Kevin see below:
> Tom
> Ooooh! This is such an easy question (s). If I were an auto collector
> and had a 1946 Plymouth, I would have a great automobile. True?
Actually no, my parents had one of those when I was a kid and Im old enough to remember it well. As a functional piece forget it. The 46 Plymouth as a collectible - well there are many cars Id rather have before I went there. And for the record I'd much rather own a jeep made by Chrysler than AMC. I remember a time when the current Maytag repairman commercials made sense. With the exception of things made by Microsoft most things dont break very often these days. So, when function rules most folks would agree modern is better.
However,
> since the acquisition of Plymouth by Chrysler and then a conglomeration of
> Chrysler, Plymouth, Dodge, Jeep, Eagle, and AMC I would say that there isn't
> a Plymouth today that has that same mystique or 'history.' I mean,
So, are you equating mystique and history with quality, desireability?
would you consider my Plymouth Breeze a car that offers 'history' as part of the purchase? No but history is not of interest to me when Im making a rational pragmatic decison about reliability, dependability, etc. O.K. I guess if you count the Prowler you may have an arguement
Dont forget the PT Cruiser. If I had 20 k lying around Id take the bet that the PT is the Mustang - value wise - 20 years out.
> but that is not a car for the averagage man/person. I equal this to
> Waterford. Changing the name and producing high quality bike frames isn't
> history. What about Schwinn, if history is important then the lineage of Waterford as has been pointed out in couple other postings is rather interesting, eh?
and the Mercedes Are you equating Masi to Mercedes? It would seem Mercedes indeed has history but also has amazing technical/performance inmprovements. Mercedes gets to charge what they charge because they deliver it all Masi is after all just a bike. Most postings so far have stated the new Masi does not equal the old. I cant go there. Dont know. has changed year after year with innovation after
> innovation, yet they still have true and well established history. They are
> still sought after as the/a car to have.
> When collecting or buying for value, history, or a simple investment...
> Masi comes to mind. I am sorry, as I don't want to offend a Waterford
> owner, but Waterford AINT no Masi when it comes to this regard. Fineto'
Actually I came to this question - intended as an "intellectual" one not specifically to get opinions of Masi vs Waterford but it just so happens I was in my LBS and was looking at what I thought was a nice clean Masi. Alongside it on the wall was a Waterford and so a direct comparison of the physical stuff frame to frame was possible. My mind started to play with the differences. Fit and finish on the Masi was good - in fact suspiciously so till I spotted the Ed Litton signature on the left chainstay and knew I was looking at a repaint. My interest immediately fell and I was surprised at that. Asked myself whats up here? Clearly the pure visual appearance stuff wasnt the only thing operating for me. Looking through the paint at what was visible in the lugs and brazing I thought why should one buy a Masi for the same price as this Waterford. There was almost nothing to choose over here. Knowing the Waterford had history of is own and knowing there would be zero worry about metallurgy condition under the paint of the waterford vs the 25 year old Masi was a point. then there was the ease of using modern parts. So I wondered whats up with the price on this Masi? The rest as they say is history? Ha.
Tom Rawson
Oakland, CA
steeped
>
> Kevin Weitzel
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> NetZero Platinum
> Sign Up Today - Only $9.95 per month!
> http://my.netzero.net/