When is a replica not a replica? | Thank Frankel it’s Friday

Those who felt that way did so for two distinct reasons. The first and perhaps less militant group were those who couldn’t understand why anyone would pay upwards of £750,000 for a Ferrari that isn’t a Ferrari when that kind of money will buy so many that are. And it’s true: you could easily create a three Ferrari garage – something old, something new and maybe something a little practical in between – for that kind of money.

The second group are those who dismiss these cars as fakes. It seems the inference they would like us to draw is that there is something fraudulent about them and that their very existence is some kind of insult to the originals. And it is fair to say that among this group I have noticed an unusual preponderance of people wealthy enough to be personally acquainted with the originals who have provided the inspiration for these recreations.

But so too do some of them have a point. If you create a car that is indistinguishable from an original, what’s to say that in the years and decades to come it might not acquire a history which it does not deserve?

The truth however is as easy to understand as it is hard to stomach: simply put, there is no straightforward answer. When does a new car become a rec-creation, a replica or a fake? Allow me to outline a few scenarios.

It’s the 1950s and a racing car gets written off. But rather than pay the tax on a new car, the manufacturer makes an identical brand new car, transfers the chassis plate and keeps racing. Have they made a fake?

Another gets crashed, but is not written off. And then gets repaired and crashed again. And again. After a while there is not a single component from the original car left. It is Trigger’s broom in automotive form. Have they made a fake?

A third car doesn’t get crashed. But decades later the same manufacturer creates another a homage to it. It is a brand new car. But is it a fake? No? So what if every part on it is provided by an external supplier and all the manufacturer does is allow its name to be used? Fake? Or what if that manufacturer has the same name as the original company, but only because that name was bought. The two companies have nothing whatever to do with each other. Is that now a fake? And if not, what’s the real difference between that company producing a copy of an earlier car and another company doing exactly the same but doesn’t own the name?

My problem is I can see it from all sides and my rather naïve solution is that everyone should just be honest about the provenance of their cars. But that’s not going to happen. But if I could do one thing, I’d establish a body to authenticate the really important cars before this all gets out of hand. It would be great if it could be the FIA but as it allows brand new cars to run in historic racing so long as they are to original specification, some understandably see it more as part of the problem than the solution.

But we cannot has a situation where the authenticity of certain truly significant cars is called into question just because someone has created an indistinguishable copy. And don’t think it can’t be done. Back in 2005 Honda was the headline sponsor of the Festival of Speed presented by Mastercard and to celebrate the 40^th anniversary of its first World Championship F1 win in 1965 it wanted the winning RA272 to be on the Hill over the weekend. But they also wanted it on the Central Feature and not even Honda has figured out how to make one car appear in two different locations at the same time. So they built another. And on a trip to Japan before the event I was invited into a room where both were parked, and asked to say which I thought was the original. But no matter how much I pored over both cars, I simply couldn’t tell. One was a literal clone of the other. So I guessed and, as it happens, guessed right. But it was a pure 50/50.

So what we need is a truly independent, not for profit body whose sole business is to authenticate the best cars in such a way that their provenance can never be challenged again. But that’s less than half an answer: it’s what should be done. How it should be done is a rather larger question and one that, I’m afraid I find myself entirely unqualified to answer.