Vintage section Fake/Replica/Recreation/Rebody discussion

Probably the case because I would suspect there would be fewer shows in the future.

 

Very good point. One of the intentions of my post is to creat interest and comment on the subject. Without nameing anyone specificly, there are people out there, often with contributions on F Chat, who are, shall we say, more in the category of historians, collecters, writers etc. It will be up to Bob Lay to eather design the categories of types of replicas or select who he wishes to advise him.This is his web site for which I continue to be extremely grateful for his efforts. Now if you are refering to persons who may contribute to any future Ferrari replica web site, they must be allowed their opinions. The same basic rules that apply to FerrariChat would , in my opinion, be acceplable to a Replica site. We all have a pretty good idea about those who regularly contribute to FerrariChat. A broad spectrum of comment and opinion is always a good thing. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

A possible replica category could be for cars just like the Lancia Ferrari. So many of the great original single seater Formular cars were destroyed when their competetive life was over that their should be a place for their replicas. The yellow shark nose F 1 is another example. Another car that might be included in this category could be the "Breadvan" which would open this category to non original two seaters whose modifications are considered the traditionally accepted historical condition of the car. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

The comments about the BOC are most interesting. The club has been around for a long time and puts out that wonderful magazine "Bugantics" My guess is their criterion for a recognized unoriginal Bug would probasbly fall into ,what I now call category A, which would include the likes of the Lancia Ferrari replica and the Breadvan. I agree the BOC does not have an active factory lurking in the shaddows but I don't think that should be of concern to the Ferrari replica discussion. In fact I would entertain the input from Classiche in the discussion. Going back to the discussion of categories, I would not recommend Classiche as a consultant in the selection and definition of the several categories of replicas considering their commercial interests in the area. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

Isn't there an original Lancia/Ferrari already?
I saw one at the Galleria in 07.

BTW If you do put together a replica forum let me know. If its as interesting as most of the things that you post here I want in.
David

Speaking of Sir Anthony, I saw him on the beach last week. Swim trunks are a great leveler

 

An important point. It is my opinion that any Ferrari replica site should have no official evaluation or opinion on market values other than than what is posted by contributers. There will of course be contributers to the site with business interests however these must be considered the opinions of the contributer only. IOW just as it seems to be with Ferrari Chat. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

As they say some folks are expert on price, others on value.

 

I respectfully disagree with the inclusion of the "Breadvan" as a replica. It is a race car that was modified in period to make it faster, and it has a significant history as raced in that configuration. Just because it wasn't modified by the "Factory" does not make that history any less important, or the car any less significant.

Back in the day, cars left the factory to be raced, and were ALWAYS modified to make them faster. They were tools to be used to go fast, not an object of art at the time. If the tool didn't fit the purpose, it was modified till it worked. The factory modified their cars and then sold them as modififed, and customers modified their cars soon after they got them. Since technology was advancing quickly at the time, modifications were often performed over modifications if it served the purpose. To my mind it is fine to accept that and keep the car in whatever state you desire so long as it is period correct. To go back and put it back to "the way it left the factory" is to ignore history and it often destroys the character of the car IMHO.

While some cars were modifed with Chevy engines, I probably wouldn't go that far as to keep a Chevy in it if a proper engine could be found, but remember, that was often done, and if somebody showed up with one I'd be just as accepting of it. While today we see these cars as precious objects, at one time they were just "old race cars" and weren't worth much at all.

It's kinda like taking 0846 and turning it back into a P3, because that's the way it left the factory the first time (not that you could easily, I'm just speaking metaphorically here). No one would suggest that you do that. The Breadvan isn't a replica of anything. It is simply a race car that was modified in period, and there is nothing wrong, or in any way unacceptable with that.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Count Volpi & company try to buy a GTO initially and were rebuffed by the factory?
Old cars, particularly old race cars, are largely of interest because of their histories. To exclude them for their stories would seem to be missing the point.

 

Hello, nothing a couple gallons of Bondo wouldnt cure. Still wouldnt mind having her, looks like good fun!

 

When is the replicas section happening.

 

moderator please move to
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=355531

thnx

 

I hope Denis Jenkinson (Wiki him) doesnt mind, as I wouldnt want him spinning in his grave, OR twitching his beard.

But these are his classifications of originality or lack thereof

ORIGINAL: Almost impossible to find, Anything that has been used and had one part replaced is no longer original. For example even if just the spark plugs have been changed the vehicle is now somewhat original which means what ?. See below. The only example for original, DSJ could come up with was the Trossi - Monaco. Greg Garrison's Daytona Spider would fit.

GENUINE: This is a much more practical description, although the vehicle concerned must have no gaps in its history, where it could have been faked, the key to this is that while parts have been replaced/ modified the core vehicle, for example the chassis, is still original. Something like 330P4 #0856 or GTO #4219 would fit.

AUTHENTIC: This is when THE ENITITY or the key sum of its parts have continued to exist in one form or another since it was built, best examples being a ROAD CAR that became a GRAND PRIX CAR and then was converted back, this car should always have its own chassis as fitted originally, and certainly no other pretenders to the thrown. The 166 Inter #014I would be a good fit here, maybe the Breadvan.

RESURRECTION: When the end is reached an old racing car was frequently dismantled and eventually some parts are still located in various places, but not the entire car. Eventually the car is rebuilt either as a new chassis with some original parts. These cars can never be seen as a genuine car. #5899 could be an example of this.

RECONSTRUCTION: A vehicle built from one single component, or components from various cars, with very little from one single entity, Jan's 156 GP car ?.

