TRIPLE GOLD OE DAYTONA DISPLAY 2012 Mopar Nationals

[maxwellwedge]

Geno's car was raised by the village. He was very open to let everyone in on his cars progress all along the way and wanted everyone's opinions on all areas of the car as it was progressing. And....He made the changes when there was a concensus on correctness. Very astute thinking. He even crossed countries with rubber glove wielding border guards (named Olga)....across tundra and glaciers to look at original cars. 

[pettybird]

[hemigeno]

Thanks, Jim (& Danny too).  I really did set out to get as much feedback and consensus opinions as could be gathered.  No one person knows every little detail, but some guys - like Jim - have both a wealth of knowledge and the original reference examples.  I learned a whole lot from your feedback and looking at your cars.  Speaking of which...

He even crossed countries with rubber glove wielding border guards (named Olga)....

That wasn't ALL she was wielding...    



BTW, Happy (early) Birthday, Jimbo!

[maxwellwedge]

Thanks Geno for reminding me!     

You put your stuff out there for the world to see (I am talking about your car......not Olga) and it culminated into a great result.

I still send kudo's to all that go the extra mile to strive for correctness at the OE level....Been there - done that....It's what I imagine child birth to be like. 

[moparstuart]

Thanks Geno for reminding me!     

You put your stuff out there for the world to see (I am talking about your car......not Olga) and it culminated into a great result.

I still send kudo's to all that go the extra mile to strive for correctness at the OE level....Been there - done that....It's what I imagine child birth to be like. 

happy birthday  Daddy   

[TONY]

I haven't posted in a long time but felt there was too much misinformation out there just to let go.

Ecs hadn't showed interest in wing cars on this board until coming on just to campaign negativity. He even posted that because my car had a title that the vin started with XS, that it wasn't a real Daytona, a rookie mistake.   When one of the 2 Daytona threads that he posts on doesn't have responses for a period, he or resq302 would post again just to keep it alive and then respond back and forth to one another even though they do talk daily or at least almost daily from what they recently posted that they do. I know when I was on good terms with ecs that he would occasionally ask me to post on his behalf too.

Just count all of the repetitive and redundant posts of the same pictures that ecs has posted, its easy to lose count and odd that would even be permitted. Look at all of the time and effort that he has spent posting pictures and replying with the same stuff over and over again, it makes it hard to hide your motive.

In regards to all of the "truths" posted by ecs
The "truths" that he posts, are his version, half truths, assumptions, all with an obvious agenda
to harm, harass, devalue, lessen, hound and stalk myself, my car, mike mancini, magazine editors, judges and whoever else he may have issue with at the time, which is anyone that challenges his views.

He had his "truth" about my car having been disassembled and sold as a regular charger, with no proof.

He also had his "truth" about all aar and t/a cars having to been driven 500 miles prior to delivery, and had many of his "truths" to back that up, which of course was proven untrue.

He also had his "truth" that he made 2 new build sheet copies for me,
When I showed pictures of them along with 2 old ones, his new "truth" changed to say he had made 4 or more.
Then he showed another new "truth" of how my original wasn't real because of the spacing of some wording on it. He was proved wrong on that as other examples were shown that were the same. He then came up with a new "truth" that the location of the lettering wasn't correct.
Disputing with him is like a dog chasing his tail.

Do you start to see the pattern that when his "truths" are questioned, he comes up with new "truths" to fit his needs and agenda

Funny, Paul Jacobs didn't want to have anything to do with ecs because he went through the ire of ecs a few years ago, but when ecs heard that paul was restoring johns car for last years oe, ecs felt the need to make amends with paul so he would have more on his side when he started to spew his latest hate campaign. Too bad paul fell for it because in a moment, he could be on the bad side of ecs again.

ecs feels he has his reasons, but the vast majority of them fall into his wrongful assumptions.
He accused me of saying negative things to the oe judges about his car/cars, that's untrue, I never met or spoke to any of the oe judges prior to meeting Keith at the 2012 nats.

