Good day for Factory Five

It was my understanding that Ford could get the EPA paperwork for their crate motors (Coyote and maybe the Ecoboost family?) but they didn't see a big enough market to bother. This may change that.

Keith Tanner wrote: If they have to transfer over the entire OBD-II system, that pretty much means that only the CARB-certified E-Rod packages from GM could be used. Nothing wrong with that if you're doing old Chevy replicas or Cobras, a bit awkward if you're doing Mustangs, and not really an option if you're doing vintage Porsches.

I'd go for an e-rod LS powered 911 replica, or even 356.

I was wondering how the emissions equipment was going to play into this after reading the article. I'm not terribly excited about it, since it is aimed at Cobra guys and there's already plenty of existing laws there, but I'm wondering if will have the side effect of making other cars like the 818C, Seven, or Exocet harder to register since they weren't setup to use those EPA approved crate engines.

On the other hand we may get more EPA certified crate engines and that would be a good thing as I'm not an LS swap kinda guy.

I don't think this will change how individually built cars will be registered in various states. It's aimed to allow for easier manufacturing of turn-key cars.

If it prompts Ford to come up with an E-Rod equivalent to the 2.0 Ecoboost, that'll open up some interesting possibiities.

In reply to Keith Tanner:

That's how I read it too. More aimed at Super Performance and Factory Five than at the home builders. I'm just hoping the language is clear on that though otherwise home builders could run into trouble.

Although.... Anyone know off hand what Nobles output is a year? I'd buy a car built in a barn.

The language on Factory Five's first test attempt here in Massachusetts got muddier and muddier as it worked it's way through the legislature. They were responsible for SUCH a disastrous, self serving piece of legislation that, once passed, it just got set aside for consideration and never put into play.

Pretty much everyone here in Massachusetts who purchased their product with the assurance that they would have no difficulty in getting in on the road got screwed ! ! Check the other forums, check the Factory Five forums, HELL—check Grassroots:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/factory-five-launches-war-aginst-custom-cars/48054/page1/

Guaranteed, this new bill is gonna suck as bad as the one that got shoved down our throats here in MA.

List of nice retro cars that could be built... -Brz powered porsche 550 or 356. Even Mayer Manx? -ecoboost caterham, ford T indy replica (caterham chassis) And so many other possibilities..

Keith Tanner wrote: Keep in mind that there are emissions regs involved before you get too excited about things like Seven and Jaguar replicas. From the SEMA press release:

Those turn-key cars would be required to meet current model-year emissions standards. In order to comply with this provision, the bill would allow low-volume manufacturers to install engines already certified for equivalent vehicle configurations by the large automakers, along with an onboard diagnostics (OBD) system. Although this is already permitted, current law requires the companies to then retest the engines and submit volumes of duplicate paperwork to the EPA.

If they have to transfer over the entire OBD-II system, that pretty much means that only the CARB-certified E-Rod packages from GM could be used. Nothing wrong with that if you're doing old Chevy replicas or Cobras, a bit awkward if you're doing Mustangs, and not really an option if you're doing vintage Porsches. If you want to see very directed kit car legislation, check out the Atom loophole in Oregon. It basically describes the Atom without naming it, and gives it a special exemption.

That's interesting. For the companies that are building cars, it does nicely limit what they can put in. And since it meets current requirements- it also means that a whole lot of stuff that's packaged into cars like a 2016 Mustang or Corvette will have to fit into Cobra's or Hot Rods.

BTW, the wording as I read them takes the OEM's out of the picture- it would be up to the smaller car maker to prove that it all still works. As hard as that sounds, there are a bunch of shops that can do the testing, as well as a bunch of small companies that can help with the paperwork.

physician wrote: List of nice retro cars that could be built... -Brz powered porsche 550 or 356. Even Mayer Manx? -ecoboost caterham, ford T indy replica (caterham chassis) And so many other possibilities..

Lots of possibilities, sure. But to make money making those cars from scratch... well.

In reply to mazdeuce:

Probably because Ford crate engines tend to be way more expensive than comparable GM engines.

Get ready for full carbon bodies of classic race cars.

I already know a guy in Europe making a full carbon bodied E30 M3. That would be amazing here!

You guys realize that is exactly what Caterham already does in Europe with various engines don't you. I'm sure Ford will come up with something in fairly short order. Caterham and/or Westfield could easily engineer in the GM 4cyl lump and/or a future Ford lump. IT's also what TVR did before they built their own engines.

