Vintage section Fake/Replica/Recreation/Rebody discussion

Well, whatever we do I hope we can separate Recreations, where someone has tried hard to stick to Ferrari components, from Replicas and Fakes with nothing more than Ferrari badges and shields.

 

I'm framing that one. Collect the whole set!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

My objection to recreations is that they require the destruction of a donor car and parts that could be used in the restoration or repair of proper cars. For me, a recreation is worse than a complete fake. A Fiero turned F40 just makes me chuckle.

 

A valid point. But, what's that got to do with the outrage of the Vintage section?

In fact, I would argue that's it's better to have recreations IN the Vintage section so that people can voice their objection to these acts.

Vintage parts are vintage parts. If you use them to create something, why should they not be in the Vintage section for people to comment on? Isn't it better to see this destruction than sweep it under the rug?

 

I don't think that is a good area. Why bugger up Other Italian, it's the Ferrari guys that have the issues.

Some of the replicas/ fakes have Ferrari VINs and are registered as such, so they aren't "Other".

 

I agree. To me, the outrage is not that these cars are being posted or discussed in this section. The outrage is that it's happening at all.

It's better to see and comment on what's going on than put your head in the sand.

 

I agree, it helps the marque when owners and club members can identify the fakes and recreations, otherwise you allow the builders to dilute the gene pool.

 

How about a new subscribed section devoted to crimes against the marque?

 

Well, I'd include all the fake Ferrari badges on Dino's and sticker shields on 308's too then.

This to me is just as much a crime:
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

If someone other than Ferrari made it, it's not a vintage Ferrari. I'd rather see the Ferrari components used to maintain the real ones. (Also true in the vintage Porsche world where some of the original components are getting to be collectible in their own right ...)

No one's expecting that fakes/recreations/replicas will be rounded up and crushed, but I'd rather not waste time reading about them.

 

Oh me too I didn't want to go there, but since you did ............. that is just wrong.

 

Well, as long as we are having a discussion about fakes....

 

Criminal, I agree.

 

Harsh! On 308's too? I get that if the car didn't come from the factory with a shield, some believe it shouldn't have one, but putting a shield on a Ferrari, a real one, seems much less of a "crime against the marque" than destroying vintage Ferrari's to create new "vintage recreations". Either way, the Scuderia Shield was placed on racing Alphas in the 1930's, which were part of Enzo's racing team, and later placed on Enzo own Ferrari racing cars. Many purists, especially in the Vintage section, would argue that the shield should only be placed on race cars, as Enzo intended, not as a production option on a modern Ferrari. BTW, I think they look great on modern Ferrari's. As far as Dino's--no comment.

 

Just another area that I am absolutely old school. I do not understand the acceptance of silicone as if it is real.

 

I will second that.

Would Reproductions, Tributes and Copies be included in;
Recreations, Replicas and Fakes.

or

Do we need another forum !!!
Then what about .....

 

+1

Finally some sensible comments. Let's face it, ignoring replicas is futile. And the grey area is so large it will make a moderator's nightmare to decide which goes where. If you
are interested in the history of Ferrari by chassis number you can't escape replicas.

Discussing them here in Vintage doesn't automiatically mean that we approve of them. If that's the thing that bothers the OP then maybe a moderator could only remove the positive comments about replicas. But that's a kind of censorship I feel is not okay because everybody is allowed to have his own opinion.

Maybe a warning in the thread title and a disclaimer in the first post (inserted by a mod) would help the fragile minds on here.

Replicas are not going to go away, so deal with it.

 

Silicone fakes ...... Chuckle

 

It is not the cars, but it is more what it does with the owners, when you have one, just be honest to yourself and do not try to compare it with the real one. I have noticed that a fair amount of persons who own a replica/fake Ferrari are always badmouthing real cars to forgive themselves they own a replica/fake. Ofcourse this is not for all these owners some are aware what they have and just enjoy themselves, the good thing is that these persons maybe one day get a real one.

 

That's the whole point. How big of a crime it is, isn't the measurementstick for the question whether or not it should be discussed in Vintage. I believe any car that has left the factory as a genuine Ferrari, remains a Ferrari nor matter what is done to it's body or chassis. It just becomes a 'stories' car and perhaps even looses it's historical significance because of any 'harmful' modification, but it still should be able to discuss these care here in Vintage.

