Originally Posted by Earl

Johnathan-

What a person legally procures, with their own income, is (or should be) their own business, explainable and defended to no one. This is still (at least for now) a country based on a Constitution with certain rights.

You, at the same time, are certainly free to wonder -- out loud -- why a person would spend such-and-such money on such-and-such item(s).

What I don't understand (at least in the 'imparted' tone of your messages) is the seemingly near-seething 'anger' directed at some of these folks with whom you disagree concerning their own private purchases, and in particular, amounts paid.

I can see feeling pity towards them; sorrow even maybe for the 'perceived' loss of valuable dollars that (by opinion) could have been 'better spent' on something else. But it seems (at least as I perceive it) that your feelings are neither of those more 'charitable' terms. On the contrary, the posts seem like 'anger' and 'hate'.

I would not personally plop down a couple million (even if I had it) for a rare painting. Nothing against them; just not my bag, not even for an 'investment'. Others, for whom that IS their 'bag' (and have the funds) might gladly do that for the joy it brings them and their appreciation of the object. But I don't be-grudge a person for doing that OR for HAVING the funds to be ABLE to do that.

Most of us on this forum might be most happy to drop $75 to $100 for a completetly and perfectly mint Cineroc hand signed by Mike Dorffler. That, most of us would probably agree, would be a pretty good deal....one not to be missed if at all possible. NOT as an 'investment'. Most of us here I suspect don't swap and buy this old stuff for investment purposes anyway, but because it's an offer that doesn't come around at that price point. Additionally, many of us never had a Cineroc back in the day and, if we were honest, still have a place in our heart for one.

Others, outside our hobby with no understanding or appreciation of what a Cinceroc is or who this Mr. Dorffler was, would probably think someone to be somewhat daffy for spending that kind of money on an 'old toy camera' (that you can't very easily use anymore).

It's hard to know what a given person's motivations are for a particular purchase: sentimental, practical, emotional, financial, etc. In many cases, espcially for things as relatively esoteric as vintage rocket kits, the persons know largely what the item is, what it means to them, and are fully conscious of the resources they are committing to make that transaction happen. I doubt too very many of those purchases are coming from folks who are just taking a wild gander at these auction sites, doing some random mouse clicks, and hitting 'something' and saying: "That looks like an interesting item! Let's buy that!!".

So, it's all relative in many cases. What one person loathes, another loves. What someone drops cash on in a second (crack? cocaine??), other see as a complete and total waste of time and money.

Space art? Astronaut memorabilia?? Seems I recall a former mention of items of that nature in your collection. Some of those things had to set you back a buck or two (masonic rings?). But that's none of my business and I don't need to know those details of what was spent. If that is what you wanted, I think that's wonderful!

But I don't HATE you for spending your cash on that!! I think it's great!! It's the land of the free (with 'increasing limits' on same). For someone (like you have done; like many of us have done) to push past circumstances, to earn your keep, and to apply your personal and private resources towards ends of your own (legal) choosing. That, at least in part, is what America is all about.

If I've missed your point, I apologize. It's just that I perceive soooooo much anger in your posts about how people spend their OWN money.

Politicians spending our money? Keep tearing them a new one. Now THERE is a travesty and mis-management (in many cases) of the country's riches.

Individuals doing their 'own thing'? Maybe a little more 'live and let live' towards 'what others do' might be a good thing.


Love ya man!

Earl

Originally Posted by ghrocketman

Mustangs have last had 4-lug wheels in 1993.
I had a 1988 Mustang GT 5.0L that had about double the horsepower it had from the factory.
The 4-lug Wheels WERE PLENTY. Number of lugs has NOTHING to do with load capacity if the fastener (stud) is appropriate. One theroretically could get away with three, but would be a pain to torque in a proper sequence.

I would not be caught dead in any rinky-dink car as small as a Festiva or Escort unless it was a Porsche 911 Turbo. If I had to spend 200K mi. in one I would consider it to be FETID.
4-cylinder econo boxes almost invariably are low content vehicles that would drive me nuts to be in for more than ten minutes...others like them but they are NOT my cup of tea.
The ONLY small cars that I consider to be DECENT are SPORTS cars with very high power-to-weight ratios.
I have the following four minimums I expect out of a DAILY driver for my 120mi commute:

1) 140+mph top speed (not joking)
2) 1/4 mile time 14.00 sec or less.
3) V8 engine
4) Horsepower level vastly exceeding that of virtually all common police patrol vehicles

There are ZERO four-cylinder vehicles that meet all the above criteria and very few can even meet two of the above.
Very few six-cylinder cars can meet 3 of the above criteria.

Most small cars react about like a BEER CAN when faced with some real iron in a wreck.

The Smart Car never was and never was intended to be CHEAP. It is produced by a division of Mercedes-Benz; most Mercedes HOOD ORNAMENTS are worth more than a 4-cyl econobox.

The Mustang II was a total pile of crap that was Pinto-based with sheet metal changes. The biggest engine one could get was a 130hp 302cid (5L) 2bbl carbed V8. Total Trash.
The Cobra II added hideously gaudy graphics to a pile-of-crap car...it was lipstick on a PIG !

Best Mustang ever was the 1969 or 1970 Boss 429; second place was the 1971 Mach1 Sports-Roof 429 SCJ with Ram-Air.

I would take a new 630+HP Corvette ZR1 or 525HP Corvette Z06 over ANY vintage musclecar. Faster and quicker along with about 25mpg.

Originally Posted by ghrocketman

The Yaris is a POS produced by Toyota.
I would not even sit in that POS let alone ride in one

Originally Posted by tbzep

Yep, but I think the engine is made by Mitsubishi.

Oh...and I've read that the Yaris is cheaper, gets better milage, handles better, safer in crashes, and has a ton more room. Smart cars ain't so smart.

Originally Posted by A Fish Named Wallyum

We have a Yaris. Nothing to shout about, if you ask me.