Dave;
-Yes I did and thanks very much. I also got "flamed" by some others
who said I should M.Y.O.B. It was just the way I was un-tactfully
"ordered" to not pursue the air-cleaner question.
-I appreciate your support, even negative comments. I thought I saw a
need and maybe have a lower-cost solution than previously pursued.
Not any one person has all the answers or knowledge about a subject.
Re-inventing the wheel is one thing...alternate routes to success is
another.
Phil
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: Re; Air Cleaners
Author: Dave McDermott <mcdermott_d@WIZARD.COLORADO.EDU> at ~INTERNET
Date: 7/10/96 10:33 AM
Phil
Did you receive my e-mail on this?
Dave
At 10:12 AM 7/10/96 PST, you wrote:
> All;
>
> -Thx for all your comments. I'm gonna' run with it until I absolutely
> hit the wall on this, not because somebody says I shouldn't. The only
> free advice I EVER got from my family lawyer was that free advice is
> worth exactly what you pay for it.
>
> -I've got over 25 years of Mfg. Experience in the Silicon Valley from
> stuffing circuit boards putting myself through school (MBA) to
> Purchasing Manager & Director of Operations. I've been recruited to
> work for "small-time" companies like FMC, Silicon Graphics & Lam
> Research. Last year I saved 45% in mfg. costs by going to the same
> supplier I contacted on the prelim. for the repro TIGER air cleaner.
>
> -I think I'm reasonably qualified to make adult decisions on what I
> can & cannot do. I get paid very well at work for this skill, &
> especially concerning my free time and what is an enjoyable hobby.
>
> -I agree with lots of the comments below. Should we turn up our noses
> at making things better, even if the original "stuff" isn't around
> anymore? Gee, maybe I should get rid of all my CD's because they don't
> make 78 RPM records nowadays?
>
> -Get real folks, wake up and smell the onion dip!! I'm gonna' have fun
> with my car, I hope you all do too.
>
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
>Subject: Re; Air Cleaners
>Author: Rick Fedorchak <richard.fedorchak@gsfc.nasa.gov> at ~INTERNET
>Date: 7/10/96 9:06 AM
>
>
>>Phil wrote:
>>> -A few months ago, knowing what the AC air cleaner assemblies sell >
>for, I contacted one of the sheet metal suppliers our company
>uses................
>>
> Rick H. wrote:
>>>....... reproduction pieces, no >matter how faithful, would not be
>attractive to the MAJORITY of Tiger >collectors.
>
>Then Larry Wrote:
>>........ don't we all use new bits on our cars? Could we afford to insist
>on NOS rubber weatherstripping, for example?
> ____ If parts that are unavailable become available again, then isn't that
>good for every- one except those who
>< snip >................................... have cars that are original and
>feel that the investment value (insert rasberry here)
> of their cars drops because other folks can restore their Tigers?____
>
>
>Ka Ching !!!! We have a winner here ! I think you nailed it with that
>last comment , Larry.
>
>
> While I have ( in theory anyway ) nothing against originality, it seems
>that the old car hobby has migrated from an emphasis on driving, enjoying,
>and generally just having fun with the vehicles...... to a fanatical desire
>to posess the most original example available. This in turn appears to
>have created a form of snobbery posessed by those who "have" original cars
>versus those who don't. What a shame.
>
>Hey, Rick H., what's wrong with making a repop air cleaner ,
>particularly if it's a faithful reproduction of the
> original ?? Why would this not appeal to the Tiger collector ? ( Assuming
>of course you mean collector as Tiger owner/driver/enthusiast and not _just_
>collector ). I think that if there are enough people that want to buy
>them, and the price/quality are good........then go for it.
>
> >Ron said
>>>I would too. I'm sure they would be easily identifiable as repro's
>.............t >
> >
>Rob Kempinski wrote:
>>I'm all for a reproduction air cleaner. And the closer one can make it look
>like the original the better as far as I'm >concerned. Then the parts can
>sell for manufacturing cost plus an equity factor and not some dollar
>inflated >aberration.
>>
>I agree. If you're gonna make a reproduction part......then why not make it
>identical to the original ??
>
>>>Then again, I can just see it now - a Tiger Air Cleaner Authenication
>committee. Decals to be placed on a >>suitably inconspicuous spot just
>underneath the AC on the top of the cleaner.
>
>I'm sure I'm gonna open myself up for major flames..........but that
>statement remings me of some of the absolute nonsense being put forth by
>TAC advocates about a year or so ago. ( remember the comment about the car
>that had the back half of an alpine grafted on, but was determined by the
>TAC gods to be a "real" Tiger cause the firewall was still intact ?? )
>Gimme a break. Says _WHO_ ?? ( And who cares anyway ?? )
>
>Back to the repop parts......hey, if you're gonna nix the idea of repopping
>an air cleaner because it might not appeal to the purists, then ( to extend
>on Larry'scomment of using new pieces on cars ) maybe we'd better close
>down places like Sunbeam specialties and such for offering repop taillight
>lenses, LAT wheels, etc. etc.
>
>I sometimes feel that we're heading the way of the Camaro ( a random example
>) enthusiast. A world where the correct placement, color, and style of
>firewall chalkmarks is all important...........
>
>Time for a reality check.....
>
>
> Rick Fedorchak
>
>
>
>
|