Replicas vs The Real Thing

VClassics wrote: He's a Ferrari collector, and I think there were only four P4s built (and fewer survive), so if he wants one that's his only way to have one.

That is the perfect situation to own a replica

I'd totally drive one of Chuck Beck's 550 Spyders. Of course I'd have to put a VW badge on the nose.

If it makes you happy--- go for it. Just don't be that guy who has a Fiero-based Ferrari kit, and tries to impress people by calling it a Ferrari.

In reply to Gary:Yes there was an eccentric attorney here that had one for a while, not a replica either. He had several cars you're not likely to see out. And almost no one ever saw any of his his either. An invite to his place to see his rides was quite an occasion!

For those that "Collect" the real thing, the value proposition is being able to make the point that they are a superior class of human who can have stuff that the plebs cant have. They may go on about the amazing vehicle attributes, but that is just a smokescreen.

The problem with the replicas is that they do not convey the same message, in fact kind of the opposite. So what you end up with is a semi-uncomfortable home build car that does not impress anyone and draws disdain from those who own the "real" cars.

Of course, if you are like me and just like to build E36 M3 cause its fun, then by all means, the kits are a smoking deal and the way to go.

Depends what it's a replica of, I think.

I love the fact that my Locost Super 7 is a "fake." And because it's a fake (or an "imposter" according to a local Caterham buff), I don't have a problem driving the CAN off of it.

It was cheaper to get into than the real thing, and less resale for sure, but pfft. Fun fun fun to drive.

Advantage though - on the street, most people don't even know what it is, much less that's it a fake.

There are some very very good replicas out there. They are no longer hideous heavy fiberglass bodies on cut VW pans. I have driven a Beck Spider and its a nice car. I have also driven both 356 and the replica, you would hard pressed to tell the difference. I also know someone who has raced a actual Cobra, one of the top line replicas and a Shelby continuation car, he said the replica was the nicest of the three.

Tom

For me it depends on whether or not the replica attempts to replicate the driving experience of the real deal, or just the look. VW based 356? Sure thing. VW based MG TD? Hell no, the engine isn't even on the right end. Pinto based MG TD? I can see the appeal.

For me, the replica needs to transcend the original by going to the Hot Rod level. Most of the Cobra Kits have achieved this. Certainly the Factory Five 32 replica.

The Beck stuff is good, maybe better than the original, so that gives it merit on its own right. But it aint inexpensive either.

Thunder Ranch also makes a variety of vintage Porsche replica kits, including a really nice 904 model. They're located in El Cajon, CA.

I have a nice 1965 Lotus Super Seven Cosworth 1500. That was the spiffiest version available in the day. It would sell today for quite a bit less than a new Caterham kit.

SkinnyG wrote:

Depends what it's a replica of, I think.

I love the fact that my Locost Super 7 is a "fake." And because it's a fake (or an "imposter" according to a local Caterham buff), I don't have a problem driving the CAN off of it.

It was cheaper to get into than the real thing, and less resale for sure, but pfft. Fun fun fun to drive.

Advantage though - on the street, most people don't even know what it is, much less that's it a fake.

That just isn't true any more. In nearly every case, a genuine car is worth more, but in many cases the replica works better.

ronholm wrote: Real ones are always better than fake, but fake ones don't bother me a bit.

Replicas don't bother me provided:

1. Don't claim it's "real"

2. Performance is equal to or better than original.

3. Has powertrain at least similar to original.

One thing to bear in mind is that many rallies don't allow continuation cars.

I like to modify cars. If it's a roached-out vintage car that's been to heck and back, and isn't likely to see a proper restoration, modification is fair game. If it's a reasonably nice example of something special, I feel the need to retain its original features out of respect. Also, with a nice example of a collectible car, most mods decrease rather than increase the value, so that's a real counter-incentive.

