Britain's "remarkable automotive cottage industry"

[meangreeny]

Did not read the whole thread but "Fat" used in this context is a compliment meaning, great, strong, cool, powerful etc.

[RallySnake]

GreenMeany,

Wouldn't that be "PHAT"?

Trevor,

Thanks very much for the great insights you have shared. Do you still visit the AC facility and are you aware of recent developments there?

I was always amazed with the friendliness and helpfullness of the craftsmen in little fabricating shops around England. One bloke happily built a whole new tube header for my Datsun 1600 roadster after the original cracked. Another time, on a cross country trip, I happened to pass by the Aston Martin factory. I stopped and was warmly greeted and got to tour the place. The price of Petrol was prohibitive. But, during the '70s, I could buy gas on the U.S. military bases for $.44 a gallon. Naturally, I routed my trips from base to base.

Paul

[Trevor Legate]

RallySnake

Yes, I do drop in at the factory as its not too far from my home. I was passing a few days after it had re-opened but the workshop was pretty empty as you can imagine. It re-opened with 9 staff. I hope to visit in the next week or 2 and find out how things are progressing - they want to see my Caterham!

To revert to a recent comment regarding the MkIV Lightweight. Definately THE Cobra to own, if an true original is unavailable. The photo on the back jacket of my last book is one such example. I had the thing parked in my photographic studio for a week - and the keys!! Wow, did thing thing take off when the clutch bit. Who needs a 7-litre?
The reason for the Lightweight was that Angliss realised that owners of genuine cars would not buy his MkIV. They always turned up for a test drive, made negative comments and went home. There was an untapped market for Cobras - hence the Lightweight which chucked out a genuine 345bhp, handled and had the original dash and sterring wheel. It was the genuine article, but with an amazingly flexible engine. He guaranteed there would be only 18 and therefore could charge a premium and £120,000 was about right. I know 3 people who brought one, including Nigel Hulme who owned the Le Mans car 39PH. Then it all went a bit sour when the owners started counting how many of their friends had brought one and it seemed to come to more than 18.......also, due to the success of the car, Angliss incorporated a lot of the cars features into the MkIV and thereafter ALL the cars were called "MkIV Lightweights". But, the genuine 18-ish examples do appear on the market from time to time - most seem to pass through Rod Leach's Nostalgia dealership, so do not expect a bargain. Possibly the Ultimate Cobra, after 1968. Also, say what you like about Brian Angliss (I'm sure some do) but you cannot fault his paintwork. That silver car I had in the studio had paint that cannot be described. You felt you could almost put your hand into it, it was almost liquid. Amazing.

[Cal Metal]

It looks like our new found English forum members have generated some present, and, hopefully, future interest in a Cobra that has not received much fanfare on CC: The Mark III & IV. Those cars sound very interesting.

[What'saCobra?]

They are.

A little clarification for our more open-minded friends is in order.

When AC stopped shipping to SA at the end of 1967, because SA didn't want any more cars they couldn't sell and had a mess of 427/428's upon which they were plonking left over race exhausts, roll bars and other over purchased race stuff made available by the FIA homologation cancellation by FORD and calling them the new moniker, "SC"... AC continued to build a 289 powered version of the MKIII chassis, which they called the AC 289 Sports. (This is not be be confused with the MKIV, this was a true MKIII, but not a 427/8.)

Lovely car, if a little underpowered appearing by our standards; yet, because of the lighter weight (not yet a "lightweight", which came much later), they discovered the car was a driver's driver, with handling that was undiscovered in prior years when loaded down with that iron lump of an FE, regardless of the state of tune of the FE.

Only the Brit's and a few germans (should always be small-capitals until the germans exorcise their east german controlled current government) knew this and then only the few that drove them. The fuel consumption (and fuel cost) of any of the prior 427's made the miserly europeans and their respectively monstrous displacement-based (7 Liters, remember) tax authorities formulate confiscatory registration costs, which the AC 289 Sports mostly dodged, at 4.7 liters.

Even so, AC eventually couldn't even sell many of these, since they were under pressure also about future emissions problems, still too high fuel and tax costs, increased prices at AC (still cheap at any comparison) and the lack of development; which was viewed negatively at the time, since the nostalgia for Cobras hadn't taken off at all until the early seventies, and then only really in 73,74 and 75.

