They’re not exactly real, but they’re not fake, either. They’re way cheaper than the originals, but they’re still very expensive. Most of them aren’t street legal, but many serious vintage racing events would turn them away. Such is the dilemma of these so-called “continuation” cars, which come about when carmakers dig into their back catalogues and build exact copies of their most famous, most highly prized hits. Something of a recent phenomenon, they’re also a bit of a conundrum, both in their identity and their place in the market. The hobby struggles to define them, so it’s no surprise that the market struggles to value them ... Read the full article on Hagerty.com:
Complicated, yet simple. Actual classics continue to be allowed on public roads, exempt from current regulation out of a "fairness doctrine" of not seizing them with retroactive laws. Making new cars that look like classics doesn't change the fact they're new cars, and ignoring the laws we enforce larger carmakers in following is cheating in every sense.
Here is the real problem. Owners and dealers of the original cars see these as a threat to the value of their cars. It is supply and demand. They snub these and see it as taking money from their pocket. The will still see 7-8 figures but it would temper their values.
We just saw chasing classics the other day about buying a low end Bugatti or a repo Type 35 that was well done for much less.
If you truly love cars for being cars you will not have a problem with these as long as they are represented properly. No claiming they are real or competing at shows with the originals in class.
But others who still may love cars will reject these as they also see the originals as investments.
We see reproduction in the art world. Prints are often made by the artist. They are accepted for what they are. The originals still are of great value and are exhibited vs the prints. These is no reason these new cars should not be treated as a print.
I also see these as much better than a fiberglass cobra with a FI 5.0. At least they are close to the real thing and are much like a print vs a cartoon image.
Personally, I think these cars should follow the same rules like California SB100 for low volume, kit and replicars. It is not as if any of these will be daily drivers.
A car made by Aston Martin or Jaguar that looks like the classic in every way and made by the same factory people, would be a great compromise in my opinion, except for one thing. If you can't take them on the road, then its a non-starter. What good is a car that can't be driven or competed in?
When will someone with the resources figure out that it's the design, size, look etc that those of us that can't afford the real thing crave? I think there's a monster market available - as Cobra knock-offs have demonstrated, for beautiful and more affordable classics. I'm sure there are hard core licensing agreements that would need to be hammered out before anything that looks too authentic could be reproduced. But what about something just slightly different? There are tons of 4.2 liter Jaguar 6 cylinder engines out there, if that's what a person wants. I would happily spend 100K on a good fiberglass replica of a D type. But, maybe there's not the demand I'm imagining. Just tired of the uberwealthy getting all the beautiful cars...Or, sour grapes!
I was walking down a street in Berlin in 2000 when I came across a parked Proteus C-Type. It really was a stunning car and given that you will pretty much never see a real one on the road it was nice that someone was out and actually enjoying it. Just in the way that Cobra replicas have not hurt the prices of the authentic cars, I am sure that the Proteus cars and the factory continuation ones will not harm prices of these very rare Jaguars.