Replicas what do you think?

From Factory 5, they are the best ones as far as looks and construction.

 

If you have the means, I highly recommend you pick one up.

 

Pete

 

I sent for the materials/pamphlets from Factory 5 about 6 months ago and my client at Bridgestone saids they do well and aim towards quality replicas. I'll decide this for myself. I'm working on putting an engine in the 85 MR2, guess I should take pictures for ya. I'm waiting for the motor should be in by Mid Novemeber she'll be done before Christmas with my current schedule of work and play i hope. Yes I'm somewhat mechanically inclined I was the tot who hung around my handyman stepfather observing and handing off the tools. Pretty fun as I recall.

Here is one I mean two that I'm interested in.

 

Man that Daytona Coupe is gorgeous, just awesome!!!

Pete

 

I like it so much!

 

authentic badged replicas are tacky poseur-mobiles and should be taken away from their owners and used (destroyed) for stunts in hollywood action movies.

also, i think it would be apt if all replicas came with a set of fake louis vuitton luggage in the trunk, and a fake rolex in the glovebox.

 

i agree, its a fake, a lie, and they are the ultimate poseur mobiles....now if you built a car with a fast engine and nice chassis and dont put a false label on it, then that is great!!!!

 

I'm not a big fan of replicas. For all of the effort involved in building one, why not just build your own design? Make something unique, rather than copy someone else's design.

Just think of the possiblities.

Dom

 

its not the real thing, almost only counts in horseshoes!!!!

 

Nothing wrong with a recreation. How many D type jaguars retain their origional pieces anyway. Same goes for 250swb. A recreation of a 250gto by favre or allgerti is great.

The quetion is where you draw the line. An ERA cobra Kirkham etc are the same as the real thing which was a bit of a kitcar anyway. What is more authentic an Autocraft mk4 with a smogged 302 or an era with a real or aluminum 427.

Certainly some Cobras with more or less bodies and solid rea axles etc aren't the real thing in any way. But there is a line here and it is not necessarily when the vehicle was built but rather how and what parts were used to make it.

100 years from now 250 swb's and p51 mustangs will all probably be in mueseums. If the technology exists to recreate them then that will be great. I for one would be very happy to race my $200 000 recreation and not woryy about chewing up the real thing which is unaffordable.

If you look at wooden boats there are any number of recreations that are authentic and acceptable, probably the origoinal ones have had their planks changed anyway.

Then look at bugattis, some total recreations are made in argentina, they are acceptable to the bugatti crowd because they are the real thing. Yes there is a value difference, that is explained by provenance.

So the real thing to me is acceptable degree of authenticity. A fiero with ferrari badges and bodykit clearly aint it, but a Norwood p4 seems to make the grade.

If one of our members can make a p4 with origional engine suspension etc then it is a p4. I saw an article years ago about a pontoon testarossa "rebuilt" from a burnt chassis. To my eyes all that they started with was a claim to provenance. Yes provenance affects value greatly, but it should not detirmine whether a car is acceptable or not, especialy as many cars with provenance have very few origional pieces.

Lastly recreations allow the car hobby to grow, as more people can experience the cars. Some people hate the idea because they come from the cars as investment perspective and want their rare beasts to reach stratospheric prices, me I want to see these beautiful macihnes whatever the provenance being enjoyed.

Fake rolex's and Louis vutton are only sad because people are prepared to pay such a premium for a stupid label in the first place. A Rolex or any fine swiss watch is essentialy a recreation of a classic windup watch, they are beautiful and mechanical and flawed just like a good cobra replica.

 

and hand gernades

 

Hi Dom, seriously, to build a design of my own, I don't have fabricators and machinists, not even the ability to draw up the plans, but boy if someone would show me how and I had the time...hey I just came up with a bunch of excuses...

I just like replicas. period. For the poor man it is a way for him to smile and be closer to the real one, I don't think he would say "it's the real thing".

I fist fell in love with them at about 13. I've also lived in about 13 different places from birth to my teens because of my fathers position in the Air Force.

Maybe teaming up with someone and building it together would be a possibility? HEY, what are you doing with your Saturday nights?

Ciao,

Brigitte

 

It all depends on the quality and authenticity. I have always dreamed of one day "sitting" in - not owning - sitting in a Gulf GT-40. Cars like this are so utterly expensive ($millions), I may never get the chance to own one. I am not one to own a replica, but after looking at a few of these GT40 relica companies, the quality and authenticity is truly outstanding. So outstanding in fact that after one ride in a CAV, I ordered one on the spot. Its an expensive recreation (cost more than my 355), but, this will be as close as possible to owning the real Le Mans winner. I'm proud to have it and look forward to driving more than any other car I own, including the Ferrari.

I do have to agree with some of you that a bad replica ruins it for everyone. It looks bad, runs bad, and you can see its cheap. I think everyone on this board will agree that owning a cheap replica translates to stepping on a lot of passionate Fcar, L-car, etc. toes.

