[cycleguy55]

If they ask if it's 'real', I can honestly say it is. It is, after all, a real reproduction or real replica. If it was an apparition or a holographic image I'd have to change my answer.

Most of the time the question they ask it whether it's an 'original'. If I wanted to play 'silly bugger' or toy with them I could answer in the affirmative. It is, after all, an original reproduction or replica. Really, if they can't readily distinguish my West Coast Cobra with its exaggerated rear fenders and lower tail from one of the original cars, they're probably up for any kind of discussion - truthful or otherwise.

Most of the time I tell them it's a reproduction and give them a bit of information about the number of original cars (998) and what they're worth - as very, very few of them have a clue (and not just about Cobras...). If it appears they're interested in learning more I'll engage them in a discussion if I have the time (don't want to hold up the line at the gas pumps). One of my favourite topics is about: a) Transport Canada's 30 year old de facto ban on 'kit cars' in Canada; and b) how difficult it is to import and license replicas and reproductions in Saskatchewan. With rare exception they are always completely flabbergasted by the draconian rules and flaming hoops we have to deal with.

Okay, time to get off my soap box.

BTW, my problem with 'kit car' is partially about the connotation Mr. Jody referenced, but also the challenge in applying that term to cars sold as 'rollers' or 'turnkey minus'. It doesn't matter whether that car came from Superformance, Shelby or West Coast Dreams - how can a car that rolled out of a factory or shop in a nearly complete state be accurately called a 'kit car'? That just makes no sense to me.