Tony's Daytona discussion

[ECS]

maybe he'll say he made 20 sheets for me next

Spin, deflect & lie!  Forget about the spacing if that is going to become your focal point to cover your lies and deceive those who are watching this thread.  Explain this one Tony!  You NEVER sent me a copy of an "original" build sheet.  You sent me a copy of someone else's that had characters whited out and your hand written information in their place.  Same with the "17 Special Order" verbiage that you also wrote by hand.  Can you please tell us all how I was able to PERFECTLY match EVERY character (position) that was exhibited on your "original (upper left in the photo) and my two copies directly below the picture?  It would be one hundred trillion to NONE chance that I could just coincidently PERFECTLY position the wording and characters to match something that I had NEVER seen.  Don't lie and tell these people THAT sheet is an original!  I know my work!  YOU GUYS are the ones who aged it (incorrectly I might add) and circled options that NEVER would have been circled by the person who was responsible for building the dash.  You got caught trying to perpetuate your lies....PERIOD!  

Again, for everybody reading or watching this thread, CLOSELY look at the characters that are on his so called "original" Build Sheet and and the copies below it.  Look at where the lines in the blank boxes above the 17 SPECIAL ORDER words are and notice where the characters line up.  Continue to follow the vertical artwork of the lines and see where they run in relation to the printed 17 SPECIAL ORDER characters below. Also look at the numbers (that are legible) and their positions within the boxes.  His "original" is IDENTICAL to my copies because it TOO in one of my copies that he is trying to pass off as an original.

[A383Wing]

[JB400]

 
                                                                             

[DAY CLONA]

Wow...I haven't viewed this thread in a while, quite interesting I just think of all the wasted energy and time used to engage in all this diatribe about some Detroit production junk, I put the "numbers", "paint daubs", buildsheets, historical documents, etc, etc behind me decades ago because it consumes too much of an individual, you guys need to focus on building/maintaining the cars, and enjoying them for what they were made to do...

I do enjoy the unique history of the Chrysler marque, but I don't let it consume me like some do here...Geez





Mike

[ECS]

Wow...I haven't viewed this thread in a while, quite interesting I just think of all the wasted energy and time used to engage in all this diatribe about some Detroit production junk, I put the "numbers", "paint daubs", buildsheets, historical documents, etc, etc behind me decades ago because it consumes too much of an individual, you guys need to focus on building/maintaining the cars, and enjoying them for what they were made to do...

I do enjoy the unique history of the Chrysler marque, but I don't let it consume me like some do here...Geez

Mike

With all do respect Mike, how or why does the manner in which anyone spend THEIR discretionary time, bother or affect you?  If you have found this thread to be "quite interesting", please stay tuned and patient for just a bit longer.  I have the proverbial nail in the coffin regarding this "wasted" subject matter to post soon!

[djcarguy]

Wow...I haven't viewed this thread in a while, quite interesting I just think of all the wasted energy and time used to engage in all this diatribe about some Detroit production junk, I put the "numbers", "paint daubs", buildsheets, historical documents, etc, etc behind me decades ago because it consumes too much of an individual, you guys need to focus on building/maintaining the cars, and enjoying them for what they were made to do...

I do enjoy the unique history of the Chrysler marque, but I don't let it consume me like some do here...Geez


=====================================================================================   TOTAL AGREE,,, waste of time and energy .that could be used to improve our cars and the mopar family.  WHY IS THIS GUY NON BANNED FOR HIS PERSONAL ATTACK ON OTHER??  HIS STORY AND INFO KEEPS CHANGING AND ATTACKS ON ALL THAT DISAGREE WITH HIS PERSONAL AGENDA?  WELL NO MORE OF MY TIME WILL BE WASTED WITH THIS GARBAGE.THANKS FOR FEW SECONDS OF WORTH WHILE INFO..DJ.

[C5X DAYTONA]

I have 2 sheets from my Daytona.   The sheet that was found taped to the passenger side of the floor hump under the carpet has items circled just like in the topic car 390018.   My backseat sheet has no items circled.  Just like in car 390018.  I notice that the earlier cars have the shorter spacing on the 17 SPECIAL ORDER at the bottom.

