Interesting . . .

[Ferg]

Originally Posted by kitcarman

The difference with the Anaconda is that Willy is going to build it first – then make his claims later . What a contrast.

..and that is really the big difference.

Incidentally, the judge's summing up of the Sumo case was quite incredible. The way he reduced the amount of each claim in a rational way was facinating. In fact, the bit about gardening in the snow was bordering on funny....

[gpdude]

Originally Posted by kitcarman

Hi Bart,
I wish I could agree, but it’s not normal for a magazine to publish the very opposite of the truth . It certainly doesn’t happen often!
In the case of the Howell reports; they were deliberately calculated to do as much harm as possible .
The very same is the case in its reporting of Python IMO , except the aim was (is) to do as much good as possible.
In both cases; readers are the losers - they were severely misled . It represents a severe abuse of trust if you ask me! One that’s far from acceptable or normal.

The difference with the Anaconda is that Willy is going to build it first – then make his claims later . What a contrast!

Den .

Den, no no no no! You misread my post I think.

I DO understand why you have a problem with all this, and I DO think the Python story is totally misleading.
I just meant to say that when I was involved in kit-cars, I was surrounded by people 'in the know' and so I learned from 30 years of experience... And let's just say the Python story is -like I said- the rule rather than the exeception. So all this is just a confirmation from what I learned back then.

On the other hand, let's be honest here, there's very few saints about in the kitcar industry is there?!

Let's summarise:
WKC, every now and then I might go to a shop and get me a copy but I don't buy it... Never did, never will.
'Times they are a changing'... well, not really...

Edit:

To make things clear...
My regard for WKC may not be high -especially content-wise, I'm not too impressed by KCM either. Amateurism rules. And that's a shame.
Let's leave it here OK.

[kitcarman]

Hi Bart,
I’m really glad that we’ve cleared up that misunderstanding. Did you know that you’re the first manufacturer to go ‘on the record’ in affirming your understanding of the nature of Fib’s . Most have done so privately. Without doubt; he’ll contact you in the next week accusing you of slander/libel .

Hi Ferg,
That gardening in the snow bit was very funny at the time (last page of Judgment, Dec 2000). The Judge’s retort “I won’t bother you with loss of earnings :he’d have been here anyway” so clearly summed-up the judges opinion of Howell. He really was an ignorant, obnoxious, argumentative, dick-head!!! The Judge made that perfectly clear throughout; I think.

Yet Fib’s published just exactly his one-sided account and only his account (again and again). Fib’s warned me as I left the Court that I hadn’t heard the end of the matter. How right he was !

That said, he hasn’t exactly heard the end of it either – has he? Sow the wind….. Reap what you sow…. What goes around….


Hi M ,
As you can see ; some folk are learning a great deal of detail from the documents. So, are you going to say why you think publishing them ( http://www.kit-cars.com/fff/filbyfactfile1.html ) is immature?

Den

[M]

Let´s pretend that the bloke writing the article is used to testing various BMW´s.
Since BMW cars are known for great handling he´s got to have a more than average measurements of standards, then maybe the Python`s handling is as good as the handling of let´s say an old Sierra by comparison….?

There´s no mention of the bodywork in the article, so I assume there is no worries in that area?

Hi Den, -No I won´t try to explain why it is immature to create a “Filbyfactfile” on the internet, you have to figure that one out for your self, maybe time will tell….

M

[JG]

Den's 'fact file' was something that was requested by a number of people that were following the saga. Posting on forums was becoming tedious as the same stuff was being said over and over. A reference for the goings on was asked for and seen as a good idea and Den has obliged. I personally don't see anything wrong or immature about it but I do think it's sad that 2 peoples lives have been blighted by this - you only get one crack at it after all.

John

Madabout-Kitcars.com

[kitcarman]

Hi M,
Listen to yourself .
Your previous post asserted:-

Originally Posted by M

My interest is purely technical…..

However, you soon move to a galaxy far, far away:-

Originally Posted by M

Let´s pretend that the bloke writing the article…….

……..No, I won´t try to explain why it is immature…..you have to figure that one out for your self

Your point is about as technical as an episode of Star Wars (or a technical feature in WCK? for that matter ).

