you are bragging about a car show win in Chicago? geez, just look at the politicians that get elected in Chicago.
Seiko (and a number of off-brand manufacturers) makes a watch that resembles the Rolex President. The case is much thinner, the movement is quartz, and of course it's not solid gold. Ethically, I don't think watches that imitate another maker's original design should be legal, but they are. However, it is not legal, much less ethical, for the manufacturer to write "Rolex" on a watch that was not manufactured by Rolex. I know that such things exist, and are available from some shady operators on the Internet, but they are illegal. Some Rolex "replicas" are even reputed to be of fairly high quality, but - as with replica cars - If they're good, why not put your own name on it? By the way, I also purchased coffee at 7-Eleven this morning, something I don't often do. It tasted like genuine coffee to me! I'm still waiting to hear how 7-Eleven makes "fake coffee." (I'm also curious about why "Skullangel" would object to this, as he seems to approve mightily of fake cars.)
How about it someone got a burned up ferrari TR chassis, dug out of the woods where it was buried after a horrific crash, we are talkinf twisted spaghetti frame tubes, burned and melted.. What if they then "straightened" this farme, (and its the frame that apparently carries the identiy) made a new tool room Tr body and put aTr motor in it. Is this a real ferrari because some rusty pieces of frame, which legitmatly have provenance, were welded into an otherwise new car. Because by the strict standards of even the snobs this is a true ferrari, and there is more than one such car fully acceptable rolling about. But if we had the exact same car without a bit of rusty provenance frame weled in it would not be a TR. The truth is both are TRs, one is a new build,m the other some type of George wasingtons ax Tr, and then there are other TR's which mar have even more original bits to their name. the differetiating factors are two. One factor is the market will value the new build less, just as the bitsa is worth less than a whiolly original Tr to the extent one even exists. The other factor is being allowed to run the car in events, being welcome in the club so to speak. In Europe now new builds are accepted by the FIA provided they are built the same spec as the "original" was in period. therfore we have new build GT40's New Build Chevrons and Lolas. In fact how many "real" old build cars really exist. If a Lola has been retubbed so it can be raced now, and the fiberglass bodywork replaced a few times over, what is original, the transmission case. How about the Mirage GT40 that just sold for a record price. This "car " raced at lemans, but then had its roof cut off for use as a film car in the Mqueen lemans movie, where it burned to the ground. Apparently something remained and was a few years back rebuilt. What could have remained, If the tub was not shot from having the roof cut off, the fire surely did the rest. The bodywork, interior etc all burned up. So someone bough some bits which gave them the chassis datat plate, built a recreation and sold it for 3 million, which is great. But dont tell me that the same car without a few bits is not a real GT 40 and cant run, if its built the same, the only difference between the two is a s somewhat spurious claim to provenance, something the market decides to pay more or less for. But as a car to drive and race, one is no better or more desirable than the other. Original cars are great for show fields and maybe some rallies, but if you want to see a GTO being driven in serious anger then hope they have some tool room recreations. Is a tool room recreation now not what these old race cars were in period. Was a GTO in the 70's for 7k not an old race car someone bought to race and drive for fun, something that was iconic and affordable, is a recreation now not the same concept exactly. And if Aston can chop up DB4's and turn them into santion 4 zagatos which now sell for 3 million plus, what makes these lkegitimate, because aston did it. If ferrari classiche did a run of new build GTO's would that be OK, probably, and given how classiche actualy makes the parts(subcontractors) if a subcontractor built the car is it not still a GTO. Its not where or when its built, but how its built that counts. Everything else is snobbery and value. remember these things are mechanical art, evocative of an era, they were all built in series, to blueprints, they are not one off canvas masterpieces. Their nature is different to painted art and as such they are replicatable in essence, just not in age and provenance. If car drives and performs like an original, is built from the same materials, it is a new build but still a cobra c type e type 57 chev etc. If the car is built with a superficialy close body from different materials and has different suspesion then its not the thing but a visual facimile kit car. I would even say that an original can be improved, many vintage racers today have engine and suspension performance way above what they had in period. I hear some original GT40's have flat plane cranks in them, something that would never be allowed in a superformance GT40 that wanted to race. If the essence of the thing is recreated, its a recreation an original, an authentic copy for want of a