Superformance Rebuilds History With Original Specification 1969 GT40s

I do struggle with these things now.

It's new, but it's old. It's built using the old bits and you can't tell that it's new, but it's new. This one is built with the same old bits as one specific old car, so it's effectively a clone, but it's still a new clone and while it looks and feels (probably) just like the old one it's not that old one and didn't win the races that the old one won. You'll be driving around in historic races in a 2019 car with no actual history...

That said it's also 1% the price of the old old one.
 
I still want one, for waking up the roosters.

H-pattern naturally, but with programmable fuel injection and ignition...
... and most probably that a/c mentioned. To keep the front screen mist free, and just in case the odd rooster have slept in til way beyond sunrise.

Were is that lottery ticket again?
 
Famine
I do struggle with these things now.

It's new, but it's old. It's built using the old bits and you can't tell that it's new, but it's new. This one is built with the same old bits as one specific old car, so it's effectively a clone, but it's still a new clone and while it looks and feels (probably) just like the old one it's not that old one and didn't win the races that the old one won.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I just don't understand it either.

Famine
You'll be driving around in historic races in a 2019 car with no actual history...
Click to expand...

This is the big thing. Is *any* historic race going to be like, 'yeah sure, your car is a replica but invokes enough of the car that you're trying to replicate, come on in!' with this?

Generally, I just treat Superformance replicas to be like a blank canvas to do your own wild stuff with. When they try to get into this sort of nitty gritt replica work...it just seems to ring false, and lose the point.
 
cc.jpg


;)
 
For some cars, I think the joy and intrinsic value of the car itself is huge, even outside the context of it's historical & monetary value..particularly in the case of super rare race cars that used fairly conventional components - Cobra, GT40, Stratos being great examples. I think this is distinct from the "value" of something like a Bugatti Veyron or Mclaren F1 where the design and execution of the car is essentially inseparable from it's mystique. I find a replica of a GT40 to be a lot more acceptable than a replica of a Mclaren F1.

For instance, I want a Lancia Stratos to have a Stratos (because of the masterpiece design and the driving experience)....not to own a piece of history. Owning a real one would be both financially untenable and also kind of a shame. Do you drive it as intended and risk writing off a treasure?

I think there is obviously a place for recreations.
 
Last edited:
A lovely thing, but it does not come with engine or transmission. (The Rousch and Ford engines are 'recommended')
As per Superformance website - "
' PLEASE NOTE:

All Superformance products are supplied complete, but without engines and transmissions. The selection, purchase and installation of the drive train are the responsibility of the purchaser. '
 
Look at this beauty...

The original Mans winning car is park at Henry Ford Museum... not to far of the Mark IV (the in-game car model).
And following previous commentaries, the value of an official GT40 race car is between 4 and 10 millions dollars (it's the most expensive US car).
This GT40 sold 10millions was driven by J.Icks during 1968 season, and 2 years later was in the S.McQueen "Le Mans" movie.
So, try to estimate the 1969 Le Mans winning GT40 price will be... interesting, surely the most expensive car ever, but I don't think Ford sell it :cool:

After that, always a pleasure to see passionate recreation of a mythical car (when it's a perfect recreation).
 
Famine
I do struggle with these things now.

It's new, but it's old. It's built using the old bits and you can't tell that it's new, but it's new. This one is built with the same old bits as one specific old car, so it's effectively a clone, but it's still a new clone and while it looks and feels (probably) just like the old one it's not that old one and didn't win the races that the old one won. You'll be driving around in historic races in a 2019 car with no actual history...

That said it's also 1% the price of the old old one.
Click to expand...

The claim that they're 100% replicas isn't very accurate, though. I've worked with Canepa Motorsport in Scott's Valley, CA, many times before and I remember when their 1966 Mk.I GT40 P/1067 project first started (still ongoing) and how we had to source parts for the restoration. I recall our research finding many differences in the parts used for replicas as they were newly sourced and modified to resemble original parts, simply because of how hard it is to get original parts for these cars. This is common and Canepa does this, too, only if necessary. But we got some floor plates and other chassis components from Superformance and there were vast differences in their "replica" parts vs. the original parts we sourced from the actual people who made them for the cars back in the day - a pair of brothers in the U.K. who still had some NOS parts.

