when is a Classische restoration a replica?

...veeeery good question!

Ciao!
Walter

 

My humble 2c.

The case of #0818 is well worth reading for anyone interested in what Classiche is all about. I believe the key outcome of that case is that Classiche is just a cost centre set up to make as much lira/ dollars/ pounds/ euro as it possibly can. The issue for us fans whom are interested in these cars and have concerns for authenticity will be what becomes the program when a valuable client takes their dubious car/ fake/ replica and wants it classiche. Ahhh but you would say that Classiche under there rules would refuse to certify it and that would be what their own rules state BUT again check out the mysterious case of #0818 and tell me again that is what happens. Just imagine if you had bought every special edition Ferrari from the 90s & 00s & 10s and having bought your first classic Ferrari found it to be a fake, what if you are some ogliarch or important euro politician or whatever, you would scream and shout that they must approve your car and maybe they will.........

As for the engines, if it is the difference between the car running and not I would replace it. The car has no utility value if it cannot run. The overriding point would be that any of the major components such as an engine or full body or part chassis produced out of period should be noted as such and can never be authentic. A reproduction correct spec 250GT engine is better than a Corvette engine unless it is a rare situation where the Vette has some historical value like say it raced as a Ferrari/ Corvette but I digress. The other option I would like to see owners retain is where there is an actual OEM Ferrari engine of correct spec fitted and the car that the engine came from is no longer in existence leave it in there. It is original, maybe not matching numbers but if matching numbers isn't an option, it is the next best thing......

I am no purist but I like to know what a car is so imo selling a car with a major item that was built last week and passing it off as built circa 1950 is simply fraud, declaring what it is and when the major components were built is not.

 

Dear George,

Many years ago Alfred Housman, a British poet, wrote a short poem entitled “With Rue My Heart is Laden”

With rue my heart is laden
For golden friends I had,
For many a rose-lipt maiden
And many a lightfoot lad.

By brooks too broad for leaping
The lightfoot boys are laid;
The rose-lipt girls are sleeping
In fields where roses fade.

I firmly believe she was very connected with the thoughts of this poem, what with the deaths of so many of her friends from back in the day.

Sure miss her.

Best regards,

Robert

 

But NEVER a G1 Alfa Romeo which was my point.

You know me well enough Wayne to know I know Enzo drove ALFA's and some Alfa Romeo's but he never ever raced or even drove chassis #6018 and yet the article indicates it is his old car, which is impossible.

So again a 20/30 or a 40/60 is NOT a G1. But the current owner of the G1 has had it restored to look like a 20/30 or 40/60 (they look similar). So sad.

In the end purchases of ANY old car need to be very, very, very careful, because it is likely to involve BS.
Pete

 

Pete

 

For as long as Ferrari exists as a business entity, with a direct, unbroken line back to the founder then however much anyone fights it, the only company that can sanction an authentic Ferrari product is Ferrari, everyone else however good they are, or who they use will always be at best second down the line in the food chain.

If Ferrari decided to subcontract every single element in their current line up and just gave it the final stamp of approval then it's still a genuine Ferrari product.

The recent batch of new Jaguar lightweight e types is a classic example, plenty of other lightweight spec cars out there, but the Jaguar supplied ones will always command more money and be more desirable to the vast majority of people.

....and this is from someone who does not like the above, but accepts it.

My own money will always be spent of achieving the best I can find, for the best value so I would source from alternatives, but as an investment alone then officially sanctioned is always going to be the safe haven.

 

+1.

 

Paul the idea that these same guys stating that a replica engine engine made today in the UK for a Vintage Ferrari is "authentic" and that a car with one is oringinal remains as laughable as them stating that the vehicles cited below that this same management made were safe to sell.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/27/business/fiat-chrysler-faces-record-105-million-fine-for-safety-issues.html

 

R

Ferrari do not say a Classiche engine is "original." It is "as original." It is a genuine and authentic Ferrari product. It is not a replica in a derogatory sense at all. The problem is that people wrongly associate the word "replica" with kit car and unfaithful copies commissioned/made by 3rd parties and these really are not true replicas at all.

 

The interesting thing is that before the head of Fiat Chrysler fired Luca, Luca was giving this all some thought.

At the time of the last factory auction, before RM said "see you" to the factory as a venue, Chassiche came up with the idea of "Ferrari of Historical Importance" which I personally thought was a good one.

The one Chris lost 4.5K GBP on:

Bad carma as Top Gear Chris Evans loses £4.5m

Because of it's non original engine would have been a good candidate as would have been the two 0818's and the two LM's that became Red book one's. AFAIK Chris's received full Red Book Authentication and as he learned the subsequent buyers didn't buy into the BS that because the Ferrari Classiche said it was OK, it was OK and paid accordingly costing Chris 4.5 GBP.

Luca, Classiche and I discussed this before I bid on 350 Can AM 0858. Even though it would have brung more money as a "Red Book" P4 they all said it wasn't any longer an original P4 and if a buyer wanted to give them a boat load of money they'd fit a replica P4 body, engine and other bits and Classiche it as "A Ferrari of Historical Importance" which I think is fair. Luca was fired and as far as I know this second classification remains seldom used even though I think it's a much more honest statement about many Vintage Ferrari's than "Authentic".

