ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

colemanitis · 16 March 2007, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

Yeah, I own a modded 1990 5.0 Litre V8 Mustang that I tool around on.

I think I qualify.

Maybe you bent the bracelet spring-bar while installing your footprint gas pedal.

roadcarver · 16 March 2007, 04:54 AM

Okay, so at the end of the day, Kris.... did you drop by RSC? If so, what was their conclusion and remedy?

colemanitis · 16 March 2007, 05:00 AM

BTW, chris, the Mustang comment was just a joke. A few years ago I had a supercharged '88LX - until someone decided to rearend it. Here's a pic! ...and the thread's been derailed again!

Alcan · 16 March 2007, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcan

Do you know some about cars?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

Yeah, I own a modded 1990 5.0 Litre V8 Mustang that I tool around on.

I think I qualify.

Hmm.... let's see.... licensed auto tech at 19, trans specialist for over 10 years with more than 2,000 rebuilds, professor of motive power technology for the past 27 years, mainly powertrain and running gear.

Do you think I qualify, too?

Btw, the most common cause of tire cupping is a lack of suspension ability to absorb jounce travel combined with lack of tire rotation.

JJ Irani · 16 March 2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcan

Btw, the most common cause of tire cupping is a lack of suspension ability to absorb jounce travel combined with lack of tire rotation.

Hey tosser,

Now can we have that in plain English, please!!

Kris · 16 March 2007, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colemanitis

Maybe you bent the bracelet spring-bar while installing your footprint gas pedal.

Couldn't of happened. The car's been off the road in indoor storage since November 2006. I turned it over for the first time 2 nights ago. Everything seems fine. It comes out April 1st................once all the snows gone.

Can't wait to drive it to Wasaga Beach this summer. My parents have a place up there and I go up for a couple weeks on my summer vacation time.

Yep, it will be me, my V8, and my decrepid SD sipping a cold one on the rooftop patio that is "Banana Joes".

santaclaus2100 · 16 March 2007, 01:22 PM

Kris, just go the the RSC, I think they should be able to help you out.

Kris · 16 March 2007, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcan

Hmm.... let's see.... licensed auto tech at 19, trans specialist for over 10 years with more than 2,000 rebuilds, professor of motive power technology for the past 27 years, mainly powertrain and running gear.

Do you think I qualify, too?

Btw, the most common cause of tire cupping is a lack of suspension ability to absorb jounce travel combined with lack of tire rotation.

Oh yeah!................well....................well. ..................well my car's faster than your's

Kris · 16 March 2007, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by santaclaus2100

Kris, just go the the RSC, I think they should be able to help you out.

Bud, that's what I did. I went straight to RSC. They blew me off with some bit about a "break in period".

Someone explain to me why RSC wouldn't just replace that portion of the link for me? Heck, I know they have them in their vault, why wouldn't they just call up the extension to their supplies and have the dude bring up a couple so I can verify this.

Seems so logical and this is what scares me. It's almost like a conspiracy that they KNOW the braclet it bad and just don't want to admit it.

Do you think Sid Silverman from Citytv's "Get Silverman" would help me out with this? I saw what he did for the guy who got conned into buying a pair of knock-off sunglasses from a licensed sunglass seller. I'd figure he'd salivate over this Rolex issue.

Kris · 16 March 2007, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colemanitis

BTW, chris, the Mustang comment was just a joke. A few years ago I had a supercharged '88LX - until someone decided to rearend it. Here's a pic! ...and the thread's been derailed again!

That's a real nice 88 vert' you had.

Mine's an LX hatch.

roadcarver · 16 March 2007, 01:38 PM

Don't think there is a way to remove the top link as there are no screws to take it out. I think it has to be pryed??

I don't think Silverman will help as it will be a minor issue for him

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

Bud, that's what I did. I went straight to RSC. They blew me off with some bit about a "break in period".

Someone explain to me why RSC wouldn't just replace that portion of the link for me? Heck, I know they have them in their vault, why wouldn't they just call up the extension to their supplies and have the dude bring up a couple so I can verify this.

Seems so logical and this is what scares me. It's almost like a conspiracy that they KNOW the braclet it bad and just don't want to admit it.

Do you think Sid Silverman from Citytv's "Get Silverman" would help me out with this? I saw what he did for the guy who got conned into buying a pair of knock-off sunglasses from a licensed sunglass seller. I'd figure he'd salivate over this Rolex issue.

Kris · 16 March 2007, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadcarver

Don't think there is a way to remove the top link as there are no screws to take it out. I think it has to be pryed??

I don't think Silverman will help as it will be a minor issue for him

I believe that's why RSC doesn't want to admit the defect. I think the SEL and the 4 links thereafter are one solid (so to speak) part right down to the first screw that allows you to start adding or taking away links. They would have to replace that whole side of the braclet.

It looks like they are trying to discourage me from doing this by playing hide-n-seek and not giving this issue even some moderate priority.

I'm in a toss-up of whether or not to go back to RSC and asking for a manager, technician, and the after-sales guy who take care of the vault or going to my AD. If RSC is hassling me, what the heck is the AD going to do??????????????

Arturo · 16 March 2007, 02:50 PM

Kris, I just have so much less fear about this than you. Rolex may be the most powerful, or one of the most powerful, brand names synonymous with perfection in the world. They simply are not going to do you wrong here. I just don't believe it is worth it to them to mess around with saving a few bucks on a link or two. They are not a car dealership, so the analogy is not a good one unless you are talking about Rolls Royce or Astin Martin. And they have NOTHING to gain by screwing over a customer. So relax, it will work out.

pcarson · 16 March 2007, 02:56 PM

Arturo's comments are very fair, Kris. You have yourself in a lather over this, and yet it's going to be OK. The problem will be fixed and the watch will be like new again if it's under warranty. There's no point fretting, even though it's annoying to have a defect in such a great watch and your disappointment is to be expected. Just figure out who (in the Rolex supply chain) you think you need to speak to next and tell that person your story calmly. A friendly tip though; try not to get wedged too far down the automotive metaphor because it's not universal and it's a hard one to back out of! Stick to the truth and stick to the watch.

Blue Bull · 17 March 2007, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alcan

Hmm.... let's see.... licensed auto tech at 19, trans specialist for over 10 years with more than 2,000 rebuilds, professor of motive power technology for the past 27 years, mainly powertrain and running gear.

Do you think I qualify, too?

Btw, the most common cause of tire cupping is a lack of suspension ability to absorb jounce travel combined with lack of tire rotation.

I promise I will come and do a degree under you,Prof,BUT,only if the degree is written in "blue" and it has gilted edges.Because blue and gold just looks so much better ....

pcarson · 17 March 2007, 04:35 AM

Chris, you're a stirrer. I see your signature says Who is CREAM?? Was that you doing a little experiment in on-line social dynamics? If so, you certainly did a nice job and got the gang going a treat. I thought he was interesting, but always had doubts about his existence. His style was a bit erratic too. Is there anything you want to confess? I understand that cardiac anaesthetists have an awful lot of time to devise sinister plans...

Blue Bull · 17 March 2007, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcarson

Chris, you're a stirrer. I see your signature says Who is CREAM?? Was that you doing a little experiment in on-line social dynamics? If so, you certainly did a nice job and got the gang going a treat. I thought he was interesting, but always had doubts about his existence. His style was a bit erratic too. Is there anything you want to confess? I understand that cardiac anaesthetists have an awful lot of time to devise sinister plans...

Oh no,he does exist.Unfortuanately,he ran away .....

pcarson · 17 March 2007, 05:13 AM

So why the sig? Are you splitting a semantic hair with the word "exists"?

colemanitis · 17 March 2007, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcarson

So why the sig? Are you splitting a semantic hair with the word "exists"?