[richRTSE]

When I made them, I didn't know exactly how to word the line that says 17 SPECIAL ORDER.  I had never seen or made another Daytona Build Sheet so I spaced the letters to a default that was used on Tran Am cars.

I did another quick google search... for aar and t/a buildsheets and found 3...all of them had the wide spaced lettering, not the close lettering like the sheets you made for Tony    


... you also posted the letter from Tony requesting 2 build sheets, and you had posted before about how you had made him 2 build sheets... and then he posts a picture of the 4 sheets he has, with 2 new-looking sheets and 2 "aged" sheets, and you say the aged sheet on the left is also one of your...how many did you make, more than the 2 he asked for?

..and what is the actual story on the honeycomb grille? Where these dealer replacement parts or a production variation?

[ECS]

I did another quick google search... for aar and t/a buildsheets and found 3...all of them had the wide spaced lettering, not the close lettering like the sheets you made for Tony    


... you also posted the letter from Tony requesting 2 build sheets, and you had posted before about how you had made him 2 build sheets... and then he posts a picture of the 4 sheets he has, with 2 new-looking sheets and 2 "aged" sheets, and you say the aged sheet on the left is also one of your...how many did you make, more than the 2 he asked for?

..and what is the actual story on the honeycomb grille? Where these dealer replacement parts or a production variation?

I have hundreds of original build sheets and used the spacing for the bottom lettering from a few of the examples I have.  I did not have any Daytona's (at the time) so I used other versions to format off of with regards to the letter spacing at the bottom.  It seems that ANY vehicle that had something unique or special about their build, have comments written at the bottom. 

I made at lead six or seven copies when I first printed them.  I do this to try and get a similar feed or positioning of the print when multiple copies are requested.  Jon (my graphics guy) usually runs these after I set up all of the type work.  He runs many copies and then I will pick the ones that are closest in "matching".  If there ends up being more than two that are a "match" I will go ahead and send those as well.  I just recently made a Daytona window sticker for a member here and did a similar thing.  He asked for one but I said I would make him two.  We ended up running 5 copies just in case there was a problem with the print or perforation cuts.  I ended up sending him 3 because thats how many of the 5 turned out to be a repeatable match.  I almost always send more than what is requested for "one off" items that are vehicle specific.  The first copy is the hardest one to make.  After that, it is just a matter of feeding in the blank copies and hoping they print in a similar fashion.  We don't run these through a "tracking" type printer so there is the possibility that they might print a bit different concerning positioning.  Jon will run as many as ten in order to get just a few of them to be a close match. 

I have been told a few of the Daytona experts that the "honeycomb" grill wasn't even available in 1969.  That variation (supposedly) came out as a service replacement sometime around 1972.

[TONY]

I haven't posted much lately and I wont again due to the fact that even though I'm not the smartest man alive, I am smart enough to never argue and debate with someone who is never wrong.

But I would like to lay this out for all of you.

Just say you want to believe the story that ECS is promoting here.

You would have to believe the scenario painted below.

The car was delivered in September 1969 to St Ann Dodge. that's as per the Daytona shipping list.

That sometime prior to 1972 when Ernie Bingham bought the car, (which was 100% complete with all of the Daytona nose, scoops, wings, decals etc in place), the car was stripped of its aero parts then replacement parts were bought and installed.

I have first person confirmation from Ernie that he bought the car complete and Ernie is alive and well and was very helpful talking about the cars history and enjoyed discussing his old car.

Ernie was first reunited with the car in 2005 when Jack Rawlings bought the car from the man who had just bought it from the 2 brothers that Ernie sold it to in 1974.  Ernie was reunited with the car again at this years Mopar Nationals where he got to see and sit in the car after it was restored, it was a cool moment for sure.

Back to the story that would have to be believed.

That a dealership that was located in the highly populated area of St Louis MO. wasn't able to sell a Daytona. Member held1823 stated that the dealership that sold them their Daytona new, only 300 miles away, had others wanting to buy a new Daytona, but somehow the one at ST Ann Dodge in a populated St Louis area wasn't able to be sold.

