Is it a kit car or replica?

[Dean Lampe]

That might be a little misleading but my question is about cars like the RCR superlite coupe and possibly the roadster. The GT40 is a replica and it has a certain appeal to it, but anyone who knows anything about cars will know it has to be a replica because if it was real it wouldn't be parked at the Dairy Queen! That being said, If you look at the SLR from RCR, does it look like a kitcar or like an excotic Italian sports car? I love the car, I just wonder if it will land in the Kit car pile (Cody Coyote) or a really cool limited production car?

I am just looking for some converstion on a relitively slow day.

 

[Fran Hall RCR]

Re: Is is a kit car or replica?

Similar to this subject thread.....
http://www.ffcobra.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170313

I dont use the term Supercar ever!!!!...but I do think we all have high performance specialty vehicles....such as the SSC started life as a Diablo replica a few years ago........Shelby Supercars - Home of the Fastest, Most Powerful Production Car Ever Made - The Ultimate Aero.

 

[chuck smith]

Re: Is is a kit car or replica?

yes the poor FFR guys beat their heads against the wall over and over on this issue. They try so hard to convince themselves that the new GTM is not a kit car even though the Company touts it as such, which of course is exactly what it is. It is not a supercar by any measure except performance, and we all know many kit cars have supercar speed. I think Frans cars are obviously kit cars too by definition. The thing that makes them ,the GTM, and many of the newer pricier kits different, is the use of quality components and true performance engineering. So to address your question, yes the SLR,SLC are kits, but I think due to their construction and components, puts them in a different class from the old "kit cars".

 

[Dean Lampe]

What is truly remarkable is the growth of the hobby. I remember 20 years ago looking at a Mercedes replica and I didn't want to spend the $5500 for the car. Now I have another kit car that cost 200% more than that! And to take it one step further, there is actually a market for these cars! I have heard people say that it is explained by the cost of the original and if you want to experience a GT40/Cobra that only possible way is with a replica. That, however, is not the case with the GTP/prototype cars. They could still run $80,000 to $100,000 and they don't replicate anything. I think this could be the fastest growing segment of our hobby given the growing natue of open track days. Will these cars carry the high resale value that the GT40's do? Maybe.

 

[Charlie M]

When I hear the term "kit car" I think of the early days back in the late 60's or early 70's when someone dropped a fiberglass body on a VW beetle chassis or a flimsy chassis with Pinto or Mustang II suspension/driveline. Those cars were made to look like something cool and that's it. Performance was not an option.

Like others have said, the cars available today are in a different class. Performance and quality is more of a priority.

 

[chuck smith]

I personally do not think so, good used track cars are cheap (my Panoz was 12K) and there are many options available now. I think they are likely to be worth about what you paid for the kit and drivetrain, much like low end cobra replicas. Of course we do not build these things to make money, but it is nice when you sell, to pocket a little cash ,much like you and I did with our Kirkhams.

 

[Dean Lampe]

Chuck, that is exactly what is at the root of this conversation for me. If I spend the money on the car, will I get out of it without to much pain when I am done playing with it? I have been very forutate on all of my Cobras to have made a little on the resale but I had a lot of "free" time in the builds. The GT40 has about 1100 hrs in it but it is an awesome car and I think it is worth every pennyI have in it (not counting my time). I am just not familiar with the Ultima, RCR SL-c/r or the GTM market since it is relatively untested.

 

[chuck smith]

the 40 replicas are certainly easier to estimate worth on, and the market is well established. Much like cobra replicas, the most desired ones(read easier to sell) are the ones that most closley replicate an original and use top notch components. SPF has raised the bar and set the resale higher than ever before for all of us, but again the end result is worth less than the cost of the parts. I bought my CAV and Daytona at good used prices and they should hold their own. The Ultimas I have seen for sale used were definitly less costly than building one. The FFr guys seem to think the GTM's will be worth north of 90K and I am afraid they will be in for a rude awakening over time as more become available. Given a used Ferrari 360 or a GTM, and the choice is clear if priced close. The middle of the road GTM builds will sell for much less than it cost to build

 

[Rob]

Good conversation Dean.....I think of this topic often..
I hate telling people that I build "kit cars" due the the negative connotation that the term has. As stated by others above... the "kit cars" of the 60s/70s were IMHO junk. They attempted appearances of certain cars, but had nothing in the way of performance. What is being offered and we are building today, does not compare. So, has the term "kit car" evolved? I guess the question at hand is are there companies out there still selling the body drop "kits" that existed years ago?

