Re: You asked for it, Bill! Long one.

["erikgeerdink <erikgeerdink@xxxx>" <erikgeerdink@xxxx>]

Moderators, please don't cut this email. I feel I have a right to 
reply back to this one.

James, I find it very inapporpriate to discuss our transaction on the 
DML. From the begining I wasn't fond of you "updating" the DML on 
the situation. Nobody needed to know how much we paid for car For 
one, I don't think they really care, and two..its none of their 
business.
Now to say in this public forum that we paid way to much? I am very 
upset by this. I'm extremely upset at you, and I'm disappointed at 
the moderator who let it pass through. 
To read your post is embarrasing to me and my father. For you to 
call me a "dumb ass" within the context of what you wrote offends me 
greatly. I don't care if it was in comedic relief. Its not 
appropriate for you to discuss this on the DML. Its none of their 
business.
Feel free to contact me OFF THE LIST! 

And to the moderator: Please don't post anything else related to my 
transaction with James LaLonde. It is not benefiting anyone else on 
the list.

Erik Geerdink

--- In dmcnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "James LaLonde <deloreandmcxii@xxxx>" 
<deloreandmcxii@xxxx> wrote:
> Well I arrived in wonderful Montgomery City on the day before 
> Thanksgiving. 
> I approached the car with a fluttering heart (what if this car is a 
> P.O.S... what if the seller lied.. what if what if what if!). That 
> wasn't helped by the obviously misfiring engine of the already-
> running car... that had been stored WITH gas in the tank.
> 
> Well no harm-no foul. The miss sounded me like a simple problem 
> (ignition or fuel injection problem)-so I dismissed that out of 
> mind. Now looking at the car, I was very PLEASANTLY surprised. Not 
> only had the seller not lied about the cars cosmetic condition... 
> but it was better than he made it out to be. No dings, PERFECT 
> interior (save a small crack in the face of the 170mph speedo, 
which 
> you can't see unless you have a light pointed at it), EVERYTHING 
> works right (save the misfire, and the spongy hydraulics.. both 
> clutch and brake). Not only that but he HAD lied... CD player not 
> cassette. Being that I don't give a rats behind about this sort of 
> originality, I also liked the custom exhuast and high-quality (for 
> the early 90's) alarm system that were installed. 
> Now the paint was probably a 8 of 10 in quality. But the black 
parts 
> (lourves, bumbers)were shiney - not matte... which I abhore (no 
> offense to you shiney-lovers out there), and the gray was lighter 
> than the stainless (I prefer it "stock" mismatched... slightly 
> darker than the Stainless). But I knew I'd get it repainted anyways.
> 
> So, being that the car was already running and I had already noted 
> that the previous owner had installed a check valve/new style banjo 
> on the old style fuel pump (with the check valve already 
> integrated... ??) and another check valve (used as a banjo bolt) on 
> the fuel distributor's fuel intake line -- I took the car for quick 
> drive. I could sense the engine struggling for fuel and the clutch 
> slipping like sh*t on a brick, but could also feel how much power 
> the exhaust had added... I'm sure you understand the feeling, you 
> can feel the power of the engine even though it's not getting all 
> the way to the wheels. Other than the misfire, and once you got 
past 
> idle, the engine ran and sounded smooth and healthy... if louder 
> than stock.
> 
> Since I've begun work I also notice the previous owner had 
> installed another smaller fuel filter/screen in the tank. And the 
> rubber hoses were now more like putty. 
> Now the cleanliness of the car was very nice, but was only skin-
> deep. The intake manifold now removed... I see the 8 pounds of dirt 
> collected under there. (since cleaned)
> 
> We trailered the car home, not wanting to chance-it with the poor 
> idle and old fuel system. My dad kept getting pissed at other 
people 
> on the road for sitting right next to the trailer, and not letting 
> him switch lanes. It wasn't until 1/2 way through the trip that he 
> realize why. They were gawking at the car! It was though, an un-
> eventful trip back home... other than our speechless praise of the 
> combination White Castle/Krispy Kreme restaurant we saw on the way 
> back.
> 
> Update on my bolt; we managed to get a hole drilled through the 
damn 
> thing with a right-angle chuck attachement, and we got a bolt 
> extracted to bite on the bolt, but... once it gets under some 
torque 
> that drill simply un-screws itself from the right-angle attachment 
> rather that twisted the bolt (the right-angle attachment obivously 
> wasn't meant to be used in reverse). I'm close... but may have to 
> drop 100 bucks into a stub-nose drill.
> 
> Thanks for your interest Bill! We all know how much each other 
loves 
> talking about our cars! Interesting how much desire we have to hear 
> about and even look at other DeLoreans.. considering (unlike most 
> other collector cars) they all basically EXACTLY THE SAME. 
> Surprising how well the car shows do...(I know, I know.. it's more 
> for the people than the cars... and yes I am planning on being at 
> Pigeon Forge)
> 
> I don't think I annouced to list my substanial settlement on the 
> car, either. I was pleasantly surprised here too. (I hadn't posted 
> it during the settling, I didn't want to jinx it). They wanted to 
> give me 20,500. But I settled for 18,500, plus me keeping the scrap 
> without the title changing hands (no salvage title). Then as you 
> know I sold 1697 to Dumb @ss (I mean Erik) and Fred Geerdink for 
> $3,800. So I netted $21,516.56
> I must say... they paid me WAY too much. But I won't complain.
> BTW, I paid $11,800 for 4009... if you care about any of this you 
> may want to know that too. :P
> 
> All in all, other than the world's loss of a DMC-12... the 
situation 
> turned out well.
> 
> -James L 004009
> (Just kidding about the dumb @ss. Erik... just a comedic recall to 
> your previous post :P)