A question that you would have to ask is, how long would be a reasonable amount of time for the dealer to hold on to the car before he would determine it to be not saleable, one year? Two years? Who knows?

The dealer then went through the expense of removing the nose cone assembly, fenders, fender scoops, rear wing and supports, and removing the large butt stripe decal on the quarter panels and trunk of the car (ill be lenient and guess that the A-pillar air deflectors were left on).

Then ordered:
charger bumper
(remember you couldn't order assemblies,  each item had to be ordered individually),
Bumper guards,
all of the bumper brackets and reinforcements of which there were many,
hood latch tray,
hood latch and release assembly (multiple pieces),
the grill center,
Grill ends: right and left,
7 pieces of chrome grill trim and all of the attaching clips,
Grill support (cage) and all bracketry,
headlight doors,
Headlamp mounting brackets,
all of the many parts used for the vacum headlight door mechanisms,
front lower valence,
right and left park lamp assemblies,
2 fenders,
2 front wheel opening moldings as they were modified also,
Most every nut, bolt and bit of hardware, because not much if any are able to be used from the Daytona parts.
And I'm sure a bunch more that I've overlooked.

Then, the dealer had to pay the body shop to:
Weld and finish the holes on the quarter panels from where the rear wing was,
Replace the entire front nose of the car,
Paint the entire nose of the car and the rear quarter panels where the rear wing holes were repaired, and possibly paint the trunk and sides of the quarter panels if the paint was damaged while removing the stripe.

And all of the above work had to be done to a high standard as this was still a new car to be sold.

If you still want to be a believer, then you also have to believe that by 1972 when Ernie bought the car, that somebody had gone through all of the time and expense to buy and locate every specific Daytona item that was removed, including the special wheel opening moldings, a red stripe, every bit of original hardware, and paint it like Creative did with the nose installed therefore getting overspray on the nose to fender seal, park lamp assemblies, etc. all prior to Ernie buying the car in 1972.

To recap,
sept 69 car delivered to st Ann dodge,
The biggest variable is how long would the dealer have had to sit on the car before he determined that it was time to do the conversion. Even Ralph W said it was "a looong time" in the video.
I don't think anyone would argue that a year would be the bare minimum,
That means some time towards the end of 1970 would be the earliest the conversion was done,
Then by 1972 (if not earlier because I have only spoken to Ernie who bought it in 1972, not the owner prior to him that also owned it with all of the Daytona parts on it) everything was put back on the car just like creative would have done it.

In the words  of Seinfeld  "that was one magic lougee"

Cont'd

[TONY]

Look at of all of the lengths and time ECS has devoted to promote and defend his point.
He interviewed and video taped Ralph, an old sales rep. Who while a nice guy,  his memory is obviously skewed as proven by his inaccurate statements in reference to AARs + T/As having to be driven 500 miles prior to sale as per SCCA and being sold as used cars,  Ralph said that was in reference to all of those T/As + AARs nationwide,  he also wasn't able to remember the name of his own drag car that was a record holder. Ralph claimed the source was from "some of the guys at the dealership", he wasn't a first hand eye witness. Another point, ST. Ann dealership (now a walmart sits on the grounds) wasn't directly across the street from the zone office that was located in Northwest Plaza as Ralph stated, but over ¼ mile away, it was close but hardly across the street, this was told to me by the current owner of the dealership (who has owned the dealership since the late 1970s) and has been nice enough to give me an original dealer sticker, license plate, dealer postcard, etc,.

ECS constantly responds with attacks and ludicrous analogies to those that doubt or don't believe him.  He changes his story as needed, ie: originally claimed to have made 2 build sheet copies for me, and has now upped it to 4 to suit his needs. Now is trying to set up another interview with a supposed worker that did the conversion work. How old are all of these former employees and how accurate of a recollection are they going to have from just a regular job they had 40+ years ago??  And how credible will it be coming from someone with such a biased agenda. He has tried to spin the AAR T/A story to not mean what Ralph said in the video. ECS has also contacted magazine staff about my car with his negative biased input, something he has accused others of and stated that he would never do.  Isn't also funny how ECS has suddenly become a wing car enthusiast and expert, it wasn't  long ago he was stating that a car with a XS title couldn't have been a real Daytona?

