Why does every thread here devolve into a "Real" vs. "Replica" argument?

[1ntCobra]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

It's definitely "Cobra-like" and a "true replica" as the Registry cites too. CS/SAI just didn't think they would sell if they were called replicas. Right there in the Registry.

And the SAAC Cobra Registrar, one of the leading historians on Shelby Cobras, has said the CSX1000/4000/6000/7000/8000 Cobras are replicas.

Not the same assembly process, not the same sales/warranty process, not the same company, not the same employees, not the same materials and not the same era. They're clones like Dolly The Sheep. But really nice ones.

Definitely, not hard stuff to understand. Hey, you too have a wonderful day. Love ya!

I think I understand now. Today you can buy a "Camaro-like" vehicle. Camaros have not been in continuous production since the 1960s. It is not really the same company after the government took it over and gave it to the union employees. It is certainly not built by the same employees with the same materials, the warranty is different, the recommended service schedule is not the same, and it is certainly not the 1960s anymore. Yet these cars do somewhat replicate the look of the Camaros of the 1960s.

I cannot believe the current incarnation of Chevy calls their cars Camaros instead of labeling a more correct term like "real Chevy Camaro-ish replica thingy".

And don't even think about starting a discussion about the new so-called Dodge Dart or VW Beetle.