The Ferrari Daytonas of Miami Vice

[Kavinsky]

Well this is odd, I just came across this Mcburnie Corvette C4 daytona replica

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Replica-Kit-Makes-Convertible-DAYTONA-REPLICA-Tom-McBurnie-The-best-/171329689413?forcerrptr=true&hash=item27e40b9745&item=171329689413&pt=US_Cars_Trucks

 

and I'm not sure what to make of it.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Kavinsky

[jurassic narc]

Well this is odd, I just came across this Mcburnie Corvette C4 daytona replica

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Replica-Kit-Makes-Convertible-DAYTONA-REPLICA-Tom-McBurnie-The-best-/171329689413?forcerrptr=true&hash=item27e40b9745&item=171329689413&pt=US_Cars_Trucks

 

and I'm not sure what to make of it.

He says it was built by McBurnie, but there is no McBurnie build plate pictured.  And he says it was built on a new car, and I have never heard of that being done.  Seems like the usual BS you see in so many of these ads.  Often not because they are being deceptive, but because they believe everything somebody else told them!  Overall, my thoughts are that it doesn't look like the Miami Vice car, and it doesn't look like a Ferrari, so what is it?

[Sonny-Burnett]

He says it was built by McBurnie, but there is no McBurnie build plate pictured.  And he says it was built on a new car, and I have never heard of that being done.  Seems like the usual BS you see in so many of these ads.  Often not because they are being deceptive, but because they believe everything somebody else told them!  Overall, my thoughts are that it doesn't look like the Miami Vice car, and it doesn't look like a Ferrari, so what is it?

 

No build plate on mine either but I do have purchase documentation.  Oddly though, the only thing resembling a McBurnie would be the door handles and maybe the fender flares. Nothing else really resembles his work that I can see. Not even the raised 'McBurnie' stamped into the hood or rocker panel.

 

And I recall in my marketing literature from McBurnie that he would build his kits on C3 Vettes. Don't recall him saying anything about C4.

 

Agree the one-time sellers may be more inclined to shoot straight vs the resellers but, in this case, if he really believes this to be a McBurnie. why wouldn't he volunteer some evidence/support?

[Sonny-Burnett]

Hi-   I am a new member to this site after just finding out about it.  Like all of you I am a HUGE Miami Vice fan......it has always been my favorite show.  Anyway, since college 25 years ago I always loved Crockett's Daytona.  I am not sure where else to post this question (would have liked to start a new link but don't know how) so I will post it here.

 

 

Where is the best place to find a "most accurate" replica of the MV car?? Is there a consensus on what that car would be?  I am not interested in a car that is "similar" to the MV Daytona....only a near 100% replica with a quality and high HP engine will do.  Not interested in buying a bucket of problems.  Also only am interested in cars with full documentation of it's build and who did it.  Also, the cars prior history mechanically needs to be documented.  I read this full thread but seem to be even more confused after reading as to the players in this industry. 

 

I fully understand that this kind of car will not sell cheaply.

 

  I am just looking for guidance of where to start and who I can and can't trust. 

 

 

 

And by the way, 'Camera Daytona' if you ever sell please add my name to the list of SERIOUS buyers!

 

Thanks!!

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

If I understood your question correctly, you're looking for a McBurnie as it appeared during the show's run? Well to my knowledge there is of course the Camera Car (Car4) owned by CameraDaytona and there are most likely no others like it now. Car 2 (stunt car)  is history. You can go back through this thread and see numerous pics of the Camera car showing interior and exterior views.

Jurassicnarc has also done an incredible job with his car making it resemble the show cars in many respects. He's done extensive rework and restoration on his car and is the closest thing to the show cars that I've seen.

However, I personally have not seen any others that closely resemble the cars in the show, particularly as it concerns the interior. The show cars had modified C3 dash and seats, and door panels, I believe.

But McBurnie also made faux Ferrari Daytonas so that they more closely resembled the actual Ferrari Daytona interior, with closing headlight covers and such. Mine is more along those lines, as are most others I have seen for sale, including that of reholmes.

