Replicas, why bother ??

Time limits? 250GTO comes nowhere close. Plus these abominations usually destroy perfectly beautiful other Ferraris in order to satiate someone's shallow-pocketed obsession. The Mayor is correct.

 

Thank you, that is my opinion too. And I find it offensive when others refer to such a quality machine as a FAKE. And yes the value in $$$ will be significantly lower, the value in smiles per mile maybe better, which is the part i care about.

 

I don't think anybody is arguing that a replica is the same as the real thing - the history of a particular winning car can never be replicated - just that they have their place and, to the op's question, a point. For many it's not just to be seen in one, either, particularly those that have an original alongside the replica.

 

Yes and if you had acceptance then there would be stanbdards and no need to destroy "perfectly beautiful other ferraris" as all the pieces are now available. Pushing what many consdier to be desireable and acceptable into the shadows is what creates priate chop cars. As usual in Europe they have a more enlightened view, just as was the case re restoration where in the USA perfectly preserved older cars were "restored" ruining them.

None of this is shallow pocketed, unless you consider 500K shallow pocketed. To spend that kind of money on something unlikely to apprecaite is not IMO shallow pocketed. Kastly considder that racing a recreation allows a perfectly beautiful older car to be preserved for posterity instead of being ground up so all that is left is a datat plate.

 

Design patent lasts 14 years.

 

From a Driving perspective its not better just the same which makes it desireable. From a $$$ value or market desire prespective yes its less.

 

Slap an F badge on it and you're in different territory.

 

It is relative. 500 is cheap compared to the original. That's shallow pocketed. Buy sthg real in budget instead. A fake Rembrandt may approach perfection and cost you many $ in labour hours. Doesn't validate the purchase and intent one iota

 

Now that's a GREAT interior


Well, I was raised in a sophisticated kind of style.
Yeah, my taste in music and women drove my folks half wild.
Mom and Dad had a plan for me,
It was debutantes and celebraties,
But I like my music hot and like my women wild.

Yeah, an' I like my women just a little on the trashy side,
When they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.
Too much lipstick an' er too much rouge,
Gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.
An' I like my women just a little on the trashy side.

You should've seen the looks on the faces of my Dad and Mom,
When I showed up at the door with a date for the senior prom.
They said: "Well, pardon us, son, she ain't no kid.
That's a cocktail waitress in a Dolly Parton wig."
I said: "I know it, dad. Ain't she cool, That's the kind I dig."

Yeah, an' I like my women just a little on the trashy side,
When they wear their clothes too tight and their hair is dyed.
Too much lipstick an' er too much rouge,
Gets me excited, leaves me feeling confused.
An' I like my women just a little on the trashy side.

 

This is a false equivalency, here is why. In the case of a rembrandt we know there is only one, its the product of one tortured mind and the appeal of canvas art is purely visual.

Now a car is indistrial art, its made to a blueprint by many hands, even if there is one vision. But even then compoanant desiggn even in a ferrari is amny people, motor by Columbo, design by ponin body built by Scalieti. It is by its very nature inherrantly replicable in a way canvas cannot be, in fact is thats what series production of a vehicle is, repilcating to a blueprint, maybe then the question is as to who is replicating and when.

But Ferrari has recreated cars. In facyt they use outside fabircators for old engine block designs etc. We know that famously audi had croswaite in the Uk recreate pre way auto unions and no one in classic car circles is questioning that.

Its more like a famous photography if a few more prints are made a few years later by the estate, like ansell adams,they are all the same, the older ones just have more provenance.

Or a car is like a book, first editions of famous books worth a lot more, it does not mean a recent print is any less enjoyable to read.

So car is replicable, perhaps the debate is a question as to who is doing the recreating. And yes if a design is protected you cant copy it. But we know certain shapes are not protected. Here is the irony, If I cut up a georgeous old car to make my SWB recreation I can put a ferrari badge on it, because the underlying chassis and engine block are ferrari.

Now If I have everything newly made, so as not to desecrate an old glodie, then even though to the bolt its a swb I cant put a ferrari badge on it, because the badge is trademarked and arguably ferrari made none of my recreation. I am good with that, I dont need the badge, what I care about is the machine and enjoying it.

So if you could accept recreations, and we can make standards, then for those with relatively deep pockets,ie 500k,( for whom a fiberglass facimile is not scceptable because it is and drives differently) there is now an option other than cutting up an golden oldie, because then you can ostracise chop jobs, disincentivising them.


I think you see bugatti accepting recreations built to a standard. We would have been served well in Duesenberg and Bently circles, how many great cars were chopped and modded to make a speed 6?

There are lots aof grey areas here. Gt40's that are completly new builds with chassis plates from a long lost burnt to the gorund car, selling to knowlegeable buyers for huge money, which to me is ludicris for what is essentialy a recreation with long dead provenance attached. But each to its own, and let the market decide.

To me a proper recreation(licesed as need be) is just like a reprint of a book or famous photograph, the same thing to be enjoyed and used, just worth less. In fact you are unlikely to read a 300 hundred year old print for fear of putting acid from your fingers on the paper and ruing the book, so a reprint is more enjoyable. Similarily owners of "rea" old builds have rereations because they can enjoy them more.

