Replicas, why bother ??

meh. Nostalgia cloak. References to the past are ok but are all too often overdone. The original intent was very pure. The available materials and techniques of the time were applied to achieve a largely functional purpose. Lookalikes just don't deliver the same passion for me. If the mechanicals underneath were faithful to the original (but not ripped out of another Ferrari) I'd be more sympathetic. But not much.

 

Nothing wrong with this at all. This would be a PERIOD rebody and the good thing about using modern components is there are plenty of them.

Plus its not a replica, more a tribute anyway.
Pete

 

I especially like this paragraph from that article.


I think we just get a bit caught up in all of this. The essence should be experiencing the car as it was
meant to be used. That’s the fun of it. I daresay I’d rather have a perfect replica that I could drive and use,
than a real one that is nothing but a static display.

 

Xactly and said by a full on gear head who can afford old builds and has both.

 

Note Leno does not own Ferrari replicas and I very much doubt he would cut up a 250GTE to make one.
Pete

 

But Leno has modified many or most of his cars. He has no problems doing this, so If you look at his actions, yes he could very well chop up a car or use it's engine for a project.

 

Oh ...

Pete

 

The replica = fake Rolex has been kicked around enough, and its just as bad an analogy as Mr. Mayor's porn star / rubber doll.

As a watch, an SPF would be the equivalent of Bulova stopping production of Armitron branded watches, and then someone buying out the brand and making very similar watches with a few changes to the the mechanism.

For a Cobra replica to be like a fake Rolex, Rolex would have to be out of business, and then someone buys a watch kit of a variety of parts -not all of which are supplied - modifies things to his own tastes, and then builds a watch in the style of the old Rolex himself. Trying to pass it off as original would be reprehensible, but otherwise it's just a watch, and most people can't make their own. Because of this, the builder himself will get much more out of it than anyone else, and it will have little resale value. Not understanding why someone might have pride in the accomplishment is just odd to me.

A replica GTO build on a 2+2 would be like taking a not so special BRM (but an out of production model) taking it apart, replacing many of the visual bits like the hands and face but using the old BRM mechanism and all BRM parts to make a watch that looks like something very rare and virtually unobtainable. Surprisingly, when I put it like this even I don't feel good about it...(so at least I am keeping an open mind)

The auto equivalent of a fake Rolex is one of those fake BMW X5s that were/are being made in china (pretty sure BMW tried to sue and lost). But to put in perspective why someone might buy one, the equivalent car would sell for $500, a price that makes the $50,000 original harder to justify.

Mostly I don't like the Rolex analogy because I think the watches are boring looking. Unless it is an old watch with personal sentimental value (ie heirloom), they are a watch for people who want someone else to know they had 10 grand they could piss into a hole. Same with some thousand dollar hand bag. If that makes you feel good, you need to reevaluate your priorities.

 

So are we only obsedded with Ferrari recreations, or just the principle. Why do Ferraris have their own special category.

As to whether Leno would cut up a 250, probably not, he has saved a number of lesser cars, starting with an old duesenberg town car.

I thought we had gotten away from the cutting up debate, prettry much no one advocates this, and you can buy all the bit new now anyway. The debate is that some call any recreatio a fake poor taste etc and unaccpetable, no matte if its licensed and using all new parts. I just point out thta Leno who is a collectors collector has no issue with recreations in fact quite the opposite.

The talk of fiberglass, gm power etc is a red herring thrown in catch all as well as the word Fake to create negative imigary in which to lump all recreations. the Leno article covers this quite well.

 

They don't but this is FerrariChat and the 60 and 70's 2+2 Ferraris are an endangered species.

I also get annoyed with 105 series Alfas being repowered with Japanese engines or early GT's been made into yawn yet another GTA replica. But the big difference here is that a GTA replica can usually be converted back, reasonably easily. Yes a GTO replica could be converted back to a 2+2 but that would be a massive remaking of the car, definitely not easy.

Even old Fords being made into hot rods is sad ... used a fiberglass body and modern chassis instead!
Pete

 

It's easy to get a replica made that does not need an old car to be cut up. Many of the top firms can do this. You just don't then get a Ferrari chassis number but you do get a car that replicates the look and driving experience. They don't come cheap though. Cutting up old cars should be a thing of the past I hope.

If you didn't need to butcher an old car could you see yourself maybe wanting a 250 SWB/TR/GTO for around 500-600k?

 

Nope. Way too many great cars available for that sort of money. Live within your means. Why cheat? You've got issues if you're so obsessed with one model.

 

Ferrari P 4/5 by Pininfarina and Eric's SP aren't replicas they're Coachbuilt cars that pay Homage to in my case our P 3/4 and in Eric's to his Boxer. There's a long tradition of period Coachbuilding on many Marques.

There is also a real issue when replica's are displayed publicly and the fact that they are replicas is left Crystal Vague.

At the latest Greenwich Concours our 002 won Best in Show. A guy in full Ferrari Regalia came by and commented that: "That's not the oldest Existing Ferrari the oldest Exostiong Ferrari is in the Ferrari museum and I've seen it there!"

The "125s" in the Ferrari Museum is a 100% replica recently made by Ferrari.

At the recent Amilia Island Concours displayed with real GT 40's with very significant History was: "Ford MK-IV J11" which is a total replica not built in period by Ford but built years later on a spare unstamped tub.

IMO this is not a good thing in that many are seeing cars in Museums and prestigious events and assuming that they are real when they're not.

 

If it's made by Ferrari then it would be a Replica-Ferrari. Would a replica Camaro made by Chevy REALLY be a replica. Kinda like falling asleep and waking up the next day, to find out someone at night replaced all your furniture with exact duplicates... ah semantics.

 

Amen.

 

A replica made by anyone is a replica.

 

How do you feel about the cars that aren't passed off as originals?

 

I have no problem with them until they start wearing badges and famous livery of things they're not.

I think it's a lot different earning livery and wearing a correct badge than implying that something is what it isn't and as Ferrari had nothing to do with P 4/5 Competizione except for making part of it's block and part of it's chassis we badged her as Scuderia Cameron Glickenhaus and got her livery the hard way.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

If Ferrari wants to make a new - old Car...As if they wanted to start to re produce the 250 GTO - its not a replica, but an actual GTO. what is different is the provenance - one made by Ferrari in period - 1962 - 64 and one made in 2013.

Since these cars are so tracked - there would be no hiding the serial number / chassis number & value. however since they would be essentially bespoke Ferrari's the value would be there.... and protect other "period" GTO's.

As for an owner changing the specification of a car - its your car, you can put whatever body you want on it. so a 330 - to a GTO or TR body - I have no problem. when you start to manufacture a false history - then major issue.

if you take a Datsun and put a GTO body on it and try to pass it off as a Ferrari - well that is just stupid, and i guess illegal.

as for the gentleman with the Rolex comment about being for posures.. I guess i'm one of them - i have several Rolex models " authentic watches" and love them. No need to denigrate others for what they like.

 

you don't know much about craftsmanship then. I can cite 3 cars built by jim rose and I can assure that the level of craftsmanship is simply off the charts and likely non duplicable within the period Ferrari car production.

that said, there are clearly some bad replica / recreations out there but there are likewise some VERY good ones.

neither you and I should make any sweeping comments about craftsmanship.

 

Pete, calm down. I did not pass any judgement on the craftsmanship of vehicles, replicas or otherwise.

Read the thread. I was responding to the sweeping statement of the previous post which claimed replica vehicles were somehow in a higher echelon of craft versus watches, art etc.

Shooting from the hip like this will certainly throw what is otherwise an interesting debate.

 

Why dont you take your own advice and read the thread yourself. My comment was in regards to the experience a watch or a painting gives compared to a car. As i said, i understand perfectly well that a watch or some pieces of art requires a lot of knowledge and very skilled craftsmen.

 

OK, I just did. It didn't change my mind. I could show you a long line of art lovers who'd very seriously and honestly claim more enjoyment with a Rothko (real) than any number of your car trips. Each is entitled to their opinion on this. You can't claim a higher ground.

But the profound human reasons for wanting to enjoy the real thing, in any sphere, are very interesting indeed. Take the Parthenon marbles. Very very good replicas are in Athens, the originals in London. The arguments about this have lasted many decades at the highest diplomatic levels and rightly so.

 

Actually the pictures I posted of the 250 TR is of Jim Rose's own car. he's in Charlotte for 6 months working out of Hulmann & Moody... super nice man. more pics below.

I think the workmanship is better than the factory. What most people forget -especially with race cars of the era, is that none of them is original. they have all been repaired, modified etc.. by various owners / teams and even the factory. so anything from the 50's to when Ferrari stopped racing sports cars in 73 has been modified from the original. Classiche is just a $$$ making arm to "certify" your Ferrari is authentic. I would argue there are no "original from the factory" cars out there before the 308's ...
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Yes, that is a car with excelent craftsmanship! However, I still need to know why someone with this obvious high level of talent does not do something that is of his own design? I think everyone knows that cars like these without Enzo Ferraris tradmark would garner little notice or praise. That little horse on the side means a lot to a lot of people and the builders know this. Now if this fellow brands his cars Roses and changes the styling just enough, what do you think would happen?