Does anyone find it coincidental that member DarrylG has the same contact, Ralph Weidner,  as ECS does, and they both make same claims. That member only joined to make 2 posts then ECS continued the crusade. Another item DarrylG mentioned was that the floors were rotted out and when the car was 3 years old and that the engine was trashed with the damaged block being located in Illinois.  I find it amazing that posts by members like that are even allowed to be kept on this board since its obvious that DarrylG only joined to spew some lies start trouble then leave.

Some try to say that the posts about the car being stripped of its aero parts aren't anything negative, but add some mystic to the car, I think not, but that's an arguable point. But for sure I think all agree that claims that the engine and trans parted from the car can only be considered a negative.

I have pictures of the engine and trans vin stampings and I have posted them here before. Paul Jacobs looked at them at the nationals and confirmed that the engine and trans stampings were consistent with what he has seen.

If you'll check out the prior posts of ECS, you'll see the vast majority of them are either to bash me, my car and Mike Mancini whether its direct or through an innuendo, to knock the Mopar nationals judging, or to defend the ridiculous claim about the T/A and AAR mileage requirement. He initially registered here to promote his postings about his cars on another website. It looks like everything has an agenda. The time and effort devoted to this by ECS is dumbfounding. Member djcarguy wonders why he hasn't been banned from here. Others are wondering that too, he has been banned from moparts for the same sort of confrontations and attacks on members, if it doesn't stop on this board then dodgecharger.com may become the Jerry Springer of mopar sites.

Someone brought up the paint match on my car prior to resto. The car did have many areas that had prime or spray bomb white on it. But you can see by a pic posted by richrtse that the original nose cone paint does match the original paint on the fender, but not the door. The door doesn't match the ¼ panel.  Well, when Daytonas were repainted at creative weren't the nose, roof, trunk and at least the top of the quarter panels painted to hide the body work, and also possibly the quarter panels too if the painters didn't want to have a paint line at the top of the quarters? So going by that the doors would be original paint and the rest of the car would have been resprayed.  Look at those pictures of the cars on the car haulers leaving creative, it doesn't look like they were done very neatly.

ECS has also brought up that my car had the incorrect REPRODUCTION window sticker. He is 100% correct. The other Daytonas at the nationals had correct REPRODUCTION window stickers while my car didn't.  The reason for that is that when I was going to order one from him he replied "Please do not take this as personal. I hope you understand what I am about to say. As long as mike mancini is doing the work for ANY vehicle, I will NEVER supply things for his projects." as Dave wrote to me in an email 3-15-2012 .

In reference to the honeycomb grill that's in my car. I too was skeptical about that and researched. The grill was installed when it was painted just like the originals were as we learned during disassembly. It had all of the correct cutouts for the attaching screws. Ernie also confirmed that was the grill type in the car when he bought it in 1972. I also corresponded with noted wing car expert Dave Patik who said (and wrote a letter confirming such) he has positively seen original owner untouched cars with the honeycomb grill, Frank Badalson has also stated that he agrees that it was original to my car, and very recently Dave B aka member nascarxx29 posted the following:
Re: Superbird grille material?


« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2012, 05:48:20 PM »
"I've seen Daytona's with the superbird honeycomb material on some original cars "

I believe all 3 of the above are accepted experts.
My research has shown that the honeycomb grill was the less common of the 2 types of original grilles. These cars were all hand converted and there will be some variables just how Genes claims his spoiler was black. There are some things like those that are out of the norm, but acceptable. Believe me, it would have been much easier for me to use the rectangular grill in the car, but I researched and went with what I feel was correct for my car. I wasn't trying to restore it as a later build restoration of its condition in the early 1970s, but in "as delivered to the dealer" condition.

Like I said, I wont come back and forth and participate in what for sure will turn into a childish debate, I just wanted to state my story.

