News

David Piper restores the Talacrest P4

Discussion in 'Vintage (thru 365 GTC4)' started by Streetrod, Sep 6, 2012.

  1. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Agree, but there is a "real" GT40 that has been there and done this and this would happen with a real P4 or GTO too.
    But they do. 90% of replica 250GTO's or TR's have cut up an old original Ferrari to make it (the other 10% are built on Datsuns). They don't have to, but they do.

    P4 replicas are made using engines out of 365GT/4 2+2's ... leaving the rest of the car to be destroyed.

    I do not support what PurSang do in Argentina. Eventually someone will market one as a real car ... and then the fog will roll in. Ferrari will also sue you if you make a Ferrari ... as they have and should IMO.
    Pete
     
  2. To remove this ad click here.

  3. tomgt

    tomgt F1 Veteran

    Feb 22, 2004
    6,215
    Netherlands
    Full Name:
    Tom Wiggers
    Yes! A well known Ford GT40 burned to ashes..; T-boned Dino 206S racer; Pontoon testarossa, 250LM, 275 GTB/C, Boano and many many more.
    They are racecars and owners can do what they want :)
     
  4. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #278 boxerman, Feb 13, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
    I think you are being inconsistent and betraying a prejudice. You object to recreations because they destroy a lesser period build. Yet a Pur Sang which destroys nothing you object to as possibly being passed off as an original old build. I highly doubt any enthusiast with a grain of knowledge would be fooled by a pur sang.

    Yes we have recently had cases where so called old builds were bits'as, an expensive Bentley comes to mind.

    In fact most pre war bugs and bentlys are made out of various pieces including new blocks bodies and various suspension pieces, and these are far more likely to fool a buyer. Plus in the absence of new builds how many bently,s have been turned in speed 6's

    Then we have Dutton built bugs which are fully accepted by the various bug organizations. We have Aston db4 zags to sanction 2 well regarded in the market and notionally built by Aston which used old db4's that were cut up, but they were "built" and sanctioned by Aston. How about the new chevron B16 of Lola t70 built by their original license holders, they destroy nothing and are well represented as new builds.

    My point is new builds have a place, they are a fact of life, they are accepted by many not least the FIA and by having standards we can also protect period lesser cars from being cut.

    Here are some good reasons
    1 As an enthusiast/hobbyist the primary interest is in experiencing the thing as designed either through driving or seeing it being driven in anger, an additional interest is in protecting and keeping for posterity rare period cars. Recreations expand the opportunity for enjoyment, and allow for the preservation of period builds

    2 skills to build and maintain recreations are no different to period builds, therefore the pool of skilled artisans and parts is expanded.

    3 With acceptance comes standards. These are standards of build and spec, but palso the possibility to ban cars built by destroying another, thereby protecting lesser old builds.
    Standards also mean recreations are registered and known entities and are therefore far less likely if not impossible to be passed of as period
    Builds.

    4 many of these cars are racers, if you go to vintage races how many multi million dollar cars are being driven in full blooded anger, it's usually the 50's Alfas that are being driven hard. You don't destroy or risk a historic artifact with a recreation so the driving and spectating experience is even more authentic.

    5 values of period builds will if anything be enhanced. Look at the value of period cobras, all those replicas have only stoked the desire and buyers know the history and location of pretty much every period build.

    6in time even Ferrari will decide that there is money to be made in construction of sanction2 cars. After all if you bring them some twisted metal and a chassis plate we know they will build you a new period 275 gtb4, because that has already happened.

    In short new builds preserve old builds and enhance and widen the experience enhancing the whole hobby. Yes they are not worth as much, but that is no sin. Done with standards they do not destroy old builds they preserve them, and they preserve the whole experience.

    What we have now is cars arsing from the ashes to claim an identity, or two cars with one identity or George washing tons axe, and old cars being ground up. It's going on, all that is happening now is the same as the father who still chooses to believe that his hot 25 yer old daughter is a virgin.
     
  5. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    I'm never inconsistent about replicas. Btw if these pur sangs are 100% perfect builds how could even an expert tell the difference? Even if they screw a plate on to them saying who built it, I can almost guarantee that plate will disappear over time when the car needs to be restored or rebuilt, or one is crashed and parts are distributed over the world.

    I'm into Alfas and the number of GTVs that are converted into GTAs is growing. This is done by a great firm in England and they are very clear about what the car is .... but still things get confused and I know of one car now that has become an old REAL GTA apparently, even though this English firm knows the car. You see somebody has fiddled with the chassis number after they did the conversion. Imagine if you owned the real car and had to defend it in the courts ... I'd be mightily pissed!