better term, the differentiator here is that the market will value it as less that an old original, but as a car person to drive it is no less. We should not be abandoning cars and car acceptability to investor classes who have no sense of what the thing really is, or appreciation of its drive, and only seek to limit numbers and use so that their investment may theoreticaly rise. A Kirkham Cobra is in my book a far more legitimate Cobra than a CSX4000 cobra with glass body. An old colt coach gun cant take modern shells, a repro can, which has more value, but which has more value for use. And cars are kinetic objects, their pleasure comes from the motion, and sound more than it comes from the visual. The old ones are all used up folks, or rebuilt so much they are not really old except in data plate and paperwork. Lets keep the old ones around for posterity and drive/race the new builds. As to the plastic fantastics, if you have a countach with a chevy engine, its really a tube framed mid engined car with a plastic countach body. Other than the superficial looks there is nothing about it that makes it a countach, not the way it drives sounds feels or is built. If you put lambo badges and decals on that what you have is a fakey doo. I have nothing against countach reps, but if you pretend this is real, with lambobadges and decals it says more about you, and your self esteem than anything, so its too little to upset me.
An old friend of mine did almost exactly that with a wrecked F40: Partially new frame, to-spec carbon fiber body, new genuine F40 engine. My own opinion is that this is a genuine Ferrari, and I thought it was great that he brought a great car "back from the dead." As to whether he was "welcome to the club," he was a member of the local FCA, but that may be because he also had a Testarossa. There were some people who really, really, didn't like him or his car. I'm not posting his name here because I don't want this to turn into a thread bashing the man. If you know who I'm talking about, please don't post his name. Agreed 100%
The Ny ferrari club had this rule that they would accept at track events ferrari powered cars. So your Norwood P4 powered by a Boxer engine was good, which seemed sensible to me. Consider that thre famous breadvan or for that matter any Drogo ferrari would not be considdered a ferrari by some peoples standards, including apprently classiche. Yet these are considered now historic ferraris, so I guesss the period racing or build history gives these rebodies provenance cred. Yes a favre or allegretti GTO being more authentic, yet of recent build does not have such cred, and would be frowned upon by various people, perhaps because the body style copies an original, lots of grey area here. One objection to rebodies is that you may well cut up a historc car. When 250 street cars were rusty old heaps no one minded, now we want to preserve as many as possible. So would it not be better on this standard alone to allow complete authentic new builds. Its happening at Lola Chevron for any number of historic race cars, I think there have even been 4 new build GT40 MK4's built by the orig company, one of which raced at the lemans historic. What if we took a 55maranello and put 550GTC/Lm bodywork on it, its still a ferrari right, although the body by then may not have been built in maranello, the essence of the thing is ferrari? So a Kirkham Cobra with aluminum body and a 427 is a cobra by the same right, its just worth less than a 66 build car from AC/Shelby. Its interesting that I read in another thread that you can buy new build FW190 aircraft and we know the ME 262 has been copied. No one in the classic aircraft scene seems to mind, they much prefer having a "real" thing in the air. Perhaps the difference is that all the 40's build versions are in museums, so no one is worried about investment, and those that want to fly them now have the chance. Really valuable iconic old cars hi performance cars will go the same way> Eventualy your Dtypes GTo's etc if they really are original will be kept as original as possible. Not raced in anger, instead used for demo runs and maybe some street drives, but mostly they will be templates kept for posterity. When a GTo is a 100 million car will it really be raced, driven in traffic, on the highway, I will bet that maybe some long time owners will track them, but anyone paying 100 mill will have adifferent view entirely. Hopefully by then with 3d imaging we can buy a new 250swb for $250K, just like you can buy a new Bug T35b. That is the future, and its happening in the cobra world and at many FIA track events for vintage racers. All good stuff if you like cars. The vintage stuff becomes usable, attainable, and there are standards as to what counts. The barrier is manufaturers who trademark shapes and try to put a stop to this, which is in my opinion misguided. Today all cars even ferraris are brand enginered products, and most cars are differentiated by a swish or grille, hood emblem which harks back to some past glory. Reacrations keep that past image design etc alive for new generations, so when jaguar advertises its feeline car, someone somewhere may have seen a Dtype type racing. Ford can recall its performance hertiage, from Cobras GT40 Gt350's, that all adds to sales of mustangs today, it certainly does not detract from them.
