Messages

quote:Originally posted by SB7019
   

   I believe (because the Dax guys told me - BTW they are very nice and very helpful people and have survived for a remarkably long time in a notoriously fragile business sector) that the De Dion rear end was introduced to aid traction off the line as well as improved handling. They calculated that however much power went into the engine ( and many people run over 500bhp in their kits) acceleration could not exceed a certain limit with the Jag rear axle. This was evidenced by an examination of the black rubber on the road after a fast start which showed an ever decreasing width as rearward weight transfer created massive camber and hence reduced the tyres contact patch. Would be interesting to see if the rear axle design of the MkVI has overcome this? I have photos of the "number 11" tyre tracks taken after Steve Gray demonstrated the acceleration potential of one of his 427 MkIII's that show full width rubber all the way. This suggests that the Ford computer did a better job in designing the geometry in the mid 60's than Jaguar did in the late 50's.
   
   

   
   Hello guys (Long time to post)
   Another thing to bear in mind in the above is that with the current trend towards larger diamiter wheels and lower and lower profile tyres the camber gain from using an IRS becomes more and more pronounced.
    15" "balloon" tyres have very forgiving sidewalls whereas 18" 35 profile 295s have very little give. They are great on track for more precision driving and offer better straight line traction on the right type of axle assy. but with a loaded IRS this advantage deminishes rapidly.

Takling about "The next chapter"
   Lets hope the build quality returns to Jane Austin standards, comment removed by moderator . And the new manufacturers are a little more interested in the Mark than just the money.

Is Emmanuell still around?
   Just thought I'd let him know I have a Kirkham build booked in. Due in the next couple of months.[;)]
   (Really looking forward to it.)
   P.S. Brushed finish 427 SO. Top loader. £60K OTR.

test

Would this 212 car actually have carried the "Cobra" name? (As in published on the reg docs.)[?]

quote:Originally posted by ak1234
   
When I visited 006 it was the same way.

   
   Nice to know that even though quality/integrity is down consistency is up.

Done!.
   >>>>
   Hi.
   Just thought I'd let you know that the front brake rotor pictured on the blue 2006 AC MK V (Chassis number 003) is fitted the wrong way around. In that the cooling vanes should point in the opposite direction for wheel rotation enhanced cooling.
   Regards.
   D Brookes.
   <<<<
   I'll let you know if i get a reply.

Hello again.
   Sorry for being a pedant but the front brake rotor on the blue car is fitted the wrong way around.
   (Reason: The vanes in the vents are angled and should be angled the other way so that when the wheel spins it draws air in through ther centre and centrifugal forces push the air out of the perimiter).

Well, don't I just feel like a right dipstick now. I'll just go and sit in my chair and blush a little.

I am sorry if my presence has upset some of you. If you take the time to read the following thread you will see that my first post on it (About no. 14 ish)was by no means trolling but replying with figures as to the cost of a fully built Kirkham.(Something I would like to do)(Costing out kit cars is my job). It all got out of hand when the starter of this thread decided that the kirkham was not a kit. (18th post in this thread:- http://www.racecar.co.uk/acoc/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=228 )
   Will someone who he actually respects please tell him that the Kirkham is a kit car for gods sake.
   If you want me to go just say and I'm gone. All those in favour say aye etc.

quote:Originally posted by SB7019
   
Dave.  Obviously some people like superchargers as proved by the $5.5 million spent last weekend!
   

   
   Too right. Stunning result for the seller.
   What I should have said was "Not fitted with turbos etc. as std." then you can make a very powerful car even more powerful by fitting them.
   My gripe with turbos etc. is cars that would be gutless without them, Mitsu. Evos etc.

messed up posting message please ignore.
   sorry.[:I]

quote:Originally posted by Emmanueld
   
Dave, I have nothing against kit cars, quite the contrary, A friend of mine just bought one of those Jaguar C type replicas, the car is awsome, just like the original, 1800Lbs, amazing, I would love to have one! I think you are mistaking about the handling of Cobras' They handle so much better than other 60s' cars, but that's for another day. Why not build a new sports car? with a new body style? Why build another Cobra? Boring??????????? Emmanuel
   

   
   Hi Emmanuel.
   I feel there are too many people trying to reinvent the wheel with new car designs and they either look like they belong in Toys R Us (Do you have those in the States?) or some sort of space ship that will travel at 800 Light years an hour. They do nothing for me. I still like the Cobra shape, E type jags do nothing for me neither do Ferrari enzos. The major manufacturers don't always get it right when designing a new car and they have mega budgets what chance does the little guy have. The only things that are sensibly budgeted in the UK that have that "Scary" look about them and are as scary as they look are TVR's and they have now gone.......Well almost.
   
   I believe that a sports car should be front engined, rear wheel drive with no turbos or super chargers and more torque than you can shake a stick at. Without designing something that does not embody the Cobra in some way and still meet all the above is going to be near on impossible.

To the above post.
   Emmanuel you really need to go head to head with either the GD or the Dax on a track with your car, I hope there is room between your legs for your tail. Boith the GD and the Dax chassis are more torsionally rigid that an original AC. It ain't always the gauge of the metal that makes it stiff, it's where you put it than counts.
   
   Hi Chafford.
   You are certainly right, the GD and the Dax will run rings around an original Cobra on the track but that it not what my point was as the two kits have both gone through numerous compromises to the original Cobra design in order to do this. I think Dax made the mistake of fitting a BB Chevy to their De Dion demo car when a lighter LS7 or such like would have made for an even faster car on the track.
   
   Emmanuel.
   I was never going to touch on the handling characteristics of the original over some of the higher end UK lookalike kits. I have never driven an original but i know a number of people who have and they have all said that the handling is apalling and very 1960's in feel and does not come up to scratch with some of the modern lookalike/"Replica" kits.
   Again I go back to my original point. The kirkham is a kit. ie. a car sold in component form for self assembly.  How does the Kirkham differ from this?
   
   I am not saying that the handling characteristics if the original or the Kirkham is poor because that is how a Real Cobra is supposed to handle and if i had the money and the inclination then the Kirkham would be the one I would buy.
   You (In my opinion) have the best Cobra replica there is and possibly the only one worthy of the title "Replica". But please do not underestimate the lookalikes in any other department other than authentic looks, some of them are incredible in the handling stakes for cars of their weight, shape and layout.
   For a living I build sports cars and your posts seem to imply that I would not be capable of building a Kirkham, Yet you are more than capable of building a Kirkham (as i have seen in your pictures), what do you do as a profession that makes you more qualified than me? You do not need to answer as my last paragraph was purely ti indicate what i feel you are implying....If you know what i mean.

quote:Originally posted by Chafford
   As for Dave's website, it's very impressive. I would buy one of his cars on the basis of his pictures.
   

   
   Hi Chafford.
   Cheque's in the post.[:X] Or should i say "Show me the money"? Whatever thanks anyway.[;)]