Quote:
Originally Posted by ERANJ
I had not looked at the earlier post on the Challenger analogy but was looking at the parallels. As a hypothetical, if Dodge manufactured the chassis in 2015 (original manfactures, components, etc., is not relevant) and for argument sake offered the rolling car without the engine because they offered an OTC 426 Hemi for the customer to install it would be a kit or replica? I'm not disputing the warrantee, etc. but don't see how you can call it a replica based on the emission requirements. Who dictates that as a replica even more so with the MSO, Challenger VIN sequence? Based on your logic I see the Challenger and Shelby as geniune, authentic, whatever term you make like to state but not a replica. It's a product that was made by the manufacturer.
|
Since it's not original, it must be a replica. Only the original can be genuine or authentic. Anything built later will clone or replicate the original. You can call it a genuine replica or true replica, if you must, but it's an oxymoron.
The VIN sequence is meaningless, since even CSBI will producing the "competition" ("Resurrection") replicas with leftover CSX3000 numbers. These are replicas as well and the sequence will follow the original CSX3000 series cars. Also, modern cars use 17-digit VIN #'s, which weren't used in the mid-1960's.
Further the Shelby replica uses different components. So it's not an exact replica. As one example, the Shelby replica uses a thicker Kirkham body (0.059" vs. 0.500") and today's aluminum has a different metallurgical content than the mid-1960's. Also, Kirkham has automated the metal shaping and cutting process beyond even what they used to build my Kirkham in 2007.
Seriously, many pages ago, I summarized all the analogies used to prove the Shelby isn't a replica. We talked about Van Halen & Journey bands touring without their original lead singers, The Car Manufacturer Analogy (above), Watches (Rolexes), and several others.