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

[Joe's Garage]

How many of the old timers remember this nugget from 2004, Evan putting csx4206 up for sale?

"DON'T MISS THIS RARE OPPORTUNITY TO OWN AN ORIGINAL SHELBY AMERICAN COBRA WITH THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL AT A PRICE YOU COULD NOT DUPLICATE IT FOR.

Call Evan Harris for details"

CSX 4206 for sale. No comments on this thread please!

Oh my!

[Joe's Garage]

Originally Posted by Joe's Garage

How many of the old timers remember this nugget from 2004, Evan putting csx4206 up for sale?

"DON'T MISS THIS RARE OPPORTUNITY TO OWN AN ORIGINAL SHELBY AMERICAN COBRA WITH THIS LEVEL OF DETAIL AT A PRICE YOU COULD NOT DUPLICATE IT FOR.

Call Evan Harris for details"

CSX 4206 for sale. No comments on this thread please!

Oh my!

Evan you got some splainin' to do!

[REAL 1]

You want me to explain an add error over 10 years ago? Ok. Keep waiting I think my intent was to convey it was an original Continuation Cobra at that time. Candidly don't recall. Of course your implication is at that time I was trying to "dupe" potential buyers. Yes, of course I was.

Still waiting for pics on your uh, whatever it is you have...

The two buyers who wanted the car on the sale (at $145K when original 427s were selling for 3 to 4X's that) were more than aware it was a continuation Shelby. Uh, its VIN is CSX4206. A village idiot looking at these cars even in 2004 knew that's a continuation series vin.

Oh, BTW that thread was back in 2004 and I just notieced in that thread SAAC had its statement position on Continuation Cobras long before SAAC had it's little tiff with Carroll in 2008. Ned the "curator" was wrong on that one too.

Here is the quote from the 2004 post from SAAC:

As far as CSX4000 and CSX7000 cars are concerned, SAAC accepts these cars as genuine Shelby American Cobras (as opposed to "original" Shelby American Cobras). The definition we use to identify an original Cobra is one which was, 1) built between 1961 and 1968, 2) at the direction of and under contract from Carroll Shelby/Shelby American Inc., and 3) sold by Shelby American or one of its franchised dealers. The only difference between original Cobras and CSX4000 and CSX7000 cars is the time frame in which they were built (1). However, all three factors separate Shelby’s current cars from all the rest of the Cobra replicas, AC MK IVs, COB/COX continuation cars, etc. So, to our way of thinking, the current crop of Cobras are genuine but are not original.

Statement superseded by Registry which takes the identical position in 2008/9 when issued.

[Joe's Garage]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

You want me to explain an add error over 10 years ago? ...

Yeah, how you added ORIGINAL

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

Oh, BTW that thread was back in 2004 and I just notieced in that thread SAAC had its statement position on Continuation Cobras long before SAAC had it's little tiff with Carroll in 2008. Ned the "curator" was wrong on that one too.

Here is the quote from the 2004 post from SAAC:

As far as CSX4000 and CSX7000 cars are concerned, SAAC accepts these cars as genuine Shelby American Cobras (as opposed to "original" Shelby American Cobras). The definition we use to identify an original Cobra is one which was, 1) built between 1961 and 1968, 2) at the direction of and under contract from Carroll Shelby/Shelby American Inc., and 3) sold by Shelby American or one of its franchised dealers. The only difference between original Cobras and CSX4000 and CSX7000 cars is the time frame in which they were built (1). However, all three factors separate Shelby’s current cars from all the rest of the Cobra replicas, AC MK IVs, COB/COX continuation cars, etc. So, to our way of thinking, the current crop of Cobras are genuine but are not original.

Statement superseded by Registry which takes the identical position in 2008/9 when issued.

That 2004 statement doesn't mean a thing, probably preceding or during the hostilities with Shelby.

Ned's thoughts on replicas must mean something to you, since you're perseverating on it. Ned has said "certain liberties were taken" with the Registry, which was published around 2008. And you're going backwards in time? Now it's the Year 2004, how about 1995 when they started the cloning process. Or even better back to 1965 and make your car a CSX3000.

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TODAY posted on the website, even remotely saying that your car is genuine. Let's think about 2015, not a decade ago. And come on, provide links, so we can have context too. It's not hard, even you can do it.

Again, more nonsense posted that proves less than before, which was nothing. Let's call a spade a spade. It's a replica. And you've admitted to that.