[JB400]

Glad you pitched in TONY.  Every point you made is exact, but as far as what response you are going to get from ECS, I think you already know.  Grab some popcorn and sit back and relax   There's going to be some fireworks.   Feel free to post more often.

[ECS]

3. buildsheet font spacing has sidetracked the thread. this discourse was offered to "prove" that the current owner of the car is misrepresenting it. it should be noted that buildsheets for other daytonas have been presented, which show the same "incorrect" spacing as seen on 390018. regardless of the outcome here, this has absolutely nothing to do with the car when it was sold over forty years ago.

Nothing has been side tracked.  It is information related and tied into the misrepresentation of the vehicle.  Once again, NONE of you have questioned your "forum fraternity member/friend" for trying to pass off my reproduction build sheet as being "real".  You guys have called it "fraud" but want to make it MY fraud.  Your forum member/friend and his restoration crony incorrectly aged it, screw up the manner in the way it was marked, lied to the judges and everyone here about it being original and not ONE of you question THEIR involvement or motives.  For the record, this is the second reproduction build sheet that this restoration shop has tried to pass off as "original."

I can assure everyone here that I am not "Ralph" or "Darryl."  I invited ANYONE to join us for the Luncheon with all of these "phony" people but none of you accepted the offer.  I believe "Ralph" was also suppose to me (at one time) and then I was later accused of just finding a guy that I would "rehearse" the interview with.  And you guys think MY story keeps changing?!?    Also included is a picture of the floor pans I was forwarded which "Darryl" or "Ralph" or "whoever", supposedly lied about.  Go back and read Tony's inference regarding his floor pans.  Were those comments just another misconstrued fact that was lied about?  Everyone can tell that they were most definitely in good condition and in no need of major repair.....right?  If he is truthful I'd hate to hear him lie!  

And yes Tony, I ABSOLUTELY said I want nothing to do with your resto buddy for the backstabbing lies that he told about me after all the help I provided to him.  I choose not to deal with pathological liars that will stab you in the back to facilitate their agenda.  Maybe you should tell your Friends here how you spent the better part of the last seven years going behind my back lying about all 3 of my restorations, secretly contacting the magazine Editors and trying to get them to print incorrect gossip about my cars, going on the Moparts forum under the alias "BEAST" (which has been recently changed to Captain Flapjack after a two year hiatus) to stir up trouble.  I especially like the response to Tony's "recollections" made by  another member:

.......Every point you made is exact......

Back to answering HELD1823's question....I do not have any personal knowledge about the grill on Daytona's.  I was just passing along some "hear say" information.  I do however have YEARS of experience with reproducing and the study of fonts and original versus reproduction characteristics of Factory documents, decals, labels, etc......  Below are a few of the small nuances that most people never notice.  You mentioned "spacing" as it relates to other cars having the "same" characteristics.  WRONG!  What you failed to notice is the vertical kerning which exposes the "real" one for what it is.......MY reproduction.  ALL Build Sheets were printed on a Dot Matrix, Continuous-Line Form Printer.  Once the Computer Network was programed to print the vehicle's information, that data was constant throughout the print run. (17 Special Order wording for example)  Since those words never changed in context, they were "locked" in and would basically remain consistent in positioning unless someone typed an extra space between characters on a different day.  The other characters (option codes) would constantly "move" in their positing because those numbers that were changed to represent the different options of the vehicle.  If the code was not changed, the positioning of the character would basically remain in the same location.  You might have some minor shifting in characters but no drastic change from one form to the next.  

Notice the two styles of print in the photo below.  I have more than 10 that can be use to illustrate the point.  Every example that used the "wide" 17 Special Order verbiage basically fall in the same positions with respect to the primary print (boxes) above it.  The primary print is the actual "static" print that never changes while the secondary print is the characters that are entered by the Computer Programmer and printed by the Continuous Feed Dot Matrix printer.  Notice the versions that illustrates the narrower spaced version of the wording "17 Special Order".  They fall in almost the same proximity, to the right, of the primary print lines above.  EXCEPT for MY bottom two REPRODUCTION copies of the Build Sheet.  Notice how the letters "S" & "O" fall to the left side of the vertical box line.   In the full size pictures also notice how even the "movable" option numbers in the "real" one are exactly in the same positions as my reproduction example.  Since I did not have an original to format from, I "guessed" where the 17 Special Order line & numbers were placed with regards to the primary print boxes.  I missed a complete "space" between the "7" and the "S"!  IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR TONY'S "ORIGINAL" (THAT I HAD NEVER SEEN) TO EXHIBIT THE SAME ERROR AS MY REPRODUCTION.  THE "NARROW" FONTS WERE ALL BASICALLY IN THE SAME PLACE WITH RESPECT TO THE BOXES BUT DO NOT MATCH MY MISSED SPACE BETWEEN THE "7" & THE "S"!  Why didn't Tony send me that "real" one as a format to use instead of a hand written sample?  I have marked lines to show what I am talking about and those examples that are "original" and reproduction.  The one on the left in Tony's quad picture is actually a "real" version but all of the identifying vehicle information is missing.  I guess that makes it "hear say" as to whether it really came from that car.  Give it a few days and they will probably come up with some "original Photoshop" versions to counter my research.  For those who have their originals you will positively see the same positioning if you have the "narrow" or "wide" font versions.  The examples I used were from the ones posted here so you KNOW they were not altered in their appearance!

[JB400]

I think my kite almost got off the ground.   

[ECS]

I think my kite almost got off the ground.  

Indeed.....nothing like pictorial proof to expel the wind from a Hot Air Balloon!  

[nvrbdn]

this car is sitting flat on the ground. is that how it was found? dont know much about the story i guess.

[held1823]

i will let this photo speak for itself, as to whether or not it is the same floor pan that dave just posted.

and once again, this sidebar doesnt have one damn thing to do with how the car was sold forty-plus years ago. can we get back to that?

[Aero426]

You guys have called it "fraud" but want to make it MY fraud.  Your forum member/friend and his restoration crony incorrectly aged it, screw up the manner in the way it was marked, lied to the judges and everyone here about it being original and not ONE of you question THEIR involvement or motives.  

Dave, if what you allege is true, you are most certainly partially responsible.   You are the person that opened Pandora's Box on "perfect" build sheets.   You would not listen to anyone,  as far as making them clearly a novelty item and detectable.    

You claim no responsibility once it leaves your hands.   That is total BS, and you know it.    You might not be the person working over a build sheet that you created.   But you made it possible.  You didn't create the problem of people altering paperwork.    You just made it easier.     For this, you do bear some responsibility.    This is not a VIN label for a '98 Taurus.   It WAS one of the gold standards for evaluating a vintage Mopar before you decided to muck it up.    

For all the good things you have done for the hobby, the decision to make build sheets for customers, friends, etc. was equally bad.    And for what?    

[ECS]

You guys have called it "fraud" but want to make it MY fraud.  Your forum member/friend and his restoration crony incorrectly aged it, screw up the manner in the way it was marked, lied to the judges and everyone here about it being original and not ONE of you question THEIR involvement or motives.  

Dave, if what you allege is true, you are most certainly partially responsible.   You are the person that opened Pandora's Box on "perfect" build sheets.   You would not listen to anyone,  as far as making them clearly a novelty item and detectable.    

You claim no responsibility once it leaves your hands.   That is total BS, and you know it.    You might not be the person working over a build sheet that you created.   But you made it possible.  You didn't create the problem of people altering paperwork.    You just made it easier.     For this, you do bear some responsibility.    This is not a VIN label for a '98 Taurus.   It WAS one of the gold standards for evaluating a vintage Mopar before you decided to muck it up.    

For all the good things you have done for the hobby, the decision to make build sheets for customers, friends, etc. was equally bad.    And for what?    

To be truly accurate, it is my Parents fault for bringing me into this World.  Had they not done that, this would have never happened.  So I am going to blame them.  

