© 2021 MOTORSPORT NETWORK. All rights reserved.
Sign up to receive latest updates for Ferrari News, Threads, and Classifieds
Discussion in 'Vintage (thru 365 GTC4)' started by rob lay, Sep 9, 2019.
A new version of this poll and topic.
To remove this ad click here.
for me it is all acceptable as long as those recreations and replicas are not stated they are original
Cutting a 250 GT 2+2 into pieces to make a clown GTO is acceptable?
YES ! ! !
I wanted to so this with 1 of my 2 GT/E with a testrossa body, but sold all before I started. no time to do.
it is a lot of craftsman work to do such project
look at all the old VW beetles customized to buggys, trikes and other kind of fun. so why not use a ferrari also for this? it is only a car even it is a ferrari.
I have seen in 1985, 86 or 87 a mercedes 123 break in los angeles as a smal pick-up. so where is the problem?
You can't compare a miserable and mass produced beetle or a Mercedes with a rare Ferrari. How many intact 250 GT 2+2 are left ? A cut Ferrari chassis with a GTO or 250 TR body has NO value. What is left is just a fantastic engine in a car with NO history.
It is an interesting question, but even more than the lack of history is that the car (say a GTO created from a GTE) won't really approximate the racing car in it's driving characteristics. It also seems to me that it would be less controversial with say a 250GT if it was converted to a 250GT cabriolet (or LWB Cal spyder) and whether the discussion of such a conversion would reflect the discussion of the Daytona NART spyders? Were the NART spyders factory jobs or later conversions? I thought they might have been later conversions. And if so, does that change the framing of the discussion for other models?
I think you are wrong. A recreation will always have value, and will be every bit as good as the original as long as it's done right. They are just cars, machines. They can be copied and remade. The factory is doing that now, with 'new' engines for the old ones that are missing or not the correct engine fr that car. I suppose that's OK because it's mother Ferrari. They are just Ferrari's, just like they are just Porsches, Mercedes, BMW's etc.
There are various ways to look at this issue, and certainly an owner of a car - any car - has the right to do with it as he wishes. But when I see a 250GTO and then I learn that it was not born that way but is the result of the owner modifying a "lesser" Ferrari model, I immediately lose all interest in that car, and I immediately lose all respect for that owner.
I answered that yes, provided the donor car has damage to the extent that, for example, it would require a virtually new body to be created. If a potential donor car could be returned to usable condition, then no.
y'all don't know how to take a poll, only 72.5% said. "100% original as it came from the factory."
ain't that the t'ruth!
I voted YES to the complete fake as an alternative to the recreation as it satisfies some people's need without sacrificing another Ferrari to do so. Unfortunately the majority of such fakes are poorly executed monstrosities.
Unfortunately, hundreds of original cars have already been destroyed to "create more look a like" GTOs. The other monsters are certainly made with tomato soup or bean cans.
I’m a total purist and have gone to great lengths to maintain my cars with that standard in mind. I admit, I frown upon mods. Having said that, everyone needs to enjoy their property however they choose.
I live in a Georgian house, which is "listed" as being of architectural or historic interest. That means that I cannot do what I like with my property - I have to ask permission to make additions or alterations to it, or to demolish it. Maybe there should be a similar system for cars?
not that I know and hopefully this never will happen as long as I liive
I no longer have a dog in this fight, since we are Ferrari-less for the first time since 1960, but I have written about this many times in the past since the debate comes up every several years or so. Here's what I wrote in February, 2012, when I cared a lot more about it (it was also before the Replicas sub-forum was created - and I thank Rob Lay for that):
"Real Ferrari enthusiasts would mourn the rampant destruction of real, original Ferraris to make fake Ferraris. I am actually relieved when I see a fake Ferrari built on a Datsun, Toyota, etc., because I know that no real Ferraris were butchered to make the Frankenstein.
I ask the following question in every one of these threads re: fakes. When will it become a tragedy for the folks who get revved up seeing a fake 250GTO built on what used to be a real Ferrari 250 GTE, 330GT, etc.?? When there are only 50 GTEs left? 25? That day is coming a lot sooner than you think. Ferrari only made 50 330 Americas; best guess is that only 18 remain, yet they are still being butchered to make fakes. Where is the outrage?
I also ask what percentage of the people who seem to love fakes built on real Ferraris because of the "practically real GTO experience" have actually ever driven a GTE or 330GT; I bet it's extremely low. GTEs and 330GTs are incredible cars and deliver the "actual" Ferrari experience; try it!
My fervent hope is that a place like the Vintage forum of FerrariChat would be a place where the preservation of real Ferraris is a guiding principle, and not a place where people get all excited about how "good" a fake is.
The ONLY reason a fake should show up on F-chat Vintage is to determine which real Ferrari was butchered, and whether it is being presented/advertised as the real deal.
Finally, for the love of God, do not bring up the inevitable "the owner has the right to do whatever he wants to do with a car." That should be obvious, and also not the point on a Vintage Ferrari forum ; it's what owner's of vintage Ferrari SHOULD do, as stewards of fantastic pieces of automotive history."
Ok, for the love of god, owners should keep their cars pure, as was intended by the factory.
That’s the spirit!
While I feel I'm *mostly* a purist, there are definitely non-original things I've seen done to Ferraris that I'm OK with...it all gets pretty subjective, and there's a gray area I think. Everyone loves an original 250TR, but if an owner is vintage racing the car I don't have any issue with safely mods like roll bars, harnesses etc. that weren't around in period. I'd rather see the car out there racing.
While it's not a vintage car, I installed tubi headers on my 355 as the factory headers are a known failure point (the car already had one OEM header replaced at 13K miles), but you couldn't pay me to put aftermarket shields or even worse, sticker shields, on a car that isn't supposed to have shields. Gilding the lily, IMHO.
Some cars get "grandfathered in" - think Breadvan - and it's a cool piece of history as it is, no one would ever "restore" it, though the factory sure didn't put it out there that way.
For sure it's a loss when someone chops up a 250 GT/E, etc., certainly don't condone that, but the car guy in me applauds things like what they guy did in this video:
Amazed we actually agree on something.
I guess it all comes down to how you define "replica". I read an interesting comment attached to a piece about a Pur Sang Bugatti replica. It is quite long, so I shall quote one or two extracts:
"In the automotive world, “replica” is now a pejorative term and the basis for discrimination if not outright exclusion from certain events"
"The dictionary defines replica as an exact copy. Nothing, and I mean nothing, that does not copy as closely as possible the entire original car should be called a replica, because to do so deprives true replicas of terminology that adequately describes what it is"
"Kit cars built on VW or other non-original chassis have been called replicas, a gross overstatement of what those vehicles are. They are not replicas because they are not exact copies"
This would exclude all the so-called replica Ferraris that are based on parts (usually the entire chassis, engine etc.) from another unconnected car, e.g. most Daytona Spyder "replicas" that are usually based on Jaguar V12s (as opposed to Spyder conversions made by chopping Daytonas, about which more anon), Fiero based 355s and 240Z based 250GTOs, to name a few.
In the main article:
“The reason I don’t agree with [letting Pur Sangs into the club] is that they are not Bugattis. They don’t have anything in them that comes from Molsheim"
If you apply the same logic to a replica Ferrari, i.e. that no part is a genuine Ferrari part, then the replica does not involve butchering another Ferrari, and if you also apply the definition of a replica as per the earlier quote, then such replicas are perhaps to be applauded, so long as they are not passed off as the genuine article. Generally they are quite expensive, but when the original is worth millions, or even tens of millions, that becomes less significant.
I mentioned Daytona Spyder conversions, i.e. 365GTB/4s converted to 365GTS/4 specification by the removal of the roof and other associated modifications. I have a personal perspective on this. In the dim and distant past, I owned a very nice 1957 Bentley Continental coupe (Park Ward version). Some years after I sold it, I noticed that it had come up for auction. I resisted the temptation (a strong one, I might add) to bid for it, but afterwards I inquired of the auctioneer as to who had bought it and was told that it had been acquired by a gentleman (I use the term loosely) form Sweden who intended to chop off its head and convert it to a drophead, worth several times the price of a coupe. On hearing the news, I felt a sense of almost physical pain. The story, however, has a happy ending. Fast forward another few years and I spotted a familiar car in an advertisement by one of the better known Rolls-Royce and Bentley dealers. Upon inquiring, I discovered that, yes, it was "my" car: not only had it been saved from execution, but it had been treated to a very comprehensive (and doubtless very expensive) restoration.
Returning to the article above, I could not help smiling when I read this:
"The front-engine Ferrari V-12 guys look down on the guys with mid-engine flat-12s, who look down on the guys with mid-engine V-8s, who look down on Lamborghini drivers"
I notice it makes no mention of V-6 owners!!
Or I-4 owners!
Technically correct the Flat 12 and V8 guys are probably sitting lower to the ground in their cars than the front engine V12 guys so we physically have to look down on them