Doesn’t it depend on the owner’s view of a replica? In my book it’s a bit dippy to present one as the real thing regardless of whether it’s a Proteus D-Type, Teal Bugatti, Hawk Stratos, or MR2 based 360/355, but if an owner has one because they like the design and a rep is all they can afford is that so bad – regardless of the price tag?
I’ve seen various replicas over the years, some good, some terrible, and one might try to differentiate between ‘recreations’ and ‘replicas’. For instance various models of Ferraris, Bugattis, Maseratis, et al have been manufactured as close to original specifications as possible; they are hugely expensive and generally referred to as recreations, whilst at the other end of the scale you have things like the MR2 and Fiero based cars which are regarded as replicas. The fact is that they are all replicas, as by definition they are not original cars of the correct period and manufacture, and they can have no provenance.
To be picky, is a 4200 a genuine Maserati, after all it doesn’t use an original Maserati engine design does it? Would the brothers have approved? And is a Cygnet just an Aston Martin recreation of a Toyota, or is it a hybrid with no proper lineage?
Each to their own, I say.
Two of the nicest ‘Maseratis’ that I covet are these:
http://www.tipo250.co.uk/
http://www.sovereigncarsales.co.uk/Classic_gridpos7.aspx
And they’re not even the real thing, so how would they be regarded at a club night?
Now I’m off to collect some Robert Taylor prints; only prints mind (although they do carry original RT and veterans’ signatures).
PH