Are these rebuilds very faithful to the originals? Yes - but I'm oldschool and value the integrity of giving something a "100% replica" title, whether Shelby America thinks they're worthy enough to earn a place in their registry or not. At an event like Concours, an expert would definitely be able to tell the two apart.
 
Hey, at least I'll have a better chance to see one racing on my home circuit for historical events. I can't afford this cheaper ones either, but I already have the Assetto Corsa version, which is close enough :D
 
TheCrazySwede
The claim that they're 100% replicas isn't very accurate, though. I've worked with Canepa Motorsport in Scott's Valley, CA, many times before and I remember when their 1966 Mk.I GT40 P/1067 project first started (still ongoing) and how we had to source parts for the restoration. I recall our research finding many differences in the parts used for replicas as they were newly sourced and modified to resemble original parts, simply because of how hard it is to get original parts for these cars. This is common and Canepa does this, too, only if necessary. But we got some floor plates and other chassis components from Superformance and there were vast differences in their "replica" parts vs. the original parts we sourced from the actual people who made them for the cars back in the day - a pair of brothers in the U.K. who still had some NOS parts.

Are these rebuilds very faithful to the originals? Yes - but I'm oldschool and value the integrity of giving something a "100% replica" title, whether Shelby America thinks they're worthy enough to earn a place in their registry or not. At an event like Concours, an expert would definitely be able to tell the two apart.
Click to expand...

Thank you for interesting and informative post!
 
Tornado
Haven't they been making these for over a decade now?
Click to expand...
Probably getting on for two, in terms of GT40s in general. I think the general idea with this one is not that it's a GT40 replica (although it is), but that it's a specific replica of a specific model, with the official replica livery as granted by Gulf Oils (along with the usual continuation chassis plates and name via Safir - which is its own hilarious tale).

Superformance seems to be suggesting that the TR model in particular is as faithful a replica of that car as there can possibly be, thanks to some hands-on time with it, although as @aluminium notes it does rather appear from the car's feature list that even that doesn't get the engine.


I've also been wondering about continuation cars and rebuilds recently. Take the XJ13. That crashed in 1971 and then was rebuilt by someone other than Jaguar a couple of years later. Despite the original chassis and engine, Jaguar classes it as a reproduction and not one that matches the original car. Meanwhile someone else built an exact replica of the original XJ13 with an original engine, in association with Jaguar Heritage (the people building continuation E-Types and D-Types and XKSS models), in 2016. That car is more faithful to the original than the rebuilt original, but it's new. The rebuilt original is not faithful to the original but it uses the original car. So which of them is the XJ13 - or are neither of them?

Even if 100% accurate to the original GT40P/1075 (and I'm not suggesting that they are), these 50 cars aren't that car. But if the original happens to be lost and you have a 100% accurate copy of it made in 2019, would that be GT40P/1075... or not? What if the original GT40 had some replacement parts (and it probably has - brake discs/pads and tires at least); is it still original? And for that matter how can you have a 2018 1955 D-Type?

What makes a car that car? It's a world of madness :lol:
 
Famine
Probably getting on for two, in terms of GT40s in general.
Click to expand...

Has to be at least that, cause I remember seeing Superformance ads in the back of Car and Driver magazine in the early to mid 2000's.

Famine
I've also been wondering about continuation cars and rebuilds recently. Take the XJ13. That crashed in 1971 and then was rebuilt by someone other than Jaguar a couple of years later. Despite the original chassis and engine, Jaguar classes it as a reproduction and not one that matches the original car. Meanwhile someone else built an exact replica of the original XJ13 with an original engine, in association with Jaguar Heritage (the people building continuation E-Types and D-Types and XKSS models), in 2016. That car is more faithful to the original than the rebuilt original, but it's new. The rebuilt original is not faithful to the original but it uses the original car. So which of them is the XJ13 - or are neither of them?
Click to expand...

In this case, I would assume that 'faithful to the original' is very much decided by whether or not said person went through the proper channels of Jaguar Heritage or through a company's special products division or vintage restoration division. If it was me deciding it, it'd probably be a case by case basis, but I'd be more willing to side with the replica produced by the company, considering if it isn't NOS they're using, then they're making the parts to within an inch of perfection, and probably have a better knowledge of the process of building parts regardless through records and history that I'm sure the company has in storage, compared to what Superformance is doing where the parts are more or less approximated. Really close, but still approximations.
 
