This is a read-only archive of the old Madabout Kitcars forum. New posts and replies are no longer possible, but every thread is still here to browse and read.
Hi, have been reviewing favourite websites recently and was looking at the Extreme website which has been updated. Looking at the 360 conversion of a 406 coupe looked very nice until I saw the piece comparing a 'real' 360 and the Extreme version and how similar they where and the fact that the Ferrari and the Peugeot Coupe have the same designer - all well and good! However when they put comparison shots of the real versus the copy I was surprised to see a shot of the 'real' 360's interior only to find what is actually a 406 interior with a yellow rev counter (which only a 430 would have)and a gate gear change which looked very convincing - until I found a picture of a genuine 360 and saw that they are nothing like the same! This casts doubts as to the integrity of the manufacturer to make such claims to potential customers which can easily be disclaimed, or am I being too harsh?
A 406 is never going to be an exact copy of the 360.
Yes it does seem they've made a silly mistake in identifying interiors. This could be a genuine mistake though as the web designer that put the site together might know nothing about the 360.
I wrote to Extreme in an un-threatening way pointing out this 'error' as it was in two different places on the site so not 'un-intentional' and got a very rude reply from Paul Belk not even addressing this mistake with any sort of explanation other than the comparisons between a real 360 and theirs was only in size etc and I was told that I was 'ill informed' 'bored with life' and a 'nobhead' (his spelling!) and I should go elseware!
So I think I was right in my assumptions that the company is not as good as first thought and I would certainly never have dealings with them as their/his customer skills are 'non existent' and he appears to be a very very rude man and maybe this was why Mirrorfinish stopped selling their products!
If it was an 'error' the least he could have done is apologize rather than attack a potential customer - or again am I wrong?
Hi, First off madolddog and madoldbugger are actually the same person - me(just that my work computer accepts one pw and the one at home t'other!)
Yes my letter was VERY polite with some praise for their quality and authentisity with just a query regarding the inconsistancies and all I got was a two line abusive reply without even an explaination or appology which I felt totally un-warrented and bloody rude - especially as I could have been a potential customer with 10 grand plus to spend! With them now - NO WAY!
There's no excuse for that sort of customer treatment and I can't understand the mentality of anyone in business doing such a thing, they must know that bad press gets out in a flash nowadays.
Exactly John! With forums like this to enable end users and suppliers to air their views I think it was rather stupid to take such a course of action especially as they are making inaccurate claims which can easily be discounted. To be so abusive to a potential customer is bound to be damaging and I would have expected at the least some sort of excuse or apology for implying that the other car used was a genuine 360 and in fact also a copy but it is now an obvious intention to mislead, but also it is clear they have no desire to uphold a good reputation and that puts a blight on their/his integrity which hopefully others will be aware of and treat with extreme caution (sorry couldn't resist)
Cheers Terry