© 2020 MOTORSPORT NETWORK. All rights reserved.
Sign up to receive latest updates for Ferrari News, Threads, and Classifieds
Discussion in 'General Automotive Discussion' started by redhammer, May 28, 2012.
Can't we all... just... get along?
No Walmart here yet, but lots of Chinese shops and street-vendors with anything fake you could possibly desire. They destroy your economy as well as ours.
You seem to know better what's in my house and what is not than I do, which makes discussing that point somewhat useless.
It appears though, that you bring this up as sort of an excuse for fake-ownership, which it can never be for obvious reasons.
You see, if un-authorised replicating someone else's work would go largely un-punished, there would no longer be a reason for anyone to create something new, as there would be no incentive. Without incentive, development stops. Everybody drives the same car, lives in identical homes, gets the same salary....oh wait, that sounds familiar....
Play nicely please. No more name calling or expect a short time out.
And for the record it's 'you're full of crap' not 'your full of crap'.
I love all cars authentic. kit cars or factory made. I own alot of cars encluding exotics. I love seeing them all.
I have a freind who has a kit 1954 vette. It drives better than my real '54 and has more power. Sadly the trunk and hood on his kit '54 are maladjusted just like my '54. No idea why but it is the same. I think he has a better car than mine.
As this poster says " life is too short to care" And I would add too short to hassle anyone over this kind of stuff. Again who cares.
Building and then flying you own airplane is impressive. this tells alot about someone and all good things. I have owned five airplanes and loved it. All my planes were factory never had the urge to build a plane. The late Cole Palen flew a triplane in his show at Kingston NY.
A lot of car people have the different bias as you post. It is important to understand but not all. I have had six freinds die in plane crashes over the 21 years I flew. Ywo of these deaths where in home built planes. It takes courage and skill to build and fly your own plane, not to mention money. I think that is the difference.
One year at Oskosh Ed died in his home built tailwind speedster on his way to the Oskosh airshow. The field is named in his honor.
There are no good reasons to fake some car company's design. A new Lotus Exige is a much better car than any fake 550 Spyder, for example. Faster, safer, more reliable and can be titled anywhere.
Generic drugs are legally allowed because there is a broader benefit to society to have drugs available in a competitive market after the developing company has had a fair opportunity to profit from its R&D. Fake cars aren't legally sanctioned and exist to deceive the public. They're about as useful to the car hobby as counterfeits of rare coins are to that hobby. Even the most famous counterfeiters, who make tributes to rare coins, are basically creating nothing of lasting worth.
Murcielagos aren't and probably won't be classic cars, but stealing Lamborghini's design and name underscores what the fake-building is all about. Taking someone else's design without permission in order to deceive the public. That still seems to be the number one reason for fakes.
Who is taking someone elses design to fool the public. If you drive a cobra no one is fooled, in fact no one assumes its real even if it is real, whatever that means. People build Cobras and for that matter spyder replicas because there are no modern equivalents, not to fool people. I have an elise and a ferrari, they are great cars. A cobra for one is a very different raw experience, some people who like to DRIVE and TINKER like that older car experience and these replicas are attainable. And since a replica has poor financial upside, they are for those who really just like the thing for what it is, which is pretty much where the original, original owners came in, long before investors and poseur race driver wanabees who are rich enough to graduate from a harley biought up the old cars.
Yes a Murcilargo replica may be built to fool people or try live out some fantasy. But most replicas are of a different category.
Lets say category 1.
These are recreations, made by independants or the original companies(ferrari has done a few of the early cars, so has BMW aston, mercedes auti union). Independants could be pur sang, Lynx and I would even include Kirkham. Theyre so close to original that the only real differences are year of manufacture. these cars are also well documented and only financialy unscrupulous passes them of as anything other that what they are, authentic clones, or tool room copies They also may well cost more in relative terms than an original did, and certainly cost no less tha new exotics..
Then there are Category 2. they closely fiollow the original in terms of motive power chassis suspension, .may use some different materials for body but are dimesional copies.
