Replica E-Types: why undervalued/underappreciated?
Discussion
Pistom said:
I don't understand the appeal of lookalikes and I wouldn't like to spend money on a car that has so many details compromised.
There is a thread here about a DB5 replica which I suspect could turn out like these cars did.
The reson the cars do not command a lot of money is because they are so compromised. The reason cars like C type replicas command so much is because they are great cars in their own right.
To enjoy cars like the Challenger and Wildcat, you have to accept them for what they are. A pity really as a well engineered accurate copy of an E in GRP could have been a great useable car in a way an original sadly isn't.
Too many people feel as I do about these cars hence the values we see them at.
Erm..... have you ever seen a good Challenger up close? I suspect not. Wildcats are cheap fun and priced accordingly. I have my mums husband's blue one and a mate has a red one. I promise you without tapping the bodywork or looking underneath even the average e-type enthusiast could EASILY be fooled into thinking they were real. Many times both have been parked in e-type sections of classic car shows and nobody noticed. £4k paintjobs do help though!!!There is a thread here about a DB5 replica which I suspect could turn out like these cars did.
The reson the cars do not command a lot of money is because they are so compromised. The reason cars like C type replicas command so much is because they are great cars in their own right.
To enjoy cars like the Challenger and Wildcat, you have to accept them for what they are. A pity really as a well engineered accurate copy of an E in GRP could have been a great useable car in a way an original sadly isn't.
Too many people feel as I do about these cars hence the values we see them at.
Edited by Furyblade_Lee on Tuesday 16th July 21:08
Replying to an old topic here, but something I heard concerning wildcats and Challenger which I wanna mention. I've noticed that on the triple C Challenger forum, a member states that the e type replica used in Mutual Friends and Extras is his and is not a JPR Wildcat but a Challenger. With lots of typical sniggering and snobbery tones, he pretty much says it's obvious it ain't a Wildcat. The reg number used for the car in the series - 595 DFD - is likely from a Challenger, but looking at photos from a blog on the net of supposed said car showing the same number, it's clear its not the same car as used in Mutual Friends (using false numbers is often the procedure to within TV productions/films). The E Type on the blog I came across (which the restorer names 'Lady Marilyn') has the reg no. 595 DFD and is an identical copy of a series 1 E type, aside from the different door handles, which tells me indicates its a Challenger, and the blog states is a Challenger. The replica used in Mutual Friends carrying the samebnumber clearly looks different as does the colour - silver and blue: door handles are like those off a Wildcat, the petrol cap isn't were it should be but is instead above the boot, rear bumpers don't curve all the way round as they should do (indicating they are original bumpers that are on a wider rear).
No idea why this chap thinks its the same car (a Challenger - if based exactly on a real series 1 E type as a lot are), when it looks more like a Ford based Wildcat. I'm quite positive that an E type kit car very much resembling the car used in Mutual Friends was for sale last year (with the reg DAP 262B), and it clearly stated was a JPR Wildcat, Jaguar E Type replica. To me it looked like a Wildcat rather than a Challenger
No idea why this chap thinks its the same car (a Challenger - if based exactly on a real series 1 E type as a lot are), when it looks more like a Ford based Wildcat. I'm quite positive that an E type kit car very much resembling the car used in Mutual Friends was for sale last year (with the reg DAP 262B), and it clearly stated was a JPR Wildcat, Jaguar E Type replica. To me it looked like a Wildcat rather than a Challenger
Edited by Jukebag on Friday 20th March 17:05
Edited by Jukebag on Friday 20th March 19:07
Edited by Jukebag on Friday 20th March 19:31
Furyblade_Lee said:
....... although it appeared with the reg no. 595 DFD ( now assigned to another Jaguar ) not the DAP plate it has now.....
Suggests it was not this Edited by Furyblade_Lee on Thursday 16th May 15:29
As you guys have resurrected this old thread.... My stepfather had his Challenger fully resprayed in the same light metallic blue as it was, all to just delete the non original SVA side repeaters....
Drastic! but he just sold it for £24k, and the guy had the money to buy a real one for £70 but chose the Challenger. It was that good. I am gutted as I had my eye on it.....
Drastic! but he just sold it for £24k, and the guy had the money to buy a real one for £70 but chose the Challenger. It was that good. I am gutted as I had my eye on it.....
Just spotted this thread. The Challenger from Mutual friends (and also appears on the lottery show rollover adverts) is mine. I have pictures of it on the set at Mutual friends as well as a Vanity Fair photoshoot. Its had different plates on for different roles but is the same car.
The pictures of from the shows that are earlier on this thread are of the challenger, not a wildcat. The history of the Triple C Challenger is well documented being based on mould taken from an original 3.8 series one E type. The blue wildcat (also on this thread) illustrates the (really significant) difference.
