Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Interesting Mk V (P1133) on E-bay
- Thread starter awatkins
- Start date
The car is currently stored (and in the ad is photographed in front of) Hall Fabrication, a Cobra restoration firm about 30 minutes from my house. One of the mechanics there is a friend of mine so I've seen this car for the past few years when I visit. The ad is pretty straightforward and presumably accurate; the very light weight is also true, I believe.
Personally I view it as a bit of a mongrel, due to the mismatched bodywork and bizarre roof treatment. I'd much rather have a 'proper' Safir than this car. Given that it has been offered for sale repeatedly with zero interest tells me that I'm not alone in my assessment.
Having said that, I do think the quality of the car can't be doubted. It's a brand new car for all intents and purposes, and seems to be well-sorted too. (I saw it on the road in England years ago, cruising through Goodwood traffic with no overheating or ill-tempered behavior...)
Personally I view it as a bit of a mongrel, due to the mismatched bodywork and bizarre roof treatment. I'd much rather have a 'proper' Safir than this car. Given that it has been offered for sale repeatedly with zero interest tells me that I'm not alone in my assessment.
Having said that, I do think the quality of the car can't be doubted. It's a brand new car for all intents and purposes, and seems to be well-sorted too. (I saw it on the road in England years ago, cruising through Goodwood traffic with no overheating or ill-tempered behavior...)
Granted, the roof treatment is unusual, but the bodywork is not necessarily mismatched. There were a number of MKIIs produced early on that had MKI style front bodywork - a gold coloured one with an automatic box springs to mind but I can't recall the chassis number off the top of my head. It wasn't until they ran on a banked track and stuck front tyre fouling problems that they modified the front wheel arches as I recall.
Kelly
Lifetime Supporter
Anyone want to weigh in on that? :laugh4:
-Sorry.
I'm trying to imagine getting 500 lbs out of P2174 and just cant see it.
Best,
K
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Had the same thought about P2160, but in my case it's more like 700 at least. So, no engine, I guess.
I take Mike's points about its mongrelness, but have to admit there is something viscerally appealling about the idea of a 1900 lb open GT40 with a 425 hp 302. But of course if that's all I wanted I could just build one via RCR, etc.
I have experience with a Safir car (P1116) and they are very nice, but I do take issue with the advert claiming "Built by Ford ten years on" and the "BRM" wheels are Halibrand patterns.
I visited the Safir Byfleet works in 1985 to see Peter Thorpe and begin pucrchase of 1116 for the owner and it was "GT40" central in the eighties.
I visited the Safir Byfleet works in 1985 to see Peter Thorpe and begin pucrchase of 1116 for the owner and it was "GT40" central in the eighties.
Kelly
Lifetime Supporter
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" /><o
></o>Happen to know how they value the car? I ask because it was suggested to be in the $390k range. Perhaps the owner or someone close to the car will weigh in but if the figure suggested above is the answer, it’s not hard to see why it been on block for a while.<o
></o><o
></o>I don’t know the car but from observation, being a roadster is going to narrow the field of interest for many and appeal to a few.<o
></o><o
></o>Given its lineage and who built it, I can imagine it’s extremely well crafted and sorted. If the weight is fact, that’s quite an accomplishment in (more or less) street trim. As for valuation and the ad, manufactured by Ford? Uh, well, you be the judge there, but that seems to be whopper. With respect to comparisons to the Ford program, just exactly what is it supposed to represent? Seems to me as being monikered the “MkV” it’s what was in the mind’s eye of someone that had a connection to the Ford program as to what the GT40 should have evolved into, an opinion on the best of past cars, thus the collection of features. Does that make its value more comparable to the original Ford cars or a high quality build replica/hybrid? The market will speak but the latter seems more realistic. <$120k in today’s market? Opinions?<o
></o><o
></o>Best,<o
></o>Kelly<o
></o>"Manufactured by Ford" seems to be a cut and paste operation that is just plain wrong - it's not even in context. As for MKV, I don't believe it to be named so as to infer an "evolution" more to distinguish it from other variants.
As for the price - if I had the money I would weigh in for it like a shot. It's a unique one-of-a-kind GT40 in period and looks to be beautifully kept. The bonus for me would be that I really like the uniqueness.
The only other '40 I would have liked to own is the Linden Green variant.
As for worth, nothing has worth except Gold, Diamonds, Silver etc everything else has a price and who is willing to pay for it.
Keep viewing these things as "investments" and the price expectation will keep rising. It yearns to be used and driven and I yearn to own it.
:thumbsup:
As for the price - if I had the money I would weigh in for it like a shot. It's a unique one-of-a-kind GT40 in period and looks to be beautifully kept. The bonus for me would be that I really like the uniqueness.
The only other '40 I would have liked to own is the Linden Green variant.
As for worth, nothing has worth except Gold, Diamonds, Silver etc everything else has a price and who is willing to pay for it.
Keep viewing these things as "investments" and the price expectation will keep rising. It yearns to be used and driven and I yearn to own it.