Lets say a multitude of replicas. In Cobras we ERA, Shelby(they closely follow originals, but use fiberglass modern brakes). Sperformance GT40(modern brakes ac), proteus(fiberglass detail differences in engine) these cars will look and drive as original but may have a 5 speed injection etc. We might also include cars like allgreti T33's here or maybe they are between cat 1 and 2.
After that we have cat 3.
These cars superficialy follow an original design. Think superformance cobras. But have modern underpinings, and period style power but not original. Beck 550,906 etc. RCR GT40These cars are still expensive, but perform better, they fool no one, but are fun hobbyist type cars. Many are really driven hard and used on track, we can say people who have these cars are core enthusiasts.
Cat 4. Are all thos fiero fakes murci fakes etc. These probably perform poorly, and also fool no one. One wonders why people do this, but it is their choice, and some are quite cretaive mechanicaly, but they are like fake boobs.
IN my opinion the car snobs most object to cat 1 and 2, because these cars may diminish the value of originals by essentialy creating more. Or they take away froim the snob cachet of "owning" and original.
However it cannot be denied that if these cars are used in anger as many are, their use provides the same DRIVING thrill as an orginal without destroying some ancient machineary and they probably prepresent the future. These cars are used in many cases just as GTO's Cobras etc were used in the 70's when they were old war horses driven for fun. In that sense they preserve the spirit of the hobby. A number of their owners also have the "real thing" but can enjoy the copy while preserving the original.
Cat 3 are just for entusiast fun.
Cat 4 are bad taste, but it is their choice.
The only cars used or that stand a chance of fooling anyone are cat 1, and it is unlikely that thier owners seek to do so. The cars that fool people are the ones owned by the truly wealthy who claim they are original where all that is original is a data plate and some tubes. But that is a vlaue thing for buyers to detirmine.
As for intellectual property and trademaks. If the cars are not badged as a ferrari bugatti whatever then the infingement is very different to say a guggi handbag. I dont know of anyone wanting to copy a 70's guggi. In fashion people want the latest and copies directly impact on the earning potential of something that someone has invested time money advertising intellect etc in creating.
An old car design is a forgotten thing by the public, the manufacturer for many reasons is not going to use it again and its copy if anything enhances the desire of the original, and evokes the core values which created the "brand and image" upon which manufactuerers now prey to differentiate and create desire. There is a difference here between recrreating old mechanical products and knocking off new/current fashion or art.
Yes a poor replica badged as a ferrari may diminsh the brand in the eyes of the public. But ca 1 and 2 do not do that, and even cat 3 is old abandond designes.
If someone in say China copied an 458 I can see the arguement.
The real objection to me seems to be a form of snobbery. If you have a f-car worth 30 million you want everyone to know it. Or if you have an Fcar in general you want everyone to see your sucess, that is why most are red.
But some of us like the thing for what it is not what it reperesents. therefore a grey fcar might be more enjoyable because you can go fast without attracting attention. A Fcar you dont tell people about(other than those also into cars) is better because you are not labeled as a fashionista wanabbe poseur.
Liking the thing for what it is means you think a great cobra replica with a 427 and two 4 barrels is an awesome car(andf I know real 427 had single 4 barrels and 428's the two 4 barrels), and a 550 for lunatics because it is fast and unsafe. And you like a superformance GT40 because now for 130k you can drive a GT40 just as a few who had the talent and taste did in the 60's..
In the end we are hobbyists, (true many newer fcar owners are pruchasers because they have the money and you need no mechanical empathy or talent to own one), but the rest of us are hobbyists, and we welcome other hobbyists, because we share the same passion.
A passion for engineering, design and speed.
Trademarks are for manufaturers to protect, and they do, in terms of their badge and design elements. Many manufatueres also like recrerations because done right it enhances their image,. A cobra after all is a ford and a racing one at that reminding people of ford's positive performance heritage. in that sense a much more authentic and legitimate evocvation than sheilds in the side of your new f-car, with ferrari branded clothing and hats to boot.
Sean I read your post with some interest. I doubt you will ever see a Lambogini replica. The company legally goes after companies that try. I also have never seen a ferrari kit so maybe they do this also.
The only area I take a different view is your coment about hobbiest who buy new cars because they need no talent to own one. Then I looked at your profile and you have alot of cars my freind and it appears you are heading into the realm of " no talent required to own one"
I submit that Wealthy people who make it on their own tend to have something going for them, talent, intelligence, hardwork, great personality, awesome staff or maybe just luck, which always play a part in sucess. Maybe they just like driving newer cars because they tend to be technically advanced and more fun to drive. Personally I like new, exotic and classic cars.
My only negative general comment is, I personally do not like "trustee babies". They are children or grandchildren of a sucessful family and they never earned their wealth. Therefore have no repect for it or the people who go to work every day in regular jobs and make society work.
Good luck to you and may you achieve "no talent" status as you strive for sucess
I agree with you about the shields, but:
An old Nissan Sentra design is forgotten. A Merc 300 SL Gullwing is a valuable trademark and part of Mercedes' brand. You can argue that a 250 TR or 550 Spyder are obsolete used cars, but many would argue they are more important. I don't agree that car designs of the past are automatically public domain. Anything that someone would want to fake is probably significant enough for the design owner to protect.
If a car needs to be classified as "cat 1, cat 2, cat 3" etc., that's already too many excuses away from being the real deal. I've seen Jon Shirley's 250 TR at a couple of historic racing events and it's a mind-blowing machine in every sense of the word. If all of my neighbors had kit car replicas of a 250 TR, I don't think it would enhance my appreciation of the Ferrari.
China, Florida, Leeds... a fake's a fake.
As someone who will never own a $30M Ferrari, and had a black metallic 328 to reduce attention paid to me, my real objection is that I can't trust what I see most of the time unless it's at a major concours where they can weed out fakes.
The other problem with this argument is that people who are wealthy enough to own these cars tend to want privacy more than anything. It's really the casual car enthusiast who gets misinformed and deceived day in, day out.
Definitely, I think everyone who builds a "tribute" 550 Spyder, Gullwing or Testarossa should share pics with the respective manufacturers and bask in the warmth of their appreciation.
Fake. Nothing more, nothing less.
Can we have categories for fakes.?
Call them what you will. They are a fact of life and increasinly accepted. I remember when hot rods were dissed, then they were on the lawn at pebble beach.
Bugatti club never had a problem with recreations. Nobody has answered whther it is Ok for the manufacturer to do a recreation, as ferrari has done, as audi did with the auto unions(not even built by them, aston sanction 2 zagatos. How about shelby with his csx 4000 cobras. In fact what was a cobra other than a re-engined ace, was shelby the creator of that iconic body.
I try not to be a car snob, I appreciate that there are many enthusiasts and tinkerers and that a good replica is a good car that many who want to experience the "thing" can afford.
Lets try grow up and be inclusive of peoiple in ourt hobby, or at least inclusive of true driving enthusiasts.
There are plenty of lambo replicas about, some posted here.
My wife says i am a poor comunicator, so let my try explain better.
I have no truck with a hobbyist who buys a new car, the newer cars have their own attributes which the older ones do not have. The fact is though that many newer cars if not most are bought by people not necessarily hobbyist, or serious drivers. As the newer cars can be ordinarily driven they are bough by many if not most as status sysmbols and fashion acessories, lifestyle statements if you will. How many people track or seriously drive their ferrari, vs attend concors and cruises.
Replicas in my categories 1-3 are alomst certainly bought or built by true enthusiast hobbyists. As a hobbyist and driver I have no criticism of another who enjoys cars for the same reasons and is a true enthuisiast. I have no criticism of people driving cobras gt40's etc, they are out to enjoy the performance and the drive, more than the hey look at me.
I find them in many ways therefore more acceptable and authentic as true enthuisiasts, than many newer ferrari and porche owners.
There is nothing wrong with decent replicas, I have seen lots of great Porsche Spyders and Lancia Stratos ones for example. It also seems like just about every vintage Bentley is a re-body to a more sexy varient and this seems acceptable.
Also don't forget many of these are owned by people who already own a real one aswell and also other models of the marque. They just want something they can actually drive on occasion in the rain or to the shops.
Also plenty of replicas give a real world experience especially ones with the period engines and rebodies.
Having said all that I do think putting real Porsche badges on a Spyder replica for example is crossing the line..........
Yeah not only are most 20's bently's rebodies, also replacement blocks and added supercharger etc. I suppose the arguemnt could be that the bently was delivered ex factory sans body, and that most of these cars have some type of original chassis.
point is its at least a grey area, just a function of where you draw the line.
If you take a xk120 jag and put brooklands windsheilds on it, ctype head and a few other bits is it a fake xk120m. If you take a boxer and turn it into a BBLM as the did in period is it a fake, its still a ferrari from the factory.
If I rebody a 400i into something that looks 60's is it a fake or a ferrari.
There is plenty of this going on to varying degrees, better to have standards than a blind eye.
Funny thing is the vitriol and use of the word fake, so reminds me of the attitude where one religion thinks it is the true religion and all others are wrong. Nowadays most religious leaders reckognise other religions as sharing the same thing as them, a reverence of god, spirituality or whatever.
us auto enthusiasts in theory all share a love and passion for cool machinary, whatever it origin.
So you've claim to got nothing but premium stuff in your home yet you don't even drive a premium Ferrari like an Enzo or F-40.
Most people who've created the most recent Supercars like the SSC Aero and even the Factory Five GTM started out building kitcars and replicas. Why bother going through the trouble of getting extreme government loans like Vector or Delorean did which is a damn huge risk considering millions of dollars will be involved and you may never be able to stay a float when you can go around, replicate some cars, build a rep for replicating the best cars, create some revenue, start your own project. Its funny how Lotus and TVR started out offering kits to the public before moving onto legit supercar building. When you look at an Elise these days its very kit car like. It also shares a lot of the Toyota MR2.
Sure there's good reasons when I can build a Cobra kit car thats cheaper, Safer and faster than paying 1million dollars for an original thats likely gonna sit in a Musuem all its life cause if I were to "have fun" with it id be killing the Value.
LOL! The Lotus Exige is inferior to most kit cars when it comes to quality. Your also not taking into consideration that these 550 Spyders, Cobras and such all their chassis have been approved by DOT standards and meet all crash testing regs otherwise they wouldn't be sold the public. Look at the Ultima GTR its faster than any Supercar you can buy these days and not to mention safer with its Group C engineered chassis.
What about people like Chip Foose who take these old school chevelles, stick in an LS3 and build a Tribute car? or how about Year one and their Create Camaro's? Same concept yet people love em! the point is to have fun while building a kit car. If your into it for the business aspect then sure your creating a whole lotta nothing. I don't plan on going to barrett jackson anytime soon so I can careless about value. Hertage I think wouldn't be hurt since most of the cars that are being replicated are classics, like I said I can't go out, pay 1mill on an original cobra and take it out on the weekends to race it like id want to.
Its one thing to say its a replica and its another to say "Its my design" I bash John Hennessey's Venom GT because its basically a stretched Elise with an LS9. The public seems to fail at noticing it but he's not fooling me. Not cool at all. Id rather be sporting an Extreme Murcielago built on an MR2, building it to be much faster than the real one and saying its a replica.
Finally we have someone with common sense!!!!
I didn't think he was trying to fool anyone. He buys those cars from Lotus and modifies them, doesn't he? That's a lot better than stealing someone elses design.
RUF does the same thing with Porsches.
"In period" is an important distinction, and your observation on the Bentleys (and prewar European Mercs, as another example) is spot on. Those have historical significance.
A fake ("tribute", replica, etc.) has no significance. A 400i rebodied into something else is a parts car held together by ego.
