HELP!! Name the replica manufacturer please

JM_OBRIEN · #1 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 06:06 PM

Hey guys, first off a little disclaimer. I only have pics of this car and very little info given from the seller.

I came across this car for sale and the owner doesn't know which replica manufacturer produced it BUT he did say that Carroll Shelby's shop built the car around 1993 in California and it does have a fiberglass body. That is where he sort of lost me as I find that impossible to believe without documentation. Anyway, he also said it is powered by a 352 and a Tremec 5-speed, 9" ford yada yada. It doesn't look like a 352 to me, I'm thinking a 351 but I can't tell much from the pic. It came with 15" Hali's but he replaced them with 16" Hali's. Obviously they are not knock-offs and I'm sure the 15's aren't either.

My big concern is not knowing the manufacturer but I'm going to look at it myself Sunday and wanted to know what you thought it was and how I could check for certain once I have my own prying eyes on it.

I'm almost 100% certain it's not an FFR or Shelby obviously but what other manufacturers were around in 1993 ?? Contemporary? Classic roadsters I think? ERA? Superformance? Everitt?? Again, I haven't looked into much of anything besides ERA, FFR, or Superformance so I don't know much about the other companies.

gsharapa · #2 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 06:13 PM

Not sure on the kit but it is not a Shelby, ERA, Superformance, Classic and doesn't really look like a FF. Motor is clearly a small block so either 289, 302 or 351. 352 is a FE design ie; 390, 428, 427 which it is not.

mickmate · #3 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 06:43 PM

Not a Contemporary, I'm seeing some B&B traits in there.

rustyBob · #4 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 06:51 PM

Its not a Midstates.....and yes that is a windsor based engine.....
be very careful about the LACK of information....
thats how somebody gets taken advantage of....
ask if you can get intouch with previous owners....

Three Peaks · #5 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 06:55 PM

The webbing for the hood latches in the corner of the engine compartment opening remind me of the way the NAF kits were built. Also a bit of B&B but NAF looks about right and they were around about the right time frame.
More pics would definitely help.

How much is he asking for the car?

Bob

jdean · #6 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 07:04 PM

Shell Valley maybe?

PSB · #7 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 07:14 PM

Everett-Morrison. The front wheels with no "dish" are to fit the Corvette front suspension. Also the rear fenders with no flares point to E-M.

Pete

JM_OBRIEN · #8 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 07:41 PM

Wow, that didn't take long!! Thanks so much to each of you! Now, fill me in about Everett Morrison, I vaguely remember them being low cost?? Is it a quality kit and if you were to compare it to an FFR, what would be the differences good AND bad?

Thanks again!

JM_OBRIEN · #9 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:06 PM

It's starting to come back to me now but was reminded of Everetts use of the longer wheelbase and this looks like it may be one of them. Also if you know of anything in particular I should look for please let me know. Thanks again!

Jerry Clayton · #10 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:10 PM

4 in round tube frame?

JM_OBRIEN · #11 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:38 PM

dunno? I'll find out Sunday if I go look at it. I'm not sure I'd waste my time with an E-M. No offense to anyone, just didn't have a good experience with the first one I've looked at. I know, the builder makes the difference and I'm sort of hard-headed sometimes(just ask my wife). I'd still like to hear the differences between it and the FFR, which I'm real familiar with.

Jon

Jerry Clayton · #12 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:43 PM

well mine has the 4 in tube frame with corvette c4 alum suspension front and rear and is 93 inch wb---ffr uses mustang components

Tommy · #13 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:43 PM

I own an EM with Corvette suspension and I can't be sure what kind of car that is in the pictures. A VIN might be very helpful.

Tommy · #14 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:48 PM

Jon,
EMs could be had with various suspension components and bodies that ranged from heavy and stout to very light. For these reasons, it's hard to make a blanket comparison between all EMs and all FFRs. If it's an EM, you'll just have to look at it and make up your own mind. Many of the EMs owned by people on this forum have been set up for hard core track use. They seemed especially well suited for that back in the 90s.

Jerry Clayton · #15 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 08:53 PM

Also most of the cars that have a really bad ass combo--supercharged, turbo charged, hemis , all aluminum components seem to favor the E-M

rustyBob · #16 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 09:44 PM

Why do people find it necessary to compare "all other kits" to the ffr's ????
there are far better ( no offence to ffr owners ) kits out there than the ffr's..
Midstates being one of them as well as ERA and several others that have been
around much longer than ffr.
if memory serves me correctly E-M's could be had with a 90 inch wheel base and
a stretch version was also available and you could get almost any suspension you wanted.....i dont think they where a bad car but they where around when other
"not so up and up" companies where around....

JM_OBRIEN · #17 (**permalink**) 01-07-2011, 10:19 PM

I can't speak for anyone else as far as comparing to FFR's but my reasoning is because I researched the cars when I was going to build a car and the FFR suited ME best. I'm a die hard Ford guy and always will be, owned and built several Mustangs and am extremely comfortable with all of the components that would have been used in my FFR build. I feel like I'm somewhat familiar with their car and even though I decided to build a '69 Mach instead of the FFR I still have kept up with their updates to the car throughout the years. That is why I asked for the comparison, sure I would love an ERA, Kirkham or even a Superformance but they didn't fit my budget plus I'm just going to beat the hell out of it anyway and again the FFR was better for ME.

As for the VIN, should it start with EM similar to what some of the other manufacturers do? I'm learning alot here about the E-M's, honestly I don't know if I gave them a fair shake prior to this(due to what was probably a sloppy and cheap build that I was able to see first hand). Can you point me to a site that has chassis pics of the mid nineties era E-M's??

Hotfingrs · #18 (**permalink**) 01-08-2011, 03:53 AM

I don't see anything wrong with an EM. Mine has the C4 suspension, 90 inch wheel base, and built very well.

Tom Cimino · #19 (**permalink**) 01-08-2011, 04:45 AM

I would bet that it's not an Everett-Morrison. The triangle webbing in the hood opening is much smaller than E-M and the rear fenders are not flared at all and the E-M does have a small flare. Of course, someone might have trimmed the webbing and the flares.

The E-M kits from when I bought mine were very nice cars. Good solid body and well built 4" round tube frame. Large choice of susbension options from leaf sprung Mustang II to Vette or Jag. The body was chopper gun fiberglass and very thick. I would not say they were a low cost kit. More in the price range of a Midstates. I'd still prefer an E-M over a FFR. (although, FFR has awesome factory support, from what I'm told.)

Don't let that one experience turn you off to E-M. Alot does depend on the builder. If anything turns you away from E-M it should be the shaky future of the company.

PSB · #20 (**permalink**) 01-08-2011, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JM_OBRIEN

Can you point me to a site that has chassis pics of the mid nineties era E-M's??

Not nearly as good as their old site, but here it is:
http://everett-morrison.com/