In the continuation world, it's often the other way. After driving it for three years, I sold my 3.4 Chevy-powered "stalker" Lotus Sevenesque for $14K. Fellows who installed the supercharged 3.8 find that puts their car to around $20K, and the ones who go full boat for a LSX-powered model find their values increasing to $25k and up. Put a V-8 in an E-type or Healey and see what happens to the value. It won't be pretty.

So a continuation car fills the void. I can mod my hearts content, without feeling sacreligious

The way I feel about it, is that I would want it for the looks. I will never be able to own a real 356, so a replica seems like the next best thing.

To me it depends upon the replica and what it is faking. A fiberglass MGT with a pinto suspension and drive train or even worse a VW motor in the back is awful, but a 356 or the Beck 550's are nice and I'd rather drive that than worry about an original. I have seen the Bailey cars, lola T70, Ferrari P4, Porsche 917 and they are awesome. I have also seen an exact replica of a Ferrari GTO done in aluminum and copied exactly how the factory did it with a Ferrari V12, (not from a GTO however) totally fabulous. I'll never afford a GT 40 but a GT 40 replica would be totally acceptable, same with Lancia Stratos!

^ So what you're saying is that as long as it's a copy that costs as much to build as the original, it's fair game. I'd agree.

mr2peak wrote: ^ So what you're saying is that as long as it's a copy that costs as much to build as the original, it's fair game. I'd agree.

Being someone who actually likes to drive his rides, I disagree. I'm not into capturing a moment in time. That's fine for those like Leno who can afford the repair costs. I'd rather have a replica that rides, drives, & is more reliable. Then I can go play without fear some idiot will run a STOP sign & total it.

Rupert wrote:

mr2peak wrote: ^ So what you're saying is that as long as it's a copy that costs as much to build as the original, it's fair game. I'd agree.

Being someone who actually likes to drive his rides, I disagree. I'm not into capturing a moment in time. That's fine for those like Leno who can afford the repair costs. I'd rather have a replica that rides, drives, & is more reliable. Then I can go play without fear some idiot will run a STOP sign & total it.

I'm with Rupert here. These guys that buy or restore these expensive classic cars and drive them, because that's the thing to do, can afford to fix them if the worst happens.

If I bought the cheapest, running and driving 356 out there, I would have to pay Porsche money for Porsche parts.

If I bought a replica 356 and something broke, it's running a VW drivetrain and suspension. Those parts are inexpensive.

If someone hit my car, it's a fiberglass body, I could get it repaired and it wouldn't cost me my first born.

I've always been impressed buy these (it is a Datsun 240Z underneath)

In reply to wspohn:That is beautiful! But I also think, unless it were wrecked or rotted out, that donor car was too.

In reply to wspohn:

Always been curious about those but never actually seen one. Drop a Chev 350 into them and you're faster than the original?

Saw some fantastic re-creations at the Mitty. If there's one thing that the crazy run-up in classic car prices has done is open up a thriving market for replica vehicles.

nderwater wrote: Saw some fantastic re-creations at the Mitty. If there's one thing that the crazy run-up in classic car prices has done is open up a thriving market for replica vehicles.

There was a P4 there built & sold by Bolt, a South African company. It looked rather well executed to my non-expert eye. It was high dollar but a pittance compared to the real thing. Seems that Mr. Bolt said they also make GT40 replicas.

That XJ 13 replica has always been a fave of mine, but I would go with a 904 or 550 replica, would need to have a flat six behind me in either one. There is a gal on a porsche board with one. She posted a pic of Chip Foose drooling all over it, which was pretty cool, but not as cool as the epic road trip thread, with pics.

Opinions on replicas are like shiny happy people, everyone has one.

