Drew

iTrader: (58)

Well IDK, I'm trying to inject levity into absurdity, and getting moderated... I just figured everyone could use a laugh. But yeah, site staff is doing good.

scottmoyer

Normally, Drew, the pics would be fine to inject levity, but in this case, Phil is just looking for something to "catch us red handed" with, since he has nothing else. That's why he is continuing to stay here even after we asked him to leave. He's reaching for something.

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

I'll second that

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Could. It. Be... ICE CREAM?

Sorry. Sorry. Just laughing thru, don't mind me.

George Klass

TGO is honored to have a celebrity like you on the forum

scottmoyer

Yay! I can do that also. I have a photo of me with Brandon Meriweather from the NE Patriots from just last weekend. I also have a photo of me with Don Garlits. I also have a photo of me with Stacey David. I have a picture of me with Jeff Allen and Meg Bailey from Car Chasers. So What?

Guess what? There are members here that have personal friendships with people even more famous than that. What're you showing us?

chazman

iTrader: (4)

CPC Norwood

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

Should I post my pics of me and President Clinton in the oval office ???

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Monica! Is that you?

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

dagwood

iTrader: (5)

Hmmmmm......Looks like this thread.......someone is speaking, and not a single person is listening.

I dont think the car is the issue here. I feel it's more of an ego killer. After all, the seller of the world record selling base iroc decal delete blah blah blah is a "celebrity" concours de elegance thing guest speaker blah blah blah that's had his picture taken with someone famous......and he should be on talk shows for being Barrett Jackson rock star for selling a $34k car, signing autographs, tv programs, etc. He should be a household name. Not being shamed for not coming clean about selling a car thats had some paint work.

The car is what it is. It's still a killer, 344 mile car. I'm sure it's awesome to see in person. And like most have said, it's not surprising that its had some paint touch up work done. After all it's an old car that was stored in a not so great place. All I have said was that it was a shame the parts were taped off, etc....and not done right for what the car deserves. Parts should have been removed to do the job right. And I'm sure that most of the paint is, in fact, original. I would still love to own it, regardless, as would every third gen enthusiast.

CPC Norwood

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Just to switch gears a bit, if you were in the market for a super low miler like that, what would YOU pay, knowing what we know?

CPC Norwood

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

I would not buy a "super low miler" if it had been touched up or re-sprayed.....there are others out there that have never been touched and if I was going to
drop that much $$$ that is what I'd be after ...........IMO anyway

odin65

It's really too bad the guy, or gal, with the second "shots" did'nt buy the car.

PurelyPMD

iTrader: (3)

?

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Like dagwood said, I'd bet most of it's paint is original. I wouldn't be surprised if it were damaged in shipping or something and the dealer did a repair before selling it to the original owner. Still a cool car, in my book. But I hear you. I ordered a 1988 Corvette in 1988. It was damaged in shipping. The dealer promised they could make it perfect so I gave them a chance. They did a crappy job and so I didn't want it anymore had them give me my deposit back.

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

agreed - it's still a very cool (and rare) car indeed !!

dagwood

iTrader: (5)

I would honestly expect to find some kind of paint work or touch up work on most of them out there. They're old cars. If I were buying that particular car, I dont really feel that would have hurt the value all that much, honestly. And the overspray issues are a pretty simple fix. I'd be buying it because it has 344 miles on the odometer. 344 miles worth of drivetrain wear, interior wear, etc. Its a still a new car. Sure, I'd rather have one with no touch up work done, but finding a 344 mile car is where the challenge lies, and the incentive is. It brought good money, and the seller should be more than pleased with the outcome. I'm not going to say that it brought more than it was worth. It's still a very desirable car, and I'm sure it's still impressive as hell to see in person.

But if I were going to buy a super low mile car, I would look for a 5k mile car that I could drive every now and then and enjoy, for a lot less money. I wouldn't want to drive the 344 mile car.

Just my $.02

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Totally agree!

chazman

iTrader: (4)

You being a painter, what areas look redone? I'd say driver's door, quarter with some blending around the bumper cover.