The 40s to me are certainly replicas, but I don't call them "kit cars" for the personal hang up mentioned. The SLCs/GTMs.... well they obviously aren't replicas, but I struggle calling them kit cars. If you have ever been down an assembly line ( I have seen Vipers/Corvettes etc) the assembly isn't much different. Taking the RCRs for example; the technology has shifted so much, that I struggle calling a car with an alumi semi-mono chassis a "kit car". I prefer to think of it as a "component car", heck it's a race car in a box! The resale question will be the $100K question....of course.

 

[MReid]

I'm with Rob on this one when it comes to the term "kit car". I have struggled to use the right term without feeling like I am being deceptive. The fact is that most people still think of kit cars as cheesy rebodied VWs, but that is starting to change. I can't tell you how many times people make a face when I say kit car and then are impressed when they actually see the car. It is also good to see how many people are now more informed. These days, I typically tell people I have a hobby building reproductions of old race cars. My reproductions of the '41 Willys, '58 Ferrari, Daytona coupe, and now GT40 all fall into this category and the name of Fran's company helps.

So far my resale record has been very positive and the funny part is that everyone who has purchased one from me also refers to it as a reproduction. No one seems to like the kit car term.

 

[chuck smith]

no doubt the term "Kit Car" has some negative conotations, however, it is what it is. If it arrives in several boxes and requires you to put it all together , then it is a kit car. The rollers are more difficult to label, but again they are kits of sorts. I love to hear the SPF and Kirkham guys(I have both, so no harm intended) try to dodge the kit car conversation. It really is not worth the deception to me.

 

[Ron Earp]

I love to hear the SPF and Kirkham guys(I have both, so no harm intended) try to dodge the kit car conversation. It really is not worth the deception to me.

It is even better when it involves the Shelby Cobra copies!

 

[Randy V]

I've also struggled to some degree with the term Kit-Car.

I think what bugs me most about it is that it seems to be spoken as a slur by many or with a nasal sneer in their voice as they roll their eyes...

Surely these people think of Kit-Cars as rebodied Volkswagens or Fieros or worse...
Honestly - I like some of the rebodies out there. They're just not in the same class as most of the cars that we are building or own..

Factory Five has made it big in the replica car business as we all know - but they also made the term "Mustang DONOR" synonomous with their cars..
That's done two things in my opinion:
1) Cheapened the term Replica by associating it to the Ford Mustang (although I've nothing against the Mustang)
2) By their sheer volume of sales - made it appear that many/most replicas are built from a Donor

For me - Reproduction / Replica is just fine. Nothing else really truly fits.. One look under the covers of my car by anyone that know's the difference between a lug-nut and a wing-nut and they automatically know that this is no "Kit-Car" in the normal sense of the term.
And if they don't know the difference - they are of no consequence to me..

 

Let me throw this into the mix! In 1965 I worked for a company that built race cars and we prepared race cars for drivers. We did most of Sam Posey's cars. I remember when Sam's McLaren MB1 arrived from McLaren Cars from the UK in a large plywood box. I was surprised to find in the box was a car all in pieces. Most of the parts & pieces were in their relitive position held together with tape and tie-wraps. I doubt McLaren Cars would have look too kindly on us at that time calling the McLaren a "kit car", but some assembley was required! Back then, I don't remember the term "replica" being used. I had a hand in building a kit that the company tried selling called the "Hustler". It was a Lotus Elan body put on... you gessed it, a VW chassis. Like all the kit cars back then, it used a Vett. Sting Ray windshield. What a great company to work for.

 

[Jim Cowden]

You can call them an ICV
independently constructed vehicle.

I think most are better informed these days due to the net and the world becoming a smaller place.
If I tell people I am putting a 40 together I get mixed replies of kit car and replica.
But none imply 70s type VW conversion,those who are interested know what you are building.

Other than the chassis ,body,steering rack and rear uprights I have built or sourced every other part on my car.
As Dean has said when people see the end product they realize that it is serious stuff and not a toy.
I dont get to concerned in a name but I do agree it cheapens what it is that we do.

Jim