BTTF Time Machine Build Questions - Ask Me Anything

[cpistocco]

Unfortunately, to some degree I would say that you are correct... for now. I definitely wouldn't consider them "the best", I'm sure there are many other people who have far more accurate information that is not in the public domain. Having seen Mark taking very precise measurements of the rear vents on the OUTATIME restoration documentary (which I HIGHLY recommend if you don't have it already!), I would really say that he is the true authority when it comes to the accuracy of the rear vents. If it helps the community, I don't mind adding dimensions to Mr Weavers CAD designs and asking if Mark would kindly verify/approve/amend the measurments as necessary (if he has the time or inclination of course!). I'm sure it would be very helpful to at least have some useful dimensions locked down for the rear vents.

It would be great if you could provide me with the additional dimensions. The more info, the better...

["What The Flux?"]

OK Thanks
I am about to spend quite a few dollars on aluminum and laser cutting, and I just want to make sure that I am doing the right thing. For our purposes, Mr Weaver is as good as it gets???? Correct?

I'm afraid for now, yes. I can definitely make some minor improvements right off the bat and if you're willing to hold fire for a minute, I can make the improvements and upload them here. An example of Mr Weavers inaccuracy is the rear plate of the part that the two oil sepators are attached to. Mr Weavers CAD file has that plate as vertical, perpendicular to the base. However, this plate is angled slightly on the A car. Unless I am mistaken, Mr Weaver did this purposefully so that he could spot "tells" that a builder had used his reference. Not cool if you're going for screen accuracy.

[cpistocco]

I'm afraid for now, yes. I can definitely make some minor improvements right off the bat and if you're willing to hold fire for a minute, I can make the improvements and upload them here. An example of Mr Weavers inaccuracy is the rear plate of the part that the two oil sepators are attached to. Mr Weavers CAD file has that plate as vertical, perpendicular to the base. However, this plate is angled slightly on the A car. Unless I am mistaken, Mr Weaver did this purposefully so that he could spot "tells" that a builder had used his reference. Not cool if you're going for screen accuracy.

Thanks a million. I actually spoke with Mr Weaver on Facebook about this matter. He was very nice....and stated that his design was close, but not 100%...

[Gary Weaver II]

After 15 years it never gets old seeing random anonymous people chime in with their expertise and act as if they know my motivations.

-Gary

I can confirm that from my experience of Mr Weavers CAD file, the rear vents are most definitely inaccurate. They're not bad, they're just not accurate. The screw positions are wrong (look at the screw positions of the rear edge screws, they are not close enough to the rear edge). I am also aware that Mr Weaver purposefully produces inaccuracies (which he shares publically) in order for him to spot people who have used his reference. Hardly useful at all if you are trying to re-produce screen accurate parts. I would certainly recommend clarifying with Mark first if he is able to assist. I would use Mr Weavers CAD file with a great deal of scepticism and caution.

I would love to know if anyone can offer some exact screw measurements and positions for the rear vents though?

["What The Flux?"]

After 15 years it never gets old seeing random anonymous people chime in with their expertise and act as if they know my motivations.

-Gary

I'm not about to tarnish yet another thread with stale, tired, boring arguments. There have been far too many useful threads ruined by the public disputes of Mr Weaver and others in the past.

My "chiming in" is to use the knowledge and expertise that I have learned over the years to help other builders and to learn new things myself. I may be random, anonymous and relatively new to this site, but I am definitely not new to the community or unaware of its history.

Mr Weaver, I know of your motivations far more than you are willing to confess to on an open and public forum. Whilst I will not dispute your willingness and effort to genuinely help other people/builders in the community (for free), it must also be said that you are very clearly motivated by money and the "business" of selling other builders your (hoarded) parts, often for substantial profit.

To return to my earlier points in this thread, I know for a fact (and so do you!) that you have purposefully left details inaccurate in your .dwg file to enable you to be able to tell who has used your material as reference. You yourself know from your own experience the amount of time and effort that it takes to research and discover accurate reference material, so for you to release a file that you know contains inaccurate information, just so that you can spot it later in somebody's build is deceptive and IMHO, kinda lame.

As I said at the start of this comment, I do not wish to engage in a bitter debate with you and don't even necessarily think that you're a bad guy, even if I do disagree with you releasing bogus material to the public.

[Gary Weaver II]

The "I don't wanna fight, but will still throw a few barbs in my commentary" technique. Classy and predictable.

The sad fact of the matter is, the files I released were always posted as incomplete and a starting point for someone's build. I knew damn good and well they were incomplete/unfinished and am totally upfront with it.

I always intended to go back and rework certain details as I had more time and even perhaps add dimensions. However, I never went back on it because I realized there is not much of a point in giving that stuff away to people and I also didn't have the time or desire to revisit old projects.

I take issue with a few points you've brought up over the course of this thread, so please allow me to assist in clarifying a few things.

