Vintage section Fake/Replica/Recreation/Rebody discussion

Jim,

Cavallino in a non-participatory magazine. As reader, your only influence on its content if you are disgusted by it, is to stop buying it or write a letter to the editor, which we all know is not content unless published in the letters to the editor section, and will have no effect on the actual content of the magazine.

Here, we ARE the content. Not a publisher's idea of what's right and wrong but a group of enthusiasts deciding what we will or will not post.

And while this is published via the internet, it is not printed matter etched in stone. It is a living, breathing medium, constantly changing and evolving. To compare it to Cavallino Magazine is not even an apples and oranges comparison, it's the first wheel vs. an Enzo comparison.

This place lives and dies on its content, provided by us. We should be able to discuss what belongs here, ask moderators and Rob to move content around to appropriate locations, and have a polite discourse among ourselves when we do so.

As to the replica issue. I also have no problem with them being sold. I just don't think they belong in a section that by default lends credence to them. As long as a sponsor is crystal clear about the provenance, or lack of same about a vehicle he is selling, then it's all good. If what you say is true about the ad in Cavallino, the issue is with the advertiser, not the magazine unless they are complicit in the deception.

And yes, the thread title is a little aggressive, but there's passion in that first post.

Yours sounds angry, aggressive towards Julio, which I think undermines your underlying argument. Could you not have made the same point without the personal vitriol?

D

 

Thank you very much Dave. Exactly what I thought as well. There should be no place for personal wars on fchat. Everybody can contact each other directly if he wishes to attack.

Marcel Massini

 

Rob's point to Julio.

 

This seems about the same issue as with 0038M as mentioned before: orginal body, then a (period) rebody and years later a replica body installed to return to the original look). I think the Canam-body is historically far more justifiable than the replica P4-body, same as the Vignale-body on 0038M is in relation to the replica Touring Superleggera-body, but surely both cars are very much eligable to be a subject in the Vintage-section??

 

While I am no particular fan of deconstructing one Ferrari to create a so-called more desirable model(nor gutting one to have a "spare" engine), I can assure you that your rants/screams at an event make someone look foolish-and it isn't the owner. Also doubtful they are walking away "with their tales between their legs". Walking away, certainly-as would I from the rants of a stranger.

 

Dim

Julio's vitriol in addition to his objection and vitriol to this sections sponsor clearly stated that this section was becoming a disgrace by having so much discussion about replica's.

My point remains. The discussion in this section that out's replicas that appear at major events such as the FOS, Revival, and The Ferrari Historic Challenge is a very positive thing and not a "disgrace". You're right that we are the content and I still feel that this is very important content for this section.

The 350 Can Am I mentioned is that LAST 350 Can Am in existence in original form. Some feel that a better use for a four head light 250 GT is a Replica GTO and some feel that the best use for the last original 350 Can Am in existence is a replica P4 but I think it's fair to say that in the scheme of things removing an original body from the last remaining 350 Can AM replacing it with a replica body of something it no longer is, is a bit more serious. IMO it would be similar to removing an original 250 series 2 GTO body from an original car and fitting it with a replica 250 series 1 GTO body because you like the way that one looks better. The long thread on this particular car in this section debates this issue I still feel that it is not a "disgrace" that that thread is in the Vintage section nor is the thread that outed the replica "250 Testa Rossa" with the hardtop that was at the FOS or the many other's that I mentioned.

Redine is the sponsor of this section. They have been Crystal clear about what the 250 GTO replica they are offering is. Sponsorship enables Ferrari Chat to exist and I'm glad they're sponsoring Ferrari Chat.

My point remains. I have no problem with Ferrari Chat having sponsors who sell replica's so long as they are clearly offered as such.

I have no problem with FML allowing replica's to be offered for sale as FML makes sure that such cars are so identified.

I have no Problem with Cavallino offering replica's for sale or allowing them to appear on the lawn of their Concours as long as they are clearly identified as as replica's but as threads on Ferrari Chat have pointed out in the case of Roland's "F40 LM" that didn't happen. In the case of the 275 GTB NART I personally don't think that happend either. I also personally don't think that most looking at the double page advertisement in the latest Cavallino would come away thinking that the car being offered is the last original 350 Can AM in existence in the process of being fitting with a replica P4 body, that it's chassis is no longer P4, that it's engine is no longer P4 and that Ferrari has clearly stated that it can not be "Classiched" as a P4.

Julio's vitriol directed at this sections sponsor speaks for itself. I still personally feel that if he feels that strongly about the people who remove original bodies and replace them with replica bodies he may want to direct some of that towards other's who are openly doing exactly that.

Do you really think that threads like the one's I've mentioned shouldn't be in the Vintage Section?

 

Ditto.

 

Exactly and FAR from a "DISGRACE".

 

I agree, a different situation. You can put stickers on a car and it's a real Ferrari with some tacky garnish on it.

Absolutely spot on.

I've followed your 275 GTB thread, and it should be clear to anyone that preserving and restoring these cars is a labor of love and scholarship, time commitment and of course a not so small amount of cash. That's the price of an authentic vintage Ferrari (or, usually on a smaller scale, Jaguar, Merc, Porsche, etc.)

Replicas/fakes make a mockery of the perseverance involved in keeping significant, classic Ferraris such as a 250 GTE on the road.

There's only one way to get the knowledge, the highs and the scars and that is to buy, restore and live with and appreciate the authentic article.

It's a cultural sickness, the notion that we can fake or borrow our way into a hard-to-come-by experience. The restoration threads on FChat are some of the best content on this site, and anything that encourages someone to bring one of these cars back to life is hugely worthwhile. Discussion of fakes in the same section implies that there's a cheap shortcut.

 

"Discussion of fakes in the same section implies that there's a cheap shortcut."

Discussing Fakes that appear at major Concours, The FOS and Revival, The Ferrari Historic Challenge and advertisements in Ferrari Chat, FML and Cavallino certainly do not imply that there's a cheap shortcut nor is it a "DISGRACE".

 

spot on. I would see as a goal for this thread, the notion that fakes are discussed here ONLY for the narrow issue of figuring out which GTE/330GT was butchered so that the registry keepers like Kerry C, Darren J and Tom W can adjust their registries accordingly.

I see too many threads on fakes where the prevailing tone is "wow - great work/I'm practically getting the real GTO experience/you can't distinguish it from the real thing" etc.. . . all sentiments that increase the demand for these abominations and therefore increase the rate of destruction of real Ferraris. If we can create the tone where the demand is decreased - if we stop the destruction of even a handful of real Ferraris because someone reading FerrariChat Vintage Forum saw the light - THEN I feel like we have accomplished something positive.

For the record, the Redline Restoration thread on the GTO reproduction did not originally have the word "Reproduction" in the thread title. I complained about that omission in post #3 of that thread and they immediately and appropriately remedied that omission.

 

Bryan

"ONLY"?

How about discussing Fakes that appear at major Concours, The FOS and Revival, The Ferrari Historic Challenge and advertisements in Ferrari Chat, FML and Cavallino?

I still feel that this is the proper section to discuss those cars and point out that they are fakes.

Best

 

+1

They appeared (and will appear soon) at Spa Classic, Le Mans Classic, Classic Endurance Racing, Tour Auto etc
And I don't care about these 'monozygotic twins' but as said before MOST owners don't tell the press, people or organisation. Why? Exclusion? Real deal is worth 4M and you dont want an 150K race Austin Healey crash into your car.......
Save the original? IMHO I have NO PROBLEM with that!
But I have said this already before

 

So we are now in a Tit-for-tat?

c'mon fellas, we're better than that, aren't we?

Or, maybe not.

