FIA Frame survey for TTR

mj_duell · #1 (**permalink**) 07-16-2006, 10:53 PM

Hi All,
As many of you know we are in the process of designing a turnkey minus FIA car. We have decided to try and make it one of the top contenders in the market. Lets say that when we offered the FIA turnkey minus that we are working on, you had your choice between our current EVO 5 chassis (see our website) or an almost dead-on to the original frame including transverse leaf-springs? What I am asking is how many would want the more modern birdcage "racing" frame versus the original "nostalgic" frame. Keep in mind the EVO 5 frame would affect historical accuracy and we would have to take small liberties in the interior spaces. The historically accurate frame would make it a true replica and very little would have to be changed in the way of looks both above and below the surface.

Just a thought,

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

1985 CCX · #2 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 04:22 AM

Here is my perspective,

I think the trans leaf direction would be the best, simply takes your frame and makes it a true replica. This would bridge you into glass CSX7--- catagories. As we all know there are two types of cobra folks in the world those wanting originality and those looking for wild. The wild can usually be satisfied via 427 car.

My vote: 3" tubing as OEM with TL.
Jeff

DavidNJ · #3 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:14 AM

You would probably need to do something to limit the tires to an early-60's spec. Tranverse leaf springs used for wheel location was a marginal design in the 50's and 60's (a time where a 12volt battery and standard heater where new things). Chassis were relatively weak, safety equipment was minimal; in a LeMans start, drivers were unbelted for several laps! And drivers died on a regular basis.

The 'original replicas would also have to be very a tentive to the other details...which could make it very expensive.

Has McCluskey made and true 289 replicas?

Three Peaks · #4 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:17 AM

While the transverse leaf spring cars may be historically correct, I believe what most guys are after is the FIA body,not necessarily the leaf spring suspension.
I've talked to a couple drivers just recently who drive the original 289 FIA cars in historic races and they both said the leaf spring cars are a real bear to drive and control on the racetrack. They both agreed the best of both worlds would be a 289 FIA/USRRC body on a 427 S/C chassis.

My 2 cent's worth is that the 289 is the most beatiful body of the Cobras, but the 427 chassis is much stronger and much easier to tune, adjust, and drive.
I think that if you try to be too original that the car may end up with all the attendant problems the originals had which may/may not be desirable from a sales point of view.
A hybrid gets my vote- use the EVO 5 chassis and have Bruce build you 289 FIA bodies to fit it.

1ntCobra · #5 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:31 AM

I don't know how much of a market for a leaf spring frame would be, but here's a Kirkham being built with one.

http://kmsac.com/index.php?option=co...id=55&Itemid=2

I think that the leaf spring frame is an expensive option with an unspecified price for both Kirkham and Shelby. Being able to supply a leaf spring frame at a reasonable price might put you in an interesting position in the market.

mj_duell · #6 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Three Peaks

While the transverse leaf spring cars may be historically correct, I believe what most guys are after is the FIA body,not necessarily the leaf spring suspension.
I've talked to a couple drivers just recently who drive the original 289 FIA cars in historic races and they both said the leaf spring cars are a real bear to drive and control on the racetrack. They both agreed the best of both worlds would be a 289 FIA/USRRC body on a 427 S/C chassis.

My 2 cent's worth is that the 289 is the most beatiful body of the Cobras, but the 427 chassis is much stronger and much easier to tune, adjust, and drive.
I think that if you try to be too original that the car may end up with all the attendant problems the originals had which may/may not be desirable from a sales point of view.
A hybrid gets my vote- use the EVO 5 chassis and have Bruce build you 289 FIA bodies to fit it.

Three Peaks,
Good observations. we have been thinking in that direction as well, but there has been a large amount of people requesting the closest replica available. I would like to get this question set to a poll if possible. We will not be using Bruce's body due to problems on Bruce's side. We now have another supplier and are deciding if we should build the modified EVO 5 frame or the purist frame or both depending on CC member input.

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

mj_duell · #7 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

I don't know how much of a market for a leaf spring frame would be, but here's a Kirkham being built with one.

http://kmsac.com/index.php?option=co...id=55&Itemid=2

I think that the leaf spring frame is an expensive option with an unspecified price for both Kirkham and Shelby. Being able to supply a leaf spring frame at a reasonable price might put you in an interesting position in the market.

We might be able to do a leaf spring turnkey minus for under $35,000. A Lemans top will be available and the TKM will sport Trigo knock-offs standard.

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

DavidNJ · #8 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:47 AM

What would you use for a spindle in the front and rear?

mj_duell · #9 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidNJ

What would you use for a spindle in the front and rear?