"Hoarding parts"? When have I ever? Can you please give an example or are you just making something up for effect?

"Putting tells in my files or on my parts". I've never done that intentionally in order to identify them as you stated earlier. I did my parts how I wanted to do my parts. Sometimes that meant doing parts a different way like the rear slotted vent louvres Mark pointed out. Or doing something for a casting to make it more reinforced for final castings. If those end up being details I can identify later when I see someone selling a cheap knock off or recast on their website, then so be it.

The front vertical plate on the reactor core? I finally figured it out after a while, but decided to just leave it in place on my file. To be honest, it was never a detailed I cared about too much. It's not like people go around yelling "see how PERFECT my car is? I have this bizarre angled plate no one can ever see or care about". Again, I didn't see too much of a reason to revisit that part of the project so never corrected it.

My lower rear plates on the vents? Designed like that on purpose so they can be cut down and trimmed to properly fit around the rear fascia and tail lights. It's IMPOSSIBLE to have one profile (or even four) to properly contour the rear of every Delorean. The end result needs a builder to change them to fit their own car and application. No conspiracy theory about tells or crap like that. Just being practical with the design.

I'm sure you've said more about other stuff in this thread, but those were the things that stuck out to me. I'd love to discuss it further, but I get the impression that's not your end goal here. Until you are willing to share with everyone exactly WHO you are I don't see any point to continue discussion here.

-Gary

I'm not about to tarnish yet another thread with stale, tired, boring arguments. There have been far too many useful threads ruined by the public disputes of Mr Weaver and others in the past.

My "chiming in" is to use the knowledge and expertise that I have learned over the years to help other builders and to learn new things myself. I may be random, anonymous and relatively new to this site, but I am definitely not new to the community or unaware of its history.

Mr Weaver, I know of your motivations far more than you are willing to confess to on an open and public forum. Whilst I will not dispute your willingness and effort to genuinely help other people/builders in the community (for free), it must also be said that you are very clearly motivated by money and the "business" of selling other builders your (hoarded) parts, often for substantial profit.

To return to my earlier points in this thread, I know for a fact (and so do you!) that you have purposefully left details inaccurate in your .dwg file to enable you to be able to tell who has used your material as reference. You yourself know from your own experience the amount of time and effort that it takes to research and discover accurate reference material, so for you to release a file that you know contains inaccurate information, just so that you can spot it later in somebody's build is deceptive and IMHO, kinda lame.

As I said at the start of this comment, I do not wish to engage in a bitter debate with you and don't even necessarily think that you're a bad guy, even if I do disagree with you releasing bogus material to the public.

[Mark D]

Mods, since this topic is starting to derail can you please move some of these discussions to a more appropriate thread? Either create a new split topic off of this one or move to this old thread:
http://dmctalk.org/showthread.php?76...place-to-start

A new thread may be a more appropriate place to have some of the discussions that are happening since that old thread is locked and what's being discussed here is no longer related to the original intent of this thread.

A lists of post numbers to please move includes 156-160, 163, 165, 167-176.

Thank you.

["What The Flux?"]

I don't see any point to continue discussion here.

-Gary

I have made my point perfectly clear and I don't see any point to continue this discussion either...

10457371_524642220991912_6143490468746542315_o.jpg 12963499_834630723326392_6945709126953284930_n.jpg

[Gary Weaver II]

That is so cute. Pictures without context to "prove" your point. I still get a giggle out of that Krups pic. Here are some details are of course missing from your pics.

That's about 15 years worth of Krups grinder searches and hunts. Incomplete torn up units missing lids or cups, wrong color units, and a couple complete ones. A few weren't even mine if I recall correctly.

As for the Flux Capacitor Rob Roy boxes... Incorrect model, but happened to be the correct color. I believe I paid market price for those as well. I then spent a good number of months buying incorrect sized boxes with the correct latches off ebay to make them accurate. Also custom fabricated the correct hinges as well. The had all the backer boards, lenses, and windows laser cut. That was about two years ago IIRC.

And what's even more hilarious? I've haven't sold a one. I'm pretty sure those and all their add on bits are still sitting in my garage. Hard to argue that I've ripped anyone off or made any money off that "hoard".

More intriguing is that this community still doesn't know who you are. Nice of Mark to make his plea to remove the posts though. All I'm doing is responding truthfully to your disruptive commentary. It's almost as if you are sitting there waiting for me to respond to you baits in order to post things you feel may be publicly "damaging" to me.

It's not like we haven't seen that happen around here before

-Gary

I have made my point perfectly clear and I don't see any point to continue this discussion either...

10457371_524642220991912_6143490468746542315_o.jpg 12963499_834630723326392_6945709126953284930_n.jpg

[Mark D]

Just to clarify, I would not like anything to be removed (as in deleted). Mods please just split this thread so that the off topic discussion can continue elsewhere.