New RF Company Formation - Page 2

Bill D · 06-09-06, 09:27 AM

I agree that the scrwes should be retained. The whole objective is to replicate a tremendously successful historic car.

Mitch D · 06-09-06, 11:14 AM

Thanks for the reply, Owen. I wasn't trying to offend, but there's a big pink elephant in the corner and noone else seemed to want to ask.

With your reply, I can tell you this. You have already shown more promptness and clarity than anything RL has posted in the last two years.

Best of luck on the venture, I look forward to seeing more info on the forum!

Regards,
Mitch D

PS - I agree with Bill D - I like the "original look" and details like screws to hold grills and covers add mounds to the overall feel of the finished product. If you want a smooth, sterile, stylized version you can always get a Ford GT.

Ian K · 06-09-06, 01:26 PM

Owen,

Good luck on resurrecting RF. The product is superb, the business model is
what failed. RL was getting too ambitious unfortunately, and once things
started to fall apart, it went from bad to worse.

I am still trying to decide between a few options, but I have plenty of
time to wait (I need a new house before I can determine what and where).
However, if the new RF pricing is right (and no, it need not be as cheap as the
SA pricing), I just may make the plunge since RF was my first choice for
many years.

Ian

JackW · 06-12-06, 09:11 AM

Alright, perhaps it was a poorly worded suggestion.

Amendment:

Suggstions for "Options"

Screw free headlights, side windows and Rear top deck and rear grills.

This would suit the less hardcore of us out there. Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle

Cheers

Jack

Pete. · 06-12-06, 06:14 PM

There is nothing wrong with the odd screw Jack. In fact it would be a sad thing to go through life without one.

JackW · 06-12-06, 07:27 PM

That I have covered. It is the fact that most of my screws are a bit loose (I Love a double entendre. That and using double entendre in a sentence!). Sorry for getting a bit off topic with cheap gags. Pete started it.

Jack

jimbo · 06-22-06, 10:33 PM

I wish the new RF the luck in the world. I hope that they are able to make good on all the funds that were lost, at least to some extent.

Some of you may be aware that my GT40 project began in NZ, and after literally years of inactivity I pulled it out of there when I felt the builder had at least gotten close to the amount of money I had put in (I said close, not all the way there). The chassis was then shipped to UK and "finished" there by the shop that built the Mark V monocoques. After that it was shipped to Ohio and is being finished by Safir GT40. Much of the NZ and UK work had to be done over to fit the GT40s body, which came from the 1960s molds used to build the first cars. Clearly the chassis jigs were not the same.

I am lucky to have a car at all, frankly. With all due respect to the gents at RF and all the other builders not in the USA, I would not do another overseas deal. It is just too chancy. Anyone overseas who wants to sell me a car can build it, bring it here, and if I like it, I'll buy it. Not otherwise.

And, the final irony: much smoke was blown at me by the NZ builder, who will remain nameless, although that is a charity he doesn't deserve. The person who went down there and reported to me that actually very little work had been done on my chassis, thereby opening my eyes to what was really going on, was....Robert Logan. This enabled me to get my car out of there, once I knew the real score. I am probably the only person on this forum who owes Logan a debt of gratitude. This is as good a time as any to acknowledge it.