Extract from the book "Dream Maker " what do you think?

[nick sutton]

I have read this book many times and it can be regarded as factually correct. It is accurate and can't be faulted for any description of major events that affected the company; except for a few minor slips what happened at what time etc. Its fault lies when the writers give opinions of people or events they didn't know or experience, this includes the car.

Looking for more detail on a specific event I read the following passage on page 452 which reflects on how history (the book was first published in 1983) will treat the car. As they say in the best colleges and Universities "discuss":-

"The DMC12 at its best is a low performance counterfeit of better cars and will never be the museum piece of quality its sellers claim today. At its worst individual models are seriously flawed and in some cases may be dangerous."

What do you think about the accuracy of these words.

Nick Sutton

[Farrar]

Interesting! I saw my first DeLorean in a museum -- so it is a museum piece! :) And as far as "dangerous" goes, of course a car is dangerous: ANY motor vehicle can be dangerous if wielded incorrectly -- my driving instructor started my first lesson with "Remember, you are in control of a couple of tons of metal and gasoline, some of which is already on fire." Heh.

Farrar

[WelmoedJ]

Farrar is right: any car can be dangerous.

However making a statement like the author did will only lead to a smile on the current owner's face.
How wrong he - the author - has been.

As an addition:
Which car manuafacturer can state that after 30 years almost 2/3 of its production still exists, one way or another.
I'm not saying that they are all drivable or all safe, but the majority is and .... they are still here!

[Jeff K]

I don't think much of that statement. He was guessing and time has proven different.

These cars are icons of the 80's and a mans dream idea. Also it's a movie star (for better or worse)

Almost every time my car is parked, I see people taking photos of it. I never see that with a Ferrari or Lambo. I live in SoCal, so I see a lot of those.

Jeff

[Dracula]

It's interesting to see just how wrong that assessment is. It's the exact opposite. It attracts infinitely more attention than the other cars it's a "counterfeit" of.

The DeLorean is the ultimate alibi; you can't drive the car anywhere without someone taking a picture of you. You can't say that about many cars. It also means that if you want to commit a murder or rob a bank, you need a second car.

The limited number of them produced guarantee its museum-piece status for all time and the flaws are no worse than a lot of the other cars I've owned.

[SamHill]

That kind of editorializing is unfortunate because it discounts their otherwise thorough reporting. It was the same in the Playboy interview where they compared it to a Karmann Ghia. Maybe certain statements were made to be quotable and sell books.

[Dracula]

Maybe certain statements were made to be quotable and sell books.

A good theory, but I'd like to present the alternative. When "Dream Maker" was written, who was the intended target audience? The only groups that readily come to mind are auto enthusiasts, DeLorean owners, and DeLorean (The man, not the car) enthusiasts. The first, if they care enough to read that book, would have formed their own opinion on the car, so it's not going to sway them. Owners are going to be biased towards their car; even if, in some cases, it's only to save face and justify their purchase. Fans of DeLorean: the man, would see him through the rose-colored glasses that most current owners of these cars have or dislike him because of the drug charges, but those people would hardly be inclined to read a book on someone they dislike.

I think it's merely one man's opinionated statement, and slightly biased at that, and it merely turned out to be wrong by the virtue of time.

[Sidaries]

I think BTTF helped a lot to the Delorean to be famous. Without it no one can say, what could have happened. Maybe the prophecy in the beginning would be true.

[Michael]

Based on your assesment of the book I bought a copy. I did not read "Hard Drivin" because I felt(from people who reviewed the book) it was written with a negative bias.

[nick sutton]

Michael,

When you read the book remember two things - factually the book is very good and although there are some minor errors in the history as it progresses the detail is good. However the writer then gives opinions of people and events that he had not experienced but gained these details second hand. In this regard it is not give a balanced view.

The book is about the DeLorean scandals and it’s extremely well researched but because it concentrates on the negative it doesn't give any real detail as to the tremendous efforts by DeLorean staff in Belfast who made the dream work.

Let me know what you think when you have finished reading it.

Nick

[SamHill]

I ordered the book many years ago and read it cover to cover within a few days. I remember thinking that its real contribution was fleshing out the corporate shell game set up by JZD's unethical attorneys so that everyone could skim a large amount right off the top. The main problem I have with that is that they used fraudulent method when a noncriminal one would have sufficed. It's like going out of your way to break the law.

[content22207]

Combined with Bill Haddad's and Hillel Levin's books, the portrait of JZD painted by many others differs significantly from the portrait he painted of himself.

Speaking as someone who actually worked with the man, I wonder which one Nick thinks is more accurate?

Bill Robertson
#5939

[nick sutton]

