Complete Domination?

[Cobra Lite]

I just read this thread over on FFR and found it very good reading:
http://www.ffcobra.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12804

Not to start an argument but just want those of you who do not read "all things Cobra" related to be aware of the posting. I enjoy reading all the sites.

I do not have an FFR car, but I have certainly read that many replica owners, builders, and manufacturer's look down on them.

Yet they have the best forum following (the forum owner even being sued by CS for being so popular I believe) and the most loyal owners and builders. Several have built more than one Cobra and they choose to build another FFR. I would think that after building one, attending kit car shows and seeing other replicas, talking with other builders of many manufacturer's and still deciding to build another FFR says a lot.

So, why are they so often disparaged?

I believe it is mostly due to the very low entry cost to build a Factory Five car. I have only seen a few replicas in person (only one FFR) and some are built very, very well, and some are not. Certainly the finished car is dependent on the time, effort, desire, and money put into the build. And I am sure that some who build an FFR car have very limited amounts of each.

Whereas replicas from other manufacturers that cost more, are more complete from the start so there is less for the builder to do poorly with. And the person who starts with a more expensive car is in the financial bracket to hire out more work than a budget builder is.

But I think the bottom line is snobbishness (is that a word?).

Someone who has spent $60k on his replica is not going to think highly of a smarter person who spent half as much building a better finished car. Like justifying the hp increase you can "feel" because you spent a lot of money on it.

I drive a Miata. Yes, a lowly Miata. It is not impressive, it is not fast, it is not expensive, and yet it will blow the doors off most cars at autocross. It is fun to drive, extremely reliable, and always handles excellently. And yet is looked down on by most performance car owners. Especially when my car turns a quicker time around the course than their Corvette, Mustang, or whatever...

I have always been very impressed by FFR as a company and what value they supply for the money. They are not perfect and do make mistakes and let the ball drop at times. Yet if I was in the market to buy a car to build, and could not afford a Kirkham, the FFR is the one I would spend my hard earned money on.

I do believe there are many fine replica kits manufactured, some better than others of course, but I think you have to spend a LOT more cash to get a better all around kit car than the one built by Factory Five.

Just my thoughts

[CobraEd]

Life is not based on autocrossing!


.

[Gunner]

I recall FFR being such a low-end production that even Curt Scott, who has trouble saying a bad word about any car, was pretty harsh on them in the third edition of his Cobra buyer's guide. They long had a reputation as junk - a third-rate body on a fourth-rate chassis populated with tired Mustang donor parts, not exactly the pinnacle of engineering compared to pulling systems from Jags and BMWs.

FFRs can also be built as complete junk, with solid rear axles that may as well be welded to the frame, donor suspension with abysmal angles and response, etc. Even the most hardcore FFR fan knows there are cars out there that just embarrass even the least discerning Cobra fan.

So, to a large extent, FFR earned their cheesy reputation, and some good number of their buyers help keep it low.

HOWEVER - FFR has clearly come up in the world and keeps working on making their product better, which is more than you can say for most kit and replica makers - the ones who fold the first time someone complains or they run out of welding rod or their brother the 'glass man gets another nickel in the slammer.

I wouldn't buy an FFR; I just don't care for their chassis engineering. I don't feel like I have much in common with the crowd that builds them as straight-line racers. I have even less connection to the crowd that seems to care less about their Cobra heritage than that they're easy to build into autocross monsters. But as a budget-level Cobra platform, I know they can be built into very fine machines, and - as I said - FFR has been consistent with their improvements and support. Power to 'em, and power to everyone who puts the sweat into building their FFR well. If they keep that up, and discourage/de-engineer the crappy end of the build options, they'll shed the last of the poor rep eventually.

[RedBarchetta]

Originally Posted by Cobra Lite

I believe it is mostly due to the very low entry cost to build a Factory Five car...and some are built very, very well, and some are not. Certainly the finished car is dependent on the time, effort, desire, and money put into the build. And I am sure that some who build an FFR car have very limited amounts of each.

FFR has cultivated a cult following through what I believe are three primary factors: low (relative) entry cost, well-documented build logs/manuals and good factory support.

Some Cobra enthusiasts frown on the FFR for various reasons: questionable realism in the body shape, use of donor Mustang parts (the very essence of why it's such a low cost entry solution!), bolt on wheels (although knock-off adapters are readily available), etc, etc, etc.

One can't deny that their fan base is extremely loyal, very dedicated to the brand and many of them drive the snot out of their cars (actual track cars). FFR filled a void at a time when the Cobra "kit car" landscape was fractured and all over the map.