Whether replica's are good or bad is an individual point of view. I have many framed prints in my house as I like them visually, the fact that they aren't the original bothers me not, perhaps it would bother some and they would prefer to only have originals. Thats the power of choice.
Value is whatever someone is prepared to pay for something, I desperately wanted a series one, and a real one (even a near basket case) was too far out of my league. Hence the challenger, with all jag running gear and mostly original e type fixtures and fittings it is perfect for me - plus I don't have to worry about rust.
Horses for courses, I'm happy with my car and as for value - it doesn't really bother me, that's not why I bought it.
Oh, and I didn't intend to belittle anyone, internet forums are a funny place and to some opinion becomes fact to easily...
The pictures of from the shows that are earlier on this thread are of the challenger, not a wildcat. The history of the Triple C Challenger is well documented being based on mould taken from an original 3.8 series one E type. The blue wildcat (also on this thread) illustrates the (really significant) difference.
Whether replica's are good or bad is an individual point of view. I have many framed prints in my house as I like them visually, the fact that they aren't the original bothers me not, perhaps it would bother some and they would prefer to only have originals. Thats the power of choice.
Value is whatever someone is prepared to pay for something, I desperately wanted a series one, and a real one (even a near basket case) was too far out of my league. Hence the challenger, with all jag running gear and mostly original e type fixtures and fittings it is perfect for me - plus I don't have to worry about rust.
Horses for courses, I'm happy with my car and as for value - it doesn't really bother me, that's not why I bought it.
Oh, and I didn't intend to belittle anyone, internet forums are a funny place and to some opinion becomes fact to easily...
If the Mutual Friends E-Type is yours Bronco and is a Challenger, then why is the petrol cap above the boot lid and not at the side like they were located on almost all Challengers and all E-Types?, and why does that car have door handles which are not off a Challenger, and clearly not from an original E-Type either?; those door handles are identical to those used on the JPR Wildcat. In certain scenes in the series you can tell the back is slightly wider. hence why the original bumpers don't go all the way around, which is what most Wildcats were made like (being based on a Ford chassis), as well as an often wider front, though for some reason there seems to be variations on a few I've seen. The lotto rollover ad E-Type looks like a Challenger because of its unmistakable likeness to a real one, wheras the Mutual Friends one is clearly a different car and looks more of a "look-a-like" rather than a true replica, as pointed out with the differences above. Look up Mutual Friends on youtube and compare that car to the one on the lotto ad, you'll notice they're not the same, only the number is the same.
Edited by Jukebag on Sunday 24th May 21:00
Speaking of Wildcats and Challengers, but does anyone knowledgable on those cars production know why Triple C or JPR Cars never produced fixed-head coupe versions of the E-Type but only produced roadsters (open two seaters)?. Was it purely down to more demand for convertibles, or was it down to production costs or even difficulties on producing moulds?, or maybe license reasons?. I'm intrigued to know because I find it strange there wasn't any demand for the FHC or 2+2 (either as factory bult or self built), even though alot of true E-Type enthusiats will swear that they much prefer the asthestics of the fixed head coupe over the roadster. I'm sure there would've been interest and demand on the replica FHC versions, not only this but not everyone likes open top riding with exposure to the elements. I think JPR Cars built 2 2+2s, but that's about it and no FHCs were ever made as far as I'm aware. I also know of a club member who built his own FHC from a mould he took off a company which once made a few E-Type kits in the 80s, but apart from that that's it. It seems ashame there was never any coupe kits made.
Edited by Jukebag on Sunday 24th May 21:29
Jukebag said:
Speaking of Wildcats and Challengers, but does anyone knowledgable on those cars production know why Triple C or JPR Cars never produced fixed-head coupe versions of the E-Type but only produced roadsters (open two seaters)?. Was it purely down to more demand for convertibles, or was it down to production costs or even difficulties on producing moulds?, or maybe license reasons?. I'm intrigued to know because I find it strange there wasn't any demand for the FHC or 2+2 (either as factory bult or self built), even though alot of true E-Type enthusiats will swear that they much prefer the asthestics of the fixed head coupe over the roadster. I'm sure there would've been interest and demand on the replica FHC versions, not only this but not everyone likes open top riding with exposure to the elements. I think JPR Cars built 2 2+2s, but that's about it and no FHCs were ever made as far as I'm aware. I also know of a club member who built his own FHC from a mould he took off a company which once made a few E-Type kits in the 80s, but apart from that that's it. It seems ashame there was never any coupe kits made.
One of the kit companies (I think it was JPR) made a very nice FHC lightweight 'replica'.... unless I'm very much mistaken or dreaming.Edited by Jukebag on Sunday 24th May 21:29
Fastpedeller said:
One of the kit companies (I think it was JPR) made a very nice FHC lightweight 'replica'.... unless I'm very much mistaken or dreaming.
