SURVIVOR vs. GROUND-UP RESTORATION!

[resq302]

Thats odd that the bottom of the oil pan is bare like that.  You would think that Chrysler would not want to have any rusted out oil pan issues.

[resq302]

Dave,

was that comment from someone on a  topic I had started on a Moparts thread? 

Thanks for shedding some light on the engine question.  I never knew the engines were on a conveyor.  I thought they had been on blocks or cradles or something so paint could be done all around the engine.

[706pkVert]

Hi Resq302,

No the post was in reference to me.

Dave,

If you are going to quote me, please don't cut out so much... Here is my message to the moderators over on Dodge-Charger.com in its entirety:

"Hi I started this thread to congratulate this years Mopar Nationals OE participants and the great achievements each of the cars earned. It has now been hijacked by user ECS to grandstand his biased agenda due to his personal conflicts with a vehicles owner. I would like to be able to delete the thread alltogether if I may or at least remove all the negative postings. This post was supposed to be a positive thing. I appreciate your consideration."

Thanks
Mike Mancini

[MY J0B]

Dave from ECS GRANDSTANDING ? I can't believe that... 

[anlauto]

Wow...the same crap does go on here like Moparts...

[706pkVert]

Dave,

The restoration of Tony's car has no effect on you whatsoever. Your persistant attempts to discredit his car for some reason make no sense to me. Who's trying to hide anything? The rust and the pictures you have re-posted were already discussed in length on Moparts and Dodge-Charger forums. It is no secret that the rear floor pans were rusted from a giant rats nest during its storage for all those years. The rusted floor sections were removed and an original rust free rear floor section from a donor car was installed in Tony's car. The exterior body panels and structural components were 100% rot free.

You are grinding the same axe over and over and over again and its not even your axe to grind.

Can't you just put this issue with Tony behind you so I for one can continue to enjoy my hobby, my passion and my business?

I want you to know that as a professional, I greatly respect how freely you speak and type what's on your mind, I just think the subject has already been exhausted and it's time to move on to more positive items. I'm sure your time could certainly be spent better elsewhere.

This thread for instance is a wealth of knowledge, excellent job! The back and forth fights does nothing to help the hobby, it actually makes people less interested.

Hope you have a very Happy New Year.

Mike Mancini

[resq302]

From an outsiders point on this (and I have not seen any of these cars in person), the feeling I am getting from seeing pictures of one thing and being told a different thing via highly known magazines lead me to believe that something is not being presented as the truth.  Maybe it is a spin on words with the magazines or not.  If it is, I find it highly unlikely that multiple magazine articles would indicate it one way vs. the pictures showing a new floor needed to be put in place.  Yes, it might be an original floor pan from a DONOR car and if that is the case then say it is.  Metal rusts, we all know that.  Its not like it is a reproduction piece of sheet metal in the floor.  However, when one starts trying to present something as "rust free" you have to start to wonder about what else might have had subjective literacy, basically spinning words to ones own advantage.  Again, I have not had a car in OE type of judging so I don't know if they deduct points for "donor" panels being used.  If they do and you told the judges that they were original to the car, that outright is deceiving trying to better a score.  In other words.... cheating, lying, coniving, etc to now get "approved" that the car is certified Original Equipment.  Very similar to a hemi 4 spd 69 charger that was at a New England Concour's d'Elegance show with me that had a mangled VIN tag on the dash.  It was questioned by the editors of the show and did not win an award at the car show the day prior, matter of fact, it didn't even place!  The next day, it takes a first place at the concours show which now says that it is basically an original hemi (if it isn't) since it won a first place at a concours event.  I know I would be really pissed if I were to purchase this car down the road and pay big bucks for something being claimed as all original sheet metal only to find out that it has had a donor vehicle parts.

[706pkVert]

Did your factual observations change from the time you discussed this on the forums and your interviews with the magazines?

No they didn't. There was some rear floor rot only, the rest of the car was 100% rot free. I did not author or edit the magazine articles.

I restored the car for a paying customer, I do not own the car.

Like I typed earlier, your valuable time could be better spent on positive things rather than creating professionally edited magazine contrasts of a cars articles you have no interest in.

Your fuel seems to be purely based on some sort or "revenge".


Dave, you are above all that.

Have a good weekend.

Mike
 

[706pkVert]

From an outsiders point on this (and I have not seen any of these cars in person), the feeling I am getting from seeing pictures of one thing and being told a different thing via highly known magazines lead me to believe that something is not being presented as the truth.  Maybe it is a spin on words with the magazines or not.  If it is, I find it highly unlikely that multiple magazine articles would indicate it one way vs. the pictures showing a new floor needed to be put in place.  Yes, it might be an original floor pan from a DONOR car and if that is the case then say it is.  Metal rusts, we all know that.  Its not like it is a reproduction piece of sheet metal in the floor.  However, when one starts trying to present something as "rust free" you have to start to wonder about what else might have had subjective literacy, basically spinning words to ones own advantage.  Again, I have not had a car in OE type of judging so I don't know if they deduct points for "donor" panels being used.  If they do and you told the judges that they were original to the car, that outright is deceiving trying to better a score.  In other words.... cheating, lying, coniving, etc to now get "approved" that the car is certified Original Equipment.  Very similar to a hemi 4 spd 69 charger that was at a New England Concour's d'Elegance show with me that had a mangled VIN tag on the dash.  It was questioned by the editors of the show and did not win an award at the car show the day prior, matter of fact, it didn't even place!  The next day, it takes a first place at the concours show which now says that it is basically an original hemi (if it isn't) since it won a first place at a concours event.  I know I would be really pissed if I were to purchase this car down the road and pay big bucks for something being claimed as all original sheet metal only to find out that it has had a donor vehicle parts.

