I've been wondering about this for a while. Hemming's Muscle Car magazine has been following the story of a clone Hemi Cuda in New York. It was just settled in court that the sale was illegal because the seller did not advise the buyer the car was a clone. I'm not caring whether clones should be built or not, but by current rules this car or others could be shown in AACA. Race cars are documented, why not regular cars? Most cars have trim tags, most giving engine info, color, major options,etc. To put it in perspective for '37gothd. Suppose Model T's body style could be told by the serial number and you changed a homely sedan into a bitchen roadster. Should it be shown in AACA?

My question is why go to the effort of changing the sedan to a roadster? You probably can buy all the reproduction parts to build the car from the ground up. All you need is a title.

With as many reproduction parts that are available for some of these cars, your question has been in the back of my mind just not specfic to clones.

the Hemi clone was not a "clone" but a car with a fake VIN tag changing the car to a Hemi Cuda.

Clones are already in the AACA, the 71 340 Challenger R/T convertible, that got a "senoir" at Hershey began life has a 318 not R/T convertible.

AACA judging does not verify VINs or the info on a "data tag"

I think the main point/question that Choc has is that AACA makes the onwers of race cars prove the cars is truly the car the onwer claims it is. It's as close to verifing a VIN or data tag as you can get on a race car. So how comes someone with say a 1969 Dodge Daytona or Plymouth Superbird doesn't have to prove that it was truly that, instead of a Dodge Charger or Plymouth Super Bee.

And just a personal thought here:
in that lawsuit, what if that car was wearing an AACA Grand National Senior badge? The buyer may have used that badge in deciding on buying the car. After all, it won the top most award in the largest car club in the world, it should be right. Now that buyer would be upset with the seller AND AACA and you know how tongues wag when someone's upset with someone else (bad PR for us).

I think a quick decode of vin tag and other tags on a car would be easy to do. I guess the problem will be that if someone takes the trouble to change a vin they will be willing to forge other documents. It could end up as a paperwork nightmare to actually prove your car is what it started life as.

<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" /> I guess we could take all of the Model A bodies off of the Chassis so we could see the frame serial number <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />.... but maybe that might be a bit of trouble. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> I think this would be opening up a can of worms that needs to stay shut. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

This is a Post WWII car problem IMO, too many options, "matching number" crap, my car is better that you car, got by "Build Sheet" BS. No comment except it makes the Model A Ford restorers look downright SANE! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Amen. This is a nightmare in many regards with no quick fix solutions for a club that allows vehicles from A to Z and cars that span 100 plus years of manufacturing. It is a concern, it is being discussed but it is nothing new in the hobby as even some brass cars are nothing more than clones.

In the Brass Car world I don't see any differance restoring a 1904 Oldsmobile that sat outside for 75 years and needs everything reproduced except the engine, and a guy building a 1904 Olds around an engine. However the same can't be said about a vehicle in the Race Car class 24A&B since the vehicles in that car must be proven to be the vehicles thay are.

Sparky's statement and MCHinson's pretty much summerizes why it would be really hard for AACA to check the numbers for all the different years and models.

My point exactly....

The Judging system is designed to do what it needs to do. Winning an award does not guarantee that a particular vehicle IS as it left the factory. It is judged against How it COULD have appeared when it left the factory.

The system is not broken. It works about as good as it can given the variety of cars it has to fit. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

MCHinson, I think you missed my point. '37 doesn't realise they built cars after 1942, my comment about the T was a joke. The clones I actually was referring to are late model 50's and up. One of my last trips to Carlisle there was a vendor with ALL the repro parts to turn a 2 door Tri-5 Chevy into a convertible. This would be OK to show in AACA? I have a problem with that. The fake Yencos and Thunderbolts, as well.The boat may have been missed but it didn't sink yet. The problem should be fixed before there's a load of fake Roush Mustangs on the field. AACA says "as built" but it doesn't really mean it.There are several AACA award winning cars that can't show in their own marque clubs because of modifacations, sunroofs, engines, etc. Why shouldn't the AACA standards be close to the same.

Another good example is that it has been said that there are more '57 Chevys with fuel injection today than what was originally built in 1957.

Not true Doug! I've actually bought three of them new starting with a 1970 LeMans Convertable.<img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> If the late model clones are a problem then the late model guys will have to fix it. Late model guys would be clueless judgeing Stanley Steamers, and the Stanley guys wouldn't know much about the new stuff. As the flood gates open futher with new cars the club gets more and more less interested members in the judging system.

Interesting topic, i got three 42 Packard, I want a 42 Rollstone, so if I build one, it for me not to compete, I think.

I can't help but notice the number of "clones" that seem to be rolling across the block at B-J...

Of the "muscle" variety...

Are the folks that build these "clones" trying to win trophies or simply out to make big bucks ?


In the case of my own '41 De Soto, I have been digging into my factory parts book, and have found that there were a number of running production changes regarding various features on the '41 De Sotos, from dashboards to garnish mouldings, to fender welting, to a host of other "minor" changes... and the books lists which version of multiple parts were used up to such & such body-number or serial number... and the change-over points are not the same for every part affected...

So, to judge whether or not a given '41 De Soto were "correct" (quality of resto or preservation notwithstanding), would require that a judge be familiar with all the peculiarities of that particular marque for that particular year... that's a tall order for a show judge...

On the other hand, if a given '41 De Soto were competing for an AACA Senior, I should think that this sort of attention to detail is warranted.

If a car is constructed from parts and/or several vehicles, to represent something it never was in the first place, then the owner/creator should be forthcoming about that.

If not, then wouldn't they be trying to achieve a deception ? ( And for some, I guess the joy is in the challenge of trying to pass-off a fake)

And if the prize-winning example turns-out to be a fake, then doesn't that qualify it as a "replica" ?

