jacobcartmill

iTrader: (6)

original poster,

has this car been on an alignment rack?

RotaryResurrection

iTrader: (8)

He stated in another thread that the car aligned fine. Even if the car is damaged as he says, it is all in front of the strut towers, cosmetic only, and therefore would have no impact on alignment.

LT1RX7

The shop that did the MD state inspection and told me it had been crashed said that they checked the alignment and it was fine.

That is beside the point though......just fortunate for me that I dont have a heap of scrap on my hands.

RotaryResurrection

iTrader: (8)

...just as fortunate for me, given that I bought it first, but you dont see me whining about it.

rx7roller02

no it isnt besides the point, actually. Know why? Simple--because this inspection shop told you that the car was in a wreck. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that the entire rest of the frame on a unibody car would be straight and perfect like that if the front was in a collision that was bad enough to require replacing that section. When a car is in a wreck these days, the force of impact travels throughout the structure. There would definitely be something off somewhere else on this car, unless the entire car had frame repair done. And if that happened there would positively be a hit on the carfax for it.

They told you it was wrecked, and the entire premise behind your complaining now is that you claim they are correct. WRONG. If the car was not wrecked, then your whole claim that he sold you a wrecked FD and didnt tell you about it is down the drain.

So, tell us again how that's all "beside the point"...

justjeff, here's your logic right there. Have you ever seen what a unibody frame looks like after a front-end crash? I have seen hundreds of them. The frame is never the same after such a crash. But this one is so straight that it aligns perfectly--even the inspector that insisted it was wrecked admits as much. So, please, apply logic to that and let us know what you come up with.

The only way this car was wrecked like they are claiming is if the entire car were torn down and the whole thing fixed from the bare frame on up. And I highly doubt that ANYONE would go through such time and expense so they could sell it to Kevin for the $$$ he paid for it. THAT is logic.

JustJeff

iTrader: (13)

RX7roller02

I'll disregard the tone of your words as being unneccesary. I'm not looking to square off with you in a battle of witty retorts.

Everyone misses the point that several of us find it hard to believe that the repair work was completely unknown to Kevin. The point isn't the safety of the car, the inspection, or even the melodrama of Kevin allowing his wife to drive it, or having his child in the car. Not disclosing repair work like that to potential buyers can get a business owner in trouble.

LT1RX7

Hate to break it to you but the supports up front for the bumper, fenders, headlights etc are all very flimsy and an the accident wouldnt have to be that severe to require it to be repaired. It would be MUCH easier if those small pieces were damaged to replace the front "clip" rather than trying to repair those small areas.

RotaryResurrection

iTrader: (8)

You obviously have some background in body repairs in order to feel that way, so you find it hard to put yourself in the shoes of someone who does not instantly recognize what is what in the way of such repairs. Let me help you.

I obviously see lots of engines and all sorts of failures and indicators whether or not a certain setup has been tampered with or previously repaired or worked on. Not everyone does. Commonly someone will bring me an engine and not know that it has been rebuilt or that XXX clip is missing or whatever that indicates to me it's been worked on, but they would never have known.

But it wouldn't be fair for me to sit here and call them a dumbass or a moron because they didn't know what I know. I dont know how much you do or dont know about these engines, but it wouldn't be right for me to walk up to a car you're selling that you say has the original engine and say "dammit Jeff you dumbass, this engine is clearly a rebuild, how the hell could you not know that??". Well, if you're not an engine guy, I can definitely see how you wouldn't be able to recognize that. But if me and some other engine guys got together and said "ah, that is obviously not the original engine" could we realistically claim that you had to know about the reman, and were just lying that you thought it was original?

IT would be about equivalent to saying that a paint man is stupid because he doesnt know the basics of computer repair, or that a body man is stupid because he doesnt know jack **** about plumbing. Being intelligent in one area does not mean you know everything about everything else. This is why when a new house is built, they have different people do the wiring, plumbing, drywall, etc. even though it is all contained within one house. The drywall man has seen plumbing before many times, but he probably wouldnt have a clue how to do it himself or to tell what is right and wrong about the plumbing, because he's not a ******* plumber.

jerd_hambone

One problem with this is, like icemark said, an accident costing over $500 to repair requires a police report.

For an FD $500 in repairs are MUCH less than what it would take to repair a front end collision.

The minimum that would need repaired would be the hood, fenders, bumper, bumper supports, headlights, and so on.

An FD front clip doesn't cost $500 ANYWHERE! An FC front clip cost upwards of $2k.

So that claim does not hold up very well at all.