Are you trying to pick a fight? Chris has been around for a few months and contributes frequently. Why would he pretend to be some jack*** stirring up trouble?

pcarson · 17 March 2007, 05:37 AM

No, not at all. Maybe I haven't got the tone right so please accept my apologies. I'm not a fight-picker. Chris and I have a mutual friend in one of those "small world" kind of stories, so there's no way I would knowingly offend him. I thought CREAM was kind of interesting in a hostile confrontational kind of way, so inventing him wouldn't really be a shooting offence in my book. If someone did invent him, then I thought it was an interesting experiment.

colemanitis · 17 March 2007, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcarson

No, not at all. Maybe I haven't got the tone right so please accept my apologies. I'm not a fight-picker. Chris and I have a mutual friend in one of those "small world" kind of stories, so there's no way I would knowingly offend him. I thought CREAM was kind of interesting in a hostile confrontational kind of way, so inventing him wouldn't really be a shooting offence in my book. If someone did invent him, then I thought it was an interesting experiment.

Oh, ok. Sorry about that. A few tense threads and now I'm all jumpy.

pcarson · 17 March 2007, 07:00 AM

Yes. I haven't been around for long, about two weeks, and in that short time I've seen some pretty...how to put this...energetic debate, almost none of it related to watches when it starts to get tense. The thing is, there are very few things I take seriously, so the chances of me getting stuck into someone are almost nil.

I enjoy my new watch every day and love learning about things horological. I think this forum at its best is an amazing collection of expertise, humour and friendship, but none of it is real enough to justify an investment of negative emotional energy, and there has been a bit of that around.

Being new, I don't know where the baseline for this sort of thing is, so I'm just taking it as part of what happens when a bunch of people get together and wander off topic!

Prince · 17 March 2007, 07:47 AM

Its amazing what kind of responses just mentioning that particular user's handle can elicit...and you could count the number of his total posts here on TRF on two hands. I consider that an impact - whether negative or positive.

It is my humble opinion that his general modus operandi was a mismatch with this board. Just because a person owns Rolex watches, it does not necessarily follow that he/she would benefit from membership in TRF, or the membership would benefit from them. There are MILLIONS of Rolex owners on the planet, but only about 3,000 of them have ever found their way to sign up as members here.

Anyway...carry on!

pcarson · 17 March 2007, 08:41 AM

Allan, you're dead right on all counts. My fascination with his impact is not an endorsement of his methods, but you correctly give him credit for impact!

And carry on I will.

Prince · 17 March 2007, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcarson

Allan, you're dead right on all counts. My fascination with his impact is not an endorsement of his methods, but you correctly give him credit for impact!

And carry on I will.

Thanks, Peter. And I knew you would!

Mrdi · 17 March 2007, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kris

Yeah, I own a modded 1990 5.0 Litre V8 Mustang that I tool around on.

I think I qualify.

The epitome of the individual is thusly presented.

Arturo · 17 March 2007, 02:20 PM

Believe me, CREAM does exist. And many of you know and appreciate who he is. But he is gone from this list so what the heck.

But I digress, it seems that Kris persevered with his AD and got some action from Rolex. And that is great for him.

16 March 2007, 04:54 AM	#32
roadcarver "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Vernon Location: C-a-n-a-d-a Watch: 16600 Posts: 5,641	Okay, so at the end of the day, Kris.... did you drop by RSC? If so, what was their conclusion and remedy? __________________ I'm just a cook...

16 March 2007, 05:00 AM	#33
colemanitis "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Real Name: Jeff Location: Florida Watch: PAM 1090 Posts: 3,723	BTW, chris, the Mustang comment was just a joke. A few years ago I had a supercharged '88LX - until someone decided to rearend it. Here's a pic! ...and the thread's been derailed again! __________________ Member #471

16 March 2007, 02:56 PM	#44
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	Arturo's comments are very fair, Kris. You have yourself in a lather over this, and yet it's going to be OK. The problem will be fixed and the watch will be like new again if it's under warranty. There's no point fretting, even though it's annoying to have a defect in such a great watch and your disappointment is to be expected. Just figure out who (in the Rolex supply chain) you think you need to speak to next and tell that person your story calmly. A friendly tip though; try not to get wedged too far down the automotive metaphor because it's not universal and it's a hard one to back out of! Stick to the truth and stick to the watch. Last edited by pcarson; 16 March 2007 at 02:57 PM.. Reason: Typo