Ahh, you're right, I forgot about those lightweight replicas, yes I believe JPR did make a few or so racing lightweights, though I seem to think they were mainly low drag versions. It's only recently I've seen one of those for sale. I believe there are two red low drag coupes known to exist (in the UK), and maybe one in the US. I know there was also a silver low drag JPR Wildcat which was for sale sometime last year. There's also currently for sale a roadster "le mans" with a green stripe across it advertised on the Jaguar classifieds website, priced at around 11 grand; no idea if it's a genuine JPR Wildcat built racer or some custom job. Aside from low drag coupes and the like, what I meant was that there has never been any factory-spec/styled replioa (Wildcat or Challenger) series 1 fixed-head coupes that were made. I've never been a fan of the racing E-Types, and let's be honest, they look ugly and lack the beauty of the production FHC and roadster. No matter how much the original racing E-Types sell for (often in the few millions), nothing will beat the looks of ths styling of the factory production FHC and OTS.
Edited by Jukebag on Monday 25th May 21:58
Edited by Jukebag on Monday 25th May 22:00
Just seen this resurrected thread! Without making a phone call to my stepfather to confirm, I think he owned both the cars on TV in question but the number plates were probobly not what they wear now or maybe even fake ones or ones he has on retention.... The film companies don't like repetition or sometimes want a specific year on a plate. Don't automatically think if the car is wearing your plate it is your actual car!!
Just seen this resurrected thread! Without making a phone call to my stepfather to confirm, I think he owned both the cars on TV in question but the number plates were probobly not what they wear now or maybe even fake ones or ones he has on retention.... The film companies don't like repetition or sometimes want a specific year on a plate. Don't automatically think if the car is wearing your plate it is your actual car!!
Old thread but thought I would reply, I owned the JPR Wildcat used in Mutual Friends and Extras.
Between 2001-2004 I painted it and add all the genuine e type parts, yes it was a rover V8.
Sold it when I went back to Australia, not sure if they guy who bought it is the same one who made it a movie car thou.
Here is a picture of me in the car at the Bath to Bournemouth classic Car run circa 2004.
Check out the registration plate.
Between 2001-2004 I painted it and add all the genuine e type parts, yes it was a rover V8.
Sold it when I went back to Australia, not sure if they guy who bought it is the same one who made it a movie car thou.
Here is a picture of me in the car at the Bath to Bournemouth classic Car run circa 2004.
Check out the registration plate.
The 595 reg no of the Mutual Friends Wildcat above comes up on the DVLA site as being a blue Jaguar, so I presume the reg has been transferred to another car since you owned the car. I have seen the Wildcat you owned in more recent years when it came up for sale on car and classic with the same colour and identical interior, the only difference was the reg number, which from what I can recall was something like DAP..... I remember saving the photos at the time but I've since lost em when my portable hard drive malfunctioned. I'm 99% sure it was the same car you owned and was used in Mutual Friends.
Edit: Just noticed from an older post the screenshot of the above Wildcat that was for sale a few years ago. I've just checked the DVLA but the DAP reg when it was for sale comes up as untaxed since 2008, how can this be when it was only for sale about 4 years ago?. Someone's got their info wrong...or maybe whoever was selling the car put on a false number plate to hide the real number, or said it was MOTd and taxed when it wasnt. DAP 262B shows up as a silver 1964 Ford. Errr?...I don't get it. Was this the donor car?.
Edit: Just noticed from an older post the screenshot of the above Wildcat that was for sale a few years ago. I've just checked the DVLA but the DAP reg when it was for sale comes up as untaxed since 2008, how can this be when it was only for sale about 4 years ago?. Someone's got their info wrong...or maybe whoever was selling the car put on a false number plate to hide the real number, or said it was MOTd and taxed when it wasnt. DAP 262B shows up as a silver 1964 Ford. Errr?...I don't get it. Was this the donor car?.
Edited by Jukebag on Sunday 9th June 19:27
Edited by Jukebag on Sunday 9th June 19:52
I've never heard of Ford Anglia's being used as a donor for Wildcats.
If the original reg number was changed (presumably to DAP 262B) after you owned it, then why does the DAP reg come up as being untaxed (and presumably sorn) from 2008 onwards?, yet the car clearly had that number when it was for sale only a few years ago, and from what I can recall from the ad, I'm sure it was said to be MOTd, unless it's exempt from tax?. If the donor car assigned to the Wildcat on that number, then wouldn't DVLA state it as being JPR or Wildcat?.
If the original reg number was changed (presumably to DAP 262B) after you owned it, then why does the DAP reg come up as being untaxed (and presumably sorn) from 2008 onwards?, yet the car clearly had that number when it was for sale only a few years ago, and from what I can recall from the ad, I'm sure it was said to be MOTd, unless it's exempt from tax?. If the donor car assigned to the Wildcat on that number, then wouldn't DVLA state it as being JPR or Wildcat?.
Gassing Station | Kit Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff