Continuation CSX a "Kit car"?

[Nedsel]

Hmmm... according to that line of thinking, any car with a VIN of 001 is a real/original whatever, but anything with a later VIN is a replica, built on the same assembly line minutes after car #001. You said this wasn't rocket science, but let's get real.

The simple fact is that anything built to replicate something from years gone by is, well, a replica. Much as I like the new line of CSX cars, they are NOT a "1965 427 Cobra S/C." They are a replica of a 1965 427 Cobra S/C. Are they a genuine Shelby Cobra? Of course.

Is this really tough to grasp?

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

Hmmm...
Is this really tough to grasp?

OK, I think I've got it now... the new CSX cars are just as much a fake as my ERA, except they're made by Shelby, right?

[REAL 1]

Ned: Thats not according to my line of thinking, that was according to the dictionary definition you used. Now you don't want to use it?

What does "years later mean"? You say 1997. But after 1962 why can't we say those Cobras made years later in 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968 are replicas of the originals made in 1962 (CSX2000) and the first 3000 series?

Fact is the definitional use of "replica" is really not applicable here. We know what the average Joe means when he asks is it a "replica" and its not "Gee is that the same car made by the same manufacturer but after the original one"?

As I noted above SAAC spells it all out. The rest is just semantics.

One thing for sure...if its not a Shelby its NOT a Cobra but a car that looks like a Cobra. End game. (Limited exceptions as to some ACs).

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

One thing for sure...if its not a Shelby its NOT a Cobra but a car that looks like a Cobra. End game. (Limited exceptions as to some ACs).

As I said above, that's your opinion and it maybe SAAC's, but it isn't mine. My Kirkham is Cobra. Tough, that's my opinion.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

As I said above, that's your opinion and it maybe SAAC's, but it isn't mine. My Kirkham is Cobra. Tough, that's my opinion.

If you've got any guts at all, you'll meet Real 1 behind the playground after school and settle this once and for all....

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by patrickt

If you've got any guts at all, you'll meet Real 1 behind the playground after school and settle this once and for all....

In the end we all die. Does any of this nonsense really matter? I'm glad they don't have these arguments with Porsches and Corvettes. Oops, they do.

[Got the Bug]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

In the end we all die. Does any of this nonsense really matter?

...and in the end, your Shelby CSX kit car Cobra replica is sold or passed down to your heirs.

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Got the Bug

...and in the end, your Shelby CSX kit car Cobra replica is sold or passed down to your heirs.

Doug, when I see your car going down the road next to me, I'll look over to my passenger and say "There goes a really nice MK III."

And then you'll say to your passenger, "hey, nice Kirkham next to us."

If we see a CSX traveling with us, then we'll both say "There's a Shelby Cobra" and our passengers will each ask us "they look similar, nay replicas, why are they called different names?" We'll answer because Shelby sued everyone for the right to call his car a Cobra."

[saltytri]

Originally Posted by REAL 1

What does "years later mean"? You say 1997. But after 1962 why can't we say those Cobras made years later in 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968 are replicas of the originals made in 1962 (CSX2000) and the first 3000 series?

That is an embarrassingly lame argument. Real, you're Really sounding like a devious lawyer or, heaven forbid, Hillary Clinton doing her pathetically transparent spinning routine.

Everyone who has at least a couple of brain cells rubbing together knows that Real Cobras were made in a more-or-less continuous production run from 1962 to 1967. Unless it was spit out by Shelby in those years, it's a fake, notwithstanding the efforts of a small group of stubborn people who seek financial gain and/or a much-needed ego boost by contending otherwise (again, certain leeway is reasonably allowed for a very small number of AC cars produced close in time to the relevant period).

[Sharroll Celby]

One thing for sure...if its not a Shelby its NOT a Cobra but a car that looks like a Cobra. End game. (Limited exceptions as to some ACs).[/quote]

Just to throw a monkey wrench into the works, (and correct me IF I am wrong), but doesnt Ford Motor Company OWN the rights to the name "Cobra"?And if Ford DOES own the name "Cobra", unless a vehicle is built BY FORD and called a "Cobra", then anything else CANNOT be called a "Cobra".

The apoplectic plot thickens.........

[Power Surge]

Originally Posted by Nedsel

The simple fact is that anything built to replicate something from years gone by is, well, a replica. Much as I like the new line of CSX cars, they are NOT a "1965 427 Cobra S/C." They are a replica of a 1965 427 Cobra S/C. Are they a genuine Shelby Cobra? Of course.

Is this really tough to grasp?

Not at all. That's it in a nutshell. I agree 100%. My car is a replica of an original car. AND, it's a real Shelby Cobra.

But just as members here point out what's being asked when people ask if it's a "real" Cobra, the same can be said for what are people asking when they ask if it's a replica, or kit car.

If they are asking if it's a replica or a kit car, they are asking if it's another brand of Cobra. And it's not. It's a Shelby. So when people ask if it's a replica, no, it's not. It IS a replica in the written definition of the word, but it's not a replica when it's being asked, because we know what people are asking.

And don't try to argue this, because this is the SAME arguement that is put forth by the nay-sayers when people ask if it's a real Cobra. Yes, 99% of them are asking if it's a 60s car, because they don't know any different. It IS a real Shelby Cobra by written definition, but not in the sense of what's being asked.

So what does all this translate to? In written definition form, it's exactly what Ned wrote above. In reality (car show questions), you MUST answer both questions with a footnote to be truthful. If asked if my car is a real Shelby, I answer "yes, it's a real Shelby, but not an original 60s car". If they ask to explain, I am happy to. If they ask if it's a replica, I say "no, it's a real Shelby". If they ask to explain, I am happy to.

Unfortunately for Evan, other CSX owners, and all the CSX nay-sayers, you can argue until you are blue in the face, but the fact is that there IS a cut and dry written definition on what the car is, and there IS NOT a cut and dry definition when being asked in person. There must always be a footnote attached to answer each question truthfully.

That's my 2 cents on a very worn out subject.