The X-bow and Polaris Slingshot already use off the shelf new engines. While these are not replicas of 25 year old cars, it proves people can and do build vehicles within these restraints. Yes I know one is not sold in NA and one is registered where legal as a bike, but the principle is the same. The X-bow meets EU regs and while the Sling shot (being a 'bike') doesn't need to it still has emissions equipment.

For an E type replica I wasn't thinking of an old engine. I'm sure there's a suitable V6 or V8 that could be used. With the price of perfect series 1 E types going through the stratosphere I'm sure there's a market for a $100K replica with more interior room and modern running gear.

I'm sure there will Scoobie powered 356 and/550 within a few years that meets these requirements too.

Adrian_Thompson wrote: I'm sure there will Scoobie powered 356 and/550 within a few years that meets these requirements too.

Been around for a while: http://intermeccanica.com/athird.net/our-vehicles/speedster

Trans_Maro wrote:

Adrian_Thompson wrote: I'm sure there will Scoobie powered 356 and/550 within a few years that meets these requirements too.

Been around for a while: http://intermeccanica.com/athird.net/our-vehicles/speedster

I know, I mean a fully emissions certified and legal to sell under this law version.

In case you haven't noticed, I think this is awesome and while it may have been a Factory Five gimmie, I think it will open up a whole new sub industry.

Although I love the idea of an early E-type replica, it would be a huge disappointment with out the proper noises, it would be like a Ducati sounding like a GSXR, or Tom Jones sounding like Billy Ray Cyrus.

alfadriver wrote: That's interesting. For the companies that are building cars, it does nicely limit what they can put in. And since it meets current requirements- it also means that a whole lot of stuff that's packaged into cars like a 2016 Mustang or Corvette will have to fit into Cobra's or Hot Rods. BTW, the wording as I read them takes the OEM's out of the picture- it would be up to the smaller car maker to prove that it all still works. As hard as that sounds, there are a bunch of shops that can do the testing, as well as a bunch of small companies that can help with the paperwork.

Sure, there are a bunch of shops that can do the testing - but you know how much stuff is part of a modern emissions system. If we're testing to the same level as a CARB EO, things like cat light-off are going to be a factor. Heck, just think of all the fuel system integrity tests that take place in the middle of the night. It won't be simple or cheap to confirm that's all working. Pre-approved setups like the GM E-Rods take a huge load off the builders.

I don't know enough about the European regs to know how similar they are. I do know that the small manufacturers there have been moving towards turn-keys and away from kits due to some emissions regs. But they also have the SVA in the UK, and that's a massive plus for small manufacturers. Or is that going away?

I don't think this was written FOR Factory Five, but the Cobra market is by far the biggest in the turn-key industry, and Factory Five is by far the biggest player in fake snakes. Superformance is an obvious beneficiary. It's just a real shame that it's limited to cars that look like old cars. I'm not sure I understand why.

I can understand why they might have chosen to make it just replicas, rather than unique designs as well, so that doesn't really bother me as much. Considering that they merely have to "resemble" the car they're 'replicating' means that there should still be plenty of opportunity for individuality amongst companies that develop cars to fit within the bounds of this law.

However, my legaleese is weak...Can anybody explain how this part of the requirement for being a "replica" applies in the real world?

Lawyers said: “(ii) is manufactured under a license for the product configuration, trade dress, trademark, or patent, for the motor vehicle that is intended to be replicated from the original manufacturer, its successors or assignees, or current owner of such product configuration, trade dress, trademark, or patent rights.

It seems to me that Carroll Shelby and his estate had/have been pretty protective of the Cobra over the years. Does this mean that after all the years of legal drama between the two, they are actually going allow Factory Five to sell the oficially licensed cars? Or if that's all expired with the Cobra, what legal grounds were the previous complaints against Factory Five based on? I presume that Factory Five, who it sounds like were a significant player in getting this passed, would not have allowed this in the bill if it prevented them from selling Cobr...er...Type 65's in any way. So if it doesn't apply to replicating a Cobra, how does it apply to any other replicas?

Keith Tanner wrote:

alfadriver wrote: That's interesting. For the companies that are building cars, it does nicely limit what they can put in. And since it meets current requirements- it also means that a whole lot of stuff that's packaged into cars like a 2016 Mustang or Corvette will have to fit into Cobra's or Hot Rods. BTW, the wording as I read them takes the OEM's out of the picture- it would be up to the smaller car maker to prove that it all still works. As hard as that sounds, there are a bunch of shops that can do the testing, as well as a bunch of small companies that can help with the paperwork.