2 cents from someone who's proud to have both the real thing and a replica.

 

I am busy building a P4 replica based on a design by Lee Noble of Noble cars in the UK. It will not have a Ferrari engine but is built from the ground up. ie. it is not a Fiero with a body kit. It is very authentic looking and I have no shame in telling everyone that it is a replica. I could never afford a real P4 !!!
This is no cheap undertaking and will be loads of fun when it is eventually finished.

It is interesting that when I look at my 355 ( genuine one ) it is built in a very similar way with a tubular chassis and very similar suspension design.

J

 

I wish I knew how to do it also. For that matter, I don't know if I have the know-how to build a replica, but I would guess that if you have enough knowledge/sweat/love to build a replica, that it wouldn't take too much more effort to build your own design.

That sounds like a great idea. One day in the future, I would really love to do something like this. Even though I don't have a clue about how to do it.

Dom

 

Your opinion, but you are forgetting one important thing. Unless you make an engine (from scratch) and all the other running gear, etc. then you are destroying a genuine Ferrari to make a no provenence car, just a replica.

I applaud people who make replicas of their favourite car WITHOUT destroying a genuine important car ... that is what replicas are all about.

Making a Cobra, GT40, any Ferrari replica (using say an Alfa Romeo v6 engine and Porsche gearbox ...) is great and means that they can pretend to be driving say a P4 ... and enthusiasts of genuine old so called boring Ferraris (like the 250 GTE, 330 America) can continue their hobby too.

It is perfectly possible for the replica market to work along side the genuine market ... instead of competing for resources and one direction fncking it for the other.

Favre did not think he was recreating history ... just making money mate. He is not an enthusiast IMO.

Pete

 

http://www.collinsclan.co.uk/Pages/Cars/P4/P4.html

You should also talk to FerrariChatter: P4 Replica ...

Pete
ps: This car unfortunately was seriously damaged by fire ... not sure if it has been rebuilt now or not, but the owner is a poster on FerrariChat.

 

I agree with your point. As I said its all a matter of where you draw the line. Destroying a good car for money is an unfortunate consequence of greed at times. But there were at one time some very ropey cars around in parts, and I do believe that some people in Italy are casting 250 blocks not to mention alfa monza parts etc.

I was thinking of cars like proteus c type "replicas" using clapped out MK2 Jags as donors. To me it seems an issue of drawing the line somwhere on acceptability, and even acceptable practice. This is clearly something to debate. Possibly certain older cars can be protected if their "offspring" were not accepted due to donor destruction, whereas other using avandoned parts would be.

I just have a huge problem with people who will not accept a new build old car because it lacks so called provenance. I think we need to accept that a part of the "old" car hobby is going to be made up of "replicas" or "recreations" and find a way of accepting and dealing with it. The current provenance snobbery just limits the supply of cars even if they have few orugional parts, and limits the ability to experience. In the U.S. it seems the shelby clubs have no problem with good cobra replicas mixing with "real" ones. Many a vintage racer uses a modded mustang to shelby specs.

I agree we should not be chopping up bveautiful "real" 250's or whatever to make recreations. But what about a rusted 70's 400 as adonor for a P4 or ferrari special. All I am trying to say is lets not be exclusionary and lets have a code that allows for the acceptance into the old car hobby of some new built in the old style cars. Clearly not all cars would qualify and there would need to be some standard of authenticity by type. Seems vintage racers do it all the time, all they need to legitimise is a chassis plate. That way "real" old cars might be even better preserved. I hear that there is an owner of an acual "provenance" d type who races his recreation so as not to destroy the real one, and no one can tell the difference. Maybee this way patinated older cars could retain their real history ie patina without being "restored" to as "new" .

Shouldnt "legitimacy" for racing or hobby purposes be the nature of the actual vehicle itself. Yes there would have to be standards and cutoff points, but at least the range of all time classics ie cobras gt40s etc could then be enjoyed by a wider contingent of people in "classic" rallies etc. It seems that right now if you had say an era gt40 youre stuck with your real "recreation" in the kit car crowd along with vw specials. Cant the classic car hobby find a way of accepting certain "new build" classic cars, let the marketplace put a premium on age and provenance and let the hobby enjoy the cars.

 

so do guys that like kits, or who think kits are better than the real thing also like blow up dolls because they're "better thank the real thing?"

Just curious

 

I have both. The cobra is a Factory Five car I built. On a cool Saturday evening on the street its awesome. The Ferrari is real, and a better car for an all day drive.

 

I would like to think those days have passed and now we are all involved for the enthusiasim, not the money .

The C or D type Jaguar is a good example ... that I had forgotten, because thousands of XJ6 saloons were built with close enough motor, etc. to be used in a replica. I feel cutting up a Mk2 Jag is a bit much ... but then they did build lots of them.