Inconsistent build quality (which you mentioned) also plays a strong role in whether someone appreciates the FFR or looks at it in utter disdain. I have seen both and first impressions are truly lasting. The FFR is truly only as good as the craftsman that puts it together, while many other manufacturers of turn key and turn key minus cars (no need to name names here) provide a level of consistency and realism that is also consistent with a higher entry level price point.

Again, they fill a unique niche in this hobby and have afforded many who otherwise wouldn't be able to get into a Cobra the opportunity to do so for considerably less than some other alternatives. Which brings up another interesting point/opinion. Because of their success, they have literally flooded the Cobra landscape and made the Cobra quite a bit less exclusive than it once was. That in itself may make others frown upon the brand, because quite honestly most of Joe Public can't tell the difference between a kit, a manufactured replica or a real one in just one passing glance.

In the end you buy and drive what you can afford, you settle with that compromise, and you be happy (and grateful) with the miles you put into the car.

-Dean

[JWilly]

My guess is that 95% of all cobra owners (replica and "real") are testosterone poisoned guys. So, unfortunately, I think the snobbishness and competitiveness are a (small?) part of the scene and will remain so. BTW, I like FFR's, they're so cute when they're little.

*Seriously, I have seen a lot of well built, very nice FFR's that I would be proud to own.

[Snakebit]

You get what you pay for. You can put a prom dress on a pig, looks good, but there still is a pig under the dress. Just like taking a Cobra kit and bolting on a bunch of used Mustang parts.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Cobra Lite

I drive a Miata. Yes, a lowly Miata. It is not impressive, it is not fast, it is not expensive, and yet it will blow the doors off most cars at autocross. It is fun to drive, extremely reliable, and always handles excellently. And yet is looked down on by most performance car owners. Especially when my car turns a quicker time around the course than their Corvette, Mustang, or whatever...

OK, who let the "girly" car driver on Club Cobra. I thought we had standards here?

Of course, beating the other drivers with Corvettes, Mustangs, etc. has abolutely nothing to do with driver's ability. For all we know, they probably drive like me and are a bunch of grandmothers.

Just kidding around Cobra Lite. I think Miatas are fantastic cars.

Back to the topic. My neighbor has an FFR and he built it all in his garage. He's got the skills of a top engineer. It's a wonderful car and he's a genuinely nice guy.

[Xavier]

You know I recently thought about this same subject, about why I initially disliked a F5 and I know I am not alone in my thoughts. After seeing some incredible builds, the support they have because of the immense volume they have out there (dedicated options, parts, support, groups, owners, mods etc.) I reflect back, specifically after looking at a Daytona coupe. I was really impressed with what they had to offer. And I find myself saying "man, I am really considering getting on of these?"

So why am I like this? Where did I get this mental impression of an F5? I thought about it, and did not take too long to rememeber the really BAD builds, the donor builds with rusted interior parts, rusted engines, wires everything throughout the engine bay. Ignition wires hanging from the dash column, back firing, oil leaking and on, and on, and on. I have 2 such builds in my area. Additional resentment is built up when you (my) kit car is put into dirrect reference to theirs - meaning (from the public perspective) all kits are the same, if they have an F5 with a mustang donor, you must have too. This just builds up any poor feelings I have had. I see myself getting angry when somone even refers it to as an F5, not that my mental impression is poor of the company itself, or to its many great owners, but becuase I cannot seem to get away from the mental impression of F5 = donor = junk (read on before you get angry). I am not alone.

I know this is wrong, I should not think like this and recently due to seeing some great Factory 5 cars, meeting some of their owners and looking at their Daytona Coupe. I have recently reflected and have changed my tune, or at least have tried to. And have looked at the many benefits one could have by owning such a vehicle. Their Cobra, which never has appealed to me (regardless of the support), can be built with the quality and care of any car. Unfortunately, in my teens, this was never the case. All I ever seen was an F5 abortion, which really hurt the image of the company. I am not the only one seeing this.

Factory Five, in my opinon, failed to do what many large successful companies have done to keep both sectors of business brewing; both high end and low end, not compromising their sales while keeping the impression from both markets that they are a high quality car manufacturing company. What they failed to do is segregate or departmentalize the marketing and branding of the car, its options and its quality and/or economy versions. There is only Factory Five, and one either knows them for an extremly economical kit or an extremly great kit, but not necessarily both (witht he exception of its proud owners).

Toyota and Lexus and Scion is a perfect example of this marketing. If Scion fails, Toyotas brand may be tarnished slightly (if at all) but they are not going to see any long term effects in regards to Toyota's sales. They move on. The average person going down the street does not even know that Scion has any realtionship with Toyota at all, its meant to be like this UNTIL Scion's brand is a success, once it is, Toyota's brand name can share in the glory. The benefit is obvious; Toyota it never looked to as "cheap high school junk", even if it would be, and the brands are seperated from the risk of failure.

F5 did not do this, and at least in the past, they show that they do not realize how bad builds, dirt economy setups have really hurt their brand image - the "perception" of their car and quality. And perception is everything (or a lot). Maybe they should have called one end of the company Eco Kobra-Stang or something, and left F5 to product the higher end complete setup with a pre-existing roller? Maybe I am off the mark. Maybe this is changing.

One thing for sure, it will be a long time until I can break away from that mental projection of F5 and a terrible donor build (but I am trying).

Gunner set it best

If they keep that up, and discourage/de-engineer the crappy end of the build options, they'll shed the last of the poor rep eventually.

I think they need to go a step further and setup an "executive" branding, car and options. Not a Kirkrham, but not an F5 either. But there again, I think I own that car?

[cscobra]

The person who spent "half as much" is not necessarily "smarter"--reverse snobbery is uncalled for. Instead, realize that we all pick our toys to meet our individual needs and desires (and fantasies!). I visited several manufacturers (including FFR's impressive facility) and I went with what was best for me. Others do the same and make different choices. That's what life is all about.

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by Gunner

I don't feel like I have much in common with the crowd that builds them as straight-line racers. I have even less connection to the crowd that seems to care less about their Cobra heritage than that they're easy to build into autocross monsters.

Do you guys have an "FFR only" table at your NorCal breakfast meetings?

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Got the Bug

Do you guys have an "FFR only" table at your NorCal breakfast meetings?

Dunno, I've only made it to one.

I don't snub anybody with a Cobra - but the ones who own them and built them and maintain them and drive them because of their magnificent heritage are the ones I hang around with.

Some of the builds, like FFR, are great lightweight drag platforms. Some are great "tweakable" race car platforms for the grind of serious autocross. I rarely hear from anyone who's built a Cobra for either purpose that much cares about the heritage and history. Power to 'em, but we don't have much to talk about.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Got the Bug

Do you guys have an "FFR only" table at your NorCal breakfast meetings?

Now I know why you BACC guys put me over at that corner table near the bathroom that sits only one. It's the BACC "FFR only" table.

Makes sense to me now, but why do you guys want me sitting over there when I own a Kirkham?

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

Now I know why you BACC guys put me over at that corner table near the bathroom that sits only one. It's the BACC "FFR only" table.

Makes sense to me now, but why do you guys want me sitting over there when I own a Kirkham?

You weren't supposed to be sitting there. That table has a little placard that says "reserved for Larry Ellison." He never shows up for breakfast though.

[Cobra Lite]

Thanks all, for some well worded response.

I have not been interested in building a car for more than the past few years (sailing was my life) so I am not familiar with the early versions of the FFR cars. When I started looking into building something they had just released the Mark III version of the roadster and it looked very well done.

I too am not all that keen on the frame. Better than original I am sure, but it could be so MUCH better, but then it would not look original. That appeals to some I know.

The single donor idea is/was very good even though it did force many compromises in dimensions, ride, and handling. It did allow many to build a car that looks good and is fun to drive though.

Good point made, autocross is not life!
For me, neither is 1/4 mile time/speed. (of course not, in a Miata????)

I did not mean to imply that everyone who builds a car for less money is smarter.
But the person who DOES build a superior car for less money is much smarter in my book. But that can be any replica kit.

I do agree that a really good looking car costs time and money and the better the kit you start with, the easier it is to end up with something to be proud of.
A Kirkham is the best start I believe

I am glad that others are aware of the improvements FFR has made in their offerings and I applaud their goal to continue to make it affordable so that more can enjoy building one. I really like the new Mk4 body shape too. Although as I look at hundreds of original cobra photos, there seems to be quite a lot of variation even among the same model. Which is understandable considering they were all hand formed and most have been repaired several times which is likely to change the looks somewhat.

Thanks again for the input everyone

[rodneym]

What the ???????

We can't be nice so soon in this thread.
There's still hours left in this work week!



rodneym

[Gunner]

Originally Posted by Cobra Lite

Although as I look at hundreds of original cobra photos, there seems to be quite a lot of variation even among the same model. Which is understandable considering they were all hand formed and most have been repaired several times which is likely to change the looks somewhat.

Cobras were originally "meant to be bent."

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Got the Bug

You weren't supposed to be sitting there. That table has a little placard that says "reserved for Larry Ellison." He never shows up for breakfast though.

He's a little busy right now with this obscure little sailing contest off the coast of Spain.

http://www.americascup.com/en/index.php

Rodney, I tried giving Cobra Lite a hard time about the Miata, but alas, I'm too nice a guy and I like Miatas.

[mdross1]

History! always interesting to read, because it affects all of us in different ways.Back in the mid 80's when I first starting looking for a way to get into a Cobra,the choices were quite limited.After reading all that was published my choice was simple,the most acurate,and best fiberglass,on the East coast,and CMC painted a bright future.I truly do enjoy the finished car,and realize any kit car is only as good as you make it.Some have strong points others do not.

[lovehamr]

No real snobbyness from me. For me it's simple; up until this newest incarnation (MkIV?) the cars just looked wrong with their "perky butts" exposed hinges and other stuff that just didn't look right to me. When you stack owners and compony people who swear up and down that the bodies are clones of an original on top of that; it just seems like a bunch of knuckleheads refusing to admit that the king has no clothes. Not something that I want to be involved in.

Steve

[bobcowan]

Hi, my name is .boB, and I own a Factory Five Roadster.

This is the second car I built. The first was a Classic Roadsters, with the extended wheel base. After I finished it, I wasn't happy with it. I decided to either tear it apart, or sell it and build a new one. So I sold it.

in '02, I was lucky enough to be on the east coast for the Kit Car Nationals. I had a list that I wanted to look at - ERA, Kirkham, FFR, and a few others. I had the oppurtunity to put my hands on each product, and and talk extensivly with each company rep. Every company rep said the same thing: "Our car is better than Factory Five because....." The FFR rep said, "We have a great car because...." That tells you a lot right there.

After taking a very close look at each frame and suspension design, I went with the FFR. There's nothing wrong with Mustang parts. There are millions of Mustangs on the street using them without any problems. Replacements are easy to come by, and inexpensive. BMW and Jag parts, not so much. Look at the price differance between ball joints. Look at the performance differance.

as for performance, again it's what you make it. Most of the time I drive my car on the streets. We cruise with club, take drives through the mountains, and generally enjoy the car. But when I take it to the track, there's nothing faster in the price bracket. It's fun to see people with expensive sports cars get beaten by an old guy who built a car in his garage.

It's been said that FFR owners don't have a sense of history. That's just silly. How can you build a mid 60's race car and not have a sense of history? If you didn't, you'de simply buy a porsche or viper. My sense of history is just a little bit differant than yours. My car is a more modern iteration of the 60's car: small block, 5 speed, EFI, custom wheels, etc. It's my vision of what a Cobra would be if they were building them today.

I also chose not to use old and rusty parts. I did a "non-donor" build, with all new parts. Have you ever seen a '66 Mustang rebuilt with old junk yard parts? I have, more than once. It's not a pretty sight.

Some people are crappy builders, and that's a fact. Doesn't matter what the name of the kit is, some builders just don't do a good job. And we've all seen the results. I have seen a BB non-FFR car with a MII front suspension, 4 lug wheels, and tiny MII brakes.

FFR has sold more than 7,000 Roadster kits. 7,000. That's reported to be more than all other kits combined. And that's just roadsters, doesn't include any of their other cars. What does that tell you? That's it's the '82 Escort of the Roadster world?

Certainly, build quality is more consistant in a Superformance, for obvious reasons. Some FFR's are better, and some are worse. Mines a better build than a roller, becuase it's not a Superformance, ERA, etc. It's a Bob Cowan original. But, some people are builders and some are buyers. Dropping in a drive train into a roller on a Sunday afternoon and saying, "I built that" is like putting a chrome air cleaner on a BMW and saying, "I built that". If there's a bolt, nut, or rivit on my car, I put it there; often more than once.

Is FFR the top of the heap in innovation and quality? I'd have to say no, they're not. But they're not at the bottom, either. But they are certainly the most successfull company in the history of kit cars. You've got to wonder why that is.

If you look down your nose at an FFR simply because it's an FFR, then maybe your eyes are closed. And when you finally open them, you'll bee seeing tail lights and a perky butt.