Sure, there are a bunch of shops that can do the testing - but you know how much stuff is part of a modern emissions system. If we're testing to the same level as a CARB EO, things like cat light-off are going to be a factor. Heck, just think of all the fuel system integrity tests that take place in the middle of the night. It won't be simple or cheap to confirm that's all working. Pre-approved setups like the GM E-Rods take a huge load off the builders. I don't know enough about the European regs to know how similar they are. I do know that the small manufacturers there have been moving towards turn-keys and away from kits due to some emissions regs. But they also have the SVA in the UK, and that's a massive plus for small manufacturers. Or is that going away? I don't think this was written FOR Factory Five, but the Cobra market is by far the biggest in the turn-key industry, and Factory Five is by far the biggest player in fake snakes. Superformance is an obvious beneficiary. It's just a real shame that it's limited to cars that look like old cars. I'm not sure I understand why.

They way I read it, everything that is in either a Mustang (for a Cobra) or a Focus (for a Caterham) would have to be retained- from the complete catalysts system to the tiny little valve that is used for the purge system. The shapes of the hard stuff can be redone- but all of the hardware would have to be retained. (realistically, there's not as much stuff as most think- the bulky parts are the vapor recovery/purge system)

The one thing I wonder- what's the burden of proof. We have to demonstrate full useful life ability. I would be willing to bet that this will not- just as long as proof (including signed statements attesting to the hardware being there) that it's complete, and lab tests demonstrating it. Being that the EPA already has the codes- it would be super easy for them to see if it's being cheated or not.

EU rules are easier to meet, and don't have an enforcement body. But I don't know much beyond that. I don't see England going away from their small manufacturer rules any time soon.

iadr wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

Robbie wrote: Actually, who wants to start a company with me? We will look at auction values and only produce cars that sell for more than 1 mil at auction. Should be an easy sell to sell a brand new version at 100k.

But it may cost $200k to make, when you factor in all of the hand work that goes into the car.

You've seen the replicating being done in Argentina? Doesn't help the US economy, though, if that's the purpose of the thread.

Feel free to start a kit car company in Argentina. I hear Polish rates are better and and the workforce is higher skilled, though.

So this doesn't help FFR's modern cars like the 818 and GTM?

Also - the whole FFR value proposition is built on the fact owners don't count the cost of their own labor. It will be interesting to see if FFR can manufacture a complete car in the states at a competitive price.

This laws seems to immediately benefit somebody like Superformance which builds nearly-complete replicas overseas.

alfadriver wrote:

iadr wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

Robbie wrote: Actually, who wants to start a company with me? We will look at auction values and only produce cars that sell for more than 1 mil at auction. Should be an easy sell to sell a brand new version at 100k.

But it may cost $200k to make, when you factor in all of the hand work that goes into the car.

You've seen the replicating being done in Argentina? Doesn't help the US economy, though, if that's the purpose of the thread.

Feel free to start a kit car company in Argentina. I hear Polish rates are better and and the workforce is higher skilled, though.

Poland is where the aluminum Cobra bodies are made. By former MIG factory workers.

jv8 wrote: So this doesn't help FFR's modern cars like the 818 and GTM? Also - the whole FFR value proposition is built on the fact owners don't count the cost of their own labor. It will be interesting to see if FFR can manufacture a complete car in the states at a competitive price. This laws seems to immediately benefit somebody like Superformance which builds nearly-complete replicas overseas.

Possibly the GTM since it could use the GM E-Rod engines.

Ian F wrote:

jv8 wrote: So this doesn't help FFR's modern cars like the 818 and GTM?

Possibly the GTM since it could use the GM E-Rod engines.

Doesn't the car have to be a replica of something? Or is the GTM close enough to a GT40?

Keith Tanner wrote: It's just a real shame that it's limited to cars that look like old cars. I'm not sure I understand why.

This may have been to keep independent niche car companies (Mclaren, Pagani, Koenigsegg, Nobel, Ultima, etc.) from gaining a backdoor that allows them to skirt all the usual crash testing and safety regulations for new vehicles.

I want a 300SL Gullwing replica with a nice modern AMG engine.