    So yes 100% replicas are only a good thing when we can trust everybody, but we can't! And the FIA can't solve this.
    Pete
     
  6. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    We know the pur sangs are not 100% apparently the dutton cars are though. It also seems pretty much accepted that every one of the t35 bugs is no longer original and made out of bits of variable provenance. Value comes from the degree of originality an provenance that is prove able, acceptance does not require this. In bug circles the standard for acceptance seems to be what was built and how, as opposed to where and when.

    Your GTA story is illustrative, how many older race cars are still the original car 50%? And of those that are arguably the original car how much of what was actually built 50 years or more ago is still present50%? You see it's all a provenance game for value determined by acceptance to events as a baseline and the arcane documentation for values beyond that, and half the cars if not more are not even "real"

    You do agree that 100% replicas is good if we can trust. Yes I agree we cannot trust, and as you pointed out we cannot even trust what passes for period now. It seems to me then that properly sanctioned recreations will take pressure of the need to fake a period piece and recreations can be registered and tracked. As it is we have a system now where recreations are even more easily passed of a period, and lesser period cars are cut up, the worst of all worlds.
     
  7. To remove this ad click here.

  8. judge4re

    judge4re F1 World Champ

    Apr 26, 2003
    13,234
    Never home
    Full Name:
    Dr. Dumb Ass
    Value is entirely subjective on all marques, it doesn't matter what badge is on the front or what the provenance is, built yesterday or decades ago, it is all about what one is willing to pay.
     
  9. VIZSLA

    VIZSLA Four Time F1 World Champ
    Owner

    Jan 11, 2008
    41,198
    Sarasota
    Full Name:
    David
    That's price not necessarily value.
    ;)
     
  10. judge4re

    judge4re F1 World Champ

    Apr 26, 2003
    13,234
    Never home
    Full Name:
    Dr. Dumb Ass
    Is there a difference here? They are just cars after all.
     
  11. VIZSLA

    VIZSLA Four Time F1 World Champ
    Owner

    Jan 11, 2008
    41,198
    Sarasota
    Full Name:
    David
    Ban the heretic!

    ;)
     
  12. To remove this ad click here.

  13. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    I would have thought value came from traceable history ...
    I don't care if 99% of the car is not real anymore. It is a machine after all that requires repairs and maintenance. As long as we have 100% continuous history then I'm looking at the real thing.

    I have no answers for this problem though. All I do know is that replicas have a habit of becoming real ... you just need to add time and human beings.
    Pete
     
  14. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    So if its 99% new but has 100% continuous history that's ok? So basically that's dealer speak for driving $value because the essence of the thing is the same as new build. I have no issue with wanting to protect period values, preventing new builds by declaring them unacceptable does not do this, all it does is force some new builds to take on period identities, exactly what you want to prevent. It also limits the pool of traceable cars, and as. More of them get locked into long term collections there is less business to do
     
  15. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    #287 boxerman, Feb 13, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
    Correct what one is willing to pay. But value is also the enjoyment to be derived from the thing. Some people are under the illusion that by branding new build period pieces they are protecting the $ value of period builds. They also seek to dismiss the enjoyment aspect of new build period pieces by casting then in bad light and denying acceptance to events clubs etc.

    A true hobbyist may naturally place more $value on a period build but may derive more enjoyment value from a less precious new build period piece.

    Unlike art cars are very much more of a physical and adrenal experience, this is largely not determined by when something was built or where, it comes rather from how it was built and to what design. Unlike an art piece a car is by in large not a one off, but rather a series produced mechanical item reproduceable in exact detail, lacking only provenance and patina. most old cars are restored lacking patina anyway.

    A driver hobbyist who really is into experiencing the thing through the art of driving, would therefore not discriminate by negating new builds, they would just place a significantly higher$value on a true period build. In fact as we can see from this thread even the naysayers are ok with new builds providing they have an old build chassis plate and "continuous history" So the banking of new builds is not about them being inauthentic from a construction or experience perspective and everything to do with perceived $ values of period builds.

    The whole dissing of new builds and lack of standards is exactly what leads us to a period Ferrari can am car being turned into a half real p3. So where is history being protected by this system.

    If recreations were allowed and accepted then there might be a number of well understood p3's exact in every detail being used and raced. The can am car would have greater value as an original period piece.

