GT 40 Confusion Invasion

CSX 4027 · #1 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 05:28 PM

What's the story with the GT 40 on the homepage?
Are they new?
Are they another South Africa Deal?
Are they the new CAV?
Does CAV still exist?
Are they a SPF Dealer or supplier?
Is there such a huge market for the replication?
Hmmmmmmmm...........
I think that should cover it.

Excaliber · #2 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 06:25 PM

They have one thing NOBODY else has got, not even FORD.

They OWN the name GT-40. In that respect, kinda cool.

Hey wait a minute, is this another Steve fly paper thread I've been sucked into?

Ernie

rlearp · #3 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 06:57 PM

I thought Safir owned the GT40 name. There has been a lot of discussion over on www.gt40s.com about the CAV story and I don't think it is still straight.

In short, CAV is out of business, lots of CAV people went to Superformance and their sub for GT40 production, some folks are trying to resurrect the CAV company and dealer structure under another name.
Ron

CSX 4027 · #4 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 07:02 PM

Yes. Another 4027 thread but certainly a valid one.

Sure beats hangin around Pearl Harbor yelling "I See A Plane"!!

petek · #5 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 07:35 PM

That yellow GT40 is Alain V. (I can't even remember how to pronouce his last name, let alone spell it)! New Zealand GT40 if I remember correct. Alain (Topeka, KS) is a dealer for them. I haven't seen it yet, but since Alain built it I'm sure of three things: it looks great, it runs great, and it handles great.

HEY ALAIN ... join in!

Excaliber · #6 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 07:53 PM

Correct! Safir is the one who owns the name GT-40.

Therefore (here comes the fly paper) is their a possible violation by somebody using the name "GT-40" without authorization? OR, IS Alain authorized to use said name?

I wonder how Carrol Shelby would handle such a situation..........

Ernie

..... I see a plane!!

petek · #7 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 08:21 PM

Is it GT40 or GT-40?

Fly paper and planes, going to be an interesting thread!

CSX 4027 · #8 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 08:32 PM

Does anyone have an estimate(I know this is a stretch)of how many GT 40 replicas have been built?

CSX 4027 · #9 (**permalink**) 03-23-2004, 08:38 PM

When Ken Miles died in the automatic car, it was presumed mechanical error not driver error. Anyone have any other insight?
Historians please jump in.......

Cal Metal · #10 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 07:31 AM

I know people who were there. It wasn't a pretty sight. It was mechanical error.

CSX 4027 · #11 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 07:36 AM

Is there any elaboration on the mechanical error that can help the rerplica builders keep clients on the right side of the grass?

Cal Metal · #12 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 01:45 PM

The accident took place at the dog leg section just prior to turn 9 at Riverside, coming from the main straight. All evidence pointed to the transmission, as there were only two skid marks, both coming from the rear of the car.

CSX 4027 · #13 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 02:32 PM

What was the purpose of an automatic transmission in the car?
What type was it?
Who was responsible for the project?

TERRY M KRYSTOFIAK · #14 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 06:18 PM

I THOUGHT KEN MILES DIED TESTING THE "J" CAR. WASTHAT A VARIATION OF A GT40?

CSX 4027 · #15 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 06:26 PM

The J Car was a GT 40 with an automatic for whatever reason.

Mark IV · #16 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 06:47 PM

The "J" car was the early version of what became the "Mark IV" GT. That it had an automatic was secondary to the goals. The automatic was at the time thought to give an advantage as Chaparral had one (like the "bomber gap" it was a "if they have one, we need one" issue) and as I understand it, the suspect failure in the car related to the bonded honeycomb monocoque/ suspension failing and causing the wreck.

A most sad event as Miles was a real charecter and a great long distance endurance racer. And he was not well liked amoungst the crew, they even replaced his toothpaste with Preparation H at one event...

Rick

Woodz428 · #17 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 06:59 PM

Isn't it interesting about different versions of the same story. It was my understanding that it was the Kamm effect tail that caused the accident, something about too much push in the corner. Since the Mark IV had the longer, more flowing tail to avoid that, I always felt there was some credence to the story.

CSX 4027 · #18 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 07:08 PM

I didn't know Ken Miles wasn't liked. Can you elaborate as to why?

Cal Metal · #19 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 09:02 PM

The transmission, guys. Two, BIG rear skid marks at turn 9. Nothing in the front indicated that those brakes were used. The car went straight off the track.

Russ Dickey · #20 (**permalink**) 03-24-2004, 09:46 PM

Interesting. I was with Woodz, in that I had always heard it was the larger Kamm tail that contributed to the wreck. That's why I love this forum. There's always somebody "in the know" to set the facts straight.

It's even more of a shame that Miles was killed testing versus in competition, and in a car as ugly as the J-car. It didn't earn the nickname "the breadwagon" for smelling like warm toast. That thing was downright hideous, and looked like a panel van with a GT-40 MK IV nose. A far cry from it's beautiful GT-40 lineage.

Russ