Then go tell that to walmart and all the other big name corprations who are making millions by simply "Replicating" another product and reselling on the market for cheap. Why should Replicars be the ONLY exception? We are perfectly fine with knock off products but when someone sports a knock of exotic its like they are breaking one of the 10 commandments in the bible or a law by congress.
Like seeing a GTO Judge at a car show. Only 650 were made and only 900 still survive today (I'm guessing the numbers). A Chevelle turned into an SS etc. Rodney
Well... yes, Aston can make Astons. Ferrari can make Ferraris. Porsche can make Porsches. Don't confuse replicas and restorations. Someone stealing a Ferrari design because they can't afford the legitimate article isn't art. It's theft with a veneer of shiny paint. Making money off an activity doesn't mean that it is legal or laudable. I am not perfectly fine with knock-off products. I think they're appalling trash. Edited your reply above to get rid of the presumed "we".
True, certainly,but - once again - the "generic" products don't use the name or trademark of the genuine product. I don't think that this is ethical or right, as I said with the Seiko watches that are intended to resemble Rolexes, but this is in no way similar to somebody putting a Lambo or Ferrari body on a Fiero and badging it as genuine. The Wal-Mart argument is a specious argument when discussing "replica" cars. Period. Not the only presumption on "Skullangel's" part.
Product design constitutes a trademark. No one is posting photos of their iPhone replicas, and for good reason. You can call your Countach whatever you want, but you don't own the design.
My Countach? I wish. . . but only a real one. My only point is, with regard to replicas, I can tolerate - though not appreciate - most "replica" / kit cars, as long as they're not badged as the car they're attempting to replicate. Skullangel's reference to Wal-Mart, and 7-Eleven coffee (wtf?), are both just red herrings with regard to this question. So are any comparisons regarding the relative speed, safety, dimensions, etc. of the donor car vs. the genuine car. A Fiero, MR2, Corvette, VW Bug, is simply not a Ferrari. I don't think that Seiko should be allowed to replicate Rolex, Movado, and other makers' designs. . . but they do.
You can have a replica of a porn star made of inflatable plastic with a wig on her head. For some, it gets the job done but it's not for me. I view replicas on pretty much the same level.
I find myself torn on this. Yes, I own a real Ferrari 308, but at the same time I have always wanted a Daytona as well. So, if I had the opportunity to buy a nice looking Daytona replica I might have a hard time saying no. Most of you know how I am about driving my cars as well. PDG
Yes but a recreation is more like a clone, than a blowup plastic doll, hence the distinguishment between recreations and kit cars.
From the builder of this Miura: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum3/HTML/000003.html He is now recreating a 246 Dino w/ a LSX motor: http://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum1/HTML/090962.html Image Unavailable, Please Login
One of the problems with these replicars is that no matter how great of a job was done in the fabrication, at some point a real car guy is going to want to look at it and talk about it and you'll be "outed" as a poser. I had a 1967 Intermeccanica Torino for about twenty years. It was a legitimate Italian exotic and I wish I still had it. But whenever somebody complimented me on my "Ferrari", I showed him the Ford 289 and explained what it was.
Car guys love to talk about my Beck 550 Spyder. It have a VW engine so... not far from the tree. I never felt outed as a poser like you said... My car was pictured on PCA magazine and even invited by a Porsche Dealer to be on display. It is an 1:1 scale model. Some called replicas are just a shadow of what it try to represents...Those are real fakes... Fieros as Testarossas, MGs with vw engine, etc. Yes there are bad cars... Not replicas, a real replica try as close as possible to...replicate. Regarding been a poser, it will depends of what kind of person you are... honest? So you say what it is and trust me, it will be appreciated as such. By the way... I am only OK to replicas of older cars. Newer cars should be illegal.