    It's pretty similar in concept to how the hobby learned from Europe that an unrestored yet well kept car was worth far more than a shiney restoration. Yet we also know that a restored car may be more useable and use up able as its already lost its originalityand can be redone again and again as long as the chassis plate survives.

    Same concept with period builds and new builds. Period builds are worth much more, and not grinding them up makes them woth even more still. New builds can be ground up and enjoyed, the driving and spectating experience is the same maybe better as the cars can really be driven in anger as designed and experienced in period.

    What prevents this is acceptance of new builds a small cottage industry of dealers and so called "collectors" who think value is greater with no new builds. What is missing from their perspective is an overriding enjoyment of the thing as opposed to perceived $value. It's ironic because these old racers were in fact preserved in the 60's and 70's by people who valed and enjoyed them purely for the experience as financially they were of little value.

    The Bugatti folk got over this hang up long ago, they welcome bugs for the experience of what they are. Ferrari folks are still into the elitist thing, even though this lack of standards and desire for maranello built parts means lesser value older cars get cut up and destroyed to make half acceptable recreations.

    I say welcome and include new build period pieces constructed to original specs and standards. It will enhance and expand the enjoyment of the hobby for drivers and spectators, and allow the old warhorses well deserved rest and preservation. In fact under my suggestion you could keepn your original got or p4 for special demonstration events and drive the crapmoutmof your recreation to your hearts content. Or you could race the original if you wanted to.We have all heard the story of the GTO and Dtype owners who race tool room copies under the guise of their original so as not to risk damaging the original. Letsnjustbacceptmthentool room copies and bring timeout in the open.
    Values would be highest for unrestored or largely original pieces. Then restored cars with many replacement parts, then what might be new builds with " continuous history" but provenance(these three categories are already accepted) last lets accept new build tool room copies, in fact many are already masquerading as period pieces. My suggestion just expands the hobby and experience, everyone wins and the few old builds left get preserved instead of being ground up or restored into something of little historical significance like the can an car.
     
  16. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Yes but it is not a new build. Yes I know it technically is but at the same time it isn't.

    A car is a mechanical object and to operate correctly as a car it has to be maintained. I'm not into not maintaining cars versus originality as some on this site. If the car needs a new wiring loom, or fuel hose, fan belt, etc. it should get one. If it needs a new driveshaft, wheel bearing or even hub it should get one.

    If a car cannot be operated as intended safely then it is not a car, but has become an object and if you cannot drive it, then I'm not interested.

    Thus I have no problem with purchasing a say 1934 Alfa Romeo 8c2300 that has continuous ownership history from day one, and has been maintained properly since then. I have no problem if it required a new body 20 years into it's life because it was crashed. Hopefully the new body was as an exact replacement and the car continued on being a wonderfully interesting car to own. Yes it's better that the car did not crash and need a new body, but the alternative is to give up on the car if it gets damaged or heaven forbid we never use the car properly in the first place.

    The history of a car just affects it's value, and I think some people pay way too much for a car that simply has not been maintained and is now a fire waiting for a place to happen because it has too many original parts on it that should have been replaced with proper maintenance. Sure it is original but effectively the machine has been abused by previous owners and now needs a full restoration at your expense to make it safely operational again. All Jim's cars are perfect examples. His Duesy I believe was a Pebble Beach winner, but unable to be driven ... what a waste. Jim has had the car properly rebuilt and now it works again :).

    Again I have no answer for control of replicas or copies. If I was rich and able to own a 250LM, I would have no problems racing it. The cost of repairing a crash is well under 10 times the value of the car ... after all it is just metal and rubber. It's value comes from its history. Sure my crash will affect it's value, but most 250LM's have been crashed and rebuilt many times over. Now I'm not saying I would race it hard looking to crash it, I'm just trying to say bending a historic car is not the end of that car. It shouldn't happen but when it does they will be repaired and back driving once finished.
    Pete
     
  17. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    Thing is, it's not just a rebody, first it's the body, then the drivetrain then a lot of the chassis. There are a number of cars from the 50's on which have pretty much original bits, yes consumables down to bearings have been replaced but the car is still original, unrestored does not have to mean unsafe running condition. The market values these unrestored cars highest.
    Also we are talking sports cars, due shies are a whole other kettle of fish and hierarchy.

    How many times do we read about a race car that has been retubbed and has new glass bodywork. If you're tracking the hubs and all the rest have been replaced too. So what remains, from period, some instrument faces, the steering wheel pedals?

