insulted by a kit car

Replicas are one thing, but... what about the "cut" cars?

1969 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 | Hagerty ? Classic Car Price Guide

History of the 1968-1973 Ferrari 365 GTB / GTS Daytona

Excerpt:

Just over 1,400 Daytonas were built, and this includes 122 examples of a factory convertible known as the 365GTS/4 Spyder. These convertibles were produced to order and, like the Berlinetta coupe, were completed at Scaglietti for Ferrari. Factory-produced Spyders command a huge premium over their coupe counterpart, and should not be confused with one of the many Spyder conversions carried out on coupes post-factory by private firms not associated with Ferrari or Scaglietti. Prospective buyers/investors should be aware that VIN numbers are no different between Berlinettas and Spyders on U.S.-spec cars, therefore due diligence is necessary when confirming a Daytona’s history and provenance. Some of the aftermarket conversions did include steel reinforced inner fenders as well as differing A-pillars that were characteristic of the factory Spyders, making for a very convincing conversion.

 

I'm a watch guy myself. First I can't imagine any scenario where someone would make such a frankenwatch. If they did they would indeed need to be beaten. That being the case; What about the high end watches that have movements from third parties? I know there has been a recent move to stop that practice by many premium brands, but it's NOT because the watch industry wanted to. It's because Nicolas G. Hayek systimatically cut off the supply of ébauches and forced it to happen. Imagine buying an expensive, rare Ferrari/Porsche/Lamborghini/Etc. with a GM Northstar engine in it. That indeed was the state of horology for decades. It also didn't stop some fairly pricy and beautiful watches from being quite successful and sought after by "enthusiasts".

So is a hand crafted aluminum bodied 63 GTO with a real Ferrari engine in it less "legit" than say a Breitling with an ETA movement inside or the early Rolex Daytona that had a Zenith "El Primero" movement inside? Sure you could say they came from the factory that way so it's ok, but is it ok? In many ways it is the same as what's being discussed here with cars. A fiberglass Countach with a Fiero engine is a cheap knock off. I think an Aluminum bodied, hand crafted, exact duplicate with genuine running gear is not so cut and dry. That being the case - I don't think I would ever buy / make one. I would however like to know and drive one anytime/anywhere.

 

This is a good point. Is such a owner now a "poser"?

 

I guess some of us are more into how the thing goes than when it was built or the badge.
A Kirkham cobra is a cobra, a SPF Gt40 is even luicensed by the holders of the Gt40 license. What sperates these cars from period builds is when they were built porvenance and by extension value. A spf GT40 is stilla Gt40, worth less $$$ but he same thing to drive and look at.

Same as a Aston sanction 2DB4 Zagato is an aston zagot, its now worth 4million as opposed to say 15 million for aperiod build.

In short there is a big difference between a kit car which may have the silouette of period car but is not that car, and a recreation(often licensed) which is built with the same blueprints methods and strandards. As to who poretends or thinks what, frankly if you have aferrari and care what otehr people think it is or not, then you are already a poseur.

Many quality recreations are owned by p[eople who own period builds. Most so called period builds are so "restored" thta besides the dtata plate there is little period car left, so these too are just dtata plate recreations.

Fact is if someone made toolroom 288 copy, I would buy one, if it had no ferrariu badge I could care less, the joy is in the looking at and thr DRIVING of these things. Frankly these days a ferrari badge is anegative stigma. Funny then that so many owners of "real" ferraris put sheilds on, who are they trying to impress and fool.

I gues some of us are drivers and some showers. The drivers I know could care less when or where it was built, just what it si and how it goes.

In the immortal words of Buggatistas, what makes a bugatti is not when or where it was built, but how it was built, spec and materials used.

I know of someone making SS100 jaguars, these are sold to and owned by owners of period builds, they just want somethig they dont mind thrashing or blowing up. Its about the drive for some, and thr story for others.

BTW at Goodwood on the 50th anniversary of the GT40 50% of the cars out these were gelescoe new builds. Perfectly acceptable to the continental crowd and other GT40 owners, what thse pople want is the race. Of so called orgional GT40's none are running their origional tub and very few Abby fiberglass panels, so what exactlky are they but recreations with datat plates. Those who will not accept licensed and santioned recreations are just snobs usuualy speculators wanting to drive up the value of a limited pool of cars.

There is a small production line in Italy of Cali spyders. I think they are great. All the bits are now available so no need to cut nanother 250 to create them. As long as no one is misrepresenting the print as an origional no harm, and frankly even if they are who cres. I far more care that you can new build an exact copyy of aan iconic car, and thta this means one does not need to cut a lesser car. Is it not ironic that if you cut a lesser 250 ferrari and make your GTO you can put ferrari badges on and its somewhat acceptable, even though you detryed a period piece.

Would the automotive world and history not be far far better off accepting a P4 recreation, than allowing santioning and acceting the destruction of a can am ferrari to make an inacurate p4 pastiche out of the bones aof a factory period build.

This is not a black and white of absolute issue, there are multiple grey areas here.

 

This happens all the time in the vintage car market. Guys get a 67 Mustang and then modify it to look like an "Eleanor" clone GT500 Shelby Cobra. Or get a 69 Camaro and rebadge it as an SS. It's gotten to the point where buyers actually have to be careful they don't buy a fake. It's way worse than the Ferrari market where clones are usually badly done and don't happen often.

 

That's pretty funny.

That being said, my Ferrari, Porsche and MB are real, BUT looking at a 63 GTO just makes my heart pound! A 63 GTO is just too expensive to buy or truly enjoy as intended. If I really came to the point that i "had" to have one - I'd consider a quality reproduction. I'm OK if there's a stigma for thinking that. Some are just so close to real to not appreciate.

Believe me, a reproduction is not even on my list. I'm just saying I don't think of extremely accurate, expensive quality builds as "posers". I'd be happy to talk to an owner at a show and be even more happy to get a ride or drive one too. Everyone I've ever met with such a car was quick to tell me it was made not bought.

 

I was looking for the scene from the Cheech and Chong's Up in Smoke where Chong is pulling the car forward and you see a Rolls Royce grill and then he pulls out further and you see the car is a Beetle. LOL.

 

I also appreciate watches, and they are also a sensory experience: you look at them and appreciate their visual appeal. Whether someone is stealing a design from Patek Philippe or Ferrari, it's theft.

If Omega makes a watch with an ETA movement, it's an Omega. You or I might not value it as highly as one with a bespoke movement, but that's irrelevant. Omega has the right to make Omega Seamasters, Speedmasters, etc. You and I don't own their designs. In fact we pay more to make sure we've bought a genuine watch with an in-house movement. For the same reason an enthusiast wants the engine in his 550 Spyder to be a Porsche engine, not a Subaru.

It's not that complicated. We all know when we're stealing, and we all value authentic stuff higher than knock-offs.

+1

So Bugatti collectors don't care whether a car was made by Bugatti? I think you're missing the context.

I'm into both how the thing goes and when/where/how it was built. You can't really separate the two. Not sure if Peter Egan is still writing for R&T, but he did a series of columns when I was growing up that captured perfectly his reverence for original cars. Especially his Lotus Seven, IIRC.

 

If you spend $50K of your own money making a perfect "tribute" of a $100K Patek, are you being a poser? How about $10K doing a crappy job or $95K doing it better than the original?

Money doesn't change the basic moral equation. Fake is fake.

 

Funny how the lotus 7 is still built then, by Caterham, and greatly valued. Yes they have the license from Lotus, as does SPF from Safir and as does Shelby license some SPF cobras.

More tot he point, those who buy and drive Caterhams cant give a whit about it beinf alotus copy, they are really into the driving, a 7 has become a thing unto itself, regardless of when built.

 

There is no absolute moral equation. If there is a model of patek no longer built, if patek does not have a trademark on the design and someone builds the same watch, its a cool watch regardless of whether its called a parek or not.

Going further if Patek Licesed someone else to build an antique design, and it was built to historic or better standards, and if by licesing that patek name could be put on the watch, are you ok with it. Ie caterham 7 or new build shelby cobra licensed by shelby. You see these are all grey areas, especialy as Shelby licenses plastic fantastics which are far less authentic machines than say a kirkham.

If a design is no longer protected or relevant, and someone builds a toolroom copy, without the manufactuers trademak horsey badge, like a pursang or a dutton bugatti, its a cool machine. If a design is protected but licensed and therefore new build like a spf GT40 its a cool machine. In both cases its pretty clear when they were built and no origional artist/brand is harmed.

Yes I agree that there can be trademark and design infirngements, but in most cases this is simply not so. The objection to recreations is more one of false reverance and snobbery, sadly missing the point that these are actualy industrial machines built in series(not one offs) for using pleasure.

In fact did audi themselvs not get croswait and gradner to build some auto unions. So I guess if origional manufactueres(or their decendants) sanction it, or someone resurects a long dead design its oK. Or do you just object to any new build or a period design no matter who santions? Because if you dont object to say a ferrari sanctioned new build made by someone else, then what we are actualy just discussing is trademarks, more than the principle of a recreation being acceptable.

BTW I also love that you can buy new build chevron B16's from Cehvron, makes the racing more inetresting and affordable.

I for one would rather preserve period builds, and at the same time would love to see period designs used in anger as intended, all while stopping the butchery of lesser cars for "authetic" parts to create false historic provenance as happened to the ferrari can am car, something that is/was a real travesty.

 

At those numbers, I agree. We're talking 20 to 50 million though. A 63 GTO is simply impossible to buy even if you have billions. There needs to be a seller to get one. Is the hobby doing justice to that race car? Is the drummer fom Pink Floyd really willing to race his to it's limits regularly as intended? There is no watch that costs 50 million. I think the record was a few million (3.5?)

I'm not arguing that a reproduction is genuine. I'm arguing that the experience of driving a high quality one can not be had otherwise. Would you not drive it if a owner offered it to you? I sure as hell would!

 

$50 Million? Not really, but top of the heap is $25 Million, in all it's ugliness.

Top 5, $$$-wise: Worlds Most Expensive Watches 2013 - EALUXE.COM
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

What in the world????!!! That thing is hidious.

Wow, I didnt realize the watch market had entered such levels. I have a Franck Muller and love mine btw.

 

Dress up a Timex, agreed, that's a poser... Hand make one in exactly the same way using genuine parts, specifically the running gear and unmarked (unbranded), not so much. Again, I dont really like the watch analagy. I liked my cloned Angelina Jolie analogy better. Lol.

 

I just feel bad for people that spend good money to build those fiberglass sausages. I don't know why they wouldn't buy a real one and put their money and talents to good use. If it's a real Ferrari, it's cool no matter the condition, as long as it's getting used.

 

these "fake or not fake" and or "replica" threads are so fun...

 

As counterpoint not everyone can buy a real one no matter how talented they are. It is glib and disingenuous to say otherwise. That is my opinion. I'm not looking for a fight by the way, just stating my opinion

And that is why replicas exist in the first place. The replica owner fantasizes and appreciates the finer points of material tastes, but, for reasons only specific to their life, cannot buy the real thing. Saving one's money for a real Diablo or real F430 is most often untenable. If it were as simple as saving your money harder and longer then replicas wouldn't exist in most cases. Moreover, everyone would live in a mansion with exotic cars and vast reserves of cash. But that has never been reality. So fakes abound. There is a market for it.

In this way it is a matter of perspective. As for me I wouldn't own or drive a Fiero Ferrari or the like. I will have the real thing or drive someone else's that is real. But if someone else wants to build a fake then it poses no threat to me. The non-Ferrari engine sound is a dead give-a-way but most people won't even notice. Most people will seldom or never see an actual Ferrari, particularly if they live outside of Southern California (there are probably only a handful of Ferraris across most of the states, with most F-cars in the USA being concentrated in Los Angeles or wine country or Silicon Valley). For many, the fake Ferrari will pass by and people will turn their heads to look--which is the whole point.

