No, I just leave when the personal attacks begin from the cowards who hurl them from behind their little key boards. I have no time or patience for that.
Ron: Once again, citing statements from the registry out of context does not prove anything. Especially, as a moderator and one of the "in" people at SAAC I would expect more. But continue taking snipets out of context as the crowd here loves it. Doesn't change things but they love it none the less.
You know as well as I what the registry really says.
You know as well as I or anyone who takes the time to read the Registry that it rightly points out the term "replica" as been
misused based on its actual definition in the Websters dictionary. The term has been widely used and now widely accepted as describing the kit cars that are in reality cars that
look like Cobras but are not. They are not true "replicas" as that term is technically defined by the dictionary but through common usage the term stuck to them. As SAAC correctly points out once the tooth paste is out of tube its hard to put it back in.
So...the term "replica" took on a negative connotation as far as Shelby was concerned and he therefore looked to separate out the Continuation series/4000 Cobras and other current series Cobras from the non Cobras. He viewed the term "replica" based on the widely accepted common meaning it took on as demeaning and devaluing to his cars. I agree it is based on how the term is understood by John Q public.
In fact, on page 30 of the current SAAC Registry sets out the varioius definitions and defines "Kit Car or Replica" along with all the other definitions for ... "Original", Original Restored, rebodied, reconstruction, Air Car, the CSX 4000, 7000, 8000, 1000 etc... You guys might want to read it. Nah, you won't like what they say...Forget that. All you need to know is the SAAC Registry does not consider them "replicas" as that term is commonly used today. Thats the significant point that our esteemed moderator conveniently failed to point out...and the troubling part is he knows better.
Anyway,
Technically speaking yes, the Continuation series 4000 Cobras are technically "replicas" as that term is specifically defined. They are copies of the original series by the original creator they are "Cobras" that duplicate or are an exact copy of the original. Given. No argument. Replicas are technically defined as recreations of a work of art especially a copy by the original maker. In fact original Cobras were at times referred to as "replicas" to wit: Chassis nos: 2136, 2137, 2138, 2154, 2155 and 2156 as the LeMans "replicas".
Now I can't believe that the SAAC Registry can be considered wrong on this. Can you???. After all as clearly noted in the Introduction the "Registry is the end result of more than 30 years of in-depth research, information collecting and various attempts at verification of these cars. All of this has been done by a small number of supremely dedicated enthusiasts whos only reward is the knowledge that they have worked to the best of their abilities to produce something that solidifies the history of the cars [u]created by Shelby American and companies affiliated with it....(The Registry ) As a totality, it defines what Cobras and Ford GTs are adn specifically identifies which ones fit that definition. In a sense, the registry serves to protect the legacy that was created by these cars by providing specifics which can be used as a yardstick against which any cars purporting to be genuine can be measured."
Acknowledgments go out to some pretty knowledgeable guys some of whom contribute to this forum from time to time. These luminaries had 10+ years to get it right since last Registry was published and during these 10+ years the Continuation series Cobras were known and in existence and did'nt' just pop on the scene right before the Registry went to press giving the "luminaries" and "supremely dedicated enthusiasts" (pretty lofty compliments) pleanty of time to consider just what the Continuation Cobras were and how to define them.
No other publication that I know of can boast such in depth efforts and the breath of contribution by so many who are supremely dedicated enthusiasts with the specific purpose as outlined above.
I also believe it fair to say that the Registry is "the" authoritative text on the subject of Cobras, tracking them and defining them. Maybe you know what thats as or more authoritative. I'd love to know.
But hey if the peanut gallary here says the Continuation Series is a "replica" as that term is commonly used and understood today then hey, silly me I believed what I read in the Registry. I'm chucking mine in the garbage.
Since, many here clearly want to throw the Continuation series into the group with "replicas" as that term is used in common usage today as they know such reference devalues the car but fascinatingly have no problem referring to their cars as "Cobras" (amusingly ironic) I think its only fair that to make things really clear. How about this... we can agree that the Continuation series is a "replica" as that term technically defined by the Websters Dictionary pointed out by the Registry (no argument) and thats how the term is meant and will be meant here on this forum (In fact Ron, post a sticky on the All Cobra talk forum setting this out) and from now on any car not qualifying as a "Cobra" under SAAC Registry definition I and we will refer to as a "non Cobra look alikes or Non Cobras" here on this forum. Sounds fair to me.
Any takers.
Hey, you guys have a great weekend!
P.S. Ron: Thanks for the info on CSX 3331. Interesting to know that new Cobras lingered on the lot until '69. I thought it was "68.