Having a front clip welded on alone would cost maybe $1k for the work, and thats cutting it slim. Now factor in the cost of the front clip. You are looking at about 4-5k worth of work.

But don't believe me if you want, not like I didn't go to college for this kind of stuff.

Kevin's right, as he always will be.

blk91fc3s

iTrader: (2)

i have had a car pulled before. there was massive suspension damage i replaced as much as i could by myself then had it pulled. $1300 total no police report. I was later rear-ended, the car was totaled. i personally would never sell a car like that but it is possible to acquire one.

JustJeff

iTrader: (13)

You have a way of manipulating words and dramatizing what doesn't need to be dramatic. I simply agreed with RX7What's post. RX7what is the one who implied you were "a retard". Replying to my post about dumbasses, talking down to me and being sarcastic to me is distracting and other than being distracting, is pointless.

Someone with a lot of experience with car engines and buying and selling parts and cars, that is a related field to body work. Wild comparisons of completely unrelated professions such as paint man to computer tech and body man to a plumber only distracts from the topic the OP brought up.

And you are wrong on your metaphor about the construction industry. My family has been involved with the construction industry for a few decades. They have subcontracted several homes, helped to build several of their own homes and have helped others family members and friends build their homes. They have built homes in several different states over that time. I have been around construction people quite a bit and have helped do some construction myself. Most workers in that industry can make pretty well thought out opinions.

rx7roller02

I'll tell you what's unnecessary here--the OP doesnt have any business, nor does anyone else, accusing a fellow forum member of lying, fraud, or any other bullshit WITHOUT ANY PROOF. We hear constantly about this "wreck", but having spent 7 years as a fire rescue medic, I have enough experience to know that it takes NOTHING to do 500 worth of damage to a car, which is all you need for a report to be on carfax. That same experience tells me that any front-end impact that would need that section replaced would NOT under any circumstances leave the entire rest of the car straight and true.

But since you want to talk about "unnecessary", let's see what you have to say about such things.

Entirely fine by me--I dont fancy such battles with an unarmed opponent anyways.

um, nope...wrong again

No one missed that point, son. The fact is this--Kevin did not do this "repair work". It is right on a factory join line. Kevin already explained his thoughts, and if you look closely at the pics there are plenty of places where the frame meets up straight. It is 100% impossible for you to think you have any business judging what his eyes saw, or how he interpreted that based on his personal experience. Which, I might add, does not include any know-how in bodywork or frame repair. Just for one minute, think of the possibility that someone who doesnt know the first thing about auto body repair could actually see how much of that frame lines up fine and think differently than you do. It is not so far-fetched as you guys are trying to claim now.

Not only that, but it keeps coming back to the reason for this "repair". Kevin had a car in his possession with a clear title, and a clean carfax. These are two of the best-known ways to check a car's damage history. He had absolutely nothing but indications that this car was not in any such wreck. So, why the hell would you insist that it not only was, but that he must have known about it?

Really?? Do tell then--why are people concerned if a used car was wrecked before? if there really was accident damage to a car, why would it lower the value? Why do things like carfax even exist? PREVIOUS DAMAGE IF NOT PROPERLY REPAIRED HAS A DIRECT EFFECT ON THE SAFETY OF THE CAR MORE THAN ANY OTHER FACTOR. Note this--the OP is not claiming that Kevin sold him a car that someone just swapped the front on....he specifically claims over and over again that it was WRECKED. Obviously you are missing something here.

That isnt the point?? It's the entire basis for the OP's complaint! He was wrongly told that it was wrecked by a guy who is hardly qualified to determine such a thing. And from that, he went straight to telling Kevin he "needs to come clean"....he used that inspection all by itself as enough evidence to call Kevin a liar. So, once again, apparently it is more of the point than you care to realize.

Of course you wont say this is the point--it directly goes against your version of logic. If he knew that a car had a problem, as you claim next, then only a complete moron would actually not see the relevance of him driving his son around in that car. Or letting his wife drive it. Like I said multiple times now--if that was your car, and you knew the frame was damaged, would you let your wife and child drive around in it? You like to say that this isnt the point, but I certainly dont see you responding each time the question is asked...

1--he sold the car as a private individual, not as a business. Therefore, you cannot connect his business to it. He was the registered private owner of the car and he sold it as such. That wont fly.