 

Some older Ferraris are the same price as a new Honda so I don't buy the argument about people not being able to afford a real one. IMO, owning a real one is the only way to go no matter what the year or model. It sure beats goofing around with a fake. I just find it sad when people need to pretend they have the real thing and fake it. So maybe you can't get a 430, so what, get a 308 and know you own a real Ferrari and forget about all that pretend stuff.

 

Replicas exist because too many people feel that it's ok to fake something they can't afford, even if it means taking someone else's design without compensating the owner.

 

I do not like the cannibalism of any cars.

 

Even though I personally would not own a fake Ferrari (as I see no point in it and would feel stupid doing so), owning a real one clearly isn't the only way to go as fakes exist. Some companies make very high end fakes that look virtually like the real cars. Those companies are not being shut down but flourish in plain sight. If there weren't buyers for them then the companies wouldn't exist. This is the market working on its own accord. For example: 1967 Ferrari Norwood for sale | Hemmings Motor News and Kit Car List of Auto Manufacturers

Moreover, everyone who wants a Ferrari doesn't want a 308. Why is this always the all around cure for everything whenever a replica thread arises?--to demand that everyone too poor for a Ferrari get in that cue over there and buy a 308?

What if someone has no desire whatsoever for a 308? Fake buyers who want, for example, a real F430 would rather drive a fake one than buy a car they don't actually want, like a real 308. This must be true because there are companies that make fake F430s and there are people who have bought them when they could have bought a real 308 instead.

The assumption being promoted here has undertones that imply one can dictate what someone else should drive, ie, the Ferrari owners can dictate what non-Ferrari owners should do with their lives. This is akin to statist socialism or communism and surprising coming from an alleged pro free-market readership.

If someone is ok with themselves driving a fake car then how is that a threat to a Ferrari driver? And how does it take business away from Ferrari? People who buy real Ferraris will never buy a fake one and no business will ever be taken away from Ferrari. If anything, it advertises Ferrari branding for free, making the Ferrari image more appealing. Ferrari should thank replica makers for advertising their branding.

 

1963 Replica 250 GTO Reconfiguration

I wonder why so many keep discussing fiberglas Fiero based kits...clearly they are copyright and trademark infringement and the road is littered with cease and desist orders. I'm having a hard time seeing why an aluminum bodied, real ferrari running gear, period correct reproduction is equally as fake as fiero based kits. iirc Even Ferrari allows them at official events. Those cars are typically owned by serious collectors too. Usually because they love their real one so much but don't dare to race them as the original was intended. You guys really wouldn't jump at the chance to race an exact reproduction 63 GTO? I'd be thrilled to drive the enclosed example.

 

Who cares if someone drives a recreation, fake, kit car, whatever you call it. Why get so uptight because someone wants to enjoy themselves and it does not meet your standards. Many great ideas come from someone tinkering. Jesus Enzo didn't even like disk brakes, so he was not the last word on a great Ferrari himself ;-).

If someone has Ferrari on the back of their Dino, do you run up to them and shout "You Looser, it's a Dino not a Ferrari". What is Jim Gs P4/5? a recreation or is it a a one-off to you? It is based on an enzo chassis. Is it sacrosanct to cut an enzo or is it okay?

I always loved Ford GTs (GT40s) but I could never afford one. Back in 1997 I went up to ERA, in Ct, to see their facility, as I was very serious about getting one of their GTs. Their car was magnificent as was their Cobra. Did Ford build a recreation in 2005 or is it okay, it sorta looks like a GT, but it's not even close when they are side-by-side. I would prefer a ERA, Superformance, Safir over the new Ford.

I own a couple nice watches and I never worry about what others are wearing and if they are real.