| Do you really want to play semantic bullshit games on this? Let's play. "I'm sure they would be fine". - They are fine and work just perfect in my Z. A supposition with no supporting data, apart from a single case - statistically irrelevant. Question though, why didn't you get the AMS overdrive pulley to go with the UD one? What made you get the AMS one first? What made you change your mind midstream?
"Knowing they were a cheap knock-off more or less" - You're kidding right? Sheesh, at least 80% of the after market items for the Z are "knock-offs from something else. Supporting knock-off products removes the incentive for product innovators to create new products. "Everybody is doing it" is a ridiculous rationalization. You contradict youself by first saying that your sure it would be fine and then say they are a CHEAP knock-off. Which is it? Are they fine or cheap? The word "cheap" can denote either expense or quality - in this case I posit he is correct in both definitions, but you're clearly using semantics here to harass him because you don't like his nonsupport of cheap AMS products. He meant "expense," and everyone smarter than a box of tampons knows it. Relax, douche. Is it perhaps that you showed some of the other nay-sayers your AMS pulley and for some unkown reason, you are now compelled to pay more for a product that you have completely no idea that is better than the AMS quality-wise but merely on the premise that they did their own R&D? One more time asshammer, the AMS is a ripoff from a company that creates new products for our cars. The idea is to incentivize product innovation by purchasing from the innovators, not the blood sucking leaches who are in it for a quick buck. "I'd rather pay a few more bucks to support the people who put their own R and D for these products". - And exactly how did you come upon the fact thet they did their own R&D? Family inside info within the UR company?
I can say without hesitation that I have been present when Vuk was going through some R&D work for some of his products. I bet you were, so much for your objective argument. Thank goodness for people who think along similar lines. They're the ones that keep the old companies going because they haven't the fortitude or gumption to move ahead or to be self-thinking and just follow the rest of the sheep. Agreed on your notion of thanking goodness for supporting those who create products, instead of those who completely rip them off. I won't even discredit the UR products not because I have used their products in the past, but because I am not completely intuned to their R&D process. I have no right to discredit something that I'm not 100% sure of and neither should anyone else. As soon as you're aware of the R&D business afairs of UR and AMS, please post up your findings to the benefit of the Z community. UR innovates, AMS copies. Everyone seems to get this but you. Statements like yours makes for very poor cohesion within the Z community when they are unfounded and are mere speculation.
In the end, you loose twice - No AMS pulleys and more money spent on UR's. In the end, you're the loser. You're supporting a company that spells the end of new product innovation, in exchange for friend-credits with Vuk. Lose/lose.
Recursively Yours,
Kenny...
PETZ Member #5
You guys rock socks. (Click for pie-chart)
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
- EW Dijkstra
|
02:53:50 06/01/08