Hi Resq302,

I understand your point but do not believe it is prudent to any of the vehicles presented for OE judging. The car is judged on its own merit and any deviations from OEM appearance would suffer some sort of deduction.
OE doesn't award or deduct points for non original panels. Perfect case in point is Gene Lewis's Daytona this year which had substantial metal work done. I do not believe he received any deductions for such a thing.

It was never stated that all the metal on the car is 100% original. The point was made to the magazines that the car had no body panel rot. The rear floor repair was never disguised. I will attest that it was repaired with original Chrysler metal but all other panels in the car are 100% born with and were never subjected to rot deterioration.

Thanks
Mike

[anlauto]

resq302   I'm guessing you've never had a car published in a magazine either..... 

I've had twelve full features over the years and not one of them had factual content. You can tell them one thing and they still write whatever they feel they want to...    I can't believe anybody would consider magazine dribble as fact.

I'm not sure what the big deal is here...The car won OE Gold with the restoration it had. To me that speaks volumns about the quality of the rust repair, reguardless of how much rust repair there was...

I can't believe I'm getting into this cat fight    I'm out of here 

[706pkVert]

I am not really sure since the Mopar Nats OE does not release the judging sheets to its contestants.

[resq302]

Hi Resq302,

I understand your point but do not believe it is prudent to any of the vehicles presented for OE judging. The car is judged on its own merit and any deviations from OEM appearance would suffer some sort of deduction.
OE doesn't award or deduct points for non original panels. Perfect case in point is Gene Lewis's Daytona this year which had substantial metal work done. I do not believe he received any deductions for such a thing.

It was never stated that all the metal on the car is 100% original. The point was made to the magazines that the car had no body panel rot. The rear floor repair was never disguised. I will attest that it was repaired with original Chrysler metal but all other panels in the car are 100% born with and were never subjected to rot deterioration.

Thanks
Mike

Mike,

Ok, I apologize then as I interpret floor pans as body panels since they make up the bottom body part / undercarriage of the car.  I consider the trunk a part of the body too, but then again, thats my opinion.  I was not aware that they did not deduct points for stuff like that.  Again, I have never entered into this high of a level of competition.

resq302   I'm guessing you've never had a car published in a magazine either..... 

I've had twelve full features over the years and not one of them had factual content. You can tell them one thing and they still write whatever they feel they want to...    I can't believe anybody would consider magazine dribble as fact.

I'm not sure what the big deal is here...The car won OE Gold with the restoration it had. To me that speaks volumns about the quality of the rust repair, reguardless of how much rust repair there was...

I can't believe I'm getting into this cat fight    I'm out of here 

Anlauto,

I have been lucky enough to have one of our vehicles make it into a magazine.  Our 70 El Camino SS 396 was selected by Chuck Hanson (former host of Horsepower TV) who is the president of ACES (American Chevelle Enthusiast Society) and did a couple page spread on our elky in the ACES magazine.  Granted, Chuck knows more about Chevelles and el caminos than I will ever know in 5 life times.  So, yes, he got the article right.  But like I said, that was only one lesser known magazine.

[706pkVert]

Wow mike!  You seem to be clueless about a lot of the things that you work on.  You can't decipher what "rust" is on a vehicle or incorrect non Factory paint or reproduction batteries or reproduction gas tanks or reproduction battery cables or reproduction glass or reproduction brake and fuels lines etc........  You should probably become more personally involved with your projects so magazine articles don't make you look like someone trying to hide or conceal the facts.

Now Dave... I can assure you I am not clueless about anything....

I have never denied the Duster had a reproduction battery and yes it had a reproduction gas tank. The brake and fuel lines were its originals that Chrysler installed in 1970. The battery cables were NOS, I agree the pos cable was a later NOS, not 100% assembly line correct. The glass...well we've already discussed this. The glass in the car is 100% original stuff.

The fact remains that you have never once seen either the OE Gold winning 1970 Plymouth Duster or Tony's OE Gold winning 1969 Daytona that my shop restored. I built the cars to be judged and critiqued and I am not opposed in the least to constructive criticism. Blind critiques, cut downs and attacks seem counter productive.

[706pkVert]

It's pathetic that you have the audacity to mention Gene in the same light.  He didn't lie or hide ANY aspects about what he did to his car.  He spent 9 years PUBLICLY showing the entire Restoration to the World.  Your pitiful attempt to claim that the Floor Pans, Fender Tag, inside Fender area, Engine, etc.... are not included in the descriptive of being "rust free" is a joke.  Anyone who plays word games like that is nothing more than a used car salesman trying to lie, deceive and dance around the truth.

Dave,

I commend Gene and yourself for showcasing your restorations, they are enjoyable and informative threads. Since I do not own the cars I restore, it is not my liberty to do the same. Something like that would be up to the owner.

Surface rust & rot are two very different things. Tony's engine bay shows a lot of surface rust but it certainly isn't rotted.

Mike

[706pkVert]

I can only go by the facts.  It appears the old adage is true........No liars memory is good enough to remember all of their lies.  Here is an email I received from you on September 21, 2010 @ 3:56 PM.  I guess the lines that you told me were badly corroded just happened to miraculously mend themselves.   

Hi Dave,
 
I am contemplating bending my own lines to match the originals. Did you have luck with a regular supplier ie finelines, right stuff etc? Usually they fit like crap and you have to tweak them quite a bit anyways.
 
Thanks for the input.
 
Mike

Yes .....where's the lie? lol. I was contemplating bending new lines, but once I got to looking closely at the originals, I started cleaning them and they came out beautifully! Those are what we used on the car. I even was able to clean and re-use most of the original fuel hoses the car was born with.

Thanks
Mike