Whitch is better, Real or Replica ? - Page 2

John Schneider · 11-27-03, 02:36 PM

I have a simple answer for this one. The one I own is the best.
For you the one YOU own is the best.
As for Jim, well I'm sorry but the Lola is the best.
The problem with this is what if you own 2? Well I quess there are no simple answers to anything in this world.
John

neils · 11-27-03, 02:58 PM

Jim,

I couldn't agree with you more....

A classic car isn't just metal and rubber, to be a true legend it has to have emotion as well.... and the Dan Gurney reference is what its all about for me...

However, I also agree with most other comments... we build these cars BECAUSE of the emotional attachment to the timeless style of the GT40, and like children, we all love our own more than anyone else..... and thats absolutely the way it should be...

Me... well if I was offered an original, I wouldn't say no..... but I have yet to see a '40 replica that I haven't looked at and thought....mmmhhhh... thats rather nice.... lets be honest... who hasn't taken a few reflective moments every now and then just to look at their car and smiled with pleasure.... I know I have [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Great thread Hershal.... good to see how emotive this darned fine car is!

Regards

Neil

neils · 11-27-03, 03:08 PM

Here's another thought....

My 5 year old son, Matthew, thinks that the GT40 is the greatest car ever made, and thats because he's seen lots of replicas... (and obviously has good taste!)

So... even if they're not originals, they are still part of the legend....

Rgds

Neil

PS Jim.... he loves looking at pictures of J6... thats his car of choice!

Howard Jones · 11-27-03, 06:29 PM

I pretty much agree with just about everything written on this thread sofar. I would love to spend some time looking over a real car and maybe go for a ride on a racetrack at speed in one but I just couldn't imagine owning one. I'd be afraid to drive it less I dammage it and I think that the real cars are better off on the hands of people who can caretake history properly. Today is thanksgiving and Thank God Enzo didn't sell!

Brian Kissel · 11-27-03, 07:18 PM

I have to agree with Mr. Schneider on this one. Although I have not seen Jim's "J-6" yet,I can say after seeing his LOLA in person, it IS by far his best. The shop that is doing the work, is doing an excellent race-storation on it. I look forward to seeing Jim's J-6, P-4, T70 and Duesnburg all in one spot at the same time. I will however probably still favor the T70. I believe a couple of years ago Jim was thinking of a Christmas card with all three cars on it saying something like " if these three can live in harmony, why can't we ". That might not be an exact quote, but the general idea is there.

At any rate, have a Happy Thanksgiving !!!!!!!! [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Brian

JP · 11-28-03, 04:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]

The dent in the tub from the time Bruce McLaren threw down his helmet and set off after the tail that had blown off on the Mulsanne. The piece of Carrol Shelby's belt that was used to reattach that tail. The wear mark in the seat that Mark Donohue made. The salvaged auto T44 from the car Ken Miles died in amoungst your spares. The tear in Dan Gurney's eye as he reached out and touched your car 36 years later...

[/ QUOTE ]

Jim,

Poetry indeed! And the old smell of Castrol R, superb. Very true [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

But my point was from a mechanical perspective, not historic.

Regards,

J.P

Malcolm · 11-28-03, 05:36 AM

So when does this discussion become a practical problem? When you go to print with a book on the GT40 as Trevor Legate did. He had always planned a chapter on replicas as he felt that replicas were part of the story. Fair enough. He got a bit of criticism from purists though for using Robin Batts excellent GTD as the car photographed on the front cover. I once asked him why he did that and he said that he just couldn't find an original that was available at the time to get into his studio for photographing and he already had these superb pics of Robins car.

The book is still as readable and informative with or without the cover picture, so if you haven't got it, get it and have a read and see what Trevor thinks on this subject.

Someone above said that most of us were into 40 replicas for the shape and what was under the skin was not as important. True for a lot of guys perhaps but I will stick my hand up and say I like the simplicity of the engineering used back then compared to stuff nowadays. I am not an engineer and certainly have little electrical knowledge for EFI etc. I think this is why Historic racing is taking off so well today. Simpler cars = easier and cheaper to maintain cars with close racing and bags of charisma. I want some of that please.

If I had an original with the budget to go with it, I would certainly have that over my GTD. But I would use it on the tracks and not polish it away. Cars are for driving. It is a budget decision for me, unfortunately.

Malcolm

Peter D · 11-28-03, 07:59 AM

Well said Malcolm - without any budget considerations, I would also go for an original & drive it - heaps (like Jim G). However, without selling the house, wife, kids, dog & various boring cars, it just won't happen - hence a replica.

The replica approach is interesting - not quite the real thing, but you get a huge sense of satistfaction from building it (if you survive the experience !). One tends to balance out the other.

Simplicity is everything - mine has no modern stuff other than what is forced upon me by the moronic bureaucrats at the RTA. So far, the big one is EFI - our '40's here in Oz are treated as "New Cars" and as such, have to meet the current design rules (equivalent to Euro-2). EFI is the only way that it can be done. Other than that, the KISS principle is the way to go.

Kind Regards,

Peter D.

ChrisL · 11-28-03, 08:16 AM

For most of us, its usually a balance between practicality and dollars (or pounds)... bang for bucks in other words. The decision that you make would probably differ quite considerably depending upon where your balance lay at the time of the question. How would you go if, for example, your finacial status were to allow you to feel very little pain while forking out for 1075. I think that would be the ultimate real test. I think under those circumstatnces the choice would be very simple for me... 1075.

Having said that, I'm expecting that I will shed a tear of joy the first time I roll my RF40 onto the road under its own power.

RobBeddington · 11-28-03, 09:11 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Someone above said that most of us were into 40 replicas for the shape and what was under the skin was not as important.

[/ QUOTE ]

Malcolm, what I said was it's the shape that links us all, and that what's under the skin is down to personal preference. I too am the 'keep it simple' type - my ideal replica would be an exact copy of the original 40, with only the most necessary mods for today's use. I'm not even a fan of 17" wheels, BRMs or otherwise. But I'd still admire anyone who built a wild spec car, as well as the car itself. Horses for courses.

I've not built my own car so I'm something of a fraud on this list. But I've been lucky enough to buy a car very close to my childhood vision of the original, and very well built. It will keep me smiling for years to come.

The shape does it for me, and so does what's underneath.

Rob
"If we were all born equal, why can't I afford a real one?"

Bill D · 11-28-03, 05:37 PM

Overall, I would say the replica is better for the reasons previously stated. However, the original is better over time resale wise.

Bill D

Tim Kay · 01-26-05, 11:02 PM

This is a great thread. Just thought I would bring it to the top again for fresh eyes [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

BenL · 01-27-05, 01:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
One reason being, NO AIR CONDITIONING!

[/ QUOTE ]
If that's a problem, you're driving too slowly. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Keith Hardy · 01-27-05, 01:38 PM

Bump.... [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

allanfeldman · 01-27-05, 03:30 PM

I have been associated with the GT40 owners club; GT40 replica club and now the GT40 Enthusaists Club for many years now. We have overcome tracks banning us because we were replicas (HSCC had a committee vote to allow us to put displays at their events). So the following comments are not anti replica !!!
My pleasure is at see the cars and members at events.
But orignals where bulit for one reason to race.
The Mk1's that were converted into road cars were not on the agenda of the designers at the time. If I wanted a road car it would be a rebuilt Sbarro or a MKIII.
Sure replicas are an affordable alternative and I envy you all that have one. But if I had £50,000 I would get myself a Ferrari Dino 246 GT! ( practicallity) Hearsey you say but if I had the extra for a replica I would get one of those as well.
Incidentially when has a GT40 replica or the New Ford GT won an endurance race like Le Mans???
Regards Allan

James · 01-27-05, 10:23 PM

I think there isnt realy a better because, the real ones were 'better' for racing, and the replicas are usually 'better' at being show cars or road cars. So really u cant say which is the better car unless you be more specificabout what your saying

Rod McLellan · 01-28-05, 05:31 AM

Well, i'm new to the GT40 stuff, but... if i had the money, the real thing, in my mind, is always better. With a replica you can design out all the bad atributes of the original. But isnt that what makes an original so special? Currently i have a near duplicate of a Lotus Seven, i would trade it any day for an original, just to say that this is a "real" one. But, seeing as i am not idependantly wealthy, i will settle for a replica. I think any replica built with some "correct" parts is just fine (Cobra's, GT40's, dare i say Porsche 356/550's). Any replica you can build using the proper type motor, suspension, wheels etc is close enough to the real thing that it should be recognized as something special, maybe not at the same level as the genuine article, but high up there. I cant stand replica's of any car that doesnt use something related to the original, except the body of course, like Fiero based Ferrari's or VW based MG's. I'm sure their owners take pride in what they;ve built and i applaud them for their achievements, but in my mind, they should never compare them to the original.
So, i think that the original GT40 is the better of the "two", just because its the definitive article, but for me, a replica, being the cheaper way, is right behind it. Just because i would hate myself if i were ever to own and steal from the world (by wrecking) a truly historic car.

Malcolm · 01-28-05, 05:45 AM

A while back I had an opportunity to be a passenger in a real gt40. We were stopped in a car park of a local office block with the rear deck up. A car stopped and the driver jumperd out and began raving about the car etc etc. He then asked which replica it was.

For the one and only time in my life I could say "...er, actually it is a real one!"

Now that was better.

ChrisL · 01-28-05, 09:49 AM

I think that there is no correct answer to the question. Just a subjective opinion. In my opinion, all else being equal, I would have an original for no other reason other than it being a physical part of history in my hands.

However, the days of seeing any dream car and getting a knot in my stomach because I don't own it are well-and-truly gone. My replica has filled that space in my garage and I can now enjoy seeing another dream car without the stomach knots. I am happy never to own an original.

PS. While we are making price comparisons, for the price of some original GT40s, you could have a replica GT40 and an original McLaren F1. A difficult choice to make? Not for me [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]