The three books you mention cover different areas of John DeLorean’s life and the company that bore his name.
John’s (auto) biography could have been more than an excuse for the public’s perception of his wrong doings. The man made an enormous contribution to the US and global automobile history during his tenure at General Motors. His story could have described this in more detail. Winston Churchill wrote “History will treat me kindly – because I intend to write it” John failed in his attempt to achieve this aim. The result being that his book was disappointing and rather sad in many places being used to point score on ex senior employees. Many of whom had devoted themselves to the man and the company. In defence, perhaps, the book was written at a time when the revenue from the book was desperately required but nevertheless hurriedly compiled with little or emphasis on the miracle of designing a car and building a factory in just less than two years. I can see at most two pages in the total of three hundred and forty nine discussing the little miracle that was called DeLorean Motor Cars Ltd Dunmurry. Perhaps by then the words Northern Ireland would be a curse on his tongue at this period of his life.
Bill Haddad’s book “Hard Driving“; at least for the period that I had knowledge, is both accurate and entertaining. It should be read by anyone interested in the history of the company. The picture Bill paints of the Hunger strike period and the mini riots is, even after all these years quite terrifying.
The most comprehensive of John DeLorean and his company was written by Hillel Levin “Maverick Mogul”. I learned a lot from this book particularly regarding John’s past and that of Roy Nesseth. I can’t fault the history of the company as known by me and my colleagues. Although written from across the water and the writer had no firsthand knowledge of Northern Ireland the book is accurate. I see no reason therefore to query his descriptions of places and events that occurred before I joined the company. If you haven’t read this book already you should do so.
There remains very little written to date about the little miracle of Dunmurry at least in any detail

Nick Sutton

[lazabby]

....There remains very little written to date about the little miracle of Dunmurry at least in any detail

Nick Sutton

Nick,
Perhaps you should be the one to write the book! I think the Delorean community would love another book written from the perspective from one who was there. Now that time has passed there should be a wealth of information to draw from.

[john 05141]

+1!!

[Farrar]

Nick,
Perhaps you should be the one to write the book!

Hear, hear!

Farrar

[Michael]

Been reading mine a little each day. I have to say, there is a obvious disdain towards JZD right from the beginning. I'm going to keep reading it, but I recently read this(paraphrased)

"JZD was not the reason behind the GTO's success, it was Ronny and the Daytonas that made it sell"

Now if the author continues writing stupid crap like that, then I will toss this book aside and wait for Nick's book.

[Delorean Industries]

"The DMC12 at its best is a low performance counterfeit of better cars and will never be the museum piece of quality its sellers claim today. At its worst individual models are seriously flawed and in some cases may be dangerous."


False. Even back then I think it was a truly wanted car after the collapse. A large percentage of the original owners I deal with who purchased these cars for well below MSRP have enjoyed these cars for 30 years and have something more valuable then other cars available at time of purchase. I have never seen a seriously flawed Delorean from the factory or one that couldn't be worked back into condition. Never one that was dangerous. The only ones i have seen that are flawed and dangerous are vehicles hacked on by PO's over the years.

[DMCVegas]

"The DMC12 at its best is a low performance counterfeit of better cars and will never be the museum piece of quality its sellers claim today. At its worst individual models are seriously flawed and in some cases may be dangerous."

What do you think about the accuracy of these words.

Nick Sutton

I disagree, and as an owner of a DMC-12 it may sound like I'm lying when I say this, but my opinion here is unbiased.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Another book to read is, The DeLorean Gold Portfolio. It's basically a reprinted scrapbook of sorts as it's entirely comprised of articles from magazines about the DMC-12 itself. Now what's interesting about it are the reviews of the DMC-12 because they're all of early production cars. As an example, I think it was the Road & Track article that compared the DMC-12 to it's competition, and it had an interesting note stating that the first car they brought couldn't be used because it's alternator failed. Speaking as honest as I can and probably upsetting some people in the process, these early cars are crap compared to the later ones. The manufacturing process was different where the doors were fitted LAST to the car resulting in poor alignment and leaks. The cooling system had the Otterstat on TOP of the coolant pipe resulting in Radiator Fans that couldn't turn on. Some parts were underrated for their job, etc.

Fast forward a few months and DMCL begins cranking out cars that are not only assembled differently with improved methods, but are also built with better parts and as a results are in fact Better Cars! Before it was in storage I wouldn't hesitate to hop in my car and drive any distance or through any weather. The types of modifications that happened to later cars never really got a chance to be applied to those earlier cars that the media reported on. If those methods had been applied from the start, the media and others would have a completely different impression of the car. Because it would in fact have been a different car.

As for the "counterfeit" comment, that's like calling every car since the very first one ever built in history a "counterfeit" automobile of that one. Just because the function is the same doesn't mean it's an imitation. Museum piece? Hardly. DeLoreans have been pounding the pavement since they first jumped off their Tellus Carriers, and will be for a long time to come. More and more come out of storage for restoration and dedication to the car continues to gain devotees based upon it's own merits. Let the opposition become cherished garage queens. Every year that passes means their parts run out, while ours continue to be reproduced and improved. Their enthusiasts die off while ours multiply. And it doesn't matter if the Oil Wells run dry. We'll just switch to EV drivetrains. If the batteries run out and there's no alternative, we'll keep pushing and pulling them. And years from now when our kids and grandkids take over custodianship of our DeLoreans they'll drive by condemned museum warehouses full of those old cars that the long dead authors claimed our cars "counterfeited". And as time passes and rust seizes those engines beyond repair and the become nothing more than mummified automotive corpses, the DMC-12 will still be pounding asphalt and cement, spinning their Odometers. And peoples' memories of those ancient cars will fade worse than their paint as people who see that unblemished Stainless Steel and will want one of these cars for themselves.

[Only1Balto]

It's interesting to see just how wrong that assessment is. It's the exact opposite. It attracts infinitely more attention than the other cars it's a "counterfeit" of.

The DeLorean is the ultimate alibi; you can't drive the car anywhere without someone taking a picture of you. You can't say that about many cars. It also means that if you want to commit a murder or rob a bank, you need a second car.

The limited number of them produced guarantee its museum-piece status for all time and the flaws are no worse than a lot of the other cars I've owned.


LMAO :rofl: