What's the difference between "clone" and "recreation"?

[MichaelRW]

I was watching the Barrett-Jackson auction from Palm Beach, FL last night on Speedvision and the announcer referred to some cars as cloned and others as a recreation. The way he was talking about those two words gave me the impression they had different meanings but he never explained the difference.

One of the recreations was a 1970 Dodge Super Bee that was originally a 383 but is now, of course, a hemi.

[Charger_Fan]

I'd say it's just different terminology, used as a tool to attempt to pry the last buck from someone's wallet.

[ScottW]

You can add the term 'tribute car' to the list, I've seen that one used too. I don't know if there is a difference between the terms or not - and if there is it doesn't make any difference to me they mean the same thing.

[hemigeno]

I think it depends on whether the owner of the car associates any stigma with the term "clone".  If they don't like "clone", it's a "re-creation". 

It's all a matter of semantics, but it boils down to a seller trying to maximize the value of what they're selling (as Charger_Fan said).  Similar to calling a used car "experienced", "pre-owned", etc. etc....  anything but what it is - USED...

[Old Moparz]

I never use either word for a car, it just doesn't sound good. I also don't see too much of a difference. I like the word "modified" or "restified" or "restored" but if I had to define them, how about, I'd like to clone a Playboy centerfold to keep at home, & I'd like to re-create the night I was with an old girlfriend & her friend.      

Big difference there I think.

[MichaelRW]

Bottomline, I guess it really doesn't matter what the difference may or may not be. I was more curious than anything. But thanks for your comments.

Now Old Moparz I like your idea of cloning.

[BigBlockSam]

i like the term replica

[Silver R/T]

same meaning

[jaak]

i like the term replica

me too

But to me restored is a term loosly used. Restored to me is concours, bottom line.   thats why I like to use the term restify, fix-up, modify, etc. when talking about my charger,   anything but restore, restore means to make new, and the only way to do that is concours, and I am not doing a concours restoration on my charger

[Charger_Fan]

.

Now Old Moparz I like your idea of cloning.

Me too! Much better than that guy with the sheep idea.

[ChargerBill]

Shoot, there are probably 300 different opinions on this topic. I'll take a stab based on hanging out with car buffs all my life and being in car clubs since I was 19 years old.

Restoration = back to original, the way it rolled off the assembly line. There are many different LEVELS of restoration from simply slapping on OEM or reproduction parts and putting a fresh coat of paint all the way to a rotisserie or concourse restoration.

Restified = the car has been completely gone through and everything refreshed, replaced, back to new but parts may not be original and upgrades could have been made such as suspension, charging system, engine, etc...

Customized = could be "restified" but not "restored". Usually means body modifications are evident, along with possible interior, dash, engine bay, etc... Some car shows consider a car with more than a couple deviations from stock a "custom" while others look for obvious body modifications before classifying a car as a custom, so this term gets a little cloudy.

Clone = can be "restified" but not "restored" (remember, restored is back to original) and not "customized" because a clone is a reproduction of a factory car that actually   DID roll off the assembly line, however THIS car did not begin life as the car you are cloning it to be.

Recreation = is turning a car into another car that once existed but was not an assembly line car, and was most likely a purpose built vehicle such as a K&K Insurance Daytona, a non-original General Lee, a Dick Landy Charger, a Hemi Under Glass Barracuda or a Bullit '68.... This could also be called a "tribute" car. Turning a grandma Charger into an R/T or 500 or Daytona would not be considered a recreation IMO, but would fall under the term "clone".

Don't confuse the act of "restoring" with the term used to label/describe the car. Only a factory original car can be legitimately LABELED "restored", be it concourse or otherwise. So in this sense, a truly "restored" car is in it's purest form...all others are not up to factory original specs.

Just my .02 ¢ for whatever it's worth...

[Ghoste]

Bill, I think traditionally, you would be correct, but today, almost all of those terms, and most definitely clone and recreation, are used to describe things which are imitations of something else for the purpos of making a bigger buck on a car.

[ChargerBill]

Bill, I think traditionally, you would be correct, but today, almost all of those terms, and most definitely clone and recreation, are used to describe things which are imitations of something else for the purpos of making a bigger buck on a car.

Yeah, I know, and that's too bad. The rhetorical geniuses in the hobby have muddied the definitions of these words in pursuit of the almighty dollar...which IMO is pure BS.

[Ghoste]

 

[69hemi]

Doesn't matter, if its not real, it is not real. 

[John_Kunkel]

I think the definition lies in the "creation" part of recreation.

A clone car is not a creation, it is a modification of an existing car to duplicate another car.

A recreation is the creation from scratch of another car, aka "replica".

Kinda like the "survivor" debate. 

[Ghoste]

If you "re" create something which was already created, is it not a replica as well?  A 69 Hemi Charger could only be created on a Dodge assembly line in 1969.  To re-create one now is only to clone or replicate it.

[jaak]

Doesn't matter, if its not real, it is not real.

well put

[ChargerBill]

Well, it's REAL if I can see it or touch it. It may not be original, but 99% of the carshow going public out there won't care. A Hemi clone may indeed have come off the assembly line with a 318, but if it has a 426 between the fenders today, it's still a Charger with a Hemi...thus, a Hemi Charger. I can see where owners of ORIGINAL R/T's, 500's, Daytonas and Hemi cars may get upset at the upsurge in cloning, but it isn't going away. And let's face it, the guy with an upgraded grandma Charger (Cuda, Roadrunner, GTX) will probably be less likely to fear driving it and have more fun with it than MOST owners of the original "real deal". Just goes to show you, you can't really have it both ways. Either you own a museum piece and rarely drive it (with a few guys as exceptions) or you own a clone and have a carefree blast. Personally, I'd rather have a fun driving the car, than just looking at it and polishing it while it creates perma-dents in my garage floor. I think anyone who has a problem with clones probably either ownes a "real" version of that clone, or has a monetary stake in the collectors end of the hobby/industry...or both as the case may be with HemiCudas, Daytonas, etc...

[Ghoste]

Exactly Bill and that's why the auction houses are trying to describe them in friendlier terms.  So the buyers of clones will pay more because they don't feel like they are getting a plastic imitation and the buyers of museum pieces won't be offended by all the knock offs.