FACSIMILE: A vehicle that now exists where there previously wasnt one. This is a complete fake with little linking the vehicle to the original(s) except the look and maybe the feel. Your 330GT/ 250 GTO Replica would fit here.

SPECIAL: A very english confection, with perhaps the Old Yeller being the closest American's have to it, these vehicles are never finished. Not really a Ferrari thing.

REPLICA: A vehicle that is built as an exact copy by its original builder, the only one I can think of is the 125 built by Ferrari some years back.

It all gives us something to think about doesnt it. My take on it is nothing is black and white.

It is patently unfair to point at any one of the people mentioned on this page and say look they did this or they did that.

Marcel Massini has as much expertise on old Ferraris as anyone, and while you would need to pay him money for his time and research, he would soon go out of business if he wasnt entirely open, unlike Ferrari SPA who have a certain profit motive behind everything they do. Frankly if I had the money and was buying myself a $2 - 20 million Ferrari I would hire him to check it out, before I hired the factory.

Doug Nye has done more than most to clarify the status of vehicles, to reseacrh their past and to write books that are bloody good, I dont hold him responsible for what goes on screen in one of the TV shows, any more than I think the Kardashians have editorial control

And what gives with some people criticising Mr Enzo Ferrari, without Enzo we wouldnt be here discussing these cars because they wouldnt exist. And while he may not have had any particular love for last years cars, without all of the good and bad stuff in the 1950's and 1960's, this hobby wouldnt be anywhere near as exciting.

 

Breadvan is not a replica.

It is impossible for a period modification to be a replica. The term replica means that somebody has made something many years later to look like a "car" of many years earlier.

The Breadvan was a period modification to make a race car faster and is unique. Nothing fake/replica/recreation/rebody about it. It's far more than a rebody, it was a start again with some of the components of the SWB. Basically the SWB was destroyed so this blank sheet of paper design could be created and as it was done in period I have absolutely no complaints at all. It is like I bought a 458 GT2 car and decided I could make a faster car and created a PSk GT2 powered by the 458 engine. Who cares, I could order another 458 GT2 tomorrow ... if I had the money.
Pete

 

Just to be clear, I wasn't disparaging the Breadvan's lineage. In fact I would cite it as an example of a car that is defined by its modifications. Making it IMHO more interesting and desirable than a "run of the mill" SWB.

 

Why don't we just keep it simple? There are replicas out there that are clearly identifyable as such and there's no disagreement whatsoever.

It's simple: it's a replica when it replicates a model that it wasn't meant to be when it was originally manufactured.

The only interesting replicas to keep track of in this Vintage section are the ones using a Ferrari chassis and/or Ferrari engine (indentifyably by their respective stampings: chassis number and engine number). For example a 250 GTO replica built on a 250 GTE chassis.

Leave the questionable cars out of the dedicated and sticky replica thread, like those who claim chassis numbers of cars long gone, built around a tach needle etc. Those discussions have their place in the Vintage section in general.

Clearly state in the first post of the sticky replica thread that its sole purpose is to keep track of these replicas and that it's not meant to support building replicas but to out them.

Peter

 

Come on guys, the topic of replica´s / recreations / fakes will always have it´s grey area´s. And that is nothing to be afraid of. It´s all up for debate and that is pretty much our core business here, no?

 

I think it is largely nonsense that replica stuff would really serve the purpose of tracking them. In most cases we have no idea whatsoever what they were built upon and as of today allowing the discussion only seems to serve the purpose of promoting them.

I have really started to think that Julio hit the nail on the head with his first post. We come here because we love old Ferrari cars and what do we see? Fakes, replicas and all kind of "hot rods" being adored.

I sense a total lack of respect for Ferrari as a marque and as a man and it makes me real sad as the site owner has done a remarkable thing in putting all this together and making it what it is. When, on top of all this, I get kicked into my ass for "looking down at hot rods" on the vintage section of Ferrarichat, I get the feeling it might be time to move on.

 

iwanna860monza

"Doug Nye has done more than most to clarify the status of vehicles, to reseacrh their past and to write books that are bloody good, I dont hold him responsible for what goes on screen in one of the TV shows, any more than I think the Kardashians have editorial control "

Doug has, as you put it, editorial control of the FOS and The Revival and as the Vintage section has repeatedly shown has no problem with replicas built on 250 GTE chassis and even pure kit cars appearing in those events non disclosed as to what they really are.

 

Fair enough Jim, he doesnt seem anti - replica's from the Goodwood FOS perspective, but maybe that is commercial reality ??. I guess the FOS has to make a buck (or a few). My thought was simply, when making TV it is always edited down to the lowest common denominator, and any mention of non - narrative items such as fakery will stress the likely viewers attention span.

How is the collection, any good drives recently ?

 

I don't spend much time on the Formular mono posto cars but my understanding is the Ferrari lancias were all scrapped and when you do see one it is the replica which from what I understand a very good one My effort in the replica business is a 250 California kit which I started with a rolling chassis and built the rest. It is a perfect Ferrari fly yellow and looks pretty close to the real thing but not quite. There is just enough about it to be sure a good eye will not take it for that long lost California. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

Good point. And each one should clearly reflect the other. A Ferrari replica web site would be a good start at establishing this. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

I knew the subject of the Breadvan would bring comment. My suggestions are not etched in stone. A higher authority tried that and look what that got us. What I am looking for right now is a location in which we can then develop a format to work from. I am hoping there will be enough interest in a replica site that one can be created as part of Ferrari Chat . Once this is established then we can start on rules to work by. just one man's opinion tongascrew

 

All's good. Monday last I drove P 4/5 C and Saturday P 4/5.

Cheers