What makes a replica?

Blitzkrieger

I can't stand "replicas" so of course I'm thinking of getting one myself.

Many years ago I saw a knob driving around Douglas in a Ferrari…….replica. It was a MR2 with a body kit and alloys. I couldn't imagine a bigger way to announce to the world : "I am an absolute tosser, without shame and the mental capacity of a spoon". I just could not get my head around any reason for buying such a thing. An MR2 is a nice car (right until it kills you) so why spoil it by trying to make it something it's not? It's not like anyone's going to be fooled. How insecure must that guy have been to be so desperate for people to think he has a Ferrari?

Then there's this tit I know who has a Audi A4 TDi tarted up to look like an RS4. On the one hand he's always saying : "It's really quite fast*, you know", but then why is he so ashamed of it that he turned it into an RS4 replica? Does he think someone listening to it's agricultural diesel clanking away is going to mistake it for the V8 of the RS4? Does he think the average person knows what an RS4 is?

I've always loved the Ford GT40. What a car - won Le Mans four times! Of course if you want an original you have to hope win the lotto a few times but I'm not so sure I would anyway. Ford have brought out their own tribute to the GT40 called the Ford GT. It's got the looks of the original car and the same Ferrari-beating performance but you get modern things in there too like ABS and air-con. And despite the engine sounding fantastic at full-roar, at normal speeds you can hear yourself think. It's also slightly bigger so anybody who isn't twelve can get in - the original was only 40 inches high. Trouble is you'd still have to win the lotto at least twice** to buy one.

It turns out there's a fortune of companies out there building GT40 replicas. You can get anything from a aluminium body to bolt onto a Pontiac shell to an almost complete nuts and bolts replica where most of the parts are actually interchangeable with an original GT40 and everything in between. They're still too expensive for me but I think that's the way I would go; drop a 428CJ into a MKIV replica chassis with modern brakes. I'm not too pushed about having the exact same suspension as the original as long as it's a good setup. The 428CJ would be close enough to the 427s that went in the MKIV for me too. I wouldn't go nuts with modernising the cabin, but if it came with electrics………..

In my mind there's a world of difference between my dream GT40 replica and that plonker in his "Ferrari". Am I just being a hypocrite? When is a replica cool?




*It's not.
**I know the cost of buying one has dropped to 150,000 Euro but think of running costs - it gets 4mpg.

Henry Ford III

I saw this at a car show a few years ago in Stanford Hall in Leicester - stunning

AVO Nationals 2002 GT40 2.JPG

Henry Ford III

I think it was perhaps an original one, but I'm not sure. It had a v8 that howled.

kdouglas

the mr2->ferrari conversion is a joke, but nothing wrong with a replica gt40

Biro

I guess there's two categories. Taking Car A and trying to make it into Car B by sticking things on, and the other is building from the ground up a replica. I suppose you need to pick a chassis and engine in order to do that, but then you buy panels from a replica company etc.
The second way, while just a copy, is built with the intention of recreating a piece of the original.
The MR2 thing (and 406 coupe too!) is just basically saying "what does my car look like... I'll try and make it look like something else with minimum effort".
What annoys me is the 92 or 93 MR2's going around with 355 kits on them, when the 355 didn't come out till 94.
The RS4 wanna-be's are just a disgrace. If you like the skirts and bumpers, then put them on. But if you put the badges on then you are a dweeb. Theres a few RS-4's (the - is intended as a minus) around Sligo, and one fool has the gall to also leave is 1.9 TDi badge still on, obviously because he thinks it's worthy to be next to an RS4. It's always the diesel brigade too who convert their audi's.
Won't even start on the M3's and Imprezas, and as for the lancers with a half assed evo wing...

Wishbone Ash

Blitzkrieger wrote:

Does he think the average person knows what an RS4 is?

Exactly. A person with little interest in cars will not recognise the difference between an RS4, M3 etc. and the ordinary models while those who do will spot the half wit in his replica straight away.

Biro wrote:

What annoys me is the 92 or 93 MR2's going around with 355 kits on them, when the 355 didn't come out till 94.

Here's a pic of a 1992 Ferrari F355, ... oops, I mean MR2. :rolleyes:

littlejukka

i saw a white 1996 323f with a ferrari sticker on the back not more than an hour ago. goon.

Mitch Connor

Replica built from the ground up....fine.

An MR2 with a ferrari shell.....muppets. Sure, you might look kinda cool to the 16yo chavette on the mainstreet, but there's a prison sentence right there. How embarassing would it be when you tell friends or new work colleagues that its an MR2 in disguise?

Futureman

The very notion if converting a car to a replica is phony, fake, and shallow IMO. It's a classic case of all show and no go.

MAYPOP

Tauren wrote:

Replica built from the ground up....fine.

An MR2 with a ferrari shell.....muppets. Sure, you might look kinda cool to the 16yo chavette on the mainstreet, but there's a prison sentence right there. How embarassing would it be when you tell friends or new work colleagues that its an MR2 in disguise?

I agree, I would regard most of the GT40 replicas as a tribute to the original, whereas the MR2/355 thing is just awful.