If Tom and I are speaking of the same event (and I'll take his word for it we
are), then clearly there is some confusion as to the real details of the event.
This happened some years ago, so memories can be suspect. And I got all my info
on the details of this event from the news and word of mouth. I did not
intentionally shade, embellish or otherwise distort the truth. I recounted the
event as I understood it to have happened, to the best of my recollection. If I
am guilty of perpetuating misinformation, I sincerely apologize. My basic point
still stands however, even if the true details of the event differed from my
report. A flywheel and clutch assembly failed sending shrapnel flying into a
restaurant. My point, flywheels do fail and it can be dangerous.
As to the rest of Tom's post. I always considered Tom one of the good guys and a
friend, and this post has really blind sided me. A simple off-list email to me,
and Tom and I could have sorted this out privately and then posted a correction
of the facts if necessary. I think that would have been better for all, and
could have resolved all the confusion without any on-list tension. I do not
understand why he would question my honesty or statements I made, especially the
way he did and on the list, but he did and I guess I need to respond.
He said - "Why on earth someone would someone be working on the fuel system, yet
note "change the flywheel" on the invoice is well beyond me."
I did not say that I was *only* working on the fuel system, I said - "He was
sent to me by TWM to try
to sort out the problems with the dual SK sidedraft kit they had sold him." That
is not the same thing as saying I worked on the fuel system and only the fuel
system. As to why a mechanic would note what he felt were faulty items on an
invoice, even if those particular items were not being fixed on that particular
visit...that seems just too obvious for words.
I do not want to get into a pissing match on the list, and I did try to talk to
Tom about this off list, but did not get a response from him. Perhaps he has not
yet had a chance to respond to my email. I wouldn't have even responded to this
on the list, except that it was pointed out to me that my silence made it seem
as though I was guilty of what Tom accused me of. And I WAS NOT.
Anyway I just wanted to set the record straight. I'll not waste anymore of the
list's time on this silliness.
Thomas Walter wrote:
>
> A few days ago, there was a story about a RX-7 flywheel that
> "just exploded". Some of the "facts" were just wrong, as I
> have never heard of one letting loose "when cruising down the
> road".
>
> Yep, the RX-7 & "other guy" were involved in a street drag race.
> No one on the street, nor close. Pretty late at night. The
> RX-7 had just tach'd well beyond 10,000 rpm when the clutch was
> dumped. That make a lot more sense.
>
> Lots of other little errors, too, about the story. Hey, if you
> were involved in drag racing in the middle of the night, would YOU
> tell the cops "I was dumping the clutch at 10,000 street drag
> racing... or Gee, I don't know happened?" Thankfully no one was hurt.
>
> No names on this one. The Eugene paper did "embellish" story
> a bit, as did someone even more. Cool fiction to drive a point
> home that flywheels will let loose. Mazda's have a double whammy
> as they use a LARGE nut on the end of a "crankshaft". And can hit
> some very high rev's. I remember when A Rotary Powered GLC managed
> to let loose isn't flywheel the same way. Driver and Navigator walked
> away with minor burns & lack of hearing (flywheel parts cut fuel line,
> the electric's... fire was out as soon as it started...).
>
> Why on earth someone would someone be working on the fuel system, yet
> note "change the flywheel" on the invoice is well beyond me. Especially
> when he noted "first Rotary I had worked on". The cracks form under the
> eccentric nut. No way to "visually" inspect the flywheel bolted up in
> the car.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
--
Marc Sayer
82 280ZXT
71 510 2.5 Trans Am vintage racer
|