You are completely correct however in your initial statement.  I had no responsibility in doctoring, aging and trying to pass that build sheet off as being an original.  I have ALWAYS admitted and openly told of the sheets that I make.  I actually had them approval from Chrysler but Dave Stuart talked me out of actually marketing them.  Its also not my fault that many of you have decided to mandate a point of view that is not substantiated by any formal or legitimate Governing Body!  

I will certainly be looking forward to reading your chastising remarks to the other side who were the ones that actually lied to all of their good Friends here and tried to pass my reproduction off as being real.  I'm sure you probably just wanted to do that in a separate post......right?    

[held1823]

one can only assume that you were totally unaware of the "repeat violation" that you tossed out there with this jewel...

For the record, this is the second reproduction build sheet that this restoration shop has tried to pass off as "original."

because if you were aware of it, you certainly would not have aided in the repeat violation, would you....


again, can we discuss the car, as it was sold new? don't leave poor ralph twisting in the wind while you bemoan unrelated topics.

[ECS]

one can only assume that you were totally unaware of the "repeat violation" that you tossed out there with this jewel...

For the record, this is the second reproduction build sheet that this restoration shop has tried to pass off as "original."

because if you were aware of it, you certainly would not have aided in the repeat violation, would you....


again, can we discuss the car, as it was sold new? don't leave poor ralph twisting in the wind while you bemoan unrelated topics.

I have already been contacted by a member here ( I do not know their real name) and has asked to be part of the meeting we are trying to coordinate.  Apparently this person said that there are other "members" in the area that might also attend.  My offices are in Chesterfield, MO. 63005.  For ANYONE who is around the proximity of the area, I am inviting you to join the meeting and we will go out to Lunch just like we did the last time.  You guys can witness and hear things for yourself.  

Again, where is the chastising for the one responsible for doctoring and trying to falsify the identity of the build sheets?  Is there not even ONE of you upstanding guys who think that taking my (admitted) reproduction build sheets and trying to pass them off as original holds no culpability?  I guess if you do THAT, it opens up the entire box of worms concerning the stories and character of those involved and just which lies you are willing to accept!  Sorry, but your hypocrisy and partiality is not even CLOSE to being concealed regarding this situation.  Here is the proof in case you just happened to miss it when I posted it before.


 

[richRTSE]

i will let this photo speak for itself, as to whether or not it is the same floor pan that dave just posted.

looks like it could be.....similar hole in rear trans tunnel, rusty rear console bracket, clean edge of seat with dirty insert area...

[held1823]

Again, where is the chastising for the one responsible for doctoring and trying to falsify the identity of the build sheets?    

as you stated yourself, that is fodder for a different thread. if you seek my personal opinion, i agree that deception of any sort is unacceptable. i also believe it is unacceptable for you to offer the reproduction sheets in the first place. the case you are now trying to build is reason enough why there is no place for these valuable documents to be accessible other than from within the car they came with. at best, you are rewriting (or more exactly, reprinting) history. at worst, you did open the pandor's box that doug alluded to. there are deceptive people out there, and had you stopped to consider what may come from your precise documents, none of what you alledge should have come as a surprise.

you continually claim we "protect our own". search my old posts, and grasp the scorn, both dished out and received back, involving me and my "narrow minded" views regarding cloned vehicles. this thread is certainly not the place to discuss that topic, but my sentiment expressed in the second sentence of this very post should show you how i stand in on the minority on that issue. like you, i am not afraid to press forward with my beliefs. unlike you, however, i generally post my dissension in the appropriate thread. your feud with tony and mike is forty years beyond anything related to this thread.

[706pkvert]

Quote from: ECS on Today at 03:50:07 PM
For the record, this is the second reproduction build sheet that this restoration shop has tried to pass off as "original."


This statement is totally untrue. Period. I've already debated this.

[JB400]

Save yourself the trouble.  All he is going to do is go on and on and on and on and on about this and that.  There's no sense in trying to turn on the light with a burnt out bulb.  If you want to make yourself helpful, vote for me or Fred  http://www.dodgecharger.com/forum/index.php/topic,95907.msg1101406.html#msg1101406