Den

[M]

Ok, Den thank´s for your pointer, back to the tecnical side:
So, Den, you agree that the handling equals that of an old Sierra and that the remaining chassi issues are fixable and the bodywork is OK???

M

[JG]

I know this is aimed at Den but would like to add that anything is fixable, we're only talking bits of welded metal here, anyone with a modicom (sp) of chassis design pedigree could fix it.

As for the bodywork, well my own opinion was that it is nothing special. I was not impressed with what I saw at the shows, not the worst I've seen but certainly not up to other makes standards. The show car has slight ripples down the sides (only slight) and the CSM can be seen through the gel coat. All fixable if spraying the car but nothing to shout about.

John

Madabout-Kitcars.com

[kitcarman]

Hi M,
It’s always a problem with joining a conversation late in the day; so let me reiterate my very first post on this subject:-

Originally Posted by kitcarman

I reckon that everybody here can see what the issues were. That said, I think things have moved on. There are now new issues. It’s makes no difference to me whether the car drives well or not. My two concerns are whether it’s safe and whether it’s commercially secure.

The factory owner in Sri Lanka tells me that he’s in the process of evicting Vince ….

The front upper wishbone ball-joint is being used for a purpose for which it wasn’t designed…. there is significant controversy concerning its suitability.

Incidentally, I was in court with Vince concerning his advertising debt the other day. He was ordered to pay me £803.82.

I believe the public is being misled by dishonest publicity .

Even if the chassis can be made straight and strong; the fact remains that the company making it is bent and weak. One aspect of it’s ‘bentness’ is in the fact that Vince still hasn’t paid his Judgment debt (FFF May 05).
Another is in the reports in November's WKC ?

Den.

[kitcarman]

Hi M,
I’ve just added a link to Fib’s latest reports on Python in the fact file (Nov 05 http://www.kit-cars.com/fff/filbyfactfile1.html ).

How and why are AhhhVD going to fix problems they haven’t got ?

Fib’s has shifted his position from “fixes are being worked on” to asserting that all Python chassis (except the one and only example on the road ) are OK. Specifically: he said, of the latest demo “Its chassis is RV’s slightly redesigned and stiffer assembly, as supplied to all UK customers so far”.

In other words, he’s reiterating the yarn that VW spun to me; to the effect that the problems were solved before they were even discovered . So, whether it’s right or wrong, the Python that we’ve all seen and read about is the Python that any foolish purchasers shall get .

The question then arises as to which version of what we’ve read is correct. There’s not much doubt: even WKC ? (in a flush of half-hearted integrity ) admitted that its handling isn’t right and that it isn’t comfortable .

That was some admission concerning a kit that costs upward of £12,000 to build! When you going to order yours M? Personally; I’d advise you to buy a kit with genuine provenance . All of them would take a BMW engine if that’s what takes your fancy. Chances are that they'll still be there in a year - which is more than can be said of AhhhVD .

Den

[M]

Thanks for some technical input, finally. I think this is more interesting to discuss, after all you aren’t marrying the salesman, it’s the product you have to live with.
To summarize:
Major front suspension issues.
Ride height far too high.
Bodywork not the best quality, ripples and all.
Exhaust not tuned.
Priced 3545£

Cold hard facts I like that

Couldn’t help noticing the irony, Den, if some kits actually are sold then Vince might afford paying his debt, what a bummer

M

[kitcarman]

Originally Posted by M

Cold hard facts I like that

Which are that:-
This mediocre , half-baked , product is misrepresented as being much better than it actually is by a demented moron working in close relationship with a bent journalist .

Originally Posted by M

Couldn’t help noticing the irony, Den, if some kits actually are sold then Vince might afford paying his debt, what a bummer

There’s no irony whatever. Vince never had the slightest intention of paying from day one!
The only reason I issued the claim was to get to the bottom of Fib’s involvement. It was worth the £50 issue fee to watch Fib's squirm before the District Judge for two hours . As to the Judgment – I’ll have some more fun with that later.

If you’re right – if Vince really is insolvent – he shouldn’t be trading – should he?

Den

[JG]

Ok, my smileyometer is indicating that this thread be locked now

John

Madabout-Kitcars.com