Brian, who then owned Autocraft, the major supplier to AC, wanted to not just build replacement parts for Cobras for everyone in the world, but wanted to build new cars and push them into the USA. He cut a sweet deal with Hurlock...bot AC with FORD, designed and qualified the MKIV for both Britain and the USA (with FORD's help) and sold a bunch of MKIV's...read the books to see that part of the story.

Trevor is absolutely correct that Brian sensed (in 1990 or so) that the market would respond to a hot version of the AC Cobra MKIV and he sold the first few rather quickly and built and sold a few others at BIG margins, as he deserved and good for him. We should be so smart. Isn't this what we credit CS for doing throughout his gloriously adulterated history?

The Shelby American world registry (which title tells it all) doesn't really come to grips at all with understanding the Lightweights, their value and their handling improvements. All MKIV's are treated like bastards, "not real Shelby's" (which is, of course, tautologically true) and miss the entire point of handling vs horsepower that lies beneith Trevor's kindly verse and accurate perspective of the Lightweights. Of course, the US of A has historically missed this handling vs horsepower argument many times in the past and needed the winning of races by Porche and others to wack us up-side the head at Sebring, Daytona and elsewhere to get our attention.

The registry (which should remain in small caps until they remove the Shelby-colored bllinkers and get with the full history of the cars made by AC as real Cobras by law and contract, just not Shelby Cobras) shows the first lightweight as AKL1313 in 1990, which may or may not be true. I personally doubt it, because I know of several Lightweights that are not even in the registry. Some are obvious by their missing serial number gaps and 1313 doesn't sound very auspicious.

I issue the mildest rebuke to Trevor's thinking as he starts to establish anything other than the first 18ish as "genuine" Lightweights, whatever he intends that dislocation of lineage to discriminate. All Lightweights, so called by AC, serialized as such by AC and fabricated to Lightweight specifications by AC...are bloody Lightweights, particularly if they are, in fact, light weight! It can be measured, observed and established by documentation.

Just because a friend of ours or two thought Brian was only going to make 18ish of them or so (he changed his mind when he had a waiting list for the first time in years) doesn't make the rest that he made non-Lightweights...or not "original" Lightweights or otherwise heavy.

That kind of wishful preferred investment conditioned thinking (particularly by a justly acclaimed and rightly popular historian) is identical to that which causes the USA, with its' Shelby totem cult, not to understand ANY of the 289 or small block cars, the AC cars of any ilk, the issues of good handling, remarkable quality of fit and finish, faster lap times, safety improvements.....yada de yada.

The registry shows at least 48 Lightweights in the lastest edition of 1997 and perhaps the newest edition will show more and be more aware of these issues...I don't know...they didn't check with me, cause I'm Mr. Nobody. (canned laughter, insert here)

Anyway, Brian did a terrific job on the Lightweights and they are a joy to drive with gusto. Fixing a broken motor is child's play compared to digging up (literally) a pukka (those living more than 4 time-zones West of Greenwhich, look it up) FE SO TP 2x4bbl Dry Sump. Look, I have one of those monsters available, but if anyone wants it they should be prepared to give up their first born and most of their other assets or at the very least a couple of dozen of Shelby's original COBRA jackets. What price historicity?

Now, stop wasting a nice day/evening on the computer and go out and drive your "genuine Cobra" (my view? If it looks like a duck...) and your best girl somewhere nice and listen to those pipes, man...

[Trevor Legate]

Greetings WhatsaCobra

Thanks for your thoughts and comments re the Lightweights. I have one correction to make to my posting - the FIRST genuine, proper lightweights were marketed as "AC Cobra Lightweight" - the remainder, the MkIV/Lightweight "production-line" models were "AC Cobra MkIV Lightweights". Getting down to the nitty-gritty here, but its worth establishing.
Always happy to receive a damn good rebuking (hit me, beat me) BUT I have to leap swiftly to my own defence. The matter of Brian building a run of 18 cars was related to me directly by all the owners i mentioned. They were:

Nigel Hulme - AKL1335 - also owner of 39PH and several other Cobras in his time and a close friend of Brian as it was his 427 that was the first complete car Autokraft made. Also a gent of the Jimmy Price school of business and the most honest, trustworthy person I have ever met. Not to mention one of THE authoritys on Cobras!!!!
Charles Agg - AKL1326 - owner of GPG4C the ex-Tommy Sopwith race car, one of the most raced Cobras of all (and, at the time, owner of 3 McLaren M8F's, including one with twin turbos....!)
Richard Duveen - AKL1342 - classic car dealer & owner of the silver car in my book

They were amongst a handful of owners contacted by Angliss and the deal was agreed that the price would be set at £120,000 on the clear understanding that no more than 18 examples would be built. Fact. At least, that was the Fact as related to me by them in 1989/1990. You have to bear in mind that this was at the height of the truly crazy money paid for "classic" cars and I know for certain that one of the above anticipated selling his car on in around 12 months for "at least £250,000" (direct quote) Then the market crashed at about the same time as the cars were delivered and their value fell overnight to circa £80,000. I know one of the cars was sold for something in the region of £55,000 some years later.
Them was the facts as related to me at the time by people I trust, my reporting of them has absolutely no underlying motive.

The first Lightweight was 1313 according to the official AC Chassis registry. I can verify most of these facts as I have a copy of the entire AC Chassis list sitting next to me, from 1962 onwards. Useful for settling friendly discussions.....

Brian then started building AC Cobra MkIV Lightweights, the title of which sort of devalued the 18 (!) 345-bhp cars. They were light, but incorporated aspects of the MkIV. I shall have a telephonic conversation with Rod Leach on this matter next week to gain further clarification. He ought to know.

On the topic of the entries (or non-entries) made in the AC registry regarding chassis numbers for the MkIVs - well, thats another topic altogether and I do not want to go there. The AC Owners Club are trying to sort out the tangled web, and jolly good luck!! I've been threatened with legal action in the past and I want no more of it - bloody dangerous business, writing Cobra books!!!

I agree totally re the SAAC blind-spot when it comes to anything built outside the USA but they slavishly toe the corporate line and air-brush out facts which do not fit the overall Masterplan. To quote exactly from an email I received recently from a noted AMERICAN motoring writer - "shuttered shores and shuttered minds".

[Excaliber]

"SAAC" Shelby American Autombile Club?

1. The name IS Shelby (not AC, ACE or English however worthy that may be).

2. It is the AMERICAN Auto Club, not the ENGLISH Auto Club (as worthy as the English are).

I see no reason based on the name SAAC why they should include any products NOT based in the USA and NOT directly associated with "Shelby". How ever worthy those other products may be. The SAAC registry is all ready SO big and includes at least SOME controversial products to further confuse the matter with English only cars would be out of control.

Perhaps what we need here is a different registry. One that deals with AC primarily and Shelbys limited involvement secondarily. Such a registry would NOT inlcude "Eleanor" or GT-350-500's and some other questionable vehicles.

Upon reading that perhaps the Americans could complain about the "shutttered shores and shuttered minds" of our English counter parts for NOT including "Elanor"?

Hey, just a thought, you know I love you British blokes!

Ernie

[What'saCobra?]

Excal:
I suspect, but cannot afirm, that the Shelby American Automobile Club, means Shelby-American (as in Shelby American, Inc.) Automobile Club, rather than an American club, but only the founding owners could sort out that sophistry with any authority, keeping in mind that perspectives and admissions change over time and prevailing winds. You might recall that for a long while Shel was seriously disrespecful of SAAC, much to his own neglect and those that love all the cars as much as we do. He gave them lots of grief and sabre-rattled more than once that they were stepping on "his" logos, trademarks and authored ideas. Usually, they tried to be polite and sort of ignore him, which mostly worked.

During those wilderness years, SAAC created, perhaps quite innocently, the mind-set began that ALL the cars were SA, which the several well-steeped authors herein have shown to be not so, as all original 289's were kept, data plated, sold and documented by SA as AC Cars, Ltd. sourced.

