What about ERA ? - FFCars.com : Factory Five Racing Discussion Forum

RenoRamone · 08-06-2002, 01:00 PM

What do you think of the ERA 429 sc and
how does it compare to FFR ?

rhygin · 08-06-2002, 01:09 PM

I spent about 2 hours at the ERA factory in New Britain, CT this past weekend as my faterh is a friend of the owner.

ERAs are really beutiful and in some ways a different league. Also, they seem to be after a different niche. If you want something that is really about as faithful a reproduction as possible, I would look at an ERA. The rub for me is the fact that my FFR is completed for what an ERA kit will start at. If I had the money, I would have built one, but I am PERFECTLY happy with the FFR that I have just about finished.

2FAST4U · 08-06-2002, 01:42 PM

Reno-

Just as rhygin stated, ERA is a VERY accurate reproduction of an original 427 S/C. Two of my friends have an ERA - one a 289 FIA and the other a 427 S/C. The ERA, however, is a 2 year wait once you place the order. The cost is also much higher, mainly because they only offer it setup for the 427 FE motor and toploader 4-spd.

The FFR allows you to build it now, and with options you prefer (351W, Chevy

, 460 series, etc.).

Another option is Superformance if you don't want to build one, and want to drive it now. The down side is they only offer it one way - turnkey minus. You or a builder installs the engine and tranny. No options for brakes or wheels, etc.

You might take a look at Unique Motor Cars. They have an excellent kit for a fairly reasonable price. More expensive than a FFR, but less than an ERA and without the 2 year wait.

Hope this helps.

Keith

RenoRamone · 08-06-2002, 01:59 PM

Here in the neigborhood (near Amsterdam) there is a dealer of Superformance cars. I like them although they are VERY expensive overhere, approx.
$85.000 (incl. Ford 302). I also think that a FFR
build with IRS,Smith gauges,pin drive etc.
Is a MORE accurate and periodauthentic Cobra than
the Superformance. As for the ERA, I like them very much, but almost all kits overhere use
a Jaguar rearunit (very cheap) and I hate them...

grumpy · 08-06-2002, 03:38 PM

Come on guys,
Where do you get off that the ERA is a MORE FAITHFUL reproduction, I DON'T THINK SO. Start with the chassis, rectangular tube steel to fit CHEVY suspension, FIBERGLASS inner panels over aluminum, and I could go on and on. Finished it looks great, but not in the terms of a faithful reproduction, the Smiths have beat ERA by a mile in that department.
Sighhhhh, if the original FFR plug hadn't sagged in the middle so in the end run they cut the ally panels wrong and created the "perky butt" we would'nt hear any of that stuff.

Take a look at the TriStates Body, gone is the PB, enough said. Give the FFR a BB and it would almost be right on. NEED to slow down on the coffee!

grumpy

[ August 06, 2002, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: grumpy ]

BobAruba · 08-06-2002, 04:33 PM

Reno, Keith said it all... I will also add.. if an authentic look alone is the most important criteria... cost not withstanding... and it is for some... I would have considered an aluminum-bodied replica from Shelby American or Kirkham Motorsports.

If cost is also an important consideration but authenticity is too then the immediate alternatives would be... ERA, Mid-States, Superformance or Unique... among others.

Although some would prefer not to hear it... regardless of whether you invest $20k+ or $100k+ for your dream... they’re all replicas of that awesome record-breaking Roadster from the ‘60’s... but with the advantage of 40+ years of advanced technology.

It goes without saying, Reno, research your tail off... and drive as many configurations as you can from manufacturer’s you’re considering... before you lay down your hard earned $... and prepare to have your budget shattered. Hopefully in the end you will have acquired what is going to make you happy... not your friend next door.

I’ve always wanted an original for what they are... but I love my replica because I can!

RenoRamone · 08-06-2002, 05:49 PM

I don't agree with the fact that Superformance or Unique build a more authentic Cobra. They both use
platform frames. Don't you think that the FFR
"base" is capable to perform in a way maybe most builders want: To put a cobra on the road for under $20.000 using the Mustang as a donor and making a car with compares with the original in handeling etc.
second would be: Using the kit with no donor parts
with all the parts and goodies Superformance and Unique use. In what way would a FFR than be less authentic than the above? And I agree: They're
all replica's !!