You see the problem with Ferrari parts being used in replicas, is Ferrari never built big runs of cars ... where Jaguar did. Using 330 Americas to make a 250GTO replica (or should I say 330GTO) is just sad, as Ferrari only built 50!. Now whether you like them or not, it is unfair to deny somebody else to own their dream car. Out of the huge population in the world, I am pretty sure we can find 50 people that lust after the 330 America as their favourite Ferrari.

I can see your point, and I have no problem with replicas in general. Infact the club race car I raced was thought to be a replica by many ... but it wasn't just happened to look a little like say a 60's Lola, etc. I also used to race against Lotus 7 replicas and that was great.

The only problem I have is the depleting of collectible cars stock to make yet another (insert yawn) 250GTO or TR replica. Over the years Ferrari made many great cars ... but if we are not careful in the future we will only have 250GTO's to look at! Yep the GTO was a great car, but come on it was great because we have other cars and Ferraris to compare it against. If Ferrari only built 250GTO's ... they would NOT be lusted after like they are today. Infact Ferrari would have gone out of business.

Thus Mustangs ... well you would not destroy a rare model Mustang, would you. But Ford made MILLIONS of Mustangs, so you are pretty safe at finding one to modify without upsetting anybody. But if you cut up a genuine Shelby Mustang ... well that is just sad.

You see every Ferrari (especially in the 60's) is as rare or rarer than a Shelby Mustang and should be treated as such.

People restore genuine Shelby Mustangs from a completely fncked rust bucket, because it is a genuine Shelby ... so why not restore that complete fncked 250GTE back to its original glory?

And again that is your opinion that a 70's 400 is a piece of ****. Again I am pretty sure I can find a couple of thousand people that would love to have the chance to restore and own a 400. They are denied this chance because somebody RICHER than them only sees the car as an engine.

I have a family, would love to own a v12 Ferrari. I like the 400 because it has independent rear suspension and a very exciting engine ... would make a perfect tourer for me and my family ... but I'll never be able to afford one (maybe) because everytime a restoration project comes up, some RICH person with P4 replica dreams in his eye buys it and destroys it .

Again it all comes down to opinions.

Why not make a P4 replica with a tuned Alfa Romeo 3ltr v6. They sound fncken fantastic, can make 400 hp (if you know what you are doing) and would have similar power characteristics to the original P4 v12, ie. rev to 8000rpm, etc.

In the end what needs to be replicated is the driving experience ... not the fact that the engine has Ferrari on the valve covers. That does not matter a damn, except when posing with the car. When screaming around the race track or driving down some country road, the driving experience is what it is all about. Thus right weight, balance, braking, power characteristics and looks are what replicas should be about ... not oh it has a Ferrari engine!

Yes where do we draw the line? ... currently like most things it is a supply and demand thing, and unfortunately many with the cash to play with classic cars are not full on enthusiasts but just want to own the latest cool car. Not all are like this ... but currently the classic car scene, say Goodwood is the place to hang where to be in with the in crowd is a big pull. Thus hangers on are being dragged in ...

Good stuff, and in New Zealand with their classic racing they very much try to include replicas where appropriate. Infact they even have a club racing series for Lotus 7's, etc. and it is great and fast racing ... I know I won it one year . We also have Cobra replicas racing against real Ferrari's and Porsches ... we just love racing.

I must say I think a racing series for replicas to recapture the 60's Ferrari versus Ford battles would be fantastic, ie. P4 replicas versus GT40 replicas, etc. No genuine cars allowed

Pete

 

What I would like to see as a permanent solution to this problem is a FIA type of committee that is there to ensure the 'protected' cars are restored properly.

Like exactly what happens in NSW, Australia if you own a historic building. For example if you want to build a fence, you have to build a fence that fits the period of the build and have to submit an application to the historic building trust.

Now this would be a huge bureaucracy thingy ... but it would recognise that we have created in our past things of transport that are now of historic value.

The danger with this type of system is that cars would stop being used ... but the focus should be on correct and period maintenance, not arguing over the brand of the spark plugs, etc.

Every year the committee gets together to make changes to the list of eligible cars as this would change over time ... ie. in 50 years say the current Ferrari 360CS might become an historically significant car they consider worth saving. Car clubs through out the world would be able to contact this committe and state their case for their cars to be included in this exclusive group ... and thus increase the value and recognition of their cars. Like say the Triumph TR7 clubs.

What this process would do is alienate the classic car market from the 'it is only a car' type and the I can make some money from that car type. Only genuine enthusiasts would be happy to go through the extra processes ... and enjoy the fact that they own a historically interesting piece.

Just my thoughts ...
Pete
ps: and heck maybe this committee would not consider the Ferrari 400 historic enough and worth saving

 

Dear doc Just Curious,

Well, "your the doctor"; why don't you tell us which is better? Try them.

The "real thing" vs. "the replica".....hmmmm....I'd have to say the Replica is less expensive all around.

As for buying the replica or blow up doll at least they are both new and I'm the first to try it out. gee did I just say that?

Decisions, decisions, decisions...may your choice not deflate prematurely.