You can start a Britisher AC registry, if you wish, but that is already in the very good but woefully underfunded hands of the AC Car Club who wish to keep good relations with the factory, but the factory under Mr. L hasn't been as helpful with documentation as would be desired. Personally, I don't know enough to make a business of it. I would prefer to aid and assist the faithful followers of the current issues and cars to learn the richness of what else exists within the logical purview of the cars origins, progenitors, siblings and postgenitors alike.

Trev:
No rebuke intended, old girl. You are certainly correct that limiting and limited assurances were made, though not in writing to my knowledge. I cannot know what BA may have said to Charlie, but don't doubt that Charlie felt that way, if you say so. Ask him where his twin turbo went, say hello and I hope to see him win again at Sebring.

Perhaps you can review your factory documentation and help ID what specification changes were made after the first 18ish. It would be most helpful to know the exact changes or at least a few, if any. I am separately told there are none of merit, except for car to car buyer variances (anti-roll bars, ratios, etc), but not with absolute authority. One concession was the inclusive documentation regarding MKIV Lightweight nomenclature for the later cars. And you are correct that the value of those first units fell like a stone. A few of the later went for less than £55K out the door with Mathwal 345HP 302's.

But, you have now introduced another new concept and termed it, "production-line" models for any Lightweights after the 18th-ish. (By the way, we keep saying ish, your word, because no one has any absolute idea of what was committed, since it wasn't in writing, unless I am misinformed.)

Now, you and I know just exactly how ALL Brian's cars were made onesey twosey and one word that makes no sense at all at Brooklands regarding any Cobras is the concept of "production-line." No such thing ever existed as each Cobra was surely a one-off at a time. We wish such a thing could have happened, because they might still be in existance. Perhaps the simple term of "later cars" is sufficient? I only harp a wee dram on this because of the confusion already existing about all these and similar issues on the multitudinous 427 versions over here.

Early last year, "AC Works" Frimley could not even produce one net Cobra per month for sure, despite promising to deliver two per month to Price, et al (although cash /credit problems didn't help.) They have claimed to have all the same tooling, etc. But, Brooklands under Brian could produce/sell about 40 Cobras per year or so, just over 3 per month. I think they could build more, but couldn't sell them, as you point out.

Please recall again that the tiny, cramped and leaky Thames Ditton Works, under the olde Hurlocks produced just over 1000 Cobras from 62 to 67, about 170 per year or just over 15 arithmetic average per month (only about 65 total in 1962). The old guys weren't that dumb, were they?

As you might know, the Lightweight shipping weight was 2350 £'s. I scaled one personally on certified aircraft scales at 2360 with about 1/3 fuel and full street trim, battery, tonneau, no spare tire, emergency tool kit, wind wings, etc. I suppose you could take off 50 £'s of steel bumpers, drain the petrol, swap out for a lite battery and get the car scaled for under 2300. That is pretty light including a serious but streetable 351 Windsor with a 3550HD Tremmec. With boy racer trim, it would be around 2200.

Super Hawaii Company, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107, Japan ordered 20 or so Lightweights as a buyer's group in 1991 and that was perhaps the largest single production order which was built, but it was completely refused by the buyers when the Yen/Japan crashed and Brian rightly kept their £20K deposits for each. Again, they were sold off onesey twosey until gone. We should have bot them all, oi?

Your "noted" American author sounds like sour grapes, short fused and given to rather broad generalities. We hardly have "shuttered shores" when we import more of everything in the world than anyone else in the world, import tax it at far, far less rates and routinely stand by quietly as "fortress Eyrope" taxes the behind off our imports to THEIR precious country.

Any "shuttered minds" in the USA are firstly led by our zombie lock-step members of the Fourth Estate (press) who become more irrelevant by the day as they lie and otherwise obfuscate their liberal path to perdition. However, if the SAAC has such a mindset, it may be a necessary adjunct to their recently improved and continued relationship with CS, their membership growth and their car holdings?

You are certainly correct that folks get pretty riled up when you start proving what is so, rather than what they hope is so. I don't much blame you for avoiding the serial number documentation issue, but you have no liabilities, only documenting what was told and some of it is in conflict, perhaps forever. A briefest and most cursory glance at the registry of SAAC reveals lots of conflict in facts and dates, even on the later cars. Such fun.