:thumbsup:
First off I am not a fan of this car but considering the vintage, history, pedigree and quantity built along with parts used why wouldn't any MkV be worth 4-5 times what a SF car would be worth? Considering there was about 40 of these built 20-30 years ago by many of the same people who built the first GT40s and designed by the same guy who designed them all as cocmpared to a kit car built in South Africa and finished by anybody anywhere to any standard in any quantity needed. Seems to me your pricing is a little off. I will buy each and every MkV you can find at 120K.
Jay,
I understand your posistion, but to call a Superformance a "kit car" and question the finish is off base. The SPF comes just as the Safir MK V I imported; a rolling chassis fully painted and trimmed. As to the powertrain completion, yes it can vary as to quality but I will tell you we had a LOT of issues with the "professional shop" in Detroit that did the build-out on P1116.
Agreed the MK V is a nice piece but actually the Superformance is much closer to an FAV car than the Safir cars are. I had the former owner of P1116 look at a Superformance MK I last week and he was impressed.
And I also will buy all clean MK Vs at 120K! (can someone loan me 119K?)
First off I am impressed by most Superformance cars. Coming from my perspective of building and working on original and exact clone GT40s, what they offer for the price is unbeatable. But to even think you could buy a MkV for the same price is pretty naive at best. There is a thing called supply and demand and they are not making any more 1980s MKVs and you can buy all the SF cars you want. And as far as stretching it a little on the facts I remember when SF claimed 95% of their parts would interchange with an original cars. For what its worth I can't recall the last Safir car that changed hands under 250K and I doubt many more will. These are along ways from a 1960s Abby Panel car but still something built in limited quantities 25 years ago and would be considered a supercar today if not for the cars built before it.
Jay,
I agree that the "95%" thing is wrong. For some reason that got put out there and has become "fact". I would gues more in the 80-85% range would be right and a lot would depend on the parts count (are we counting fasteners, clips, Rose joints, etc.?).
The Safir cars have some interesting features like the Alan Mann type front suspension and there are some "unique" versions like Peters roadster, the removable door top cars, etc.
I agree that the "95%" thing is wrong. For some reason that got put out there and has become "fact". I would gues more in the 80-85% range would be right and a lot would depend on the parts count (are we counting fasteners, clips, Rose joints, etc.?).
The Safir cars have some interesting features like the Alan Mann type front suspension and there are some "unique" versions like Peters roadster, the removable door top cars, etc.
How interesting - a debate about "worth" between a replica supplier and a restorer? (sorry Jay I can't find a better description although I am sure there is one - no offence mate) but neither of you are net consumers of said product and, from an outsiders point of view (i.e. prospective purchaser) it would seem your comments could be taken (or misconstrued) as 'self interest' designed to 'manipulate' interest and therefore perceived value toward your own corner.
This is a beautifully made and well kept 'in period' GT40 with all the right bits.
Someone please tell me, how this can be compared with a contemporary replica in pure terms of 'worth'?
I have absoluteley no desire to denigrate the SPF brand, but it seems to me that since it's arrival - the subject of 'worth' sometimes takes an ugly perspective - mainly because of the 'continuation' tag.
Because of this commercial manoeuvre, many consumers seem to have bought into the idea that this means an automatic benefit in terms of investment. Not at all dissing SPF but it should be referred to as a 'replica' albeit a mighty nice one. Please don't be fooled by the 'continuation' stuff.
The subject of this thread is about a unique GT40 built from the right parts in period by the owner of the GT40 'rights'. In this way, this car is (in my own opinion) worth many more times ANY contemporary replica whatever the tag.
Absolutely no offence to any manufacturer, reseller or owner.
This is a beautifully made and well kept 'in period' GT40 with all the right bits.
Someone please tell me, how this can be compared with a contemporary replica in pure terms of 'worth'?
I have absoluteley no desire to denigrate the SPF brand, but it seems to me that since it's arrival - the subject of 'worth' sometimes takes an ugly perspective - mainly because of the 'continuation' tag.
Because of this commercial manoeuvre, many consumers seem to have bought into the idea that this means an automatic benefit in terms of investment. Not at all dissing SPF but it should be referred to as a 'replica' albeit a mighty nice one. Please don't be fooled by the 'continuation' stuff.
The subject of this thread is about a unique GT40 built from the right parts in period by the owner of the GT40 'rights'. In this way, this car is (in my own opinion) worth many more times ANY contemporary replica whatever the tag.
Absolutely no offence to any manufacturer, reseller or owner.
Actualy you could not be further from the truth as if this car was anywhere near that 120k price I would buy it today and I have no self interest in this debate as I sell alot of parts to original owners as well as SF owners. And I bet Ricks estimate and mine on what this car will sell for would be very close to each other.
On another note I bet I have a MkV car in my shop along side the original thats here now before summers over.
On another note I bet I have a MkV car in my shop along side the original thats here now before summers over.
No offence Jay, it's just an opinion but the whole GT40 thing seems to have become skewed by claims that appear to be aimed at a new breed of '40 owner with more investmment than passion in mind.