In reference to his positive cable on the challenger. I first asked ecs about it, my point was that I felt it was a later service cable, ecs told me that he got it from frank mitchell and it was nos, after ecs and I spoke,  I was looking at the engine compartment when Rick Ehrenberg asked what I saw and I told him the same thing I had said to ecs. Rick had also asked me if something else that he pointed out may have been incorrect, and I told him no, that it was correct. The other thing that ecs is referring to is my erroneous answer when I was asked about the vc gasket on his valiant. I wrongfully answered that I didn't believe rubber valve cover gaskets were correct, I was wrong and shouldn't have answered as I had never researched a 225 engine. Ecs's cars are great/excellent top restorations.

I also supplied him with some rare parts he needed (as he supplied some of his products to me), and went to bat for him publicly when he had some judging issues. But you don't hear about any of the good stuff.

In nov of 2011 Ecs and I had a 3+ hour conversation, I apologized to him about what I had said about his vc gasket, and we had what I felt was a good and productive conversation. We had kept in regular contact and despite his issue with mike mancini, who he had said his problem wasn't with mike, but with the oe judging and mike was just "collateral damage", we were on what ecs led me to believe were good and friendly terms.  Then in June of 2012 he starting posting all of his fabricated stories and the pictures that I had taken. I can only guess that he was leading me on the whole time and just waiting for the time to get closer to the nats when he felt his wrath would do the most harm.

In regards to the mcacn judging.
I wasn't at my car when it was being judged, so it was impossible for me to have been "following the judge around" as was stated prior. I was called when the judge was almost finished to answer a question. The question the judge had was that he felt daytonas shouldn't have organisol paint on the rear body panel. I told him that it should and I asked what did he see on the other daytonas? He said he hadn't gotten to them yet. He suggested that WE look at the other daytonas there, I said ok, but warned him while looking at restored cars wont always give you the correct answer depending on how correctly the car was restored. So WE looked at other cars there and I told him why don't we look at Malcolm's car as that car is unrestored and wouldn't have been subject to a restoration. After looking at the other cars and Malcolm's he agreed that organisol was correct. I don't think any of the other owners would have acted differently. Although I was painted to look like I was following the judge around while my car was judged,  another untruth.

In regards to the mcacn score. My score also changed after it was signed off on. And it too was reduced. A 1000 point total was signed off on when the judges left my car.
Afterwards, bill braun, the head judge called for me to talk with him. He told me that because he took so much flak after a car scored 1000 points a few years ago, that he will no longer allow a car to get a 1000 point score and took a point off of my total and had it signed off on.
I never complained about that or made any issue out of it, I just did mention it to bob ashton only after it was brought up in this thread. I told the same story to the mopar action writer and he felt since the car was signed off on 1000 points then had a phantom point removed, that he would go with the 1000 point reference in the story.

In reference to the tires that ecs OFFERED to me. I DID want them when I thought they were polyglas tread, not speedway tread. Once I found out that they weren't the correct tread for a Daytona I was no longer interested. The 1 owner coronet at the nationals with the speedway tread spare is correct for a coronet as they weren't built at Hamtramck where polyglas and firestone 14" redlines were used.

In reference to the rot hole on the original drivers door to my car. That door hasn't been on the car since about 1975. Remember in all of the magazine stories on my car, it mentioned how the car was hit in the drivers door?  The door was replaced with another door by the brothers that owned it, and it doesn't/didn't have any rot. The original door was stored in the garage where the car was, and mice had a mouse house in that corner of the door that caused the rot hole. That door wasn't used, the replacement door is still on the car and I still have the original door.

Ecs also mentioned how we were having a celebration of some sorts at the nats but that we were disappointed after the awards or judging. I have no idea what he's referring to, zero. He wasn't even at the nats this year?  Makes you wonder who is fueling the fire. I was very pleased that my car was awarded a gold. I also congratulated john and gene on their accomplishments.  I said prior to the event, my only hope was that the car would earn oe gold, it did, I'm very happy it did.

Just to make a point of how little I'm concerned with the judging, I left Sunday morning prior to the award ceremony at the mcacn event.

contd

[TONY]

Before the judging sheets from the nats were released, I had mentioned to paul Jacobs that since the oe judging is so vague and very unspecific that I would consider having my car rejudged when he was running the judging since he plans to be more interactive with the owner. He replied to me that my car wouldn't really get a different point score, I said I wasn't concerned with the score as much as what the shortcomings were so if I deemed them important enough, I would correct them. The point of that is how did paul already know what score my car got and what the deductions were for?? I still don't know what the majority of the deductions were for, I'm still wondering about that.

Paul also had told me that him and gene checked out the tire dates on my car. Of course the tire dates are on the back side of the tires, perhaps that's when the pics of the undercarriage and wheels/tires of my car were taken and forwarded to ecs, since ecs wasn't at the nationals to take the pics himself. At one point I told gene that it was fine with me if he took some pics of my car. I found it odd that he placed his camera at the front of the RH valve cover and pointed towards the RF hood pin pocket area and took some pics of that area amongst other areas. I realized why when ecs posted that he felt my car had improper paint coverage in the hood bumper pocket area. So I guess ecs is being sanctioned by gene, which explains why a member is permitted to post here only for the means to start trouble.

In reference to what was posted here about mopar action writing stuff not to their liking, do you think it may have something to do with the magazine being threatened with legal action and that possibly rubbed somebody the wrong way??   John told me that his mcg story wasn't exactly what it was supposed to have been. Anyone that has had their cars in magazines know the story isn't always exact, as some embellishing and sensationalizing for the sake of a better story takes place.
In regards to the mopar action story with the reference to the rot in the rear interior floor pans, it was told to all 3 publications, but they pick and choose what they want to print, mopar actions story was really the first of the 3 magazine stories that was initiated and the mention of the floor rot was in there from the beginning, due to space limitations in the magazine and being that they are a bimonthly publication the story didn't go to print til after the mcacn show, and that's why there was mention of those results in the story.

Have at it, I wont be part of a back and forth

Thank you

[ECS]

Paul also had told me that him and gene checked out the tire dates on my car. Of course the tire dates are on the back side of the tires, perhaps that's when the pics of the undercarriage and wheels/tires of my car were taken and forwarded to ecs, since ecs wasn't at the nationals to take the pics himself. At one point I told gene that it was fine with me if he took some pics of my car.

Are you REALLY that paranoid and clueless about people passing around pictures of your car Tony?  Every photo posted of your "undercarriage" is on the internet and in the magazines for the World to see.  Your editor posted them.  Didn't you know that?  The incorrect "double wheel weight" picture was taken from the 2012 Nationals video that was distributed by FIVE STAR productions.  No one "forwarded" those pictures to me.  Here is the Mopar Action link showing the "tires" that you referenced.  Scroll through and see them for yourself. 15 photos down from the top.

http://www.moparaction.com/Article/LORD_OF_THE_WINGS/LORD_OF_THE_WINGS.html

[resq302]

Since some of you have taken a liking to my rap name, here's a lil beat.....


(in rapping voice)

yo, yo, yo, yo!
I'm Grand Master B,
I'm here to make ya see,
that I'm all for the hobby,
here's what Im bout to lobby,
no matter what car,
neither here, nor too far,
ill care 'bout your ride,
as long as its bonafide! (TRUE!)

don't care for manipulation,
im here for verification!
cause of my occupation,
theres no deliberation!  (boy!)
you better watch out you scammers,
cause we're 'bout to drop the hammer!
Cause all ya gotta be is TRUE!
and thats why Mopars RULE! (WORD!)    


written and (badly) sung by Grand master B
aka - Brian  - Resq302

[ECS]

.....the rot in the rear interior floor pans, it was told to all 3 publications, but they pick and choose what they want to print.....

Really?!  Is that how they did it?  They just coincidently wrote detailed observations about the same inaccuracies?  Hmmmmm....