The Race Replica Debate

[RogerH]

Another component of this issue is the mechanical adherence to period specs. With Formula Junior for example, there is a philosophy supported by an ever increasing rule book that subscribes to the "as it was, so it shall be" approach.
The intent is to have all mechanical components of the cars as they were in period (1958 - 1963). However despite the intent and the rule book, performance from engines has spectacularly improved. Period works engines that put out around 100 bhp at about 8000 rpm are today approaching 130 bhp at 10500 rpm. How much of this is down to improvements in such things as metallurgy (should you be able to use titanium parts when they weren't used in period?) and how much is the bending or "interpretation" of rules?
How do you question, say, potentially dubious head modifications made today when all the period heads have long disappeared?
Would a 30% improvement in performance from a engine be expected using the same period components - could these gains be down to improvement in such things as head flow technology etc?

[Oldfart]

, for example 585HP F5000 cars (or whatever they make these days) reflecting ongoing inprovements in metallurgy etc.

It's an interesting argument if kept friendly but I can imagine could become very heated in the paddock between car owners.

If only some of them were that simple! I believe that some somewhat more exotic material than metal is being used in F5000 cars, and to me that is way outside, at least, the spirit and probably even the rules for the 5000. But someone is claiming to be making and selling these components. Not really their fault, but the buyers are probably crossing a few lines. It's a bit like complaining about the tabloid press, if no-one bought the things the publisher would not print the crap!

[Murray Maunder]

If only some of them were that simple! I believe that some somewhat more exotic material than metal is being used in F5000 cars, and to me that is way outside, at least, the spirit and probably even the rules for the 5000. But someone is claiming to be making and selling these components. Not really their fault, but the buyers are probably crossing a few lines. It's a bit like complaining about the tabloid press, if no-one bought the things the publisher would not print the crap!

If these components being used now do so to overcome scarcity and costs or to improve safety then surely that is forgivable. However as always happens without really strict rule interpretations the chequebook starts to dictate the winner's circle. I don't know if I have it right but I had the impression that about a 20% increase in power was the major difference. I can see that almost 30 years of progress would find these increases through porting, metals, lubrication and detail work. But surely the chassis and most running gear is close to 70s spec?

Can Dale and co pull it off in HMC and keep the lid on it? That will be one to watch!

[GD66]

I don't know if I have it right but I had the impression that about a 20% increase in power was the major difference. I can see that almost 30 years of progress would find these increases through porting, metals, lubrication and detail work. But surely the chassis and most running gear is close to 70s spec?

Can Dale and co pull it off in HMC and keep the lid on it? That will be one to watch!

I reckon they can. You've got a small group of hard-core enthusiasts, who have a clue.

Interesting to see you've included lubrication : I reckon this is one of the most-undervalued improvements in race prep ever. It's bloody good now, and by comparison still cheap to put fresh stuff in every race day.

[AMCO72]

This is interesting. The 'Custaxie' is for sale on Trade Me !!! Asking price $30,000. Whats going on here. Will be interesting to see if it sells and who buys it, and sorts out the COD compliance issues.

[AMCO72]

Hey, I wonder if I could sneak it onto the grid in Oldfarts class. Do you think he would notice. Might be a little bit too modified!!!!!!!!!!!

[RogerH]

This is interesting. The 'Custaxie' is for sale on Trade Me !!! Asking price $30,000. Whats going on here. Will be interesting to see if it sells and who buys it, and sorts out the COD compliance issues.

TradeMe link (hard to find as they spelt "Custaxie" with a "z" - maybe that's why it didn't get a COD ) : http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used...-425725024.htm

It is perhaps a bit naughty to say in the advert "The famous championship Allcomers Race Car has been restored to it's original condition." as it implies it was the restored original car rather than a completely new built replica.

The seller is Robert from the North Shore - I wonder if Robbie is selling it?

[105angria]

are there any bits of the Custaxie in this car ?

[Eagle512]

...be only slightly an improvement on the glory days, for example 585HP F5000 cars (or whatever they make these days) reflecting ongoing inprovements in metallurgy etc.

Just FYI, I have seen the original dyno sheets from some of the F5000 engines around 1970 and they were WELL over 500hp. One Plymouth in particular was near 600. Fragile, yes. The top teams brought many sets of heads to each event and changed them nearly every session. I think lots of people said "oh, it's about 450hp" because it made the driver appear to be the the key component in winning

Heck my car still has the original Hurst Airhart brakes. Last thing I need is more power!

[AMCO72]

Well, you need to read NZ Classic Car....March 2010 [Vol 20 No 3] Page 56 onwards details what has been done. Seems as though some of the original body survived, but most had to be re-made. It appears that John Miller is responsible for most of the new work. Robbie and Co were trying to trace Tony Kriletich, who did the original car, as he had the best knowledge of how it was built, but for some reason couldn't get hold of him. The most up-todate feature that I can find in the present car is a fuel-cell rather than a petrol tank, other than that they seem to have been very careful to do the rebuild as close to the original as possible.......if you believe what is written, and I do. It's 45 years ago since the Custaxie 1 was out there, and although you think you might remember how the job was done, in real terms you don't. We shall see.

[Howard Wood]

(Quote:It is perhaps a bit naughty to say in the advert "The famous championship Allcomers Race Car has been restored to it's original condition." as it implies it was the restored original car rather than a completely new built replica.)

And there in a nut shell is the main issue regarding replicas. A replica is not the original car, no matter how well (or badly) replicated and should NEVER be passed off as such. Possibly the wording of this ad gives a hint as to the reason for the issues/ controversy surrounding this particular car?

[RogerH]

Well, you need to read NZ Classic Car....March 2010 [Vol 20 No 3] Page 56 onwards details what has been done. Seems as though some of the original body survived, but most had to be re-made. It appears that John Miller is responsible for most of the new work. Robbie and Co were trying to trace Tony Kriletich, who did the original car, as he had the best knowledge of how it was built, but for some reason couldn't get hold of him. The most up-todate feature that I can find in the present car is a fuel-cell rather than a petrol tank, other than that they seem to have been very careful to do the rebuild as close to the original as possible.......if you believe what is written, and I do. It's 45 years ago since the Custaxie 1 was out there, and although you think you might remember how the job was done, in real terms you don't. We shall see.

If you compare the interior photo on the TradeMe advert with a similar interior photo on the inside back cover of the 1967 Shell Book of New Zealand Motor Racing, it can be seen that although the layout is similar it is not a replica (an accurate facsimile). It is disappointing in that regard as it appears that it would have been just as easy to get it right as it was to not get it right.

The article in the Oct/Nov 2009 Classic Driver infers the original car and body were dumped and the new car was made out of a 1955 Customline - the story I heard was that none of the original car existed.

[105angria]

I agree if its a replica at least make it look like the car you are copying, that would be the basic Ist rule , is the Renault- Chev the real thing?

[AMCO72]

I think not much more than the rear-axle is from the original Renault-Chev. Then all of this debate gets very mucky......how much of Kenny's Lola will be salvageable to rebuild into a 'new' car. How much of the Dickie/Doyle Anglia will be in the recreation........and while we are at it, I think that is a better term than replica for all of these cars. I say again....who cares....so long as we all KNOW what it is. Things like the Custaxie/Anglia etc etc etc will only be recreated ONCE. Unlike, say a Jaguar C type of which there have been probably 100's built.....some hardly distinguishable from the real thing, and this is where it gets mucky......these perfect REPLICAS get passed off AS the real thing a bit further down the track, and this is where the $$$$$$$ start kicking in. There is at the moment a REPLICA works Mini Cooper S for sale in the UK for, wait for it.....85,000 POUNDS. A couple of years back you could have bought the REAL thing for about half that. Needles to say it wont sell, in MY opinion, but you never know. Somebody in the Land of the Rising Sun might think it is worth it. Of course this is the reverse of what it should be with the replica being 'worth' more than the genuine article, thats why I think the guy is dreaming. April the 1st anyone!!!!!!!!!!! Anyway we need these recreations out on the track again, as we are not so inundated with entries YET that we can afford to be that fussy. One day we may be able to be, till then all these recreations liven up the racing scene.

[105angria]

question for you Amco, if heaven forbid you damaged the shell of the mini{back corner into armco]and you reshelled it ,followed all the details of existing car ,holes dents etc and put all the bits into car.would that still be the same car ,its not a recreation . another example, you found an historic saloon ,its been outside for 30yrs but its all there, 98% complete but the shell is stuffed with rust and not safe, you rebody the car seam weld it use the bonnet doors boot ,guards,refurbish all the running gear etc get it perfect to pics from the era thats not a recreation is it ?

[rogered]

He He He the great debate.This has been gone over numerous times for years and years.