Notice you never hear owners or original old builds decrting recreations, even here. Thats because the old builds are so expensive and precious you cant really drive them in anger as designed, whereas you can have exactly the same and better driving experience in a recreation, which piints to their validity, at leats amongst those with deep pockets.

 

But doesn't Allegretti only builds scale models for youngsters?

 

No they go the real thing. as well as some great T33 with montreall motors.

 

I see I had posted the edited verion, please watch this longer version especialy the track part with an experienced driver whi vintage races old builds.
See his conslusion and perhaps you will understand why there is no modern substitute for a Driver.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBL_TRqcc3Y]Fifth Gear - Hi-Tech (Superformance) GT40 - YouTube[/ame]

 

I'm honestly intrigued why recreations (assuming they don't tear down "healthy" Ferraris to build them) are so upsetting to so many here? So many of the arguments against recreations seem to lean towards "it's a cheap knock-off" - even going so far as to call a $500k investment "cheap." $500k is $500k - the value of money doesn't vary in context to how it's being spent, after all. Other arguments attack the motivation of the owner - suggesting they're posers. Does the argument against replicas really boil down to dissatisfaction with how much money the owner has (or doesn't) and why they were motivated to build/buy/own a replica? That seems awfully shallow and nosy.

UNLICENSED replicas, and usually of modern-day products, are usually the biggest concern for manufacturers. They dilute the brand, impact sales, hurt brand reputation (as they're usually not equal quality), etc. But recreating a classic car UNDER LICENSE is another thing altogether.

It's good to be a purist to some degree. But take fine art or literature as an example. If reproductions were so offensive to society, think of how many people would have never had an opportunity to read a classic book. It's pretty tough to get an original of Moby Dick. Or how many people would lose out from enjoying The Scream if they couldn't get a replica to hang on their living room wall. We can acknowledge these aren't "original" (after all, they're not) - but they bring joy to the owners in the way the original artist intended. They're not diluting the value of an original in any way - and in some cases may be helping to inflate originals by drawing attention to the desirability of these works of art.

I'd suggest that as long as replications of any intellectual property (be it art, machinery, literature, etc) are being done under license, that's all WE as a society need to be concerned about. The motivations of whomever buys, builds, or owns these replications are really nobody's business but their own, as the pursuit of happiness is an individual liberty we all hang our hat on.

 

Exactly! Badges and names are trademarked. When someone applies these to their own creation they are misleading or forging a vehicle.

 

I believe Ferrari sell their badges all over the place. Probably one of their most profitable items. Now you can't make a Ferrari badge and sell it, but you can buy one from Ferrari and slap it on anything you want.

 

Oh, but it does matter. Of course originality is lost over time. That is a given. They are only original "as built" when they roll off the line. It's the VIN number of a vehicle and the companies or people behind it that give the VIN it's "soul" for lack of a better term. This VIN will have some sort of provenance, that along with all subsequent owners care and maintenance will determine the value or quality of a vehicle. The VIN of a vehicle ultimately determines what it is.

 

The Vin detrimes provenance and value. What it is detirmines what it is. In other words how it is made, what it is made into and the materialys used, no when or where wtirmine what it is. Now where and when it was made detirmines the label that is affixed and to some this is the only measure of value, as they measure value in $$$. As to value in driving enjoyment that is detirmined by what it is, not when or where it was made.

As to originality being lost over time yes that is true. But we have a preservation class which reckognises cars that are unrestored as having higher art and value than a shiney restoration wherin the original car is lot to time.

 

Interesting, so if you buy a Ferrari Authorised badge, then it ok to attach it to your pride and joy.

 

Yeah, but what is the intent? To wave the banner high or to fake and deceive? There is a big difference!

 

Yes the car world is a strange place to some. A guy with a Miura SV can burn it to the ground and completely rebuild with probably little or no impact on value whereas the guy building an exact replica in his basement is probably burning his money. Sad for many but this IS the reality of the car world. It is what it is. And that's how it is.

 

OK, here is better equivalency for you: reproduction Eames or Corbusier chairs are often made with royalties paid and support of the trustees / licencees of the original item. A Caterham 7 has correct licenses arranged with Lotus.

If a Ferrari replica is licensed and has royalties paid to Ferrari, fine. If not, it should not exist unless it does not pretend to be what it is not.

And to those that persist with the fallacy of 360/ /355 / 308 replicas being a different thing to high end replicas, they are not. Same deal. Same fakery. Same ethical considerations.

 

When you bring "values" into this debate, you're on very, very shaky ground. You do not know what any of the rest of us have or haven't done. . . and it's starting to sound like you're saying that theft and breaking the law has nothing to do with an actual moral decision; it's just a matter of different. . . values, all of equal validity.

Dude, seriously?

 

Depends on the person. To me it would indicate there's a Ferrari motor in the car, so to 'wave the banner.'

 

No logic to your argument. Now you've resorted to namecalling.

I suspect that you're really twelve years old.

My opinion is that people who can't appreciate genuine Ferraris - this is, after all, ferrarichat - should go somewhere else.

And I believe that it's the forum's rule that those who can't express a difference of opinion without namecalling get banned.

This thread has become so tiresome that it ought to just be removed, and those of us who are gentlemen should make a gentlemen's agreement not to enter into any further discussion of fake cars again.