Thanks for the inputs and responses. This is surely an interesting set of notes we are creating for those who care.
--------------------------------------------------
Aside regarding duplicate serial numbers:

For instance, more McLaren M6B's are racing today than were ever built. Lots of duplicates exist, so a buyer should beware and determine the provenance with a trail of documented owners. Most don't bother, since they are buying the McLaren at a "wonderful" price, compared to the rediculous overpricing of some of the (real) cars. Ask Charlie.
----------------------------------------------
Remember:
Experience is all we sometimes get when we don't get what we paid for (or at least expected).

[Excaliber]

Jay Leno once commented they are more Dusenbergs registered now than were ever built. A "real" car with a "simulated" motor. A real motor in a simulated car. Some "fakes" SO good virtually impossible to tell the difference.

,,,, oh the tangled web.

Ernie

[nikbj68]

Originally posted by meangreeny


Did not read the whole thread but "Fat" used in this context is a compliment meaning, great, strong, cool, powerful etc.

...Have to agree with RallySnake here, Greeny. Taken in the context of the original article, I`d say by "Fat" the writer means 'big', not implying any greatness, coolness or strength, just BIG. Usage of the word 'fat'(phat!) for cool doesn`t occur in the language of anyone over the age of 14 in the UK.

I also took Trevor Legate`s mention of the 18 lightweights not to mean that anything subsequent was less genuine or inferior, just that anyone who bought into the 'limited' production run at a premium pricetag would be justifiably pi$$ed off to find more than their 'batch' being made. I took 'production line' to mean an available model, rather than a row of cars in various states of assembly.

Who once said that we(Brit & US) are a people separated by a common language????

[Trevor Legate]

Hi WhatsaCobra....

Yeah I go along with just about everything in your reply....its not easy putting all this into writing, since the subtle inferences get lost or misconstrued...but I guess thats just part of the fun as well!
MY use of the term "production line" was a bit flippant, but You Know What I Mean....they were the "cars as seen in the brochure", not the sneaky little specials Brian liked to knock out - like the occassional MkII car that slipped through the registry. As you are no doubt aware he also built a 427 that carried the identical chassis number (CSX3056) to the first "427-continuation Cobra" that Carroll Shelby (and McCluskey) built. Brian was very proud of that car and insisted I had a look at the chassis plate and took a photo. This was, of course, at the time of their little spat and the car is still out there, as are CSX3057, 3058 and 3070. And maybe a few others.

If you have my 'Cobra - The Real Thing' book (never did like that title) you will see the 'Japanese-order' cars on pages 160, 161 and 162.

I have studied the registry pretty carefully, but there is no clear reference to the first 18+ Lightweights or any subsequent variations. I shall look into the matter..........

Re the amount of cars ever churned out of Thames Ditton....I thought they were built to Shelby's order regarding quantities and schedules of delivery, as opposed to punting out as many as possible as fast as possible. I would doubt that Shelby American had the facility to complete cars if they poured in too fast! Neither company was all that big, to say the least.

As you say - Such Fun

[What'saCobra?]

Yup, having agreed on that not insignificant point, you will then notice that the 1997 registry (p. 289!), after describing the AK1xxx cars as standard MKIV's, calls out two AKL1xxx "Lightweight groups", Series I and Series II, whatever they mean by that pair of invented partitions.

As you know, the truth is lots more interesting and complicated than this and the factory designated no such easy grouping, except for the simplistic AK vs. AKL chassis number splits. If there were such a grouping, there might be perhaps 5 variants, reflecting lots of different kinds of cars, from milk-toast 302FI streeters to full strength SC's with specialist upgrades. To its credit, the registry adds, "Both Standard AK and AKL cars ['Lightweights'] have had any combination of the above features retro-fitted at the factory." Pretty smart disclaimer, that. Accurate.

Their sloppy use of the words "retro-fitted" might imply "changed after original fabrication", but that would be misleading. Many of the various chassis were built from scratch with customer or Brian-selected unique performance, trim and chassis features.

I suppose the best way to certify a Lightweight would be to see first if its documents verify an ALK1xxx serial number and then weigh the bloomin' car. Even neat paperwork doesn't modify the acceleration due to gravity!

The full rich story is smothered by the regulatory requirements that obscure the detail from us hoi paloi. The SAAC is certainly not interested, to my knowledge, in discovering what lies interred below the National Type Approval, DOT and even the RSPCA rules.

Such an inquiry of the facts might further show that old Shel' not only completely abandoned the Cobras in 1967 through 1996, then constantly gave people guff and threats as they tried to pay the best tribute possible to the design by copying, but was completely upstaged by Brian during the seventies, eighties and nineties; who was building many significant cars that are secreted away from easy scrutiny and who's owners blast around in such secret fun.

Perhaps, like sex, secrets make it more exciting?

You are also absolutely correct that during 1991, 1992 and 1995 Brian built CSX 3056, 3057, 3058 and 3070 (a complete replacement car sent to a Channel Island) as perfectly cloned 427 MKIII SC's. These are what Aston Martin correctly calls "continuation cars." It says "427 MKIII SC" in the AC Cars, Ltd. Registry Book, at the top of the page you are reading, including interesting customer details in column two. (This page immediately follows the page showing CSX 3055 as the very last coil-spring chassis of the competition series cars which was sold to John Wilment.) Even that 1990's list is more interesting than you might at first guess, but it will be some years before all this comes out. When the cars are then worth over a half million apiece, people will want to know.

Twenty years from now, we'll tell them!

The current owners are not the least bothered about the duplication of their serial numbers by Shelby's subsequent purloining of the numbers on his McClusky clones in the early nineties, the so-called "completion cars", P. 254 of the registry, since their CSX 30xx serial numbers are sourced from AC Cars, Ltd., like the originals in 1965, 1966 and 1967 and are not kits, Shelby-authorized psudo-kits or otherwise knock-offs.

I have checked and certain involved parties have said for sure Shel' was never authorized to use the AC Car, Ltd. serial numbers sequenced as CSX30xx.

Much more positively, Brian built what you wanted and what he liked. He was no potted plant, that dude. Talk about customer service. You could get his personal opinions on what would work for you and if at all sensible to his engineering whit, he would build it. I parked my car there in and out for quite a while and the good folks were just the car nuts from whom you wanted to buy.

He will forever be in my memory as my kind of guy and has earned my respect through observed performance. I cannot speak for others, of course or other deals.

The history of automobiles, reflecting our own lives, is littered with broken hearts (even old Shel's replacement heart), wallets and bones. But, it has also seen the flashes of brilliant design, fabrication, marketing and racing that are reflected in our Cobra sport. Again, not often all at once.

For all this, Shel' has earned his place in the firmament...along with the other members of the SA team and the unique contributions of AC Cars, Ltd, before, during and after the fact.

And the beat goes on...

[Trevor Legate]

And I'll drink to that..............................

[What'saCobra?]

yea, but you and I would drink to anything.

[Trevor Legate]

On ain't dat de truth!!

[Excaliber]

Interesting that the light weights were around 2200 pounds. With any replica today a difficult number to get down to. 2300-2400 is about the lightest your likely to find.

I understand the 289 FIA cars were 2000 (or less?).

Performance is directly tied to weight. What kind of things were done to make the light weights "light"?

Ernie

[What'saCobra?]

If you read my posts, mostly hot air! Or what I like to call 'adding Bulloonium.'

I would caution a presumption of 2000 pounds, but it might be possible with a careful selection of items. CSX3127 certainly didn't get there. But, it was close. Particularly, not with the Webers, since they were heavier.

The real reason they were light is that the blocks were real 289's and didn't have the beefsteak of a current 351 HiPo. The frames were 3" dia (making them a flexible flier), VERY light compared to a 4" 427 chassis. The cars were smaller.

But, they had iron heads. Today's cars could be done all alloy motors/transmissions, carbon driveshafts, lightweight CV joints, etc. and just might make 2000 £'s as a racer. I would love to try with a Kirkham. Ask Tom.