I have always seen things differently as a net consumer. I would really like to own this car because of it's unique features and history. I personally cannot imagine how anyone could pitch this, level pegging with a modern replica - it's no-one's fault, I just don't get it.
Put it this way - I would be prepared to pay at least twice the going rate for a new SPF with all the toys, to get my hands on this treasure. As I say, it's a personal view but I do not understand the comparison because to me, there is none.
I have used the term 'personal' more times in this post than is really healthy, but it really is that, just a personal view probably born out of the frustration that last year I maybe could have bought this thing, (over $250,000 sitting around doing nowt) but not this year..
I have always seen things differently as a net consumer. I would really like to own this car because of it's unique features and history. I personally cannot imagine how anyone could pitch this, level pegging with a modern replica - it's no-one's fault, I just don't get it.
Put it this way - I would be prepared to pay at least twice the going rate for a new SPF with all the toys, to get my hands on this treasure. As I say, it's a personal view but I do not understand the comparison because to me, there is none.
I have used the term 'personal' more times in this post than is really healthy, but it really is that, just a personal view probably born out of the frustration that last year I maybe could have bought this thing, (over $250,000 sitting around doing nowt) but not this year..
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Keith -- I'm not sure, but you seem to be implying that there are people who consider buying, or actually buy, a Superformance GT40 as an "investment" that is to say with the intention of making a profit beyond what one could make with a similar amount of money in a low risk investment like a treasury bond.
If that's what your are saying, I would really like to know your evidence for the existence of such a person.
If that's not what you are saying, what do you mean when you (twice) use the word "investment" in this context?
PS: just as an indication of where I'm headed with this: I think any retail customer who thinks he can "make money" by buying a new SPF GT40 is either stupid or naive or both. I don't care how long they sit on it, no one is going to beat the rate of inflation on one one of these things; in fact you'll be lucky to recover 80% of your cost. Go take a drive.
Last edited:
Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
Even to hint that Jay or Rick are deliberately choosing their words in defiance of the truth simply to inflate the value of either Superformance or Safir GT40s out of their own commericial self-interest is an insult to Jay and Rick's intelligence or to their integrity as honest gentlemen, or both. If in fact either of them has a conflict of interest in this regard I think they both have managed it quite well. So in addition to being rude, I think anyone suggesting such is paranoid to boot.
And by the way, prefacing an offensive statement with "no offence" simply establishes that you know it's offensive but don't wish to be held accountable for it. Doesn't work.
Kelly
Lifetime Supporter
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" /><o
></o><o
></o><o
></o>Come on guys, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but market value is whatever someone is willing to pay for it at that moment. It’s not necessarily equivalent to worth. People overpay for things all the time and the market size at that point in time may be limited to 1 person at a given price. Auctions are a good example of this. If an item repeatedly trades in a price range, that’s a better indication of market value. Collector cars, art, celebrity memorabilia, etc, trading at ridiculous prices, happens all the time. Though I’m sure many would scoff at the comparison it is the same emotional attachment that motivates some of this silliness and it’s only a matter of degree in comparison. The common thread in most of these instances is most buyers of such are people that have accumulated enough wealth they no longer value it in the same way most people do.
<o
></o><o
></o>Do I have reverence for people who pioneer the way and advance the state of the art in their field such as those associated with the GT40 program did in the 60s? -Yes. The GT40 program of the 1960s was a great accomplishment in motorsport and that’s why it is still discussed and regaled the way it is nearly 50 years on. It is a small part of why I own an SPF car, but a very small part. The bigger part is because of the level of performance it offered at the price I paid. If and LS7/Ricardo equipped SLC presented itself to me at the same time, I wouldn’t own my SPF car now but I’m still glad that I do. Would I rather have built my own of either? Absolutely, it’s just isn’t an option for me at this point in my life even though ownership still is.
<o
></o>Would I pay $xMs for an original 40? No. And it’s obvious (at least to me) that someone who would is not motivated by achieving the fastest lap time because there is much more available for less to accomplish that. It’s just emotional attachment and that’s fine for those that place that level of value to such. This may not line up with the views of everyone on this forum, but revisit my opening sentence.
<o
></o><o
></o>With respect to the MkV car in question, What is it? Is it car with racing history? Is it just a sports car that looks like a GT40? Or is it a collection of parts that has been well crafted into a nice car with a story that somehow makes it some rare part of history? Maybe this thread should be moved to the original GT40 section if it’s such an important part of the marque’s history?
<o
></o>When you have to tell an elaborate story to connect the car to the events that actually brought notoriety to the marquee, I thinks it’s fair to question what that means to its “collector or investment value” and that's my opinion. My statement of valuation was merely what it was worth to me as car, not as a story. <o
></o><o
></o>So what’s it worth to you Jay? You’re in all day a buck twenty. At what price are you <I>not</I> buying them all day?<o
></o><o
></o>K<o
></o>Seymour Snerd
Lifetime Supporter
It is none of the above. But then neither is a MK III or many Mk Is.
I would have posted it in the original GT40 section if it hadn't started as an ebay listing.