I understand that maybe 35 or less were ever made by McBurnie, so who knows how many are actually still running.

Judging by the mere handful of owners with McBurnies on this site, and from those that come up in auction, it seems they are very limited in number.

 

There are other manufacturers as well such as Rowley and Roberts that you could also look at and they also made cool looking Daytonas.  They also come up in auction from time to time.

As to high quality and owner documentation, good luck on that. Most of these cars now are 25 to 30 years old and have been driven hard. So they are constantly needing upkeep and maintenance. Mine is an ongoing project.

For condition, I'm betting reholmes car is in the best shape as it sat in storage many years, has low miles, and was sold by the original owner. But this is quite the rare find imo.

For the same reason, most probably don't have original documentation because they may have changed hands frequently. In my case I acquired it from the family of the original owner, and I acquired his purchase documentation when I picked up the car. But for cars in auction, I have never seen any others that indicated they came with original paperwork.

So if you want the look of the show cars (as they appeared in the show) this thread is great for seeing the details of the camera car, and you can make a project of duplicating those features in whatever car you acquire. You'll probably need a c3 donor dash and harness, as well as seats and frames, a Momo steering wheel, and cap, baby tornado mirrors, and quite a few other things to make that happen., including a highly competent interior shop who can customize dash leather, rework dash covers, seats, and consoles. Jurassicnarc is certainly the expert on that subject.

 

Hope that helps.

Edited May 19, 2014 by Sonny-Burnett

[jurassic narc]

No build plate on mine either but I do have purchase documentation.  Oddly though, the only thing resembling a McBurnie would be the door handles and maybe the fender flares. Nothing else really resembles his work that I can see. Not even the raised 'McBurnie' stamped into the hood or rocker panel.

 

And I recall in my marketing literature from McBurnie that he would build his kits on C3 Vettes. Don't recall him saying anything about C4.

 

Agree the one-time sellers may be more inclined to shoot straight vs the resellers but, in this case, if he really believes this to be a McBurnie. why wouldn't he volunteer some evidence/support?

It looks like a McBurnie kit that has been modified.  The fender tops in front are for sure not standard McBurnie. It does look like a later body with the single headlight, and a lot of cars didn't have the raised McBurnie logo on the rocker panel or under the hood. 

 

Who would buy a brand new car and then put a $20,000 plus body on it?  

[Sonny-Burnett]

It looks like a McBurnie kit that has been modified.  The fender tops in front are for sure not standard McBurnie. It does look like a later body with the single headlight, and a lot of cars didn't have the raised McBurnie logo on the rocker panel or under the hood. 

 

Who would buy a brand new car and then put a $20,000 plus body on it?  

 

Good eye for details there JN, but I didn't see a pic of the headlights.

If it is McB it would have to be a modified kit, because aren't the C4s a different length frame than the C3?

 

Good point on the cost....never heard of anyone doing that either, and he seems to be generalizing rather than claiming his was new.

Btw, did you notice the VIN number tag pictured is not the same VIN he references?

[jurassic narc]

Good eye for details there JN, but I didn't see a pic of the headlights.

If it is McB it would have to be a modified kit, because aren't the C4s a different length frame than the C3?

 

Good point on the cost....never heard of anyone doing that either, and he seems to be generalizing rather than claiming his was new.

Btw, did you notice the VIN number tag pictured is not the same VIN he references?

After your post I re-looked at the build plate.  The build plate from California indicates a date of 7-29-2003 for it's completion in California.  The new 84 Vette sat from 84 to 2003 and then was built as a Daytona---just doesn't seem likely.  And McBurnie was not building cars after 1999.  It would be a major problem for him to certify anything in California after he lost the suit to Ferrari.  Nothing like a government document that certifies your violating a court order.

 

On the headlights, the covers are two small for 2 4x6 headlights, and most of the post 88 kits were designed to have a single high/low beam that would pop up like the real Ferrari (just not the round headlights of the real deal).

[Sonny-Burnett]

Here are the pics of my car taken by the PO https://mcburniedaytonaspyder.shutterfly.com/pictures/8 , and the description he posted on eBay. I bought the car about two years ago. It's not for sale, but thought it would provide one data point for you. He was a member of this forum.

 

 

 

Did you receive the original purchase/sale documents (from McBurnie to the original owner) ?

 

Also, from the photos I could not determine where the well was for the tire jack, or whether there is room for a spare somewhere. Can you elaborate pls?

 

For some reason I thought your car had headlight covers, but appears to be plexiglass.

[Sonny-Burnett]

After your post I re-looked at the build plate.  The build plate from California indicates a date of 7-29-2003 for it's completion in California.  The new 84 Vette sat from 84 to 2003 and then was built as a Daytona---just doesn't seem likely.  And McBurnie was not building cars after 1999.  It would be a major problem for him to certify anything in California after he lost the suit to Ferrari.  Nothing like a government document that certifies your violating a court order.

 

On the headlights, the covers are two small for 2 4x6 headlights, and most of the post 88 kits were designed to have a single high/low beam that would pop up like the real Ferrari (just not the round headlights of the real deal).

 

Hmm, interesting on the VIN label. Wonder if that could simply be when the car was actually titled in CA and perhaps it was re-titled and so reflected a later date?

Btw I also noticed he claims it was a 1984 Vette yet his title info (for searching) indicates 1980, conveniently before the date cutoff for history reporting. Why the date discrepancy?

Also noticed one very negative feedback comment among several where he had been selling cars. Wonder if he could be another reseller?

 

Also I didn't realize McBurnie was still building as late as 1999. I thought he was cutoff sometime in the late 80s?

 

Ok gotcha  on the headlight covers...they do appear somewhat smaller than mine. Great catch there.

 

Also didn't know that post '88 McBurnies were single lens headlight assemblies. How did you come by that info?  

I thought the real Daytona's we've seen had two circular lenses in each housing...maybe my memory is off.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Sonny-Burnett

[jurassic narc]

Hmm, interesting on the VIN label. Wonder if that could simply be when the car was actually titled in CA and perhaps it was re-titled and so reflected a later date?

Btw I also noticed he claims it was a 1984 Vette yet his title info (for searching) indicates 1980, conveniently before the date cutoff for history reporting. Why the date discrepancy?

Also noticed one very negative feedback comment among several where he had been selling cars. Wonder if he could be another reseller?

 

Also I didn't realize McBurnie was still building as late as 1999. I thought he was cutoff sometime in the late 80s?

 

Ok gotcha  on the headlight covers...they do appear somewhat smaller than mine. Great catch there.

 

Also didn't know that post '88 McBurnies were single lens headlight assemblies. How did you come by that info?  

I thought the real Daytona's we've seen had two circular lenses in each housing...maybe my memory is off.

My bad, it was 1989 when the case was settled.  The California build decal (if I recall correctly) is for the constuction, not later titling-but not sure on that.

 

I can only assume the single headlight was to get the headlights to go up and down, with less weight.  The actual Ferrari did have dual roudn headlights (never had rectangular headlights).  The build manuals that came with the kits are circa 1987-88 and picture the single headlight in the constuction information.

[Kavinsky]

Well to be fair though I came across this years ago of a C4 replica

 

 

 

and it looks like the same car actually and I think it was a mcburnie of some sort,  and I have seen one or two other C4 replicas over the years

 

http://corvette.canney.net/webvettes/customized/c0049/index.html

 

and there was another one on ebay similar to the above in the link a few weeks ago, and also apparently this isnt the only dick gulstrand made replica

 

http://car.mitula.us/ferrari-daytona

 

or atleast not the first time Dick has had a run in with the replicas, also the Business card of Mcburnie seemed to have a C4 replica on it from back in one of the other threads.

 

 

mind you that might just be artistic licence at play, given it has sidewindows in this drawing along with the 2x2 headlamp covers,

 

 

and reading that book by tom falconer on the Corvette C4,  the cars parts of the C3 and the C4 are compatable because the frames were not that modified that much from the C3 to the C4, only the body was drastically changed and redone, and is somewhat shorter than the C3, the rest are parts that are more or less an evolution of the C3 parts. 

