RIP 1961 250GTE #2709 | Page 2 | FerrariChat

RIP 1961 250GTE #2709

Discussion in 'Vintage (thru 365 GTC4)' started by FarEastFerrari, Sep 18, 2015.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall
    #26 Rifledriver, Sep 21, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2015
    I don't understand.

    Are you saying that by selling the car he no longer has a right to be offended at it's fate? Or that our inability to purchase said item either because of opportunity or lack of financial ability somehow deprives us of the right to be offended?

    How is selling something enabling another? Sadly few of us have the resources to retain possession of everything we have ever owned, particularly an asset as valuable as a vintage Ferrari. I have a very great respect for the rights of ownership but at the same time I have great respect for the observance of the intrinsic value of a rare item, particularly a rare item representing human ability and artistry. I would never dream of depriving and individual of either.

    To say "it was his to do with as he chose but it is a shame he chose to do that" isn't OK? Really?
     
  2. TTR

    TTR F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    5,137
    Riverside, CA
    Full Name:
    Timo
    No Mr. Crall, with all due respect, that wasn't what I was trying to say, but now realize it apparently could be interpreted as such. I should've know better than offer an "opinion" on public forum. Live and learn...
     
  3. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall
    If I have it wrong, that's OK. Just trying to understand your position.

    That's why it was posed as a question.
     
  4. kare

    kare F1 Rookie
    Consultant

    Nov 11, 2003
    3,627
    Exactly, because every copy I've seen so far has turned out to be just crap. Therefore the cars are lost for no gain, no gain at all.

    On top of that restorations of real cars are turning really crappy lately. Every new kid in town thinks he can recreate a masterpiece just like that and as a result we have a growing number of genuine cars that look like crap. CRAP!!!!
     
  5. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall
    I think the available restorations are better and worse than ever because so many have chosen to get in on the action. Just look at Classiche, case in point.
     
  6. kare

    kare F1 Rookie
    Consultant

    Nov 11, 2003
    3,627
    What I hate the most is when wrong-doings get white-washed with freedom-powder. It looks clean but it still stinks.
     
  7. Fennicus

    Fennicus Formula Junior

    Apr 10, 2015
    592
    Helsinki, Finland
    Full Name:
    Pekka T.
    Exactly. I know I may seem harsh occasionally, but I just flip when I hear the words "it's your car, do what you like!"

    NO! That is not "freedom". It's "stupidity". It basically means you are saying that because you have the money, you are the greatest man who ever lived and can decide alone what colour suits a certain classic car best (again in your opinion) or what kind of a body should be cogged up to replace a genuine historical creation.

    The Picasso example used in here earlier is a good one. You do not change a masterpiece to your liking even if you could. And you DO NOT have right to destroy it only because you had the money to buy it in the first place. Why? Because we are human and we are supposed to care and do what is right, and we owe so much to the generations before us and after us.

    I for one would not like to be remembered as the idiot who destroyed a perfect classic because of a compulsion to get a "GTO" that still would not be the real thing, nor as one who had a perfectly nice original car repainted only because it had a "less desireable" colour according to the classic car market experts or general public.

    Ok. Ok, I'll get off the soapbox! :D
     
  8. FarEastFerrari

    FarEastFerrari Formula Junior

    Jan 27, 2014
    433
    Hong Kong, LA & NY
    Full Name:
    Thomas Choi
    I dont have any right to anything I sold off. I think I am just expressing my opinion that it is sad to see another one of our favorite cars be destroyed to make some fake. 2709 did indeed need a lot of work. More work than I wanted to put into it as I was hunting for other cars and I wanted to free up my budget. In the end, I got a much better and well restored GTE for much less money than it would have taken to correctly restore 2709. Perhaps this is the reason why it was chopped up to make a fake. A fake SWB/CalSpider/GTO is probably going to be more popular than a restored GTE for many folks out there perhaps.
     
  9. GIOTTO

    GIOTTO F1 Rookie
    Consultant

    Dec 30, 2006
    3,597
    FRANCE
    No, they are just interested in money. They destroy precious original Ferrari, but their "new" creations are just CRAP with NO value.
     
  10. FarEastFerrari

    FarEastFerrari Formula Junior

    Jan 27, 2014
    433
    Hong Kong, LA & NY
    Full Name:
    Thomas Choi
    I agree on the CRAP part. I passed on a couple of chances to buy a replica/fake GTO based on a 250GTE/330GT2+2 because it just seemed weird and dishonest. No matter how much it cost, I didn't want to feel like the guy who was wearing a fake watch to impress people.
     
  11. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    I didn't explain myself well enough.

    Lets try again. In 2002 around when the P4/5 was created you could still make a 2002 Ferrari Enzo, if Ferrari so wished. Conversely it is completely impossible to reverse the destruction of the creation of these replicas because in today, in 2015, it is impossible to make a 1962 250GTE. Yes Ferrari could make the car, but it will never be built in 1962!

    This is why PERIOD rebodies are perfectly acceptable, but replication is utterly not. If you want to make a Ferrari 250GTO replica, build one around a modern and common production car, don't destroy and historic old Ferrari that CANNOT be replaced.

    Yes both cars have now lost their original forms, but in the P4/5 case this could have been resolved if somebody so wished, ie. gave Ferrari a blank cheque. With the GTE, no matter how much somebody wished, it is completely impossible ... even with 2 blank cheques ;).
    Pete
    ps: What I would like Ferrari to do is to contact all countries motoring departments and say these chassis' are no longer Ferraris and cannot be registered as such once they have in modern times lost their original form. This would stop the "it is a genuine 1962 Ferrari" which is why they hunt these GTE's, etc. ... impossible yes, but crushing all these cars is the only other option I can think of.
     
  12. TTR

    TTR F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    5,137
    Riverside, CA
    Full Name:
    Timo
    #37 TTR, Sep 22, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2015
    With all due respect, but if we were to follow that logic, couldn't the person with TWO blank cheques use the first to purchase the fakeydo built around the GTE/PF/??? chassis number and most if not all related O.E.M. components belonging to that number (body, running gear, trim, etc) and instead of helping/urging Ferrari or various governments around the globe to crush them, hand over everything along with the second cheque to some body (DK/Ferrari/MPI/???) to put them back together to their original form ? Come to think of it, one might even be able accomplish it with just one blank cheque... ;)
     
  13. Enigma Racing

    Enigma Racing Formula 3

    Jun 1, 2008
    1,111
    London
    Full Name:
    Kim
    A recreation SWB (GTE 3439) sold at the Revival auction for £600k. Quality workmanship, with or with out components from a donor car, has a market and the "crap" cars will always be crap. What is interesting is that some of these cheap "crap" recreations that are sitting around unsold are now being rebuilt in preference to breaking existing cars
     
  14. peterp

    peterp F1 Veteran

    Aug 31, 2002
    6,509
    NJ
    Full Name:
    Peter
    I do agree that an Enzo serial number was lost (which is not even remotely trivial), but everything else in the comparison is apples and oranges. The GTE is being converted into a replica of another model and the car is being transformed into something it never was (a 2+2 being turned into a GTO or whatever).

    P4/5 was a new "clean sheet design" -- not a copy of anything -- and the creation of it essentially converted a supercar into an even greater supercar.

    Mathematically, it is fairly accurate to say that the impact of the GTE conversion to Ferrari history is "-2" (-1 for destroying a GTE plus -1 for creating a fake GTO or whatever).

    The impact of P4/5 to Ferrari's history is subject to everyone's individual interpretation. I would say that it is at least +1, and probably much more (-1 for removing an Enzo plus +2 for creating an even better one-off supercar that was of sufficient quality to earn Ferrari badging). I feel certain that time will tell that the creation of P4/5 enhanced and enriched Ferrari's history to a degree that much more than compensated for the donation of 1 Enzo.

    It's also important to consider that the donation of the Enzo was probably only necessary because Jim was so far ahead of Ferrari in the concept of reviving coachbuilding, and Ferrari was probably absolutely right at the time to seriously question whether anyone could coachbuild a supercar worthy of the Ferrari name and the Enzo chassis in the modern era where safety and other considerations necessarily dominated so much of the design (complications that didn't exist at all in the heyday of coachbuilding). Jim pulled off what many thought was the impossible, and Ferrari (IMO) rightly endorsed it once they saw that it could be done, but it would have been a stretch for Ferrari or anyone else (besides Jim) to think that the P4/5 would as complete and mature a car as it ended up being when the concept was first proposed.
     
  15. merstheman

    merstheman F1 Rookie

    Apr 13, 2007
    4,417
    São Paulo, Brazil
    Full Name:
    Mario
    My issue with the replica industry is that the fact they build the cars on real Ferrari chassis means that their intention is to present the car as a real Ferrari. Otherwise they would build a replica Chassis, too. That is the most irritating part of it all. If you want to build a copy of a car, fine, but another car shouldn't be killed for it.
     
  16. GIOTTO

    GIOTTO F1 Rookie
    Consultant

    Dec 30, 2006
    3,597
    FRANCE
    You said it all.
     
  17. TTR

    TTR F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    5,137
    Riverside, CA
    Full Name:
    Timo
    Again and with all due respect, if this logic is followed, what about EVERYTHING else ?
    Should every body involved with re-developing and replacing any building or structure in Helsinki since 1550 be considered "stupid" and "destroyer", especially when some of the structures demolished in the process might've been considered "masterpieces" by others ?
    What about restoration ? Any restoration of any vintage car, musical instrument, painting or even building, no matter how "authentic", always changes/erases originality. So does that make any one restoring anything "stupid" ? Should everything (buildings/cars/etc) be left "as is" even if they are rusting away or falling apart from aging because the current owners of any old items have no right to do anything that might disturb its originality ? And when new ones are needed, they should only be built with "virgin" materials or on to previously undeveloped properties ? Just curious and trying to wrap my head around various logics presented here :)
     
  18. GIOTTO

    GIOTTO F1 Rookie
    Consultant

    Dec 30, 2006
    3,597
    FRANCE
    But we don't speak about buildings or "EVERYTHING" here. Everybody should read carefully again post #40.
     
  19. Marcel Massini

    Marcel Massini Two Time F1 World Champ
    Honorary

    Mar 2, 2005
    22,737
    You forgot something which is most important in this replica building process:
    A replica builder uses the donor car BECAUSE of the already existing paperwork and the chassis number which enables him to have the "new" car (replica) registered easily and without any troubles. It is a legal (registration) question. If he used a brand new (non-Ferrari) frame/chassis (and thus a new number) he would not be able to register the replica without going through all the legal problems and MOT/DMV tests. THAT is the key.

    Marcel Massini
     
  20. TTR

    TTR F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    5,137
    Riverside, CA
    Full Name:
    Timo
    #45 TTR, Sep 22, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2015
    With all due respect, I do understand but some one else drew art/masterpiece ("Picasso") and other historical context in to this so I was just trying to follow (or question) the logic of that argument. Perhaps I expanded too far, but I believe my questioning of that logic can be narrowed back down to vintage cars, be they Ferrari or other makes/models or even individual vehicle.

    Don't get me wrong, even though I make a (modest at best) living restoring vintage cars, including several Ferrari, and their components I have myself always (or at least for past 35+ years) preferred to own unrestored examples.
    For example, number of years ago an (ex-)client of mine acquired a very rare and unusual 100+ years old vehicle in surprisingly good unrestored original condition. Upon first seeing it I immediately expressed my utmost desire to become its next "custodian" (=owner) to ensure it's originality would be preserved to best of my ability and even though I'm a person with vey limited means I' be willing to pay for this privilege what ever he may deem necessary.
    And to make sure he understood the seriousness of my desire I kept asking about the car and his future plans to letting go of it every 6-12 months.
    Now imagine my shock when I learned that not only had he sold the car and for a lot less than
    I had prepared to pay, but that the new owner had immediately commissioned a "full restoration to like new condition" !!!`
     
  21. Andrew D.

    Andrew D. F1 Rookie

    Jul 6, 2008
    3,979
    Goodwood Ontario
    Full Name:
    Andrew D.
    I kick myself every day that I didnt buy a perfect GTE for $25,000,30 years ago. Not to break it up but because it was such a beautiful car.
     