Why should s/n 3731 be discussed anywhere else?

Of course there are the Datsun GTO's and Pontiac F40's, and off course they have no business on the fora that are devoted to Ferrari. I think we all agree on that.

 

Is there any logic in this thought....

Since i joined FerrariChat I have learned a huge amount, the community have been generous and extremely helpful with the restoration of my 275GTB. But the one thing i can say more than any other, is the way the community have changed my view towards fakes, recreations, replicas - whatever you want to call them.

Prior to purchasing my 275, I used to look at the fakes in a different way - I would admire them as good looking cars, be impressed by the engineering and fabrication that went into building them and generally think - yes i wouldn't mind a go in that!

BUT.......

Then I started the restoration of my 275GTB, I would visit and read Vintage FChat everyday, I read every thread no matter what the subject - and this is where i have changed - through the passion of the community and their united distaste of these fakes - I now hate them with a complete passion, the thought of destroying a 250GTE (one of my favorite cars) to make a fake GTO or SWB makes me sick, i feel angry about it - i have on several occasions got vocal with a few owners of such cars - they have never won this argument with me - and all have walked away with their tail between their legs - i genuinely believe after one of my rants they are ashamed and actually wonder what on earth they have wasted their money on!

HERE's THE THING....
Yes i have a beautiful 275 sitting in the background, its easy to win the argument with that as part of your ammunition - but the real strength of my argument comes from the passion of the Vintage FChat community, the way you have changed me and my view.

If you have changed my perception of these fakes, you have undoubtably change other to think the same way - seriously after reading our views on fakes, who in there right mind would want to be seen in one - or more importantly commission the destruction of a GTE to create a poor impostor?

Is it not a good thing that we continue to "out" the fakes, shame the owners and put off any potential future fraudsters?

By continuing the debate in a recognized thread within the vintage section we hold up our belief and passion for these great cars - the power is in our words, lets keep the message strong rather than hiding the thread away. If we continue to change peoples attitudes we continue to save the cars and drop the commercial value of the fakes, to the point where they are no longer viable.

I scream at anyone who owns a fake or is considering commissioning one - take a look at a 250GTE it is a work of art, one of the most beautiful cars ever made - buy a GTE or restore one, the pleasure you will get is immeasurable compared to the day i bump into you with your fake GTO and make a total fool out of you in front of all your admiring friends.

cheers Mark

 

+1000000

 

It is apparent that the subject of misrepresentation of Ferrari models is of great interest and/or amusement depending on the object of discussion. Many angles have been stated but so far we've not reached any conclusion.

The difficulty seems to lie whe to draw the line between "eligible" Vintage forum recreations and replicas and those that are a total misrepresentation to the originals.

Clearly the "official Replica thread" is insufficient to cope with the interests and yet it is accepted by members and Administrators alike.

I would suggest an official replica thread per model. Then it is up to the members and administrators decide if any posted replica is of sufficient high quality to remain in the Vintage forum or be moved to General Auto.

A simple democracy.

 

I totally forgot about that thread. Problem (partly) solved: if it's clear as day that it's a replica, post it in there. Make it sticky so that everything else in Vintage is spared from the misery.

 

Hey Julio

Are you going to write a Letter to Cavallino which self proclaims itself " The Journal of Ferrari History" for running a double page add featuring a 350 Can Am for sale that the offering dealer is removing the original 350 Can Am body and fitting with a replica P4 body admonishing them as to what a DISGRACE it is that they'd allow such an advertisement to run in their magazine which is about original Ferrari's?

Unlike you I have no problem with Rob having Sponosrs who support the Vintage Section offering replica's for sale especially as they have been Crystal clear about exactly what that car is and it isn't.

Do you think the advertisement in the latest Cavallino is Crystal clear that the car being offered is no longer a P4 but is a 350 Can Am and that putting a replica P4 body on it won't magically make it a P4?

There is a long thread in this section of what the 350 Can Am being offered is and is not. There was a long and very interesting article in FML, about what that car is and is not. I haven't seen a similar article in Cavallino.

I look forward to seeing your outrage.