 

hence the 1990 300 HP LT1 showing up in this one as well:

 

http://corvette.canney.net/webvettes/customized/c0050/index.html

 

along with youngmans car having a latter motor and I think angled radiator of the C4 in it.

 

basically the entire C4 redesign sounded like it was the lets make a C3 do a 150 MPH with a 350 project (something that was only really possible with a 454 in stock form back then, given the amount of torque it made) and it took them until 1989 to really sort out the early fitting and finishing problems of the C4

 

something noted Car clown Jerremy Clarkson always bashed in the 1990's, especially the early 1980's model C4's with the Z51 Package.

 

falling under the purview of the 5 year rule that seems to effect everything.

Edited May 20, 2014 by Kavinsky

[Sonny-Burnett]

That Guldstrand photo is interesting ...but what tells you it is a C4, or much less, a McBurnie?

 

The first car in your links didn't appear to be a McBurnie...note the narrower fender flares.  

 

The second link was to a search index...can you refine to a specific car?

 

On the McBurnie business card.... looks to be a pretty generic Daytona to me and maybe intended to resemble the genuine Ferrari with the side windows shown. (wouldn't have helped his legal case)

 

So if the frames are different sizes between the C4 and C3, I would think that would present some issues for the McBurnie kit assemblers.

Pretty sure the marketing literature I have specifies C3 but I have to go look for the brochures to confirm.

[jurassic narc]

That Guldstrand photo is interesting ...but what tells you it is a C4, or much less, a McBurnie?

 

The first car in your links didn't appear to be a McBurnie...note the narrower fender flares.  

 

The second link was to a search index...can you refine to a specific car?

 

On the McBurnie business card.... looks to be a pretty generic Daytona to me and maybe intended to resemble the genuine Ferrari with the side windows shown. (wouldn't have helped his legal case)

 

So if the frames are different sizes between the C4 and C3, I would think that would present some issues for the McBurnie kit assemblers.

Pretty sure the marketing literature I have specifies C3 but I have to go look for the brochures to confirm.

The grille on the C4 in the photo marks it as a McBurnie.  No ones else used that grille, as it is not a Ferrari clone like the Roberts, Rowley, et. al..

 

I too have seen other C4s, and they all are similar.  Seem to recall one that had the complete front clip lift forward just like the C4 Vettes did.

[Sonny-Burnett]

yep, that is a McB grill re the car in the photo,  and just found this brief note about the car in the photo:

 

http://www.vetteweb.com/lifestyle/vemp_1104_dick_guldstrand/photo_07.html

 

But without seeing the interior I can't determine if it is a C4. Maybe you see other external features that I'm not picking up.

[jurassic narc]

yep, that is a McB grill re the car in the photo,  and just found this brief note about the car in the photo:

 

http://www.vetteweb.com/lifestyle/vemp_1104_dick_guldstrand/photo_07.html

 

But without seeing the interior I can't determine if it is a C4. Maybe you see other external features that I'm not picking up.

It says in the photo caption it is an 86 Vette.

[Sonny-Burnett]

It says in the photo caption it is an 86 Vette.

 

 

lol..yes I saw that. But was wanting to see some kind of photo evidence in support. We've seen plenty of sellers/owners with misrepresentations.

 

More to the point, other than the mirrors does anyone know if there would be any identifying exterior feature difference between a C3 and C4 Daytona?

[jurassic narc]

lol..yes I saw that. But was wanting to see some kind of photo evidence in support. We've seen plenty of sellers/owners with misrepresentations.

 

More to the point, other than the mirrors does anyone know if there would be any identifying exterior feature difference between a C3 and C4 Daytona?

The most obvious thing is the width and angle of the windshield.  If you drop on the body, really not much else to cue on.  Of course the inside fixtures are totally different and based on the way the instumentation is, probably hard to convert to faux Ferrari.

[Kavinsky]

What I mean is with the frame the C3 and the C4 are more or less the same dimensions save for the construction methods, as I think they changed some of the finishing properties on the C4.