17 March 2007, 07:47 AM	#53
Prince "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Real Name: Allan Location: St. Augustine, FL Watch: Daytona/Sub/GMT/DJ Posts: 20,323	Its amazing what kind of responses just mentioning that particular user's handle can elicit...and you could count the number of his total posts here on TRF on two hands. I consider that an impact - whether negative or positive. It is my humble opinion that his general modus operandi was a mismatch with this board. Just because a person owns Rolex watches, it does not necessarily follow that he/she would benefit from membership in TRF, or the membership would benefit from them. There are MILLIONS of Rolex owners on the planet, but only about 3,000 of them have ever found their way to sign up as members here. Anyway...carry on! __________________ Member: Rolex Keeper's Society "You see, you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself." - Rick Nelson

16 March 2007, 01:22 PM	#37
santaclaus2100 Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Han Location: Singapore Watch: TT GMT Master II Posts: 130	Kris, just go the the RSC, I think they should be able to help you out.

16 March 2007, 02:50 PM	#43
Arturo "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Arturo Location: Pacific Northwest Watch: Black GMT ll Posts: 1,271	Kris, I just have so much less fear about this than you. Rolex may be the most powerful, or one of the most powerful, brand names synonymous with perfection in the world. They simply are not going to do you wrong here. I just don't believe it is worth it to them to mess around with saving a few bucks on a link or two. They are not a car dealership, so the analogy is not a good one unless you are talking about Rolls Royce or Astin Martin. And they have NOTHING to gain by screwing over a customer. So relax, it will work out.

17 March 2007, 04:35 AM	#46
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	Chris, you're a stirrer. I see your signature says Who is CREAM?? Was that you doing a little experiment in on-line social dynamics? If so, you certainly did a nice job and got the gang going a treat. I thought he was interesting, but always had doubts about his existence. His style was a bit erratic too. Is there anything you want to confess? I understand that cardiac anaesthetists have an awful lot of time to devise sinister plans...

17 March 2007, 05:13 AM	#48
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	So why the sig? Are you splitting a semantic hair with the word "exists"?

17 March 2007, 05:37 AM	#50
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	No, not at all. Maybe I haven't got the tone right so please accept my apologies. I'm not a fight-picker. Chris and I have a mutual friend in one of those "small world" kind of stories, so there's no way I would knowingly offend him. I thought CREAM was kind of interesting in a hostile confrontational kind of way, so inventing him wouldn't really be a shooting offence in my book. If someone did invent him, then I thought it was an interesting experiment.

17 March 2007, 07:00 AM	#52
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	Yes. I haven't been around for long, about two weeks, and in that short time I've seen some pretty...how to put this...energetic debate, almost none of it related to watches when it starts to get tense. The thing is, there are very few things I take seriously, so the chances of me getting stuck into someone are almost nil. I enjoy my new watch every day and love learning about things horological. I think this forum at its best is an amazing collection of expertise, humour and friendship, but none of it is real enough to justify an investment of negative emotional energy, and there has been a bit of that around. Being new, I don't know where the baseline for this sort of thing is, so I'm just taking it as part of what happens when a bunch of people get together and wander off topic!

17 March 2007, 08:41 AM	#54
pcarson Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Real Name: Peter Carson Location: Australia Watch: 16610 Sub Date Posts: 265	Allan, you're dead right on all counts. My fascination with his impact is not an endorsement of his methods, but you correctly give him credit for impact! And carry on I will.

17 March 2007, 02:20 PM	#57
Arturo "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2005 Real Name: Arturo Location: Pacific Northwest Watch: Black GMT ll Posts: 1,271	Believe me, CREAM does exist. And many of you know and appreciate who he is. But he is gone from this list so what the heck. But I digress, it seems that Kris persevered with his AD and got some action from Rolex. And that is great for him.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)