2--he did not repair a wrecked frame, so your "disclosure" bit wouldnt fly even if he sold that as his business. He put more sealant on the join that was already present when he bought it. There is no law in any state which requires a seller to be aware, to disclose, or to be responsible for, ANY repair work done to a car before he even took possession of it! Further, it was clearly established that the car came as-is, with no warranty, and that Kevin made no statements or guarantees as to the car's history before he bought it. This was all already covered. The guy heard all of this, looked it over, and bought it anyways. Seriously, how can you be ignorant enough to think that the law would require Kevin to disclose something he couldnt reasonably even be aware of???

And when was the last time you even bought a car? No such disclosure is required by law. The only disclosure the law requires is the condition of the title. This is why car dealerships state in the fine print that the car "may or may not have had previous accident damage" and that they are not responsible for any such previous damage.

In other words, this cannot get Kevin in trouble in any way. He did not represent this car to be anything that it isnt. No claims were made about the car's previous history. It looked right. It drove right. Everything works on it as it is supposed to. And it has a fresh rebuilt engine. It was sold for a very good price. And Kevin met the guy several hours away from home with the car, which most sellers wouldnt even think of doing. Kevin made every reasonable effort to accomodate this buyer and even some extra effort beyond that, and still the guy got a hell of a price. Have you ever bought a car from far away from where you live before? I have. It is the BUYER'S responsibility to arrange all travel and shipping as needed. Kevin went out of his way for this guy. Last time I bought a car like that I had to hop a plane and drive it back home from the seller's driveway.

JustJeff

iTrader: (13)

RX7Roller02 most of what you had to say to me is complete forum bravado about a situation you were and are no more involved with than I am. Either the OP or Kevin could be lying their butts off and no one would know. We can have a difference of opinion and both our lives will move along as if we never exchanged words about this.

waysrx7

I'm just curious, but was this the first engine rotaryressurection has put in an FD or painted an FD's engine bay?

It would be really easy to say Kevin bought this car then later saw the damage and didn't say anything about it because he knew the value of the car would drop.

Likewise it's just as easy to say kevin sold a good car and the new owner damaged it and fixed it but now has a beef with kevin so is trying to hurt his name.

We can't deny that the car was/is damaged, but we also can't say when it was done. If the a current carfax doesn't show any repair work then the damage could have happened before kevin bought the car and the "clean carfax argument" has no merit to either support kevin nor hurt him.

Wow, I only wanted to ask the first ? but here I go babbling on.

Kevin, I don't know you and as for your work I hear it's good; you may not have the best personality but I guess I'm trying to say this hasn't affected my perception of you, which is a good thing and ya it is way too old to bring up now.

rx7roller02

well thank you mr obvious...I dont seem to recall saying anything to the contrary. A difference of opinion is one thing. Making accusations against someone is another. And if you wish to try to discount or discredit my statements in this fashion, I imagine that you should be intelligent enough to consider the same about your own views before you determine that a very highly respected forum member (who has personally gone so far out of his way to help this forum's members that he has no chance of ever recouping the cost) is lying. Funny how this is only your take when someone challenges your opinion.

In either case, this is more than just a he said-he said deal. Kevin has a track record on this forum probably better than any other person. And he is a one-man operation, but he still does more for his customers than anyone else I have ever seen. He has never had a problem as far back as I can remember on this forum taking care of his work, EVER. There have been times before where something was wrong, and it never took anything for him to admit it. That speaks volumes in my mind.

Drop to what, exactly? Dude, are you even aware of the facts of this incident? Are you also aware of the typical going price for an FD today? This car was sold at a bargain price, with clear title and clean carfax, plus a rebuilt engine and new paint. The whole car worked as it was supposed to. And it was sold at a good price because Kevin hasnt tried to rip off a single person in the history of this forum. We live in a day and age where getting an FD without a drivetrain can run you as much as 7K....and this was a complete working car, runs and drives perfectly, everything works, with a freshly rebuilt engine, sold for 10,500!! So, PLEASE, do tell, exactly what would that value drop to??

That's rather odd--you are the one and only person in this whole thread to say that statement. I guess it isnt "just as easy" after all, considering that Kevin freely admitted what he saw when he was working on the car. A dishonest person isnt so easily found to admit he had seen anything....

It most certainly does have merit, because when you see a clean carfax it isnt usually something you question without proof. Kevin bought a car, and every which way he looked it was accident-free. That does hold water. Then, it is very easy to understand the point that he looked in the engine bay, at a known facotry join location and thought something other than "accident".

rx7roller02

Related field?? Are you on crack?

They are only related because they both work on cars. If they have so much in common, why does each profession need its own certifications? Why does an auto mechanic not have the necessary training automatically to do body work? Because they are DIFFERENT. A guy who does oil changes cant work on air conditioning without more training and more certification because it is DIFFERENT. But they both work on cars, so it should be the same right?? WOW that's just ignorant.

