Superformance MKIII vs Shelby CSX.....2016

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by patrickt

You're quoting an old Styx tune??

Domo arigato.

[ASO544]

OP.....I appreciate your question as I'm in the middle of it too. I'm back n forth between a CSX, SPF, and ERA all with a Southern Automotive 427 engine as well. Something about the CSX and ERA just looks more original to me based on what I've seen. The SPF seems like a damn nice car but just has a look that seems a tad off. I don't think you can really go wrong with either of the 2 (CSX/SPF) but I'm leaning toward a CSX 6000 at this point but tomorrow ...who knows !

Also, been some good info provided on this thread. There are some very knowledgable people on this site.....and some funny barbs thrown from time to time as well.

Good luck

[Bernica]

Originally Posted by ASO544

Also, been some good info provided on this thread. There are some very knowledgable people on this site.....and some funny barbs thrown from time to time as well.Good luck

Don't count me as one of those guys. "Money for nothing and the barbs for free""

Yes, you are in good company if you can stand it and have a thick skin.

[Anthony]

These threads remind me of the good ole days.

Blue _ early Superformance Red - Early csx4000

[Rich A]

My 2 cents,

It doesn't matter, since his passing I now own a Shelby Cobra.

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by buddyg

Can someone explain to me the differences in the body between an original and an SPF?

Thanks!

From another thread in which I outlined the essential issue which is that SPF's original molds were splashed from a post-modification Contemporary body in the mistaken (and still widely touted) myth that Contemporarys are "the most accurate Cobra replica".

The difference in appearance between the SPF and cars like the CSX's, ERA's and Kirkhams is more of a body shape/fitment issue than ride height settings and roll bar heights. Superformance, like many others, based their body on the CCX or Contemporary body in a mistaken subscription to the myth that they are the "most accurate Cobra replicas". The truth is that while the early Contemporary bodies may have indeed been splashed from an original Cobra, they chose to alter the shapes drastically in some odd attempt according to them to better fit the lower profile 50-series tires being used at the time of production.

The result was a higher, chunkier body sitting higher up on the frame, with lowered and reshaped wheel openings more radiused to the shape of the tires. The rear arches and cowl of the CCX shape are much higher over the frame than the original Cobra body, and this contributes to the strange appearance of the roll bar. Its not so much that the roll bar was lowered - the bodywork around the roll bar was raised up around it.

I'm actually a bit adamant about the whole CCX myth because it resulted in those less attractive traits being injected into the replica gene pool when newer manufacturers like FFR, Everett-Morrison and Superformance mistakenly saw the Contemporary shape as the gold standard to replicate. That distinctive high-butt, chunky-side look spread throughout the industry, leaving other brands more accurately based on the original shape looking noticeably lower, leaner, sleeker and meaner.

Superformance recognised this and made some after the fact modifications to their bodies to reverse it, but were only able to go so far with the existing chassis and packaging.

Everyone wondered why FFR never re-engineered their cars as CCX clones after they purchased the molds and tooling, etc when Contemporary folded? Most likely the reason is that they were already based on the CCX shape and using bodies out of the original CCX molds would not have made their cars significantly more accurate in appearance.

Using superficial methods like lowering the ride height and raising the roll bar will make some difference, but you'll end up with a roll bar that towers above the windshield, a ground-scraping oil pan and rubbing tires long before an SPF will ever look like an ERA or Kirkham.

There are others here that know these truths, but dare not commit the heresy of defiling the reputation of the all-holy Contemporary. That is not my intention either - they were well built cars and most are finished to a beautiful level of quality. I just don't like the shape of the body; and the untruth that it is the most accurate replica I like even less. I'm certain Jimmy Price, owner of Hi-Tech regretted not doing a bit more research before buying in to that fairy tale.

This may make some people angry, but it is essentially the truth. The other truth is that it shouldn't really matter to anyone other than those who are a bit obsessed with the shape, look and stance of the original Cobra. SPF owners rightfully love their cars - they are without a doubt one of the best products in the entire replica industry. They are however, differently shaped to the ERA's/CSX's and one can only go so far towards changing that with simple modifications.

There are articles referencing and documenting all of the CCX/SPF shape issues if anyone cares or is curious enough to do a bit of searching.

Once again this is my pet peeve about the body shape perceptions and is in no way intended to be a derogatory commentary about anyone's choice of Cobra replica. They are all distinctive and unique in their own ways and appeal to their owners for many different reasons.

[patrickt]

Well that was a damn thorough answer. All you have to do is park an FFR next to an SPF next to a KMS/ERA/CSX car and it will jump right out at you -- even if you don't know a lot about the cars themselves.

[Dimis]

On the phone and too lazy to post the pic....

See link.

Compare car profiles

Further the radiator angle and roll bars look different.

Like I said, if you can't tell the difference from 10ft away (or don't care), buy the SPF.
You'll love it. Else, you're welcome to tip in the extra cash for the badge, and you'll love that too.

[66gtk]

I really dislike that comparison pic from the ERA website. Too many variables to make a useful comparison. I have been trying to conduct my own scientific photo comparison but have been unable to assemble the right number of cars at the same time.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by 66gtk

I really dislike that comparison pic from the ERA website. Too many variables to make a useful comparison. I have been trying to conduct my own scientific photo comparison but have been unable to assemble the right number of cars at the same time.

I kind of agree. I've seen pictures that make the ERA 427 and FIA cars look very close in shape, but in real life they're like night and day.

[peterpjb]

i am not as familiar with the 427 shapes as with the FIA shapes, nobody mentioned so far if there is a difference in the csx bodyshape between the alu- and glass-cars.
the csx-FIA cars have a huge difference between alu and glass, i suppose it is the same with the csx-427?

[66gtk]

Wheel size and side pipes/roll bar aside, these photos were taken by the same photographer at similar distances with the same camera/lens. Can you spot the body shape/proportion differences?

[66gtk]

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by 66gtk

Wheel size and side pipes/roll bar aside, these photos were taken by the same photographer at similar distances with the same camera/lens. Can you spot the body shape/proportion differences?

Absolutely.

[66gtk]

[Three Peaks]

I can tell the differences, but they are definitely subtle in most places.

IMHO, the OP can't tell the difference from what it sounds like so it boils down to driving or investment- which is the important factor here? Heck, if you put a FF5, ERA, and just about any other cobra in with those pictures, 90% of the people who looked at them couldn't tell the difference. The regulars on this forum eat and breathe cobras so the miniscule differences are pretty huge to us. Not so much to the barely initiated masses or new converts to the Cobra hobby.

In the end, if you want to attempt to recoup your investment at some future time buy the Kirkham or Shelby. If you want a driver that will serve you well and you can enjoy without guilt, get the one easiest on your wallet. Many times that will be the Factory Five or similar car.

Bob

[peterpjb]

Originally Posted by 66gtk

wow, the rear curves are completely different, how can that happen?

btw... the lower one is a csx?

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by peterpjb

wow, the rear curves are completely different, how can that happen?

Like I said - Contemporary Classic DNA...

[66gtk]

Originally Posted by peterpjb

wow, the rear curves are completely different, how can that happen?

btw... the lower one is a csx?

I purposely didn't label which cars are what - allowing you to investigate the differences first. In person, these differences are about 50x easier to spot. They are obvious when the cars are parked next to each other. It jumps right out at you.

Which cars above do you prefer?

I'll give you a hint. Below is a CSX 4000 car.

[patrickt]

Here's an old side view shot of my car, in roughly the same position, to help you ferret it out. The second red car, which is an older ERA in the late 400's, is a little different than the more recent ones.