RenoRamone · 08-06-2002, 05:55 PM

I think my main problem is that I like original cars. I've had Triumph's , MG's and even Kitcars
like a dunebuggy ans a Sterling/Nova.
I HATE kitcars like most sold in Europe. Fiero based Ferraries, Fake Audi TT's, and some Cobra
clones sometimes fitted on a VW chassis.....Its a thin line between Ugly and Great, but thats personal....

2FAST4U · 08-06-2002, 06:27 PM

Reno-

The very first AC cars had a 260 Ford engine, drum brakes and leaf springs in the rear. Next came the 289 FIA which dominated the races. Carroll Shelby then decided to put a 427 FE motor in the car, but it didn't win the races like the 289 FIA did.

The 427 S/C came with 4 wheel disc brakes and Jag rear. Original front spindles and brakes are no longer available, so something else had to be used. Hence, Corvette (ERA and Unique), Mustang (FFR and Superformance), and Mustang II (B&B) components were utilized to save costs. Yes, you could get someone to manufacture new AC front suspension components, but why? The aforementioned components are today's technology and by far, superior.

The ERA is more period correct (427 FE motor, Jag rear, tilton MC, and toploader 4-sp). The FFR can be setup for an FE, but not the Jag rear, which is period correct. The basic FFR uses a Ford 8.8" live axle. The optional IRS uses the 8.8 pumpkin with T-bird brakes. How is that more period correct than the Jag rear? Superformance uses the same 8.8" live axle. Unique uses the same Jag rear as ERA. The FFR doesn't come setup for a 4-sp Toploader. ERA and Unique do. Again, period correct.

Another point not to overlook is the quality of the bodies. I have seen ERA and Unique bodies and they are far superior to the FFR body.

The FFR Cobra is an accurate replication of the 60's Cobra. It is a great car (I'm building one), don't get me wrong. But an ERA is an ERA. PERIOD!!

Keith

[ August 06, 2002, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: 2FAST4U ]

ffr3245 · 08-06-2002, 06:47 PM

I too looked very hard at the ERA replica, and almost ordered it. But I have a video on the shelby factory when they were building the cobra. And the frame comparison to Factory Five is damn close! That is what really sold me. After thinking about it really hard, I didn't want a fiberglass tub bolted onto the frame to take all the stress from minor twisting and torquing. So I chose FFR for their aproach on the body shell. I am in no way of dogging the ERA replica or any others, but I just liked the way FFR does their kit. Plus it was cheaper.

Erich

Metal-Morphous · 08-07-2002, 03:02 AM

One of the problems with the original cobra frames design was that it would twist with the extra horse power the 427 had. ERA just figured they would not build in the problems of the 60s so the re-design the frame(square tube X membered like the 60s vette) but kept the round tube look on the only part of the frame that can be seen without the car being on a lift (behind the electric fan). Its not a tub design atall. The body is attached to the frame with rivets about 2 inches apart along a lip under the sills. This also helps in the rigity of the car as a whole. In short, my ERA is 21 years old, been on the track 3 times and doesn't have one stess mark, crack, spider lines or fiber mat settling.
They build one heck of a good product and have the track record to prove it. But I must admitt I like the look of the FFR body, not replicated but very atractive. Now remember this is just my opinion.

Ron

oldguy668 · 08-07-2002, 03:10 AM

Ol' Shel bought hisself some AC Ace bodies and frames from "over there" and put his very own Ford engines and transmissions and other stuff in...uuuhh correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't that a "kit car"?

BobAruba · 08-07-2002, 05:16 AM

Don’t mean to open up a can of worms but I’m going to try to be a little more specific regarding this delicate subject and it is not my intention to slight anyone’s manufacturer.

Reno, you said,"I don't agree with the fact that Superformance or Unique build a more authentic Cobra". I wasn’t talking about frames... to reiterate... I said, "...if an authentic look alone is the most important criteria...". My friend, original Cobras did not have several bolts on the lower side securing the body to the frame... nor did they have the FFR’s unique perky raised rear... or exterior trunk hinges. But obviously, to me, it matters not... I own one.

The FFR... to me... is a good-looking replica but it lacks visual authenticity in those three very obvious areas. Loose the side bolts, rear exterior trunk hinges and raised rear end... then the Roadster could look closer visually to an original... but hey, I own a “5” with the side bolts, rear trunk hinges and raised rear... and wouldn’t have it any other way.