At least in the world of "fine art", there are some very, very good "fakes", that are very nice to look at, and are excellent examples of their maker's skills ... but they're still not the "real
Mc Coy"

I agree that this is a can of worms, but perhaps for later-model vehicles, that are more likely to be "faked", is it not so far-fetched to have class-experts armed with the various numbers-books so that things a '70 Hemi- Walleye could be thoroughly checked-out ?


As for somebody recreating the rest of an appropriate body around an extant running gear from say a 1904 Olds or the like, again, as long as the owners offer disclosure, I don't see harm in that effort... but again, it would largely be a "replica", wouldn't it ?

(Perhaps I'm missing the point of all this; a "fake" is something designed to deceive; a "replica" is more of an homage... so I guess it comes down to intent, or motive... <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> )

I'm a Model A Ford owner. Finding a Model A with THE original engine, or THE original shocks, or THE original (insert part of your choice here) is often a tough order. Lots of used parts from other Original Model A's (which might have been on a different body style) are needed to restore the average Model A Ford. (Yes, even some high quality reproduction parts sometimes slip in.) <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I don't really want to see the frame serial number on my Model A, and that is the only way to actually see if the car is the car as it is titled. What in the heck would I do if it did not agree with the title? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

I guess Cloning is too advanced a concept for me to understand or worry about. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Even if the judges were armed with decoding books and the likes a real problem is that guys are buying total wrecks of a valuable car just for the VIN numbers. They cut them out and weld them on a different body. Or better yet stamp there own VIN. For Mustangs at least the data plates that had a lot of option information on them were reproduced for years. So anyone could stamp what they wanted.

The other thing is how far are you going to go? I believe the AACA has always said that as long as it was an option for that model and year it was ok. Are we going to start saying that now you have to have the exact paint color the car started with?

The building around a VIN issue has been a hot issue since so many reproductions became available. Isn?t it Dynacorn which is reproducing an entire car? Its a big question with no easy answer. I don?t know if there is we can do to catch everything but maybe we can find ways to discourage some of it.

What about the "weight" that a given organization's credibility carries? If you are serious about buying a Corvette, for example, you might look at if a car has achieved NCRS certification versus an AACA Senior or Grand National, or whatever, award. Not all marques have thier own organization such as this, but if it does, I would say that there is where these details are meaningful versus an all-inclusive stage.

The fact that mis-represented cars are able to get through at AACA events is indeed unfortunate, but because of the wide range of stuff that is included I have to believe that it would be impossible to get that personal with each car that shows up. As the viewers, we'll just have to take these cars with a grain of salt.

What about the guy who has a rusted out '58 Chrysler convertible and restores it using a 2dr hardtop donor car to replace the main frame, quarters, rockers, doors, floorpans, etc. - all stuff that is not reproduced - will that be considered a clone, or a legitimate car? I've sold a number of cars to guys to be restored in this manner, the wrecks we find up here it's usually the only way to save them.

I guess it depends on whether or not that '58 Chrysler convertible transmogrifies into a "300 letter-car" along the way ?

The muscle car Mopars are really a shaky area on this--the build sheets exist up to the '67 model year, and are gone after that. The cars that are really hot now are 68-71 Hemi-powered cars, and E bodies, and there is a little cottage industry out there popping out fender tags (that say what you pay them to say) and one self-appointed expert whose every word is taken as gospel truth. B-J likes what happens when these cars cross the block, and that is going to tempt a few souls. The same thing has been happening to Schwinn Phantom bikes (clones from lesser models) and Lionel immediate postwar F-3 Santa Fe Diesel A-B-A combinations--you have to know your product before putting your precious $$$ down.
The ultimate award of a given vehicle usually comes from the marque club that knows that make and year and model, down to the fastener heads, hose clamps,underhood finishes and QC man grease paint marks. No car restored without strict adherence to originality score high with most of these groups.
The AACA judges are good, and know a great deal about many cars, but none of us knows everything about every given make and model down to minutia. I remember showing an Auburn at Hershey, and Madame judge wanted to dock us points because "we moved the battery from under the seat to under the fender". We politely pointed out that all Auburn models in this year-series-type have their batteries under the fender, with a cover. She insisted that "all cars from the thirties had the batteries under the seats". We were able to pull another well-known Auburn owner into the discussion, he affirmed what we said, and the points were not knocked. That would not happen at a single-marque judging meet--those guys live,eat,sleep and breathe that particular car, and know where, and how everything is supposed to be. On the other hand, they might know something completely arcane about "how your car is supposed to be" that you did not find when you got it to restore, and the deduction of points can be a shocker.
Not to slam the AACA and their judging--any group that promotes the caliber of restoration we see at the Hershey show every year must be doing something right.

not true about mopar build sheets, i have one from a 74 cuda

Quote; "The ultimate award of a given vehicle usually comes from the marque club that knows that make and year and model, down to the fastener heads, hose clamps, underhood finishes and QC man grease paint marks. No car restored without strict adherence to originality score high with most of these groups."

That would be nice however there are a few marquee clubs that aren't even close to judging perfection. The one large club in particular like many has one national convention a year, no experienced judges or training and knowingly allows false data plates if the owner wants to change colors to either stock or wild. I have had food vendors judge my vehicle as they were that short on judges.

It helps to read your magazines! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Last week's Autoweek (which I just got around to reading this afternoon) had a feature on an allegedly cloned GT40. Along with the story was a reference to a service by the FIA for certifying high end classics as authentic.

An FIA Heritage Certificate would be a very expensive prospect, especially for a car in the U.S. It might be a good idea for someone with an easily/frequently cloned valuable car like a GT40 or early Ferrari.

Perhaps it would be a good idea for someone in the U.S. to start up a service like this for muscle cars and Full Classics.