    The gt40 that was sold recently, the one that had the roof cut off was used as a film car and then burned to the ground. Now it reappears with roof all great bodywork.

    We know a gt40 monocock had no rust protection, so a burned car stored in a shed. What was sold here was a new build, pretty much the same thing as a SPF car that happened to have had historic provenance with a period data plate.

    I have no issue with that, I think the buyer bought a new car with "traceable" provenance that's all. I have no issue with another new build exactly the same, just missing the traceable provenance, the two are the same drive and the same experience, just very different values because one has a data plate and the other not, and that is ok to.

    As they are both essentially the same why accept one to track events and forbid the other. The only reason I can see is to push speculative values of "historic pieces" higher. That has nothing to do with really enjoying the experience of the thing.

    My point is whether a unrestored car, well maintained car, new build with provenance or new build tool room copy, each has its place each has its value in the hierarchy, but each is also essentially the same machine and experience, and each enhances the desire ability of the other.

    Maybe you could afford a 250 lm recreation, it would be no less a car or experience than a period build, the only difference is in perceived $ value. Maybe to you the idea of rolling around in some old bits also has a Walter Mitty value and this too is reflected in price, but price does not change enjoyment value in a dynamic driving environment except maybe as a detriment.

    Now if your talking different dimensions, different motors and different materials then those are component cars and a different category.

    But if its the real thing in its essence construction location and period should only affect value not acceptability. In fact the burned wrecks which arise from the ashes prove the point, al they have is a chassis data plate to separate them from new builds, so they are woth more $ but certainly are not better machines or better or even different driving experiences. In the end is it not the driving experience supposedly what it's all about, if you're an enthusiast as opposed to an investor. Should we arrange the priorities of our hobby to suit an investor class, I guess taken to its conclusion that means we are ok with the can am car being turned into a p3.

    All I am saying is tool room recreations are the same thing, they already exist masquerading as period pieces. If we are really enthusiasts into the thing for what it is, why be exclusionary, lets enjoy the hobby for the driving value and let the $ market determine $ value by historic provenance as it wishes. But don't let the $ market determine who can play and who can't, that should be determined by what the thing is how its made, not when it was supposedly built.
     
  18. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    The more times a car is rebuilt the less its historic value. If they are just metal and rubber and all the metal and rubber has been replaced what do you have. Yes it's worth more than a new build, but realistically what is it besides marketing.

    There is a reason Jim found the original motor and body pieces for his p3 that gives it far more significance historic and $ value than replacement pieces.

    A chassis data plate may well add $$$ value to a new build "restoration" it may even attach some historic link, but its not the period piece.so in the end if this is acceptable why exclude the same car from events just because it has no period data plate, at least if you're an enthusiast I see no reason for exclusion.
     
  19. tongascrew

    tongascrew F1 Rookie

    Jan 3, 2006
    2,989
    tewksbury
    Full Name:
    george burgess
    Your posts are most interesting.You might be interested in post #55 in the ".."FCA Platinum winners...." thread.You both might want to get in on any discussions that come about resulting from this post. tongascrew
     
  20. Timmmmmmmmmmy

    Timmmmmmmmmmy Formula 3

    Apr 5, 2010
    2,134
    NZ
    Full Name:
    Timothy Russell
    An interesting conundrum has grown in scope within the classic car community with regards to the provenance of classic automobiles. Within the collector car comunity there are two main types of vehicle, and simply they are;

    - Anything that is raced
    - Anything that is not raced

    The likelyhood of any vehicle being raced increases the chances of it being modified, possibly fatally by many times. A pure road car has two potentially destructful possible outcomes for its existence, it can be crashed while being driven, like any vehicle, in a road accident OR it can be parted out due to careless ownership. A race car can have either of these but also many more paths to destruction. The paths are;

    - It can lose its core parts during race preparation
    - It can lose its core parts to keep it competitive
    - It can be crashed while racing (and either destoryed or sufficiently replaced with other parts)
    - It can be parted out
    - It can also be crashed under normal conditions (such as driving to and fro a race)
    - It can be dismantled to provide parts to another car

    The likelyhood of any of these paths happening is directly proportionate to the amount of times the car is raced.

    Providing context is the argument of what makes a race car or any car for that matter original, authentic, genuine or merely representative of the original. While clearly the optimal condition of a car you purchase will be exactly as raced in its most important race perhaps the best example of this would be a Le Mans winning Ferrari or an ultra low mileage anything. This is only realistic if the car was promptly put in a museum and then not raced again. This is extremely unlikely and ultimately a fruitless endeavour since the end use of the car will be directly proportionate to its level of originality.

    If you have the gold ex. Garrison Ferrari Daytona Spider that sold at Goodings in 2006 that was ultra low milaege (less than 1000) or something equally original, what could you actually do with it that doesnt destroy the originality of it other than look at it. Certainly you cannot race it, maybe some demonstration laps could be acceptable, although even this will add mileage and could lead to damage. The counterpoint to this is oft complaint of some of our american brethren that this is all a bit namby pamby and they should be raced (like they do in Texas - lol) and fair enough, these cars are generally locked up in museums for protection and good care and very rarely driven, if at all. To be glib they are only original once.

    Once it has had some parts replaced, bodywork alterations etc., although no chassis changes, it is authentic, since it is in the same spec. and is directly appropriate for what it is. This covers the vast majority of cars, expecially a large proportion of the even number racing ferrari's. Still very valuable and carying the vast % of material that was raced by the famous drivers. You can still sit in the seat and think Fangio, Surtess et al sat here and know your 10 million was well spent. Anything that has been restored is also likely to fit into this category. These cars can be raced with some caution and small expendable parts can be replaced.

    Then there is the genuine which have had larger parts replaced, including engines, entire bodies, bits of the chassis and more but are still the embodiment of the original car. This is where the glorious spectre of whether it is the embodiment of the original car comes in. A safe, salient argument is the value is whatever someone is willing to pay for it but really this is where a smart buyer can research its condition and claim to history. These cars can be raced with little worry since the bodywork or engine isnt original and can and will be driven hard. This category includes a large proportion of the racing Ferraris, especially those that continued to be SCCA raced well after there prime and where bastardized to fit V8 engines etc.


    And then you have the other categories of replication from new chassis through to good only knows what. A large proportion of these cars never saw the Ferrari gates much less contain original material. These cars fill the racing grids in most countries and are either admitted replicas or sneakily claimed as somehow real. The benefit of cars like this though is that without them would we be able to go and see historic racing. After all they are somewhat expendable and the value of them is as a tool that can be played with, crashed and repaired with little loss of value.

    Currently buyers are valuing historical importance (race winning or famous owner) and then originality above another facet a car may have with truly original cars selling for double or even triple a non original car compared to two to four times value for historical importance.

    Where does this leave historic racing ?. I for one would hate to see races between pure replica's with no concern for originality. The other issue is the oft told complaint that drivers of replica's will be less concerned with their track behaviour which may be correct. My belief is that historic races should be -

    - Very tightly regulated by drivers stewards and anyone that is actively trying to win championships, suspended or thrown out. If you want to win races at all costs race expendable modern cars
    - Very accurate replicas should be allowed to race alongside original so long as they are all modified to the same specifications.
    - Modifications allowed should only involve safety upgrades rather than allowing modern materials et al.

    A few instructional vehicles for the display of value

    - Alfa 8C2300 sold by Bonhams for US$4.1 mil. (Largely modified, new bodywork, original chassis)
    - Aston DBR1 being offered by Talacrest for about US$25 mil. (Aparently original, won Le Mans etc., clear tracable ownership.)
    - Auto Union D - Type sold by Hall & Hall 2012 (The story of the Karrasik Auto Unions is fascinating and elemental to the subject of authenticity)
    - Ferrari 166 sold by RM for US$1.2 mil. (Much messed about with and value compared to an original 166MM at US$5 million or more)
    - Ferrari 375MM Not sold at RM at US$3.5 mil. (Questions, questions)
    - Ferrari 410S sold at RM at US$8 mil. (Absolutely original)
    - Ferrari 250TR sold privately approx. US$24 mil. (Not entirely original, but did win Le Mans)
    - Ford GT40/ Gulf M1 sold by RM at $11 mil. (Great history, been messed about with)
    - Mercedes S - Type sold by Bonhams 2012 for US$4.7 million against a $2.3 mil.+ estimate
    (The car hadnt been modified in any way in over 80 years)
    - Mercedes 540K sold by Goodings at $11.7 mil. (Very orignial, but had been restored, would probably sold for much more unrestored)

    And I believe that if you read up about these cars you will come to an idea of how a potential purchaser might value them compared to another example.

    OH and the 350/330P4 can not be called a replica.......... Pleasssseeeeee
     
  21. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    I can accept these very sensible regulations (for want of a better word).

    Good post.
    Pete
    ps: Modern motorracing does not have the appropriate driving standards for historic racing. Actually I believe the standards are too low and way too much contact is allowed. This is why modern racing drivers should be used with caution to race historic racing cars IMO.
     
  22. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    I pretty much agree with everything you have to say.

    However many in the community would not accept "very accurate replicas being allowed to race" and that I think is the crux of the whole debate.

    If you had two identical newly built cars but one had chassis plate provenance it could participate according to current thinking, but the identical twin without the historic chassis plate would not be allowed to even breathe the same air.

    We are not talking $ value here, we are talking acceptability and exclusion within the hobby. No doubt the more original metal the higher the $ value, and I can even see some events being limited to original metal assuming enough varied participants, but this blanket exclusion of non chassis plate accurate replicas is hypocritical and motivated more than anything by a sense of $$$ and not b the sport of and experience of the hobby. It' s also limiting and does not really enhance the hobby or values.

    I for one would love to see a p3/4 racing a gt40 in pure anger, not going to happen unless we allow accurate copies. Each organizer is of course free to choose the field of cars they think best serves the goals of the event. My objection is to the cultural approbation on accurate replicas as somehow being "fake" and unacceptable.

    Of course these same people are ok with a sanction 2 db zags to, or even the new build lancia d50's and of course any car that can claim continuous history even if there is only 1% or less of period pieces still extant.

    The 350/330p4 is not a replica chassis wise, but this craziness is causing an exiting period pice to be butchered into a half replica rebids. And while this car may retain more original period pieces than many others a complete period artifact is being irretrievably destroyed. I would much rather give the owner of this car a free pass to race show what're a new build p3/4 and preserve the 350 can am car. The utility and experience from an operational perspective would be the same and a priceless artifact would be preserved.

    On a similar level, regulated copies would protect 250 2+2's from being cut up.
     
  23. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    So we are all in agreement then
     
  24. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    Well I thought I was coming over as too negative/combative so I've compromised. Still rather ALL replicas were crushed on sight and parts sold off for a fixed cheap price to people restoring original cars.
    Pete
     
  25. Timmmmmmmmmmy

    Timmmmmmmmmmy Formula 3

    Apr 5, 2010
    2,134
    NZ
    Full Name:
    Timothy Russell
    I think the risk with allowing replica's to race needs to be carefully managed for the following line of thought.

    Step 1 - I will build a replica D - type Jaguar
    Step 2 - I want to win
    Step 3 - I will fit my Jaguar with a souped up 3.8 Litre Turbo, Supercharged, nitrous engine and fit carbon fibre panels etc.
    Step 4 - I will crash into whatever because of Step 2
    Step 5 - I will repair with new even faster, lighter bits because it wont hurt the value of my car, since it isnt original.

    All of this means the person with an original car has to think twice about racing since they cant possibly beat the current class front runners and dont want to risk severe damage from someone that simply isnt worried about crashing. Just look at the FIA spec E - Type Lightweights, both real and replicated, racing throughout Europe, some of which are modded to a rdidiculous degree with 4.2 Litre engines, kevlar etc. You simply wouldnt want to try to beat them.
     
  26. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    This happens in the overly serious historic racing right now, except the cars are real. Adrian Newey's lightweight E-type has been in the Red Bull's win tunnel ... those E-type Jag's are miles faster now than they ever were.

    There is more cheating in historic racing than legal, by a long way. Those original looking shocks you see ... if you tried to remove one and take it apart the owner would have a fit, as things are not what they seem.

    It is a very sad situation that so many people have forgotten the point of historic racing.
    Pete
     
  27. boxerman

    boxerman F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    May 27, 2004
    12,754
    CT
    Full Name:
    Sean
    I hear that some gt40's are running a flat plane crank.

    If you think about it a car with provenance has almost automatic acceptance. A new build has to be built to period specs to get its acceptance papers therefore it is far more controllable in terms of spec than a provenance car.
     
  28. PSk

    PSk F1 World Champ

    Nov 20, 2002
    17,673
    Tauranga, NZ
    Full Name:
    Pete
    #300 PSk, Feb 15, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2013
    Another potential replica Alfa Romeo GTA that has been sold as a real car ... but the original car has been under restoration for 30 years ... Gta ar 752501 - Alfa Romeo Bulletin Board & Forums

    Just disappointing! It appears it is up to owners of real cars to prove providence ... that is just wrong!
    Pete
     

Share This Page