I think we can try to keep this discussion academic, even if the emotional issue of what a fake is, what a recreation is, what a replica is, particularly since folks who post here may have a dog in that fight.

To make this suddenly personal, to attack back and forth on a more base level, demeans us all, and detracts from the actual argument.

If I stand here on Fchat and yell, "You are an idiot for believing what you do." it makes any other effort I might make moot. I certainly take more seriously those who can elevate their argument to an intellectual level instead of a personal one.

So who cares, right? As long as I can scream louder, or threaten more forcefully to make my position the "right" one, nothing else matters?

We need to return this conversation to one were the points matter, not the personality of the person making that point.

D

 

Jim, I deleted the balance of your post to shorten the space this took.

1. I do believe anyone who loves Ferraris would agree that fakes need to be outed. That replicas constructed from bitsas are also in question and that a "250GTO" that was not originally a 250GTO should not be called a 250GTO, plain and simple.

2. I think this is an EXCELLENT section for outing those cars, if they are of the vintage era.

3. I do not think this is a section where we should in any way promote the sale of cars, Ferrari or otherwise, that are not of this era.

4. I don't think the sponsor of this sub forum should advertise non-Ferrari work, or sales within this forum. I do not want to read about a corvette restoration here in the FERRARI vintage sub forum.

5. I do think there are plenty of forums where those same cars could be listed here.

Your angst over Julio's posts is obvious, as is his desire to keep this forum focused on vintage cars, not fakes, etc. We're all entitled to our opinion about what does or doesn't belong here, and majority rule doesn't apply as anything more than a suggestion for the moderators and Rob.

I still believe our points can be made respectfully, and would hope that we all behave in a manner that encourages conversation, and discourages confrontation.

Dave

 

Dave

Julio's initial post was a vitriolic rant. It was neither civil nor respectful. I still don't agree with you that his "passion" excuses it nor do I think his bold statement that The Vintage Scetion has become a "DISGRACE" is true.

 

Perhaps in part because I agree with some of his underlying sentiment, I saw it slightly differently. I will agree his choice of terms was poor, and his suggestion that Rob allows it because he needs the money so off base as to be laughable.

I would agree that his tone was harsh, and perhaps given a moment or two to reconsider, he might have dialed the rhetoric back a bit.

He apologized for his tone in his second post when you called him on it.

Again, simply because others choose their words poorly or attack others here, does not mean we should mimic that behavior.

D

 

True and that's a very important point. There rarely is full disclosure. That's why I feel discussing these particular cars in Vintage is important.

The particular Fake 250 GTO for sale here was touted as so real looking that it fooled organizers and was raced at big events by the owner of the real car to avoid damaging the real GTO. Still not sure that that's true especially in light of the pointing out in this section that the real one has 3 vents and the fake one 2.

 

I disagree with your overall bias to certain individuals. Your posts and "$.02" look like a retaliation stemming from a previous disagreement.

DM,Marcel,Julio and any that cant sleep at night! To the best of your knowledge If you could please explain what consists of an authentic Vintage Ferrari? and besides the obvious (value) why do you set a replica so far apart. School me if you will.

 

Simply for me, a replica starts out as something other than how it ends up, be it a Ferrari 250GTO fakey-do made from a 240Z or from a 250GT. Doesn't matter what lineage the underpinnings have, if it wasn't that car out of the gate, it isn't that car.

A car repaired, even if several body panels are replaced is still what it purports to be.

Now for the gray area. Several cars have been rebodied and adapted over the years. Is the breadvan a 250GTO? I think so, others might disagree that it doesn't belong with the rest of the group.

Is Jim G's P3/4 an original, rebody, replica, recreation, or something in-between? There's been some discussion about that here and elsewhere. Ferrari accepts the car as a Ferrari, Cavallino does not, or at some point did not. I don't know if that was ever resolved, there were many heated discussions about it here, and there's a long standing thread on the car and the associated topics. More than one member got banned here from comments in that thread, as I recall.