  22. Fennicus

    Fennicus Formula Junior

    Apr 10, 2015
    592
    Helsinki, Finland
    Full Name:
    Pekka T.
    Hi,

    Yes, I wasn't referring to replacing worn out components like tyres, filters, seals etc. :)

    But butchering a complete GTE or 330 GT 2+2 etc. in my eyes and mind is like chopping a Picasso or a Matisse. A crime against humanity.

    If you are really interested, I would actually support a law in Finland that would TOTALLY forbid changing the plan and destroying the very few old houses and appartments we have. Once they have been "renovated" or "remodeled" they are what most of you perceive most of the SWB, California Spider and GTO repros are: CRAP!

    Now does that answer your question? I sure hope it does. But I know it's also just my opinion. But I think I learned quite early that things are original an genuine only once. After that it's just a matter of opinions, no more, no less.

    Cheerio,

    Pekka T.
    Fin.
     
  23. PAUL500

    PAUL500 F1 Rookie

    Jun 23, 2013
    3,136
    The last production Enzo rolled out of Maranello in 2003 I believe, and the post production Pope car in 2004. Jims project began life in around I think 2006, long after the Enzo had already established itself as a classic in its own right. From what I understand Ferrari had no associations/involvement with the car until after it was completed by PF for Jim.

    Just plucking dates out of the air to justify the difference between converting a very limited production numbers classic car a few years after it ceased production and a quite long production run 250 GTE many years later is simply out and out double standards, pure and simple. An Enzo was lost, a GTE was lost, same difference, what they ended up as is also irrelevant, whether it be a copy of an existing design or a one off, neither have been sanctioned by Ferrari at their onset.

    Will the loss of one Enzo be critical to that model, no of course not, far more have been lost for good in accidents, loss of one GTE (which by the admission of the OP was not the greatest example anyway hence why he sold it!), again no big deal, plenty more rough ones out there still, as they get rarer they will become more valuable and less of a target for the replica builders anyway.

    How ever much people harp on about converting old cars into replicas wont make an ounce of difference to the practice anyway, it will still go on, nothing anyone says or does will stop it, there is nothing illegal about it, and once those cars roll out of the gates of Maranello its nothing to do with Ferrari either, it is a product that is sold and they go on to the next, they are a business at the end of the day not a charity.

    The only way would be for them to lease the cars not sell them, and they would not last long as a company going down that road.


     
  24. merstheman

    merstheman F1 Rookie

    Apr 13, 2007
    4,417
    São Paulo, Brazil
    Full Name:
    Mario
    Yes, that was what I was implying, but it is important to state it clearly. To me it is a fraudulent industry taking advantage of a loophole in regulations. Not the first, not the last, but it ticks me off.
     
  25. PAUL500

    PAUL500 F1 Rookie

    Jun 23, 2013
    3,136
    Fraud is only applicable if a seller tries to deceive a buyer into believing they are buying an original, I am not aware of any cases at all where a replica has been sold purporting to be an original. I recall an outfit in Italy making replica's that was closed down but that I think was more to do with Italian law and copyright.

    The replica builders are simply the modern day version of coachbuilders, it is still a Ferrari under the skin (which Ferrari never actually made anyway). No loopholes being used at all. Like any industry some are good at what they do, a lot are dreadful.

    We are not talking about MR2s pretending to be 355s here, but rebodied original Ferrari's.

    Again I don't see anybody spending £600k plus on a replica and then claiming to own an original, they like the shape, the style, the design and these provide a means to own and enjoy something as close as possible to a car out of reach even to the rich.
     

Share This Page