Not sure how religions could be compared to cars. They're all a matter of opinion, by definition, and everyone is entitled to believe what he/she wants. The distinction between a real 1928 Bentley and a deceptively accurate "1928 Bentley" I built in my own garage isn't a matter of opinion. I can drive it and call it a Bentley, but the reality is that I would be lying.
On the "vitriol" comment, maybe I'm seeing it from another perspective, but the self-righteousness of the fake/replica industry ("My tribute car is better than the original -- people can't believe it's not a real one") is appalling. It's not "better". It's a different object altogether. An analogy: There's Paris in Las Vegas, and Paris in France. It's possible the Eiffel Tower in Las Vegas is made better, and it is cheaper to visit for those of us in the US, but ultimately it's tourist trash that will be torn down.
"It's cheaper" - true. But it's not a Cobra.
(Not sure the Ultima GTR is a replica, so not sure why it's relevant here?)
On safety, low volume cars get exemptions. If you really want to crash test a plastic kit car "550 Spyder", I'd suggest hitting a Smart car at 20 mph, after you have all your personal affairs in order.
Also, and this is going to sound elitist, but if you go to Monterey weekend or the vintage races here in Coronado, you will see seven-figure cars on the track, not in a museum. Granted the guys who drive them are well up in the top 1%'ers in terms of wealth, but it's all relative. We all decide what we can afford, and then drive it as we choose. If someone has a really nice Porsche 944 Turbo, drives it on nice days only and keeps it in top shape, I have immense respect for the owner as a car enthusiast. It's not going to have the curb appeal of a fake Murcielago, but 944 Turbo dude isn't out for bling -- just appreciates what he has. It's about the car, not the image.
A) I don't worship Chip Foose and wouldn't drive or spend money on his stuff. I'm sure he's a very competent car builder. I'm more interested in Ferrari and Porsche, and somewhat in Lotus. To me, those are the legendary sports car marques.
B) I understand that people "love kit cars" and "replica Murcielagos can be faster than a real one" -- the point is someone is stealing a design from Lamborghini, which is probably illegal, rather than doing something creative. It's a self-centered view based on what someone can get away with without being caught. It's not like some kind of virtuous act to preserve the "endangered" Murcielago -- it's all about self-gratification at the expense of the marque that built the car. There are and will always be tons of used Murcis around.
I agree. Not really replicating something so much as modifying it.
Kinda like proteus Ctype then?
My understanding is that they dump a Jaguar 4.2 block in a car styled to look like a C-Type, and use modern fuel injection for improved driveability.
I'd much rather have a Jaguar, maybe a real E-Type.
replicas, kit cars, rebodies, they're all fine in my book. Some look better than others though and some are built to a higher standard. Some are better suited for certain applications than the original. Some are just horrible.
as anyone, I do have a problem with owners who will state that their rather obvious almost-look-alike-whatever is the real deal. Then again, I have a problem with people using their car (regardless of what it is) mainly to draw attention to themselves. Or as an accessory.
Besides, regardless of whether I buy a real countach to show off on sunny days or a mechanically improved look-alike for serious trackdays, Lamborghini wouldn't be seeing my money (no, not even the engine service would do that, I'd rather find an alternative which wouldn't necessarily be accepted by purists)
Actualy they make it how you like it, alloy body, 3.4, ctype heads with tripple webers, or the 4.2 route 5 speed and GRP body. And it is a Jaguar all the bits save the body come from a long lost Jaguar. BTW Jaguar club has no problem with them, perhaps because since the s2 etype they have not made a real sporting car, and these are fun to drive while keeping the heritage alove.
BTW with all the repro bits out there today, you can also build a new Etype if you dont mind spending the $$$. Given how fast an e type would rust, I wonder how many very restored old etypes are actualy more or less new builds withe the old data plates. Someone is using all those repro tubs door and hoods. So how may E types are "real" Jaguars.
Same question for a number of 250 swb's and GTo's. how much of the original car is still there?