Certainly other cars have been wrecked and rebuilt and are still considered Ferraris.

A car is only original once. That's a different subject altogether. Many of the vintage era cars don't sport the original interiors or paint colors they left the factory with. They're not original, but they're not recreations either, they are still what they left the factor as.

Why are replicas set so far apart? To me they have less intrinsic value. What do I learn about the actual cars from a replica? They can't be sold as an original, and I think they often do a disservice to the original cars. A 250GTO built on a 240Z frame isn't going to enlighten anyone about the 250GTO, neither is a kit-car Dino.

D

 

FWIW, if we're voting, I'll vote for disclosure, exposure and - as Yale points out, is not always done - naming names. I have no problem with that happening here, in vintage. The destruction of cars for profit, and the misuse of scarce parts in so doing, saddens me. And I've actually spent money and time in an effort to make my three "Vintage" cars correct.

If anyone has a proper window switch for a 67 GTC ....

 

Isn't it generaly known that s/n 2819 isn't a GTO but a 250GT SWB?

 

I think we are all more in agreement than we can realize because of the heat of the argument.

 

Possibly we should be looking at this matter an entirely different way.
The protective legal documentation of most countries rules against fakes. The diametrical view being that what is not going to be crushed (by whoever or whatever) should be allowed. It would be a brave man who would drive his Datsun 240Z based GTO replica around Maranello. If it got to the point where he actually moved more than 50 meters, the authorities would impound the car and the owner may well face charges for copyright.

The point I am trying to make is that there are rules out there that do govern what is real and what is considered a fake. Maybe if our judgement was more aligned to the prevailing considerations of reality, we would be better off. The suggestions of another forum in a different section, preserves the integrity of the Vintage section. The guy with the 240Z probably is not interested in the Vintage section anyway, so give him an area that he can post in.

You can not please all the people all the time.

 

So within all of this wonderful thread, what do we have

My take on originality (zealotry) goes like this, where is the limit for some people: is it
- Original as it left the factory, down to what (the same tyres ?, original paint ?, ala few cars)
- Authentic (Not rebodied/ re- engined, some small details altered - most cars)
- Accurate (rebodied/ re-engined in the original style - ala 330LM #0808)
- Rebuilds (mostly original parts but highly modified and rebuilt in original style - ala 166 #0024 or 375 Plus #0384)
- Replica's (250 GTE made into 250 GTO's etc.)
- Fakes ( Datsun 240Z made into a Ferrari 250 GTO)

How many of us would only accept a certain level of originality, I personally believe that any of the cars are okay, excepting the Datsun FAKE's, which are not Ferraris in any way. I personally wouldnt own a Replica 250 GTO of any kind, my attitude being if you cant afford the original buy something else like a Porsche or whatever you can afford. But I am a realist and believe that while I wouldnt do it, who am I to judge. Further I wouldnt buy a 250 GTE/ 330GT, they are not my cup of tea.

Equally who can say that a 330GT repped into a GTO cannot be still seen as a Vintage Ferrari, its underpinnings certainly are 1960's Ferrari and as such I would support the idea that a post/ thread would be titled 330GT/ 250 GTO or some such. The idea that this car should be lumped in a replica thread with the Datsun 240Z based replica is shortsighted. And giving this argument validity is where would the mod's draw the line, at anything less than 100 % original ?, 80% original?, 5% original ?.

And if taking a tight line, then we would miss out on threads regarding cars like #0031/001 or the ex Chinetti 250P or the breadvan and on and on, and that would be a pity, because they are really cool and interesting cars.

Marcel, you are one of the most knowledgable Ferrari experts and Jim, it is great to have someone posting here that owns some of these amazing cars, and to others that own cars like this or have the experience and expertise, you are what make FerrariChat as much as the posts on these cars. It is reading your comments and understanding what you are telling us regarding their history that makes logging on each day so much more interesting.