CPC Norwood

Drew

iTrader: (58)

$

Drew

iTrader: (58)

Prove it

dagwood

iTrader: (5)

He won't. I tried and tried to get him to. I even went down to my garage, removed my car cover, and took example pics of every area and angle to show, and got zero back. It was that simple to prove, yet that difficult to actually do, lol

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood

I am ready to “Prove it”

scottmoyer

GOODBYE, Phill. You're aren't contributing any value to this thread any longer. You can leave at any time.

dagwood

iTrader: (5)

Both rear quarters and roof. And here's why. BOTH tail lights have overspray on the seals, the fuel door has a paint edge all the way around it, and the drivers drip rail has overspray on the front, bottom end. All of these things prove paint work was done AFTER assembly. There is no good break off point on these cars when repairing a quarter panel. Unless it's a convertible, of course. But on a hard top and t top car, to paint on one quarter requires clearing BOTH quarters and roof without doing a clear blend on a sail panel, which is not really the right way to do things, either. It's a great place to do a color blend, but the clear has to go all the way around. So, my professional opinion is just that. Both quarters and roof have had work.

And, FWIW, I would rather have both quarters redone, rather than have a clear blend on a sail panel. Clear blends can be done, but are not recommended by any paint manufacturer, and are about impossible to make invisible.....at least to a trained eye.

I'd bet most of the basecoat is original, and just had some color blends done around the color overspray areas, and re cleared.

CPC Norwood

scottmoyer

Phil, you can't prove it now. The paint work that was pictured has had over a week to be removed. It's very easy to remove it all with the detailing supplies available today. You can't prove anything anymore because you probably altered the original canvas from what the pictures depicted. I've said it before and I'll say it again. You need to leave TGO because you have outstayed your welcome.

You should have allowed people to prove this while the car was still onsite and untouched, but you contaminated the "crime" scene by having the car removed from a high security location. Good job Phil. Your reputation is still on the line and your comments here are sinking it lower. I think I'll reach out to Wayne Carini and ask him if he saw this thread yet.

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Thanks. Makes sense.

ray jr

iTrader: (2)

if i saw those problem areas on that car i would just walk away and have no interest in it .. i just couldnt deal with those issues on a 344 mile car , if it real has 344 miles ..

dagwood

iTrader: (5)

I would bet the new owner addressed thes issues immediately when he got the car home.

There will always be evidence, but would require removing parts. Rear quarter spoiler, etc.

scottmoyer

Phil, quoting all of our posts so that they can't be deleted by the person originally posting them does nothing. You do know that as moderators and administrators, we can delete ALL posts, even the ones in your history so that they can never be found again. A search for all posts you made CAN be easily cleaned up so these will never be found.

However, we have absolutely nothing to hide, or nothing to fear. So, you keep playing this game your playing, thinking you have us caught red handed and documenting all of this. You have nothing on us. Barrett Jackson doesn't care about this, they were just the consignor and you were the seller. Read their legal paperwork that people have to sign when they get a bidder's paddle. Also, a judge has already ruled in Barrett Jackson's favor to dismiss when someone said BJ misrepresented a car they sold at auction. It was deemed that BJ was just the middle man and sold the car based on the facts presented by the seller, so the case was dismissed. You keep saying that we're misrepresenting the car, but we have no legal interest or contractural obligations regarding this car, so we can't "legally misrepresent" anything. We're just a message board full of keyboard warriors discussing a car. Good luck prosecuting. You're still not helping your self in any way.

BTW, you can leave now!

scottmoyer

It's in quotes. Phil. It's a play on words used in criminal cases when something that needs investigation is contaminated because something was moved. Move along, Phil. There's nothing to see here.

CPC Norwood

BizJetTech

iTrader: (3)

This is a lot like the government shut-down - neither side will budge - Scott, how about considering a more permanent end to this on-going train wreck of a thread?
I think there might be some support of that here? No? Maybe a poll to decide ?? ......Just a thought

CPC Norwood

chazman

iTrader: (4)

Of course, I would too.

1MeanZ

iTrader: (9)

CPC Norwood

CPC Norwood