Recall also that the upper link in the front was a cross leaf, which is relatively light in total weight, since it requires no fore or aft top locating device. (Notice here the current Corvette single cross leaf rear independent syspension.) Small dia. anti-roll bars are all that is necessary for smaller and lighter cars. Note further that Ken Miles used mostly NO anti-roll bars (front or back), to keep the chassis under less twist due to different dia, fr to back. He liked the way the tires of the day would "bite", he said, under extreme roll conditions, with air under the inside front tire. Look at the pictures, which tell the whole story. ( The difference in the effective diameter of the left vs. the right rear wheels due to such extreme leaning explains one of the reasons why the diff had to have a cooler, since it flopped over so much under high power conditions in turn exits and generated heat.) Depended on the track, he said, also. And that dude could drive, baby.

Bob Negstad, FORD engineering manager extrordinaire, under whom the new coil spring suspension system was designed in 1964/5, confirmed this exact theory to me a few years ago, before his untimely death.

Nobody wants to hear this today, with all our certain knowledge about how many shocks and sway-bars are necessary. Tubular bars, solid bars, Heim jointed, keflex grommets, long links, etc.

Viz, a coil spring street car that has no sway (anti-roll) bars, handles great, with some roll, of course, but is much more comfortable on the street, if you don't tighten up too much on the shocks, because a bump on either side doesn't lift up the other side through bar lift transmission. Rear adhesion on the bumps under power is particularly better. Harder to lose sideways. (How are your reaction times...hands?...sphincter?) I can't tell if it is quicker, since that would require very serious street driving beyond the call of duty. Tires are important, of course. And, you have to learn how to drive...nothing replaces seat time...

"The results you achieve may be different than this. These results were achieved on a professional closed course by professional drivers (@85¢ an hour including driving the transporter, setting up the tents and finding a decent lunch) driving specially prepared vehicles."

They were also accomplished in the dim and distant past; though I have to say, as I ruminate, that some of the things I remember happening might not be so. I am not going to fret about it, since they are nice memories, even if they didn't happen.

Do you dig it?

[clayfoushee]

Trevor Legate and What'saCobra,

I would like to thank both of you (as well as others) for the amazing education I received as a result of taking the time to get through this thread. I learned more here than from any other single source I can remember. Sorry, Trevor, I haven't read your books yet, but I now know I need to acquire them.

I too grew up "brainwashed" by the SAAC, "Americanized view" of the Cobra. I was also amazed to learn of the later AC MK cars and their capabilities.

Now I'll just humbly get back to enjoying my completely fake, "boat-anchor FE-powered," glass-bodied, facsimile, which I do like very much, as it gives me great pleasure. It does proudly display an AC centercap on the steering wheel!

Thank you again, in all sincerity!

[Trevor Legate]

clayfoushee

Thanks for the thanks - my time here has not been wasted! Wonderful!

Just to clarify a few things - as an admittedly lapsed member of SAAC I have the greatest respect for the Clubs efforts and achievements, especially to Rick Kopec who was a mine of information and assistance when I was thrown in at the deep end to write my first book circa 1979. Generosity above and beyond the call.....They still continue to assist and send me all their newsletters to keep me updated. I only wish I could say the same about the UK equivalent! The only downside to SAAC is a West Coast faction who would remove AC Cars from history (look in the drivers footwell guys, what do you see?)
If you could bear a quick story that illustrates the "problem" in my mind;
Some years ago, the British Cobra guru Rod Leach created a money-no-object twin-turbo 7-litre 'very special' Cobra and sent photos to SAAC. At the next SAAC annual convention in California, they showed his slides at the dinner- with the images reversed to make the car a left-hand drive (American) model. Members were stamping their feet and cheering, dancing on the tables - which would have been OK but Rod Leach was sitting in the audience. I think the word that I am looking for is "Respect."
Such details aside, great club, nice people, wonderful conventions.

However, as I have maintained for the past 30 years....If it looks like a Cobra, sounds like a Cobra and goes like a Cobra.........its probably a Cobra. Happy motoring!

Here endeth this thread??

[What'saCobra?]

Amen, amen I say unto you, verily, that he that lasts laugh, lasts beast.

Don't ever let anyone give you any grief about your baby. Everyone started knowing nothing and to nothing we will return in our dotage.

If it looks like a duck...sounds like a duck...turns pink slips like a duck...don't let any snobs get your powder wet...they are just jealous of your good lookin' beastie...you know it's working if they get snoby...

I quit, I'm beat...

Good nite Trevor, darling!