The official replica/re-creation thread

Mate, you are barking up the wrong tree here ... but it's amusing to watch, LOL.

Do you know what original means?. RR's were made that way and thus of course it is a real RR chassis with a coach build body, but that body that was FIRST put on that chassis is the original, and as car enthusiasts that is what we should be preserving. So if that body is removed that car is no longer original and what a bloody shame .

The answer to your "Same goes with Ferrari", is simply no. There is a huge difference in a period rebodied car (which was by the way not trying to copy anything) and a modern replica, whose only claim to any fame is that it looks like a special model. Again we are criticising replicas, not period rebodies.

When they created the period rebodies they did NOT take a 50 year old car and rip the body off it, they took at most a 0-5 year old car that was usually still in production.

Anybody that can cut up a 50 year old Ferrari is NOT an enthusiast, period. If you want to make your own rebody of a Ferrari, go and purchase a 2011 California (note the date so we don't make a huge fnck up) and rebody that car, like Jim did with his Enzo to create the P4/5.
Pete

 

With respect, you might be surprised at the extent and depth of my Ferrari education. Among other things, I have learnt that a Ferrari is not a RR, and that a period rebody is not the same thing as a modern fake.

A modern Ferrari fake is obviously never considered original, unless the owner lies and disguises its provenance, something which is unfortunately increasingly common. Its value is always very, very significantly inferior to the value of a "real" original (in the commonly accepted sense of the word original).

The destruction of a classical Ferrari in order to build a modern fake is nothing but a dishonest act of poseur-driven vandalism.

 

Hello Chris,

Thanks for your information on this car. I saw it at Cars International in London about a year ago. The s/n was on the info leaf visible in the picture.

Best, Peter

 

When does a car become a ‘fake’? Where is the fine line?

If I have an original chassis with vin# and period photos of the car to assist re-creation, but the rest of the car is lost or totally beyond repair including the whole of the running gear. If I need to fabricate all new components in as close to original spec as possible, is the finished car a ‘fake’?

 

If they have so much money, build the cars from nothing, don't cannibalize another old Ferrari for it's chasis, drive train, etc. If all you have is an engine and transmission, rebuild the car they came from.
And the real thing always comes up for sale sooner or later.

George

 

I don't think it's a fine line. You say you have an "original chassis with vin#." Chassis and vin of what? a 330GT? a 250GTE? If you turn it into something it never was, like a replica of a GTO or TR, then you have made a fake. There were 39 GTOs and their serial numbers can be found on this forum; any car purporting to be a 250GTO that does not have one of these numbers is a fake, replica, recreation, tribute, facsimile, clone or whatever word you want to use to describe it. AND, IMO, ITS STATUS AS A REPLICA SHOULD ALWAYS BE STATED FRONT AND CENTER, ESP AT CAR SHOWS.

 

My personal guide is that a fake is something without any Ferrari components, like the 250 GTO based on a Datsun. A replica is the same thing but it uses Ferrari chassis and/or drive train. A recreation is something that tries to replicate a particular car that no longer exists.

 

In your specific example, the car is not a fake. Nothing has been destroyed, nothing has been transformed, nobody has been fooled, and nobody pretends to be what they are not.

The line is thick, despite what happened to Theseus and his ship. Unless you consider an aging and minor rock star the new Ferrari reference.

 

What about a continuation then? You might be right in your definitions, but all those names have lost much of their meaning. A GTO based on a destroyed PF or gte is most definitely a fake, and an evil one at that.

 

Yes, but...

All the "fake" owners I have met or seen hide their car's status, starting with the dishonest bastard who fraudulently participated in the Mille Miglia two years ago, happily being interviewed by Italian TV and letting the whole world believe that he really owned a TdF.

As a first (but not last) unpleasant consequence, GTO's are now like Cobras: If you see one, you can safely assume it's a fake.

 

It's getting so bad, you need a crib sheet of serial #'s to be sure. I've been fortunate to see a handful of the real deals and, also a few of the not so. I too find it dishonest to show a car without divulging what the car really is, I feel cheated some how when you look at a car thinking it's real only to find out it isn't what it purports to be! Reminds me of the time I saw a '58 or '59 TR with a six digit serial number and one of the judges actually telling me it was authentic!!

 

Sorry Bryan, I was not clear. I meant the chassis and vin of the actual car the photo's are for, basically 'restoring' the car to what was on that chassis before. My mention of fine line is in relation to what percentage of 're-creation' is deemed acceptable? If let's say it's 95% new, then the car is basically new, albeit with a title from 40 odd years ago. Yet just because it's has the old chassis (which needs a lot of work!) and vin# it's ok?

 

ah, ok; that's a much more difficult question. Without giving you my personal opinion, you could look at the Ferrari TR prototypie 0666 which sold for $16M last month. This car burned twice; here is a pic of what it looked like after the first fire. The old cars, esp the comp cars, led a very tough life. So when you see one auctioned or at Pebble with an immaculate skin, the immediate question is how much of the metal that you see was hammered by Pininfarina/Scalgietti, etc versus was formed last month? We happen to be extremely lucky to have a '55 comp car that retains all but about a third of its original body, and every bit of its original parts except for a replacement, but period, mechanical fuel pump. Even the Classiche rules allow for "certification" of a car where its body is not the original - it has to be a really good copy made out of the same material. (Do not construe my last sentence as a blessing of Classiche - it isn't).

