[Russ Dickey]

Great article and I want to commend Jim Maxwell on submitting his original for it. I really enjoy this magazine for it's content and awesome photographs.

Now with that out of the way, here's my beef: why can't one of these magazines do a REAL comparison of an original vs. a replica, where the cars are prepared with the same engines, same transmissions, same gearing, same wheel/tire setup, etc?

You find one original Cobra owner like Jim who is willing to submit his car for the test. The original doesn't have to be 100% stock, but should probably be close. Then you approach each replica manufacturer and have them submit a car that is built to the same specs as that original. Same engine specs must be used, same transmission, same gearing, same wheel/tire combo (or at least same size, brand, and model of tire). Heck, you could even have one engine shop build the engines for all of the replicas, so that they are all as close as possible.

In fact, to avoid "ringers" that might be built and submitted by the replica companies themselves, you could have one independent shop build them all. That way, they could give detailed pros and cons of constructing each. Each one would be built as closely as possible to the original car used in the comparison, but could come with whatever "top of the line" suspension or brake options are offered by the kit manufacturer. And they would build it using just the regular assembly manual that comes with each kit, without any "creative engineering" tricks and tactics that might be used to give the car an unfair advantage.

And after the cars are all built, you do a Car & Driver style road test. The exact same drivers have to drive them all. Then and only then could we ever see a truly accurate comparison of real vs. replica.