replied to this thread. There has been a wealth of info posted in the last 8 hours or so!

Second, computerworks could you please explain this "perky butt" issue with the FFR Cobra in a way that a novice like myself can understand?

I have seen some Cobra kit cars that use solid axle rear ends that have the rear fenders of the car setting to high in relation to the rear tires, making the car look silly and incorrect, as the original Cobra set nice and low in the rear with the rear tires nicely tucked under the rear fender wheel opening. Is this what you are talking about when you say "Perky butt”? Because the FFR Cobras that I have seen pictures of and also the ones that they include in their DVD all seam to set nice and low in the rear as far as the relationship of rear tire and rear fender wheel opening’s go. Or are you referring to the shape of the tops of the rear fenders or something to that effect?

So can you please explain the "Perky Butt"? Is it what I have described, or something else?

Thanks.
Brian

Quote

Bill S.


PS: "You "painted" your Kirkham??????"

Yeah, I painted it. If I had purchased a glass car it would still be the same color. I always liked that color and I don't really care if people know its aluminum. No, I'm not trying to be a hard-ass, thats just my preferance, I think the bare aluminum looks great too. Thanks for the comment Bill

Brian,

I suspect Ron (Computerworks) will give you a more definitive answer, but I've always thought the "perky-butt" appearance was more a function of both the amount and curve of the rear fender flare on the 427, as well as the slope of the rear deck. Not having the wheels tucked in just right and higher rear height probably contributes to it as well.

But again, like everthing else, it's all a matter of personal taste. Some people like more perky and some more droopy, at least on Cobras:cool:

Thanks Clay, when you say "a function of both the amount and curve of the rear fender flare" are you talking about the top curve of the fender where it slopes off towards the trunk lid looking from say left to right across the car, as in a taller sharper (Perky) fender top? Man, this is hard to discribe :-) Or are you talking about the flare around the wheel opening?

Thanks,
Brian

Brian,

It is hard to describe, and I don't think I can do any better than I did before. Plus, it's just the way my eyes have analyzed the difference. For me, it's more the overall fender and rear deck shape.

To me some of the fenders, are more angular, while others have more gentle curves. Similarly, some rear decks have more slope than others. Again, it's very subtle, and quite difficult to quantify.

Plus if you gave pictures of 4 or 5 different replicas to 10 different "Cobra experts," you'd easily get 10 different answers.

So would you say then that the FFR has more "angular fenders", giving a "Perky But" and other cars have more "gentle curves"?

Yes, in my view the FFR rear fender shape is more "angular" than some of the others. As I also said above , it's not just the fenders but the rear deck slope.

In addition, setting aside the FFR, which is generally attributed with that look (per Computerworks' response above), among those types generally credited with being more original, some are "perkier" than others.

That's more than I have to add on the subject, but the most important thing I think I said above, is that every "expert" will have a somewhat different opinion. Stop worrying about it so much and just buy the one you like the best!

In the end, it really doesn't matter. Unless, you have an original 60's CSX 2xxx or 3xxx, (that hasn't been incorrectly restored) everything else is a more contemporary reproduction.

Thanks clayfoushee.

Well--lots of replies. Here's my contribution--read this: http://www.c4restore.com/partsispartsnot.html

I have to ask, don't you ever ask permission before stealing copyrighted material and placing it on your web site? Just "giving credit" to where you found it on the web does not keep you out of trouble..............

Bill,
It says pretty clearly on his website:

From "Meat" on the Cobra Trader Forum

Was that not there when you followed the link or did you not see it?

No, it's hosted on "his" site:

http://www.c4restore.com/partsispartsnot.html

Not HERE

That makes it theft of intellectual and copyrighted materials. Just like when he swiped "my" pictures of Jespers car off "my" web site which includes then following.

"Entire site, including photos and graphics (c) 2003 by Bill S. Not to be reproduced without written permission"


Bill S.

PS: Edit: It's funny,he has "Copyright © 2003 C4 Restore" on his site, then ads the following. "No copyright infringement is intended for various articles taken from unknown sources.", what about when the sources (such as my web sites) is known...Does this mean that he does plan to infringe on my copyrighted materials.

Well at least it started off for a good while as a civil thread.Please take the off topic tirades somewhere else. chuck

Yes lets please try to stay on topic. I don't think C4 Cross Fire was trying to infringe on anybody’s copy rights, he was just trying to help me out. Thanks everyone!