 

probably something along the lines of what Delorean did with his car, where the chasis was actually made out of normal steel and just covered with a very durable expoxy that has survived to this day more or less.

 

although I'm not a 100% sure, with the windsheild they dropped the angle of it, I had the literature saved about the exact angle it now sits at ( I think 65% degrees) but I swear I think the windows on the C4 are the same as the ones used on the C3, or atleast damn close.

 

and also I can tell just by the windsheild that this ones a C4 under this bodywork, mind you its not a daytona replica.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/10789705@N05/2839209494

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pillarofautumn/8700105603

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77458709@N00/4994186865

https://www.flickr.com/photos/foenix/2847551353

 

also the dash on all of these C4 replicas seems to be completely flat and more or less made using the GM stock units as to fit under the swept back windshield.

 

so if the dash is as flat as a pancake its probably a C4.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Kavinsky

[reholmes]

Did you receive the original purchase/sale documents (from McBurnie to the original owner) ?

 

Also, from the photos I could not determine where the well was for the tire jack, or whether there is room for a spare somewhere. Can you elaborate pls?

 

For some reason I thought your car had headlight covers, but appears to be plexiglass.

No, and I inferred that Bob Youngman didn't either. I do have a photo copy of the original title. He sent an agent to purchase the car in Minnesota with instructions to "just get  the car." I think the transaction was through the original owner's son. I probably know more about the donor chassis than I do the build. It does have a McBurnie build plate, and interestingly Minnesota titled the car using the McBurnie serial number as the VIN--which could have been because McBurnie apparently made a "typo" on the VIN on the build plate which resulted in a non-traceable VIN. Bob titled the car in Illinois as a McBurnie using the McBurnie VIN. Arizona balked and titled the car as a 1969 Ferrari with an AZ VIN. The AZ VIN destroys some of the car's provenance, but may be much more convenient in the end.

 

 

There is a battery well and a tool well behind the seats. There is some room but not enough for a spare behind the side panels in the trunk--which is nicely finished--and the killer sound system takes up some room in the front (back?) of the trunk. The only place for a spare would be in the passengers lap ;-) Interestingly, I was just about to ask the forum, who had spares.

 

 

Yes, the headlight covers are plexiglass. have heard that the first few non-import F-cars had plexiglass but went to "flippers" to satisfy DoT requirements.

[Kavinsky]

doesnt the spare hang the gas tank?

[reholmes]

doesnt the spare hang the gas tank?

The top of the gas tank is right against the floor of the trunk.

[Sonny-Burnett]

No, and I inferred that Bob Youngman didn't either. I do have a photo copy of the original title. He sent an agent to purchase the car in Minnesota with instructions to "just get  the car." I think the transaction was through the original owner's son. I probably know more about the donor chassis than I do the build. It does have a McBurnie build plate, and interestingly Minnesota titled the car using the McBurnie serial number as the VIN--which could have been because McBurnie apparently made a "typo" on the VIN on the build plate which resulted in a non-traceable VIN. Bob titled the car in Illinois as a McBurnie using the McBurnie VIN. Arizona balked and titled the car as a 1969 Ferrari with an AZ VIN. The AZ VIN destroys some of the car's provenance, but may be much more convenient in the end.

 

 

There is a battery well and a tool well behind the seats. There is some room but not enough for a spare behind the side panels in the trunk--which is nicely finished--and the killer sound system takes up some room in the front (back?) of the trunk. The only place for a spare would be in the passengers lap ;-) Interestingly, I was just about to ask the forum, who had spares.

 

 

Yes, the headlight covers are plexiglass. have heard that the first few non-import F-cars had plexiglass but went to "flippers" to satisfy DoT requirements.

 

Ok on the docs. I wasn't recalling that bit of info about whether BY obtained them. Perhaps the seller's family may still have them if you wanted to obtain them for additional provenance.

 I have mine and am debating posting them in here but want to do so in a way that does not allow the scammers to copy them and then photoshop them for their own unscrupulous purposes.

