[A-Snake]

Originally Posted by Power Surge

The whole "not a kit car" or "factory built" (when talking about non-Shelby Cobras) is a strange situation. People who say stuff like that, are trying to let people know that their Cobra is superior to some other Cobras, when they can't say they own a real Shelby Cobra.

I think the biggest problem with SAAC and the "terminology", is their view of the word "replica". They are trying to use the exact dictionary term, meaning an exact copy. So by their view, any non-Shelby built car is not a replica, whereas the rest of the world calls them replicas. And then fighting that notion, makes them look even worse.

In my opinion, a replica is something that is made to look like something else. It doesn't have to be an exact copy. Any non-Shelby built Cobra, should be legitimately called a replica. It's replicating the look of a Shelby Cobra. You can buy a Rolex watch replica right? It looks like a real Rolex, but it's not an "exact copy". Most things that are considered replicas are rarely exact copies.

And a "kit car", is a car you buy as a kit. If it has to be assembled, it's a kit car. If it was built by the manufacturer, it's a rolling chassis and the term kit car is not a valid term. SAAC should stop calling all non-Shelby built Cobras kit cars.

My FFR was a kit car. My Kirkham was a roller. Both were replicas. It's really not that hard to define.

Sal,

Here's some notes from the new Registry, page 708,

"Because he (Shelby) did not want his cars devalued by using the term replica, Shelby chose "Component Cobra." This separated his cars from all the rest, the riff-raff, and also suited his need to explain (mostly to various DMV authorities) that these cars were only components of a completed car - not the completed car itself, which would be required to adhere at all sorts of current stringent governmental safety regulations"

Ok, you can discuss now

Signed: Only T. Messenger