Many people only consider 'continuation' vehicles to be replicas, everything else is a 'Tribute' ‘Homage' or just an ugly kit car. While it was commented on up thread that continuation cars aren’t acceptable in many rallies, they are widely accepted in Europe for historic racing. There is a whole industry based around building things like ‘C’ and ‘D’ type Jaguars from the original blueprints with original tools and equipment that then get FIA papers for racing. I think that happened as A) the cars became so valuable that some ubber wealthy owners didn’t’ want to risk their investment so built 100% replicas of cars they already had, warts and all. And B) It’s almost impossible to regulate, especially if you want to get sneaky and build a 100% replica, Vin and all of a car you own.

I’m far more liberal. I am willing to call things like the high quality 356, 550’s, Superformance GT40 etc. replicas. These are cars that are dimensionally correct and trouble has been taken to make it look as close as possible to the original car. Under the skin it’s got different materials and construction, but the basic engine type, size etc. is the same. (VW split port or type I, II or Small block Ford).

Then you get further away with things like Factory Five, various Lola T70’s, 917’s, Westfield XI etc. These are cars that look close(ish) to the original but with very different detail, execution etc. and in some cases different engines (Flat 6 Porsche in a 917, LSx in a T70, 302/Mod motor in a Cobra that had a 427, A series instead of Coventry Climax etc.). I don’t think of those as replicas, more like ‘Tribute’ cars.

Then you get to things like ‘7’ type kits. I don’t even call these replicas, to me they are ‘Clubman’ style kits, even Caterham. Not 1 in 1,000 look remotely like a Lotus 7 other than the cigar shape and open cockpit. The truth is there were dozens or even hundreds of different production, semi production, kit, home built, specials etc. in the 50’s and 60’s that embraced this general ethos. The ‘7’ endured longer so gave its name to a whole industry of small light cars.

Finally there are things that look sort of like a well-known car but bear little if no accurate resemblance or even have the same general layout as the original.

I think they all have their place. I have no issue with original badging on continuation cars or even some high quality replicas like a Beck 908 or Superformance GT40. But if I had a T70 with an LsX or a 917 with a Flat 6 I wouldn’t put Lola or Porsche badges on it. With the 917 I would have a subtle ‘Powered by Porsche’ with a Porsche Logo, but it wouldn’t have a Porsche badge on the nose or say 917 anywhere on it.

Two quick asides. I remember at the Brighton Speed Trials in the early 90’s (93 I think, but I’m not 100%) there was a very nice Ferrari P4 ‘replica’ Look alike. Externally it was very close and period correct, but when you got up to it and looked in the engine bay there was an F1 Cosworth DFR in the back. It was gorgeous and sounded insane. This was the days when the speed trials were ½ a mile before they got reduced to ¼ of a mile after a fatality either that year or the next. The guy crossed the line north of 200mph and lifted off. Then 1960’s aerodynamics and 1990’s F1 power overcame a slightly rough road surface and the drivers skill. He lost the car, luckily it didn’t flip, but it hit a lot of stuff before coming to stop. The driver jumped out A OK, but the car was totaled. I have some pics of it in a box somewhere back in the UK.

Another is a car I’d love to own, and think there would be a market for. This comes under the ‘sort of looks like’ but differ construction, look and layout end of the scale. In the 80’s, again in the UK, there was a company called GT buggies, no surprise they used to make beach buggies, although they were started in the 60’s making fiberglass panels for F1 and sports car teams. They made a 718K Spyder ‘look alike’ based off a shortened Beetle floor pan. No it wasn’t super accurate, but yes it was cheap, easy to build and a real fun way to have a ‘tribute’ or ‘style of’ car. I’m sure there would be a market for something like this over here now assuming you could make a body for $2-4K, plus screen, light covers, seat molds, screen, lights etc. for under $5K all in. Those prices don’t seem out of touch with what similar size, construction and basis buggies go for. You could then build a fun weekend car for $10-15K, less than half what a more accurate 550 or 718 costs to build. And let’s face it, if you’re not racing it and aren’t trying to fool anyone you’ll have just as much fun as with a Beck 550 I would think.

That brings up another point. Is a Berrien Nostalgia a replica or an original Manx?