The guy who owns a 4k series Cobra manufactured today probably paid around $120+... if it’s aluminum bodied... and you know what... it is still a replica... albeit a very expensive one. Don’t get me wrong... I’d love to own a SA but it will not happen in this lifetime. To me the true originals were manufactured in the 60’s... everything manufactured today is a replica or faithful facsimile of those coveted and expensive 60’s vehicles... some may not agree with me but everyone is entitled to their opinion... that’s what makes this country great.

When I hear someone inquire with the first words out of their mouth... is it real? I usually look at them with the same curious look and ask them if they can tell the difference... then depending on how they answer me... I usually take the time to explain exactly what it is.

I’ll wager those good old boys that own those plastic bodied ’32 Fords never go through the same hassle. But you know... they’re not driving one of the badest cars on the street either!

BobAruba · 08-07-2002, 05:45 AM

Besides the excellence engineered into all of the components... the neat part about building or having someone build a Factory Five Roadster for you is... you can construct it/individualize it exactly the way you want it... as a trailer queen... drive in princess... or road racer... a fast, cool street car... or a quarter mile 10 second road rocket... docile... hot... or scalding!

2FAST4U · 08-07-2002, 02:00 PM

Bob Aruba wrote:

Quote:

Besides the excellence engineered into all of the components... the neat part about building or having someone build a Factory Five Roadster for you is... you can construct / individualize it exactly the way you want it... as a trailer queen... drive in princess... or road racer... a fast, cool street car... or a quarter mile 10 second road rocket... docile...
hot... or scalding!

AMEN!!

Keith

Ophitoxaemia · 08-08-2002, 03:48 AM

the FFR is a great car, whether or not it resembles any other car.

no ERA will be beating my FFR in autocross!

-james

[ August 07, 2002, 11:49 PM: Message edited by: Ophitoxaemia ]

grumpy · 08-08-2002, 01:07 PM

Mr. Randall,
Let's go one further, got five bucks that say you jack up your ERA frame on the rear front by the wheel and do that with a FFR to at least 8". The bet is the FFR will torque less than 1/4" and be completely off the gound both sides and the ERA will torque over 1/2" in delection, it will surprise you. This is not degrading ERA but torsional stiffness the frame does not have if comparing. The 427 CSX frames DID NOT TWIST, that's an "old wives tale" carried over from the small 289 frame and competition that keeps going around. ERA makes one of the finest bodies out there and will probably never show any stress cracking, they can be very proud of that fact.
grumpy

Metal-Morphous · 08-08-2002, 07:58 PM

Mr Grumpy
I did just what you asked, at least I think I did.
Both tires went up(with the extra weight of the 427 big block), then I took measurements, Jack side to other side and showed a 3/16 differance. I will ask one of my FFR freinds to come to my shop and we will do the same test(small block). I knew it would not be a 1/2" because of the fact the body is secured and ridget to the frame. No fiberglass that I know of can sustain any forces applied to it, if so it would have spider crack faster that you can spell it.

Ron Randall

[ August 08, 2002, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: Ron Randall ]

bobputnam · 08-08-2002, 10:33 PM

Grumpy,

Sounds like a good bet. I've posted the torsional stiffness of an ERA. Why doesn't someone measure an FFR? Anchor the front of the chassis at the spring mounts to a surface plate. Measure the twist at the rear spring mounts after applying a torque. My money's on the ERA, even against the MK2 FFR chassis.

I'm curious about the FFR's stiffness anyway. [img]graemlins/evil.gif[/img]

[ August 08, 2002, 06:37 PM: Message edited by: Bob Putnam ]

Ophitoxaemia · 08-09-2002, 04:13 AM

i am also interested in the torsional stiff for my own tuning. i dont have any way to tie down a chassis though.

id be very surprised if the ERA was both lighter AND stiffer, or nearly as light and stiffer as the FFR.

never seen an ERA go fast in autox though.

