The non-authentic vehicle class has also been used several times by the Ferrari
Club in their concours evaluations as well. There have been many Testa Rosas
built on authentic 250GT PF chassis and several Daytona coupes ending up as
convertibles! The value placed on them typically exceeds the original vehicle
configuration but less than the other original which it duplicates.
Some one-off Ferraris have been destroyed in racing accidents only to emerge
later in pristine "original" form having been rebuilt on another authentic
chassis, utilizing a new but authentic-to-the-year drivetrain but having a
complete new rebody. The only truly "original" part being the tag salvaged from
the wreck! Now that would be a judging challenge.
Wonder how this situation would relate to our FWDLK cars?
If one used parts and new sheetmetal to create an authentic "replica" of a model
that was produced, say a '56 Plymouth Fury - except that the starting vehicle
metal may have been some other Plymouth h/t model. Suppose the drive train, body
tags (from a wrecked Fury) and all other equipment and details were authentic;
how would this car be categorized? It would be an exact duplicate of a car that
once was, but not a custom, not a "what if" or "shoulda been" and not a
"phantom".
Would this car then be "authentic"?
Brian
D500s in MI
Wayne Graefen wrote:
> When it comes to questions of "how to judge" a car or a situation that has
> not come up before, I have found it very helpful every time to look
> "upscale" at how it is handled with the great marquees. So in this case of
> a created or "phantom" (the new term) model, I would apply what the Classic
> Car Club of America has found it necessary to do over the years. In that
> club's case, they know that VIN #XXXXXX '34 Packard came from the factory
> as, lets say, a 12 cyl. coupe. The car is now being shown as a LeBaron
> bodied roadster (newly created body) and the few of those that were actually
> built are all accounted for. The car is welcome to be judged on its own
> merits but is placed in a class called "Non-Authentic".
>
> This would work really well for example with the '57 DeSoto Fireflite that
> was for sale as an Adventurer convertible at the Barrett-Jackson auction
> last January, or for a '55 Fury or '56 Town and Country woody.
>
> This is why DOCUMENTATION is so important to a car; especially one that is
> rare or limited production or a factory one-off like the Keller '55 Imperial
> convertible. Might Chrysler have mocked-up a '55 "Fury" to test the
> concept? Yes, they might have. Did Chrysler build a handful of '56 Windsor
> convertibles into 300B-like cars to gauge public opinion before bringing out
> the first 300 convertible in '57? It is thought that they DID!
> So if that phantom whatever does show up for judging, there needs to be a
> Non-Authentic Class for it, or it needs to bring documentation to prove its
> authenticity.
>
> My $.02 -- well maybe that's worth a whole nickel.
>
> Wayne
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: brian [mailto:xm2cars@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:49 AM
> Subject: Purist Question to ponder!!
>
> In light of the current discussion thread about the '61
> DeSoto convertible's heritage, here is something to think
> about.
>
> What would you folks think about a car that may be
> immaculate in every way and perhaps even so authentic
> looking it would be hard to decipher as different from
> factory built - yet that particular model never existed!
>
> A car such as a: '55 Fury, '99 LHS convertible, '56 T&C
> woody, or others etc.
>
> Would this be a problem car to anyone? (a negative reaction)
>
> Should this car be eligible to enter in a show as an "ABC
> model of a DEF" make and judged with the other models of
> that make as long as it was described as non-authentic?
>
> Would you accept it as an automotive creation that should be
> judged on its own merits?
>
> Brian
> D500s in MI
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network