Typo on the McBurnie build plate? Can you show that or describe?

So if Arizona titled the car as a Ferrari, did they hit you with a large tax on the car at purchase?

 

On your battery and tool well behind the seat, from the photos on your link it appeared the well was fairly small, and so it appears has two separate compartments?

Mine is one large unfinished well, and is covered by a carpeted wood panel. Needs some work as does the rest of my interior.

Nope, no room for a spare in my trunk (or anywhere either) as the trunk is not large, and the side panels only expose a small area where I discovered a bottle of touchup paint and some small items.

 

I'm not familiar with the F-cars you mention, but I thought McBurnie went with the flip covers to give a more Ferrari-like appearance, in addition to his faux Ferrari dash and gauge clusters.

[Sonny-Burnett]

What I mean is with the frame the C3 and the C4 are more or less the same dimensions save for the construction methods, as I think they changed some of the finishing properties on the C4.

 

probably something along the lines of what Delorean did with his car, where the chasis was actually made out of normal steel and just covered with a very durable expoxy that has survived to this day more or less.

 

although I'm not a 100% sure, with the windsheild they dropped the angle of it, I had the literature saved about the exact angle it now sits at ( I think 65% degrees) but I swear I think the windows on the C4 are the same as the ones used on the C3, or atleast damn close.

 

and also I can tell just by the windsheild that this ones a C4 under this bodywork, mind you its not a daytona replica.

 

 

 

also the dash on all of these C4 replicas seems to be completely flat and more or less made using the GM stock units as to fit under the swept back windshield.

 

so if the dash is as flat as a pancake its probably a C4.

 

Hard for me to make out what you are referring to as to windshield size and angle...maybe I need to find a side by side of the two Daytonas to see that.

I know the interiors are a dead giveaway, as they look nothing alike.

Exterior-wise I see the mirror difference when looking at the C4 version but mirrors are pretty interchangeable.

[Sonny-Burnett]

The most obvious thing is the width and angle of the windshield.  If you drop on the body, really not much else to cue on.  Of course the inside fixtures are totally different and based on the way the instumentation is, probably hard to convert to faux Ferrari.

 

Thanks JN. Just not quite visualizing this windshield thing as yet but still looking.

[Kavinsky]

Sorry I ment doesnt the spare hang off of the gas tank at the bottom, around where the exhausts hang like on the C2 and C3?

 

and yeah sonny I wouldnt post the documents here without having the numbers blotted out, just as a security messure. Otherwise you'll run the same risk as Camera would if he provided the documents with the numbers of the vice car on it. as we already see how desparate people are to claim their car is the vice car with the volo car.

 

also didnt you say that the dotted ink on them was fading as well?

 

with the C4 its one of those things where you look at the angle of the windshield in relationship to the hood to see the differences

 

 

 

and as the C3 Daytona replicas use the coke bottled C3 as the basis, the angle of the windshield seems a touch high against the now flat body of the replicas, given the squeased in the middle look of the C3. so the windshield starts right at the edge where the body meets the doors, where on the C4 its rigged up to be further out, into what would be the fenders of the C3, in that area

 

after all camera said he was using a Corvette C4 cover for it, and I kinda think that's why the dash was raised and angled the way it was on the first 4 cars, as this is what a daytona replica looks like with a flat, stock dash

 

 

something seems off no?

 

vs dashes that fill up that area, that try and match the angle of the windshield, as to better blend it into the body, hence why the dash is just as important as how the trim of the windshield is rigged up

 

 

note the tip of the dash over the insturments seems to line up with the angle of the windshield perfectly, and accentuates the windshield as well.

 

and it makes me wonder if the pilot seats followed the same flow.

 

 

and when It comes to the windshield trim I think this is one of the best ones I've seen

 

 

note the dash on this one follows the same philosophy as well, blacking out the chrome and going for a satin black look.

 

not unlike the same satin black color that was used on Magnums 308 for the same part,

 

the latter quattro valve GTS that had the blacked out grills on the front

 

Edited May 22, 2014 by Kavinsky