A plumber and a roofer both work on houses. I can tell you right off that there is no way in hell I want a plumber on my roof. A CNA, an EMT, and a brain surgeon all work in the medical field--which one would you prefer to operate on you?

"but...but....but....they are related fields...."



We could do this all friggin day. The point is that your oversimplification of this isnt working. Like I said, you cant speak for what his eyes saw and what that meant in his mind. Be smart and leave it at that

um, hate to break it to you, lt1, but the total damage of even that kind of accident would be more than that. You neglected to account for the cost of replacing the front bumper cover, which would be damaged in an impact of just a few miles an hour. Once you figure in the estimate of a new bumper cover and paint to match, your $500 is more than met. And no body shop estimate would not include such work, nor would any insurance company leave it off either. Their job is to make the car as it is supposed to be, and any estimate would have to reflect that.

And again, you are talking about cutting off part of the FRAME. If the frame was intact, who would go through all that effort?? Only a real moron, thats who. You're telling me that cutting a frame off and welding a new one on in its place, when the frame was 100% intact, is preferrable to replacing brackets and supports???? Do you have any idea what an estimate for frame repair would run? That in itself would kill the $500 minimum!!

In short, what youre saying simply makes no practical sense whatsoever.

waysrx7

You should do a little more reading and a little less typing, reread my post.

I'm not bashing on kevin btw.

rx7roller02

I read your post just fine. And I didnt say you were bashing on him--I merely commented on your post, simple as that.

I said that it does lend merit to what Kevin has said. And it does. If you think a car might have been in a wreck and you pull a clean carfax on it, plus the title's clean, then chances are good that there was no wreck. I am not saying that carfax is perfect, but the odds are simply in favor of it being right more times than wrong. In this case, the title and carfax show no damage. And the only evidence of anything is along a known assembly line on the car. With no other damage anywhere on the car, when it drives just right, when carfax and the title both indicate no wreck, how the hell should Kevin automatically know that this isnt just a factory seam that needs more sealant like some people are claiming? EVERY indication points to no accident damage.

And you actually think that this information holds no merit either way? I fail to see your reasoning there.

djmtsu

iTrader: (3)

Kevin is not in the wrong here. The OP is a typical 'want something for nothing then bitch about it' person that we all know and despise (especially Kevin).

For the deal he got, who cares. I have a local friend that payed WAY more for that for an FD that had a salvage title and was wrecked badly in the rear. The car was safe and had no issues.

JustJeff

iTrader: (13)

RX7Roller02 your posts would be taken with more credibility if you dropped the combative, condescending, and aggressive tone.

The reason I said that you aren't anymore involved with this than I am and that the OP or Kevin could be lying was to bring up the point that neither of us were there, none of us who post have anyway of knowing for sure what happened, how it happened, or when it happened. Only the OP and Kevin know the truth and it's really between them.

The reason I said we can have a difference of opinion and move along with our lives was simple. To try and get the thread away from long posts filled with "I'm better than you" talk on issues that are barely related to what the OP originally posted about.

JustJeff

iTrader: (13)

+1
especially the part about it being too old to bring up now

Rx-7Doctor

iTrader: (13)

Heres my stand point on this thread. After members read this then I believe I will delete it. The below is the rule as stated in the main rule section.
7. Don't make slanderous accusations. If you have a problem with another member or business, and cannot prove it absolutely, don’t bring in into the forum. It could be treated as grounds for a lawsuit if you do. Provide your proof in any such posts. Post with accusations but no proof will be deleted, and the poster will be notified. If your beef is over a purchase/sales experience, we have an area of the forum devoted to that, the "Good Guy/Bad Guy" forum.

LT1RX7

LOL I got a stock AUTO FD for $10500, that is hardly the great bargin you all are talking about.

I just am curious as to what type of "seam sealer" Kevin used....it must have been mislabeled because the only thing in the area where Kevin admits to working in is crappy welds, BONDO and black paint.

LT1RX7

I posted this in Good guy/Bad guy forum and I showed the photo evidence...what did I do wrong rx7doctor?

Rx-7Doctor

iTrader: (13)

Evidence of what? This is from almost 1.5 years ago. You are "Assuming" that Kevin knew this and did this. There is no "Absolute" proof that he knew or did anything, therefore it is an "Accusation". As stated if their is no "Proof", then it will be delted. Sorry but I am just following the letter of our posted Club rule concerning issues such as this.