On the other hand, if you have nothing but a stamped chassis, and are having to fabricate/source everything else to rebuild that serial number car as it left the Factory, then you have what I and many others lovingly refer to as a "bitsa". Cars w/ re-manufactured bodies may take a value hit; 0666 clearly did not. Cars w/out their original drivetrain will also take a major value hit. But I would not refer to a car that has needed major fabricating and sourcing as a "fake" or "replica" because you are not trying to create something that that serial number never was. For me, it boils down to honesty; if you are rebuilding a car to be as it was, and most of the metal and parts are new or sourced, then just say so. As Jim Glickenhaus says, "let the metal speak for itself."
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The subject has gotten a little heavier than I am willing to discuss outside of a pub... however, I can shed some light the question of the number of GTE's that have been transformed in some manner.

First, I want to clarify that there were 954 GTE's made, which consist of 4 Prototypes, 300 of the Series I, 350 of the Series II and 300 of the Series III.

I will leave the 50 330 America's to Kerry, but from the 166 Transformed GTE's that I have in the Register, we now have:

21 - California Spyders
2 - Drogo Speciales
43 - GTOs (including 3 Drogo's and excluding the 1 GTO Museum Display)
2 - LMs
2 - Nart Spyders
2 - Nembo Spyders
42 - SWB Berlinettas (including the 3 Drogos)
4 - Tour de Frances
37 - Testa Rossas
11 - Others (including 2 GTE Convertibles and 2 that we don't know what happened to)

That being said, I was not aware that 3121 has been transformed (and have not included it above). Can you give me some more info?

 

Tom-

I was just going to reply to another post on this thread, but.......WOW!

this is the most mind-boggling post I may ever have seen on the forum!

reading about individual sn's one at a time just does not convey the impact......wow, again.

any idea on the approx. timeframe that your list covers?


(and I'm on the trail of yet another one in-the-making......)

 

The Drogo conversions were done in the early 1970's, so it started pretty early on. At this time, we know of the current owners of about 400 cars and another 50 or so that were wrecked or parted. That still leaves over 500 cars whose fate is still unknown. Keep those spots comin' !

 

Thanks, Tom, for the insight. I note that the numbers of the different models are in the approximate order of my mental list of pretty body shapes, so I guess I'm in the mainstream. Speaking of which, does anyone know how many 206SP's and/or P-cars have been built?

 

The first ‘P car’ (not) I saw on the street was a 330P4 back in 1989 when I was at college. He was filling up at the little mews petrol station that used to be opposite Coy’s in Queens Gate Mews SW7. I asked him if it was real, he said it was a replica based on a 512BB.

 

Hi Bryan,

Thanks for your response. 0666 shocked me when I saw the final price. You wonder if the buyer and late bidders were aware of the history!?
Your view regarding fakes is similar to mine; although I think that a bitsa as you call it is basically a reproduction when very few original parts are in the mix. Where the line is, I don’t know. But as you say, honesty is key.

Purely out of interest, not that I have in my possession, but if Classiche were presented with the title, original chassis plate and open cheque book for chassis #xxxx, do you think they would ‘rebuild’ it?

I read through your ’55 500 Mondial thread, wonderful!

 

Correct, one of the most well known Ferrari's the breadvan was built by Bizzarrini.

 

Velocetwo,

The point Darolls was trying to make was that reboding an now old Ferrari is the same as what they used to do, and this is NOT correct. Those period rebodies or coachwork that were designed by Pinin Farina, Drogo, etc. were done for a reason, such as making the then MODERN cars faster on the race track. They were NOT trying to copy an existing design at all and they were NOT taking a 50 year old Ferrari and destroying it.

Original should mean something to us guys and means the car has the body, trim, etc that it was built with. Yes there are some cars such as the Breadvan that lost their original body for very good period reasons, but nobody would make a 250 GTO replica out of the Breadvan, for example.

History SHOULD be important to a car enthusiast, not just making what you want to play with now.
Pete

 

probably; "cheque book" being the operative word.

Re: the Mondial, thanks; we've had a great time w/ it - my dad especially w/ 51 years of ownership.

 

wow, i am genuinely surprised at the amount....thank you for answering this question.....it's surprising to see that 6% or more GTEs used in conversions......it certainly puts a whole different light on the subject!

 

So what do you all think about this one; a piece of crap????

http://tinyurl.com/3noox5c

 

See my response to your other post on the same question http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showpost.php?p=140823122&postcount=2934

The point, no replica that destroys a REAL old and irresplaceable Ferrari is any good. Why not make your own chassis, put a 280 hp Alfa v6 engine in it and go and enjoy yourself. Would sound good would perform similar and no old Ferrari harmed.
Pete