GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,894
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on August 6th, 2019 in the Automotive News category.
I do struggle with these things now.
It's new, but it's old. It's built using the old bits and you can't tell that it's new, but it's new. This one is built with the same old bits as one specific old car, so it's effectively a clone, but it's still a new clone and while it looks and feels (probably) just like the old one it's not that old one and didn't win the races that the old one won.
You'll be driving around in historic races in a 2019 car with no actual history...
I do struggle with these things now.
It's new, but it's old. It's built using the old bits and you can't tell that it's new, but it's new. This one is built with the same old bits as one specific old car, so it's effectively a clone, but it's still a new clone and while it looks and feels (probably) just like the old one it's not that old one and didn't win the races that the old one won. You'll be driving around in historic races in a 2019 car with no actual history...
That said it's also 1% the price of the old old one.
The claim that they're 100% replicas isn't very accurate, though. I've worked with Canepa Motorsport in Scott's Valley, CA, many times before and I remember when their 1966 Mk.I GT40 P/1067 project first started (still ongoing) and how we had to source parts for the restoration. I recall our research finding many differences in the parts used for replicas as they were newly sourced and modified to resemble original parts, simply because of how hard it is to get original parts for these cars. This is common and Canepa does this, too, only if necessary. But we got some floor plates and other chassis components from Superformance and there were vast differences in their "replica" parts vs. the original parts we sourced from the actual people who made them for the cars back in the day - a pair of brothers in the U.K. who still had some NOS parts.
Are these rebuilds very faithful to the originals? Yes - but I'm oldschool and value the integrity of giving something a "100% replica" title, whether Shelby America thinks they're worthy enough to earn a place in their registry or not. At an event like Concours, an expert would definitely be able to tell the two apart.
Probably getting on for two, in terms of GT40s in general. I think the general idea with this one is not that it's a GT40 replica (although it is), but that it's a specific replica of a specific model, with the official replica livery as granted by Gulf Oils (along with the usual continuation chassis plates and name via Safir - which is its own hilarious tale).Haven't they been making these for over a decade now?
Probably getting on for two, in terms of GT40s in general.
I've also been wondering about continuation cars and rebuilds recently. Take the XJ13. That crashed in 1971 and then was rebuilt by someone other than Jaguar a couple of years later. Despite the original chassis and engine, Jaguar classes it as a reproduction and not one that matches the original car. Meanwhile someone else built an exact replica of the original XJ13 with an original engine, in association with Jaguar Heritage (the people building continuation E-Types and D-Types and XKSS models), in 2016. That car is more faithful to the original than the rebuilt original, but it's new. The rebuilt original is not faithful to the original but it uses the original car. So which of them is the XJ13 - or are neither of them?
What makes a car that car? It's a world of madness
This is the big thing. Is *any* historic race going to be like, 'yeah sure, your car is a replica but invokes enough of the car that you're trying to replicate, come on in!' with this?
This is the big thing. Is *any* historic race going to be like, 'yeah sure, your car is a replica but invokes enough of the car that you're trying to replicate, come on in!' with this?
Thank you for interesting and informative post!
Take, for example, the iconic No. 46, 1971 Datsun 240Z that won the SCCA Runoffs C-Production championship in 1970 and 1971, driven by John Morton. We've all seen this beauty before, rockin' those amazing red and blue BRE stripes, courtesy of Pete Brock. What a lot of people don't know is that the car was totaled just two weeks after winning the 1971 ARRC at Road Atlanta. So how come you saw that car last year alongside Morton at the Rolex Motorsport Reunion in Monterey? Because that's not the championship winning car - that's a replica, a project ignited by Randy Jaffe with the support of Morton, BRE and Nissan. What you're actually looking at is in fact a 1972 street car that was converted into a 1971 BRE replica. Even the engine is a BRE motor, sold by Mark Belrose and was built by Bill Martin, originally intended for VARA Events in C Production racing. With some help from Marc McKinley, the owner of PDK Fabrication, the small team of people making this car were able to rebuild the lost 240Z. They even got some original paint borrowed from the inventory of the No. 3 BRE, courtesy of Gerry Mason. The car was given the blessings of Morton, BRE and all those who originally participated in the race car's success, even the original manufacturer of the car [Nissan] adopted the car as THE 240Z BRE racer.
So yes, when a car is built to capture the spirit of the original and is built to the same specifications, it can be regarded as a replacement. Jaffe's project is now enjoyed by many throughout the world because of their efforts of bringing this iconic racecar back to life.
@TheCrazySwede stop by if you're in the area for Car Week. There's a mkIV here too.
-Max
Yes, definitely! Hope to see you there.I'll definitely try! Will you be attending the reunion?
Also, congratulations!