-james

bobputnam · 08-09-2002, 11:49 AM

We're certainly not lighter - the ERA chassis weighs 350 lbs. I don't know many people that autocross but we've got a bunch of cars that do very well on road courses.
Northeast Replica Challenge

Tulsa Vintage Series

grumpy · 08-09-2002, 07:28 PM

Okay,

Sounds like we need a mediator, just kidding. Our goal when we did this was to check the AC/CSX design for the "twisting during cornering in Autocross" we had heard time and again and NOT to throw rocks at brand. We set an electronic level sitting on a piece of 3/4" steel plate shooting to paper on the frame. No reaons the ERA was sitting in the door so we jacked it up first (428FE mid 80's), at 8" it flexed almost 3/4" at the opposite side measured by the difference of the marks on the paper taped to the frame. The FFR (granted it was a 302) with a version of the MKII tunnel welded in by the builder in 1999, but going thru the same steps resulted in a twist less than 3/8". My CO buddys JBL 302/richmond twisted about 3/16". The CSX 427 twisted about 5/8", but the frame was not level to start with after a later setup on the floor plate (never wrecked says the owner).

NONE of these figures are great enough to get excited over the difference, except that the FFR/CSX style frame does not flex like a lot have claimed over the years. This was done over a year ago to and don't know if I could get those cars togather again, but if I do, this time it will be with photos. That said it will still be subjective to varying methods of the test. Just ask any attorney, Simpson did not kill Nicole, it was proven in a trial.

grumpy

[ August 09, 2002, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: grumpy ]

David Borden · 08-09-2002, 08:02 PM

I can tell you the FFR's new MrkII chassis is significantly stiffer than the older one.

Also, there are a couple tubes that MUST be installed in order for the backbone to work properly. They are correct on the MrkII but if you are missing ANYTHING when you DIY, it will not be nearly as stiff as the genuine MrkII frame.

Grumpy, can you give a better description of how you did your test. I am unclear exactly where you jacked the car up and where you measured it.

I did a similiar test on the spec racer using a lazer level. When attaching the level at the back of the chassis, and shooting it across the to the opposite front corner of the chassis, I got between 1/16 and 3/32" change by completely lifting that front off the chassis off the ground.

I have not tested this on my street car with the partial backbone though.

On the street car I plan to X in the frame in front of the most forward cross bar. I am sure that will help.

David

aumoore · 08-09-2002, 11:00 PM

This is about as important as a bunch of 12 year old boys standing around braging about which one is bigger. This Chassis flex thing is getting out of hand. In a 90" W.B. car there is going to be very little chassis flex unless you are using balsa wood for frame rails. I have seen several cobra replicas run on road courses and run my Hunter cobra and from what I can see the tires make more differance than the chassis. On a smooth track the live axle FFR runs as good as a IRS car but now if you put a few bumps in the turns like a typical old track or street then the IRS pays off. It also rides better.

P.S. Mine's Bigger

grumpy · 08-12-2002, 01:45 PM

Aumore,
We are twelve year olds, David and I both want to know where we can find a smooth track.

David, in reality this was not an "engineers" method of testing the chassis flex, since we did not have strain gauges, computers for readings, the chassis's were not tied down to a rigid fixed point at the rear, or anything like that, it was just a bootstrap method that we tried to apply fairly to meet the same parameters on each frame, since so many had complained about a CSX style frame a few years ago. I think over the past few years that same AC design thru FFR has been proven even more extensively. The first frame we built was of the AC design in 1972, but due to "known racer" pressure at the time resorted to a 19 car run of a square tube ladder frame in 1974 and they proved very disappointing in this area, again the FFR is true to form in that area and I support that style 100% for the COBRA. We have a stress analysis program that also proves this out also.
grumpy

[ August 12, 2002, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: grumpy ]

aumoore · 08-13-2002, 04:15 AM

The test track at Gainesville, FL(sister track to NHRA Gatornationals) is a very smooth flat 1.6 mile road course perfect for testing the 20 to 100 mph handling of your Cobra. The Deep South Cobra Club has run three events at this track and will be running again in January.

I have run my Hunter twice there, Engineer Ed has run his FFR there all three times and others have run various times. The last time I was there a Superformance(ladder style frame) kicked butt and was running with a Z06 vette. Both were running "R" compound tires. Engineer Ed was slightly slower in his FFR on Street 17" tires and I was a little slower than ED in my Hunter on 17" kumho's. Ed runs a stroker and had better rear gearing than I ran otherwise I feel that we would be running the same times. The SPF had run the first time on BFG radial TA's and he could not keep the car on the track and I could walk away from him with my little 302(in the curves).

The tires make more differance than the frame when it comes to cobras handling.

P.S. there was a big block ERA at the first event and it was very fast on both the corners and straights.