Not sure yet, I have people working on that and many other solutions. This project and production may happen here in the U.S. if we go with the "True Replica" frame. The problem is making everything look original yet use updated running gear. For now I would like to see what people want, EVO 5 or True Replica frame. I will get back with details in the next few weeks.

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

Roger Cormier · #10 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 10:07 AM

I agree with "Three Peeks" reply.

1ntCobra · #11 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidNJ

Has McCluskey made and true 289 replicas?

McCluskey has made Daytona Coupe replicas with leaf spring frames.

1ntCobra · #12 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 10:49 AM

I wonder if the people who want the most authentic car will want the authentic frame with a fiberglass body?

Aren't most Kirkham FIA cars hybrids with the 427 frame? Do you suppose that is because the leaf spring frame option for Kirkham is just too expensive and a special order? Or is it because the 427 frame is preferrable? The hybrid has an authentic body with an incorrect frame, yet it seems to be the popular choice.

I always thougth that I would want to build a 427 SC car. But then recently I started to think that I could probably be able to afford a car sooner, if I built a small block car instead of one with a 427 motor. I don't think I'd want a 427 style body with a small block motor. And the FIA body is pretty cool.

Being a few years away from building a car, I'm probably not the right person to ask. It seems like you have some potential customers with deposits ready to buy from you. Which frame do they want?

mj_duell · #13 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ntCobra

It seems like you have some potential customers with deposits ready to buy from you. Which frame do they want?

That is the question of the day. We would really like to concentrate our efforts in one direction.

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

marcalan · #14 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 11:29 AM

I have been watching your progress in the past few posts regarding the FIA. I am awaiting my FIA from ERA, should be a few more months as it is off to paint.

When we started looking for a car to build, a few things were paramount, safety, reliability, and looks. We chose the ERA with the based upon those criteria. I think that you will find a few purist that want the leaf spring, however, IMO I would rather work with newer technology and engineering as what I am building is not an original car.

Allan A · #15 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 05:46 PM

Quote:

While the transverse leaf spring cars may be historically correct, I believe what most guys are after is the FIA body,not necessarily the leaf spring suspension.
I've talked to a couple drivers just recently who drive the original 289 FIA cars in historic races and they both said the leaf spring cars are a real bear to drive and control on the racetrack. They both agreed the best of both worlds would be a 289 FIA/USRRC body on a 427 S/C chassis.

My 2 cent's worth is that the 289 is the most beatiful body of the Cobras, but the 427 chassis is much stronger and much easier to tune, adjust, and drive.
I think that if you try to be too original that the car may end up with all the attendant problems the originals had which may/may not be desirable from a sales point of view.
A hybrid gets my vote- use the EVO 5 chassis and have Bruce build you 289 FIA bodies to fit it.

I have tracked both cars. The leaf spring design may be old, but IMHO it is a much better track car than 427. The car is very predictable and handles very well. Recently we were running against a KMP 427 (SO block with realistic HP, not 600 or 700) with the full aluminum suspension and had no problems passing it.

DavidNJ · #16 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan A

I have tracked both cars. The leaf spring design may be old, but IMHO it is a much better track car than 427. The car is very predictable and handles very well. Recently we were running against a KMP 427 (SO block with realistic HP, not 600 or 700) with the full aluminum suspension and had no problems passing it.

Now, did the drivers have something to do with that?

kris-kincaid · #17 (**permalink**) 07-17-2006, 11:06 PM

Yeah, the "A" is for Andretti

I think his point is that the leafspring chassis isn't the inferior beast most claim it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavidNJ

Now, did the drivers have something to do with that?

mj_duell · #18 (**permalink**) 07-18-2006, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allan A

I have tracked both cars. The leaf spring design may be old, but IMHO it is a much better track car than 427. The car is very predictable and handles very well. Recently we were running against a KMP 427 (SO block with realistic HP, not 600 or 700) with the full aluminum suspension and had no problems passing it.

I have heard this before as well. I believe that leaf-spring cars are bias based on the coil spring chassis being a later and higher tech. I'm not saying the leaf spring car is better or equal, but I think it gets an undeserved reputation.

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.

DavidNJ · #19 (**permalink**) 07-18-2006, 10:16 AM

Using a transverse leaf spring to locate the suspension was not new to the Cobra, it was a cheap way to avoid spending money on coil springs and upper control arms.

When you were on the track, did you have race tires at 210° across the tread? Or street tires with hot shoulders?

Do the leaf spring cars have ball joints or king pins?

mj_duell · #20 (**permalink**) 07-19-2006, 05:56 AM

O.K. been doing some thinking,
How would a 289 style, 3 inch diameter main tube, MKII coil-sprung chassis sound? It would be able to accept 8.8 IRS or 8.8 solid axle with a pan-hard rod? This would be the best of all worlds IMHO. Your thoughts?

--Mike / Turn Ten Racing, Inc.