Replica or not? Thoughts on definition!

One of the most important questions I have when it comes to all things replicas/recreations etc. and one that I haven't been able to find an answer to it.

Remember the whole 0846 debate? How much of an original do you need? Is Arlie's WWII bomber rebuilt around a piece of fuselage a replica, a recreation or a restoration? Same goes for the proverbial tacho needle.

Some people focus on the ID plate, some on the firewall, but nobody has come up so far with a good definition.

 

If the factory built it, or at least authorized it, then it is an official recreation. I would even stretch that to suggest that if VW took the supposedly available chassis and parts to build a Royale, then it is a Bugatti Royale recreation, as VW owns the Bugatti name.

If some entity not related to the factory built a car, even if using factory parts, like Jim Carpenter did when he was in Arizona with the P-4, then it is only a replica.

 

facsimile - from Latin "fac simile", "make similar."

 

Shelby doesnt builds Cobra's........... AC builds Cobras , Shelby markets them in the same way chinetti Marketd Ferrari 275 Narts..... he may have had the idea but he didnt build any of the major components

 

To me a replica or re-creation of a vehicle are the same thing. These are the result of an attempt to duplicate a vehicle after the original production run had ended. There is no amount of component parts that can be assembled and called part of the original production run. The only way to circumvent this is to take the original chassis or serial number portion of the chassis and to build the car around it. A new stamping of an old number is misrepresentation. If the factory, as part of their production run or thereafter, destroys a serial numbered chassis, they have removed it from production. They are the only entity who can accomplish this but even they can not perform this in reverse (adding a number that did not previously exist).

Opinions?

 

Yes Andrew,
You have touched on a point that the uninitiated don't understand. Shelby never built Cobras, until the "continuation" cars, where after 35 years, he happened to come across a number of AC Cobra chassis that were supposedly built during the production period of the original AC built Cobras. Even the Peter Brock designed AC Cobra Daytona Coupes were in fact built on AC chassis.

But in a case of AC building Cobras, or in a case of Ferrari building another 125S, if they were built in the exact manner of the original and came from the same factory, how could they be replicas? They would be later runs of the same cars, otherwise the second car built of any production run is just a replica of the first.

They couldn't be replicas, they are continuations.

 

I think this definition avoids the real issues. There are two aspects to a historic car, the physical car and the history it experienced.

If the factory somehow preserved the parts, the line and the processes to recreate a car built 30 years ago, it is no different than if the factory had been in continuous production for 30 years. This doesn't normally happen in the auto industry, but sometimes happens in some other industries (e.g. watches or rangefinder cameras). In any case, so long as the factory designates the new car as a 2005 Ferrari 250GTO (or a 2005 Nikon SP Rangefinder), every knows what it is and it is a genuine Ferrari and genuine 2005 250 GTO.

What can't be recreated or reissued is the history the car underwent. The opportunity for any particular GTO to have contributed to racing history and the 62, 63 and 64 titles has passed. Those cars that were actually there and contributed more are probably worth more, subject to condition. The baseball that Barry Bonds hit for the HR record was worth $1, until he hit it, after which it was worth $1M. What we don't know is if collectors (in the aggregate, individual responses will cover the spectrum) would value a new 2005 250 GTO to the same amount, greater or lesser than a 1962. if collectors value the history most, even for an unremarkable 1962 250 GTO, then a 2005 250 GTO would be worth less. If collectors value the actual design and driving experience more (doesn't seem likely), then the opportunity to own a brand new 0 miles 250 GTO with factory warranty and support and in a limited edition series, might be worth a lot.

 

Good point and I'm not trying to argue against it, but how does that relate to a Ferrari street car without any racing history? Let's say the factory decides to start production on the California Spyders again. Would they be fetching the same amounts of $ as the few real ones do? Probably not, so it is not "just" about racing heritage.

 

I would agree with you and that raises a 3rd component of valuation. Call it the "first edition collector syndrome". For some odd reason, the human collecting instinct likes to distinguish firsts and pay more for them. Take books as an example. A "first edition" is one of the first print run (the publisher typically marks books that are otherwise exactly the same on the copyright page with the sequential print run, sometimes just a few weeks apart). Collectors will pay more for those first editions, even though its a difference of a few micrograms of ink, with all else the same.

A "first edition" car that is part of the original run, properly distinguished by the factory by its S/N and ID tag is apparently worth more to car collectors too, even though all else might be the same physically in a reissue run. The difference could very well be just those few micrograms of metal that mark the S/N and date of manufacture.

 

PS Andreas, I'll take 3 of the Cal Spyders, 2 SWB covereds, and a LWB covered.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Ever try duplicating your grandmother's meatballs (or sauerbraten, or whatever) using the same recipe she used? Hypothetically you can preserve parts, processes etc. but in reality...

 

Good point.

NASA couldn't rebuild the mighty Saturn V even if they wanted. Too many suppliers of subcomponents are out of biz by now. A lot easier to start from scratch.

 

Your friend needs to look no further than Superformance's own literature which goes to great lengths regarding the myriad of "improvements" that they have made to the "original" design - including, among other things, extending the wheelbasse to make the interior cabin larger.

No need to get into the vast differences that actually exist in their build process and materials.

Clearly - REPLICA. Tell your friend that I am sorry to sink his Battleship.

Oh yeah, when did they move the AC assembly line to South Africa???

Scottie
www.TheCarcierge.com

 

Scottie behave!!!

 

Even if a company stays in continuous production for 30 years, it's likely there will be some changes, usually for the better. Is a 1995 F355 exactly the same as a 1999 F355? No, we know there were some tweaks and improvements (like valve guides). Is the first 250 GTO exactly the same as the last 250 GTO? I doubt it.

Since a 2005 250 GTO would not be represented as a 1962 250 GTO, I don't know what the concern is. It would be up to the costumers to decide if that was better, worse or indifferent to a 1960's model and what to pay for it.

That being said, replicating processes or recipes can certainly be hard. A classic story is that of the RCA image vidicons (the TV camera tubes). At one point RCA moved the factory to another site and the red color transmitted by the tubes produced was washed out. RCA engineers tore their hair out trying to figure out what had changed. They finally pinned it down to the phosphor, but they couldn't figure out what was different since it was formulated exactly as the process instructions stated. They finally got the previous phosphor fabrication tech back in as a consultant (he had retired when RCA moved the factory) and had him go through the steps and watched him. At one point, in the process, the tech spit into the vat containing the phosphor mix and then continued stirring. Well the engineers watching him jumped up and said "what are you doing, that isn't in the process instructions". He said, "oh, I've been doing that for 30 years, if you don't the reds don't come out right..." If you can't duplicate the recipe, then someone left out an important step or ingredient.

 

I think a manufacturer can run a model as long as they please. They may also re-introduce a model if they please. Ferrari built an '05 125 sport for whatever reason.... but it's still 125 sport. The missing '47 has a racing history, the '05 like most ferraris does not have a history.