Why does every thread here devolve into a "Real" vs. "Replica" argument?

[Xack]

deleted

[ERANJ]

Originally Posted by Xack

Owning a "real" Cobra defines Evan, or at least he's allowed that to happen. If you oppose that, then you oppose his definition of himself. If he acknowledges that he will cease to exist. You've reduced yourself to a paradox pal. Congratulations!

Amazing that many here have resorted to attacking the guy personally because he has made valid arguments or those that attack cannot prove otherwise and resort to twisting his words. I can see how it angers many that CSX Continuation cars are real Shelby Cobras (truly amazing how it enrages some) to quote a few here. I can bet if he choose to he could acquire on of the 998 as referred to....and how would he be attacked then?

Very transparent indeed.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by ERANJ

Amazing that many here have resorted to attacking the guy personally because he has made valid arguments or those that attack cannot prove otherwise and resort to twisting his words. I can see how it angers many that CSX Continuation cars are real Shelby Cobras (truly amazing how it enrages some) to quote a few here. I can bet if he choose to he could acquire on of the 998 as referred to....and how would he be attacked then?

Very transparent indeed.

ERANJ, Evan gets some abuse, often deserved so, for insulting others over the course of 50+ pages. One of Evan's original insults, was his use of "wheat versus chaff." The CSX4000 is "wheat" and the rest of our cars are "chaff." That's one of the original ones that helped kick off this thread as well as two other threads started by Evan when he was heated. He's thrown around several insults, so he's not blameless.

[ERANJ]

Originally Posted by Al G

I was also working from memory. It still says "Shelby Cobra." Are you going to argue with that? My take on the definitions still stands. I never claimed it was not a component vehicle. Nor did I ever claim it came from Shelby with a drivetrain. So what is your point.

Agree AlG. What does the point by JGarage have to do with the original discussion the word component means simply implying that it cannot be sold with engine or transmission for legal reasons. Talk about fishing.

[Nedsel]

Here's a new one: I wonder how many people here are aware that back when Shelby was buying Kirkhams to make them into Shelby Cobras, he had the chutzpah to sue the Kirkhams for copyright infringement. Now there's a good story: "Hey, I'd like to buy some of them Cobras you're making, cause they are better than anything I can currently get elsewhere." "OK." Hey, wait - those really look just like a Cobra! You bastards!"

[Blue66]

Shelby was always looking for a new opportunity to capitalize on.

[Jamo]

Oh hell yes...I remember that well. More than a few long calls with Provo and counsel for the Smiths and the folks in SA, who were also being sued...and Bob Marsh trying to mend wounds as the Old Man continued to open them up.

And it's good you bring that up Ned since many of the folks involved in the five dozen pages have no clue what the basis for many of these terminology issues really is. The fight over what is a replica and what isn't may have a passing importance here, but it was central to the legal issues raised by the Old Man in a variety of venues, with only moderate success. As far as the courts were concerned (generally), a replica is a replica is a replica.

...and yet Kirkhams were rolling down I-15 to Vegas on a regular basis.

History is more than a coloring book...you need the crayons to bring it to life.

[jhv48]

And to go along with that one, now we have to call continuation cars "component cars".

Will the madness never end?

[Jamo]

I see it now...they are real genuine Shelby Comp Cobras.

[jhv48]

Real genuine (but not original) Shelby comp cobras, sold as 1965 continuation component cobra replicas.

I think I get it now.


KIT CAR!

[JBCOBRA]

Shelby was the master at selling dreams and special Kool-ade

[CompClassics]

Sorry but this whole discussion seems to be based on who can call their vehicle a "Cobra" or not. It's pretty simple, those that payed for the privilege wether it be one of the original 998 or a later Continuation Series manufactured by Shelby American Inc. both have paid the price to have the right to call their vehicles "Cobras".

[JBCOBRA]

Is that kinda of like paying for a marketing scheme to sell Kirkhams at an inflated price in trade for a badge and a dream? Just curious....

[Joe's Garage]

Originally Posted by CompClassics

Sorry but this whole discussion seems to be based on who can call their vehicle a "Cobra" or not. It's pretty simple, those that payed for the privilege wether it be one of the original 998 or a later Continuation Series manufactured by Shelby American Inc. have paid the price to have the right to call their vehicles "Cobras".

Although I think no one will dispute Shelby has the sole legal right to use "Cobra" which is copyrighted. Does that copyright have legal reach to "Cobra Replica"?

[Blue66]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

Although I think no one will dispute Shelby has the sole legal right to use "Cobra" which is copyrighted. Does that copyright have legal reach to "Cobra Replica"?

Ask FFR ..

[ERANJ]

Originally Posted by jhv48

And to go along with that one, now we have to call continuation cars "component cars".

Will the madness never end?

Good one.

[RodKnock]

Mine is called Kirkham Cobra. It's in the Registry. It's in print.

And my Kirkham's CO states "1965 Replica Roadster." And the CSX4000/6000 is built from a Kirkham body and chassis or more. Go figure.

I'm pretty sure every one else calls their a Cobra too. Legally or not. The registry addresses that one. That horse left the barn a LONG time ago.

[LMH]

So on the subject of Cobra, did CS steal the name/emblem from Crosley?
Larry

[REAL 1]

First, my add back in 2004 as "originally' written was a mistake as back then I myself was not sure how to classify my Shelby. The way I saw it, it was a real Shelby Cobra and misused the term "Original" to convey that. It was corrected based on the SAAC statement. The two buyers interested in the car, which sale I called off deciding to keep the car were made very aware of it's vin and that it was a Continuation series car. No one expected to buy an "original" Cobra even back then for $145K. No one back then accused me to intentionally misrepresenting something. The error was pointed out and corrected. Stop the smear effort. Stop.

Based on that anyone who continues to accuse me of intentionally trying to pass my car off as something other than what it is is going to really piss me off. Read into that what you want. Thats a public allegation I don't take lightly.

Second, my "wheat/chaff" comment was spun waaaay out of context and twisted for their own purposes. The context of the statement was made in relation to "what is better" discussion and that certainly depends on your particular definition of what's better to you.. If I want a modern chassis Cobra replica with advanced suspension that's modern it would be something other than a Shelby and something other than a Shelby is the wheat. If you want a "genuine" Shelby then the only wheat is an original or continuation Shelby.

Thirdly, you guys are reading way too deep into this "real" issue. The Shelby MSO must describe the car as a component vehicle to avoid having to comply with federal regs. Its just whats required today. It is no longer 1965 and the fed has buried us and the auto industry with regulations. Some good and some bad. Actually, the safety regulations are good. The Cobra is a dangerous vehicle. It has all the safety protection of a tuna fish can.

The MSO clearly identifies the vehicle as a Shelby Cobra 427.

Kirkham has the same issue. None of the manufactures today can sell a Cobra or a Cobra like vehicle as a finished vehicle. It can't be done based on federal regulations. All these vehicles and their manufactures are hamstrung by these regs. As I explained, even if SAI stayed with production of the 3000 series and were were up to CSX 3878 hypothetically even into the 1970's federal regulations would have killed the Cobra from being produced as a finished running vehicle from SAI. The same games to avoid the regs would have to be implemented by SAI even back then. Irrefutable.

SAAC is a club. A well respected club with regard to Cobras and their cumulative knowledge base is respected world wide. Actually the world's most respected authority. You don't have to agree with what they say. That's fine with me. I, however, think they nailed the issue on the continuation cars and got it right and were very fair, logical and reasoned with their approach.

Real and replica are not mutually exclusive based on the actual Webster's definition as used by SAAC. The current production Cobras are authentic Cobras. They are real McCoy Shelby Cobras. They just belong to the continuation series Shelby Cobras. They don't pretend to be original series cars, no one is passing them off as original series cars.

CompClassics is spot on. So was Jamo. So are a number of other guys here whose arguments are consistent with the Registry and what I've been saying for years and years here. Oh, so is the Registry.

My car is a Shelby Cobra. Not a replica of a Shelby Cobra. Shelby didn't intend to nor did he make replicas (i.e "fakes" as that term is commonly misused to mean) of his Cobra. He continued production. Someone other than Shelby who makes a car that looks like a Shelby Cobra is making the "replica" as that term is now commonly understood and used per SAAC..

Refer to my car as a "replica" don't expect much respect in return from me. Refer to my car as a Shelby Cobra I'll return the respect and refer to your car as we commonly refer to them as a "Cobra". We'll get along just fine.

Finally, my issue with the new Competition Shelby Cobras from DeBenedeste is not that they aren't Shelby Cobras but with the use of the CSX 3000 vins. To me know the car has cross the line and pretending to be something it's not. Part of the original series.

[Paul F]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

Although I think no one will dispute Shelby has the sole legal right to use "Cobra" which is copyrighted. Does that copyright have legal reach to "Cobra Replica"?

Anyone can use 'Cobra'. It is not trademarked for this type of product. It is trademarked for many things, but not a car. Shelby used to have it trademarked, but let it go. So everyone has a Cobra if they feel the need to use that term.

But on a more serious note; Yes, the 10 hours went by. I thought, I wrote, I didn't throw it in the garbage can. But during those 10 hours, listening to the Jeopardy think music, I transitioned to the ethereal plane. I became one with the universe... Oh, and I won that raffle for that VIN tag Cobra_Diver was raffling off. So now I own a real Cobra. Unlike the rest of you cretins. You lowly replica owners. You know who you are. I'm better than all a ya's. So there. And it only cost me $500 bucks!