Dear Lord MkIV

Me and my hiding-rock have been otherwise occupied. It's nice under there....safe....
I do pop by from time to time or whenever sober. Not a lot I can add to postings about goings-on in the world of replicas/continuations/fakes/club meets especially I as I am based 'over here'. If I can Impart Great Wisdom regarding the AC Cobra, up I pop. Otherwise I keeps me powder dry.
Plus now that I is properly vacciminated, it's safe to come out of my lockdown. Stay safe!!
Cheers etc

He must have heard his ears ringing.
BTW, Wikipedia calls a 2004 AC the "Mk V", so that settles that. :LOL:
Respectfully though, Trevor, I enjoyed your book. 5 stars.

I thank you Mr. Scizzors. Indeed there was a 'Mk V' but only a few were built in Malta (seriously) and we don't talk about them. Not without a lawyer in the room....

I noticed that no one really answered the question of why the 427 cobra stayed with a 90" wheel base, after Ford spent large sums of money to perfect the 93" frame and suspension. If you go to page 57 of Wilson McComb's book, AC (Shelby) Cobra, you will find the answer. Yes the book is from the AC perspective and biased towards them, but they were there. It is more a case of what was not said, then what was said. Alan Turner, AC Ltd head of design, received a computer print out and a couple of graphs showing wheel movement and ideal pivot locations on the rear suspension based on Klause Arning's mid engine Mustang project. When Turner rolled this out, he found the forward pivot points were in side the driver and passenger, so he set out to redesign it. No mention from Ford on a lengthened Cobra. About that time Phil Remington showed up, and he chalked up the useless computer drawings to the Ford computer, not knowing the magic 93" parameters. Finally Bob Nagstadt showed up, but he never mentioned 93" to anybody there, he just rolled up his sleeves and spent a couple of weeks helping Turner. This is condensed of course. I think it was a case of the ultimate dysfunctional family! Ford was already moving on from the toy called Cobra, to Eric Broadley and the GT40 program, Carrol just wanted 100 427 cars to homologate them for racing, and he wanted them last week, and Derek Hurlock, owner of AC Ltd was getting tired of Shelby and his bragging. Keep in mind, yes AC Cars was tiny, but the Hurlock family was a pretty big company with government contracts. I heard it best on why the Herlock's would keep building cars in such limited numbers, AC builds cars, because AC builds cars, It's a Zen thing! So, no one was talking to each other and that is how we ended up with the most reproduced cobbled together car in history. Hay, it rally is a Zen kind of thing!

Malta? Hmmm...

When I went to import my car into Canada from Connecticut, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) interpreted the "MIxxx" VIN as "M1xxx". The former is Michigan, meaning the car was duty-free under NAFTA, while the latter represents Malta - meaning I would have had to pay duty (6.25%, IIRC). It took a few hours on the phone with the good folkas at the Michigan Secretary of State to get a letter that satisfied the Canadian authorities.

Finally the Cobra AC should have made , but is making now! http://bit.ly/34Bjb7o#AC#ACCarsOfficial#AC120http://bit.ly/34Bjyjb7o#AC#ACCarsOfficial#AC120/IMG

In E Wilson McComb's book, AC (Shelby) Cobra, he talks about the different MKs used at AC. If you think that clears every thing up, you are wrong, it only makes it worse! Mark II meant coil-sprung Cobra in the chassis record book at AC, but it meant leaf-sprung in the drawing office. Go figure! I will stick with what I heard in the 60s and 70s, 260, 289 and 427. I know, a lot of 260s have 289s in theme, and never mind the 428 powered 427s, but close enough. I would settle for any one of the above, regardless which MK or engine.

It was an experimental aluminum 390 FE. It was tested in Ken Miles car and failed every time it was raced.