The first thing that comes to mind is the bentley Ol Number 1.

The Aussie Group C-A chaps have this as best sorted as can be i think.
I think if you can provide a complete line of "history" warts and all, so it can be reasonably clearly stated .
"this is the car from new" through to "this is the "same" car as it stands today".

[AMCO72]

Are you trying to trip me up here 105angria? Plenty of race-cars have been rebodied, and I have said before that the Mini is one of the easiest to do and replicate. For instance, the Coppertone Mini as it is today has been rebodied. The original was crashed and burnt. Still owned by the same guy who raced it originally. Is well documented that it has a replacement shell, but it is still entitled to be called the Coppertone Mini. I know of other cars that have been rebodied, and so long as everyone is keeping secrets no one will know. As I have said if it is only recreated ONCE I dont have a problem. Some of these machines are like Grandfathers axe......but so long as the panels etc are replaced AS THEY ARE DAMAGED that is OK, continuous history. It's when they are all replaced at once...ie rebodied....that the issue becomes a bit clouded. Think of all the ERA race cars in the UK. Some of them have almost nothing left of the original 1930's car after 60 odd years of hard racing, YET, they are still entitled to be called R4B, or whatever. I dont believe engines/gearboxes count in this debate because NO ONE would have their original engine without it having had numerous reconditions. Beowulf jokingly said once.....do they still have the original oil in the sump, water in the radiator, air in the tyres......silly, yes, but THAT is original. Your mythical historic saloon is NOT the car that actually did the business all those years ago but having been resurrected [another term] using some original parts, is quite entitled to be called the genuine article. Knowing that the Dickie/Doyle Anglia has a lot of remade parts in it's construction, will NOT diminish its worth or history in my eyes, as it is the ONLY one that is entitled to be called that.

[RogerH]

question for you Amco, if heaven forbid you damaged the shell of the mini{back corner into armco]and you reshelled it ,followed all the details of existing car ,holes dents etc and put all the bits into car.would that still be the same car ,its not a recreation . another example, you found an historic saloon ,its been outside for 30yrs but its all there, 98% complete but the shell is stuffed with rust and not safe, you rebody the car seam weld it use the bonnet doors boot ,guards,refurbish all the running gear etc get it perfect to pics from the era thats not a recreation is it ?

Isn't it the difference between a recreation (or replica) and a restoration. A restoration is the re-building of a genuine original car around at least some of the major components of that original car. It may end up being re-shelled or having a replacement engine but it has always derived from the original car.

A recreation/replica starts from scratch with either nothing of the original car or nothing of any consequence from the original car. However to substantiate a claim of being a replica, the new car needs to replicate the original car not just pay homage to it. This is where I think the "Custaxie" had it's problems. It claimed to replicate the original car but it fell short of actually achieving that. That doesn't mean it can't compete but it turns into a retrospective special based on the Custaxie rather than a replica of the real thing.

There are grey areas but common sense should prevail. A recent example was a Birdcage Maserati up for auction last month in the US. It claimed the identity (chassis number) of a car broken up in the 1960s on the basis (unsubstantiated) that it contained some switches and tail lights from the original car. Apart from these switches and lights being generic parts bin items that could never be traced to a particular car, there was clearly not enough of the original car to support the claim of "restoration". It was criticised in forums and the press as a fake and didn't sell at auction.

[pallmall]

Regarding the Custaxie, the original was long gone, but one article about the recreation did allude to original parts being used, which was not correct. They couldn't even get the colour scheme correct on the recreation, probably the easiest thing to get right as there are plenty of photos available, so it dosen't give you much confidence in the accuracy of the mechanical bits.

[105angria]

Not a trick question Amco, in the course of the 2 year resto of the Anglia i had a lot of peoples point of view , the panel beater that would do things a better way, the cams guy that was happy as long as it had the original firewall, no poly bushes, no electronic ignition,allsorts, for me it was a case of not overrestoring it,patina , being true to the guy that built it,giving people a sense how these things were in the day, if you have good reference how it was [Group U you have to pick a time ] be true to its history ,re the one only recreation ,as an example Doyle /Dickie Anglia with Fastbacks reference id love to see the pre breadvan car with the stacks through the bonnet, but would have to respect Fastbacks view as he holds the car, but what a great pair and slice of history they would be .I may "own" my Anglia but its there to reignite memories and joy of a time that was freeer more alive exciting and inovative