 

Do not blame Classiche for Chris Evans losing money on the SWB Cal Spyder. To be certified for Red Binder the engine and other components have to be of the correct tipo and if that car has a Red Book then the engine will be of the correct tipo. A car does not need to be matching numbers, but the report inside the Red book will state this. The lesson is - Read the book!

Classiche were not willing to certify 0858 as a P4 as a car of historical interest (White Book) either.

 

Think the effected cars are pre-gov.t giving Chrysler to Fiat ...?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/11/automobiles/chrysler-to-recall-fire-prone-jeeps-to-add-trailer-hitches.html

 

The recalls weren't, some up to 2015.

Personally I don't think they handled the recalls properly.

I believe that's why they were fined 105MM

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/business/nhtsa-hearing-fiat-chrysler-safety-recalls.html

 

I'm not a fan of Classiche, but the term "replica" is far too broad a term to accurately describe their recreations. For example, if you wanted to refer to a specific group of people (e.g. the citizens of the United States), you could call them "humans", which is technically accurate, but that would be a poor choice of labels because far better terminology exists and failing to use more accurate terminology synthesizes a huge amount of unnecessary confusion (given that most humans are not citizens of the United States).

Like the "human" example above, there are far more accurate and appropriate terms than "replica" for what Classiche creates. The term "replica" includes Fieros, corvette engines, etc. and many other things that are a million miles away from what comes out of Classiche. Classiche's products are stamped differently, so there is no ambiguity about their differentiation from original -- the only real question is how those differences are interpreted by the relevant parties (owners, judges, auctions, historians, etc.). I would suggest that a more appropriate term for Classiche's work is "authorized reproduction" and a more accurate term for independently contracted work of the same caliber is "correct reproduction".

The above terminology is flawed a bit because it implies Classiche is better when there are undoubtedly instances where independent work is better than what Classiche produces. On the other hand, the fact that the Classiche work is authorized by the factory does (right or wrong) carry some weight in the market, even if the work is the same or worse than what would be done independently. As imperfect as the above terminology is, both these terms are certainly more accurate and appropriate than broadly labeling them replicas. I would never want a Classiche reproduction to be considered on par with an original engine, but broadly labeling them replicas is an unfair representation in my opinion.

 

My view is that an engine is a composite of wearable components, as long as the original producer supplies replacement parts to the same spec then it stays original, does a car stop being original when the first tank of fuel is used up or the oil changed?

If the motor in a modern ferrari blows up where do you go for a new one? same place as the company that supplied the classiche engines.

If two cars are lined up side by side and are identical, I agree the one with the newer engine does drop slightly lower in the pecking order of originality/desirability, but it's still to original spec.

 

It is "original spec", but not "original" -- very different terms IMO. Major component replacement within an original engine is an unavoidable part of long-term maintenance. Without that, there would be virtually no original engines running to rated performance today, so I don't believe that any type of maintenance done to an original engine reduces originality as long as it is done as correctly.

Replacing a lost engine is different -- the new engine is not original, nor should it be considered as such. I agree that "original spec" is a technically accurate term, but would suggest that it is not the best term possible because the label implies "original" too much when it is clearly not original.

 

Does anybody know how precisely the Classiche reproductions mirror the original engines? For example, would any vintage engine part be interchangeable with any Classiche replacement engine part? Do they retain mousetrap valve springs (for cars that originally had them) or do they now build those engines with coil valve springs?

 

I agree with all that is said, but with modern Ferrari's if an engine blows it gets swapped out, same with most manufacturers today, no one repairs engines/gearboxes, diffs etc anymore, I doubt the service techs would even know how to pull one down and rebuild it.

So in 20 to 30 years time when the new cars are classics and collectables, is the market going to frown on say a 599 GTO that had a warranty replacement engine in its first year of life?

 

A bit different when it's fitted with a replica engine built in the UK, outside of the Ferrari factory, where the original engine was manufactured, 50 years later.

 

There"s original and there's original.

We even use original yellow string that Sal brought from the factory to align 0854...


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

But surely logic dictates replacement is replacement if done by Ferrari as the originator of the car, time is irrelevant, as is their subcontractor.

As someone said above better to have a classic that is drivable than a static museum piece, and these old girls need maintaining and parts replacing to keep them on the road, the tag line on your post says it all Jim

I guess if cars were not shown at these events, and had not become commodities to be traded then no one would actually then care as to the origins of the components and just enjoy them instead.

The good thing is we all have the freedom to express our opinions, what a boring world it would be if debate was suppressed.

 

I agree that it's MUCH better that these cars are made usable.

Many times a original engine exists from a destroyed car or in the case of a racing car a spare engine or using modern techniques an original damaged engine can be repaired and IMHO this is always a better route to go.

If that is not an option I have no problem with fitting a replica engine but I still don't believe that doing so even under the auspices of Classiche some how makes that car "Authentic" or "Original". Adding small print such as "as" to "original" still doesn't impress me.

 

It's a the whole Classiche oval emblem...it kind of reminds me of a Union "bug" that one would print on a business card, to signify Union labor.

Do Italian communists use that??

 

Classiche provides a legal fiction.
Nothing wrong with that as long as all involved recognize the fact.