Silver Arrows
This is the big thing. Is *any* historic race going to be like, 'yeah sure, your car is a replica but invokes enough of the car that you're trying to replicate, come on in!' with this?
Click to expand...

I think it depends on the company doing the continuation. I know the Superperformance GT40 is eligible for both SVRA and HSR events.
 
Silver Arrows
This is the big thing. Is *any* historic race going to be like, 'yeah sure, your car is a replica but invokes enough of the car that you're trying to replicate, come on in!' with this?
Click to expand...

Short answer is yes; long answer - it's complicated.

Take, for example, the iconic No. 46, 1971 Datsun 240Z that won the SCCA Runoffs C-Production championship in 1970 and 1971, driven by John Morton. We've all seen this beauty before, rockin' those amazing red and blue BRE stripes, courtesy of Pete Brock. What a lot of people don't know is that the car was totaled just two weeks after winning the 1971 ARRC at Road Atlanta. So how come you saw that car last year alongside Morton at the Rolex Motorsport Reunion in Monterey? Because that's not the championship winning car - that's a replica, a project ignited by Randy Jaffe with the support of Morton, BRE and Nissan. What you're actually looking at is in fact a 1972 street car that was converted into a 1971 BRE replica. Even the engine is a BRE motor, sold by Mark Belrose and was built by Bill Martin, originally intended for VARA Events in C Production racing. With some help from Marc McKinley, the owner of PDK Fabrication, the small team of people making this car were able to rebuild the lost 240Z. They even got some original paint borrowed from the inventory of the No. 3 BRE, courtesy of Gerry Mason. The car was given the blessings of Morton, BRE and all those who originally participated in the race car's success, even the original manufacturer of the car [Nissan] adopted the car as THE 240Z BRE racer.

So yes, when a car is built to capture the spirit of the original and is built to the same specifications, it can be regarded as a replacement. Jaffe's project is now enjoyed by many throughout the world because of their efforts of bringing this iconic racecar back to life.

Sick Cylinder
Thank you for interesting and informative post!
Click to expand...

Thanks partner, glad I could share something interesting today! :)

EDIT:

Some pictures of the P/1067 GT40:

 
Last edited:
TheCrazySwede
Take, for example, the iconic No. 46, 1971 Datsun 240Z that won the SCCA Runoffs C-Production championship in 1970 and 1971, driven by John Morton. We've all seen this beauty before, rockin' those amazing red and blue BRE stripes, courtesy of Pete Brock. What a lot of people don't know is that the car was totaled just two weeks after winning the 1971 ARRC at Road Atlanta. So how come you saw that car last year alongside Morton at the Rolex Motorsport Reunion in Monterey? Because that's not the championship winning car - that's a replica, a project ignited by Randy Jaffe with the support of Morton, BRE and Nissan. What you're actually looking at is in fact a 1972 street car that was converted into a 1971 BRE replica. Even the engine is a BRE motor, sold by Mark Belrose and was built by Bill Martin, originally intended for VARA Events in C Production racing. With some help from Marc McKinley, the owner of PDK Fabrication, the small team of people making this car were able to rebuild the lost 240Z. They even got some original paint borrowed from the inventory of the No. 3 BRE, courtesy of Gerry Mason. The car was given the blessings of Morton, BRE and all those who originally participated in the race car's success, even the original manufacturer of the car [Nissan] adopted the car as THE 240Z BRE racer.

So yes, when a car is built to capture the spirit of the original and is built to the same specifications, it can be regarded as a replacement. Jaffe's project is now enjoyed by many throughout the world because of their efforts of bringing this iconic racecar back to life.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that, and that's why I say later downthread that ultimately, it's a case by case basis as to what constitutes a 'real' historic vehicle. If it's a replica or reproduction, or in the case you outlined, a street car turned into a race car replica, with full support of all parties involved, and the original vehicle was wrecked or examples are so prohibitively expensive that it makes it impossible to own one? Then absolutely, it can be considered a 'real' vehicle
 

Latest Posts

Back