Trouble with UThomas

[UThomas]

I think at this point what would be nice for you guys is if Army post pics of the whole gun in natural lighting without glare - the exact specs he asked of me that I provided.

That way you can get a feel for what the marker looks like in its entirety in normal conditions and judge for yourselves. The other side of the marker without dispute looks almost new as the pictures will indicate.

Thomas

BTW - the safety mechanism is stainless - it doesn't rust.

[SockMonkey]

The problem Thomas is that he has done a very good job at showing what you've done (intentional or not) though it does lean towards the intentional side.

But If I was buying a 1965 Shelby Cobra for $50,000 (an ORIGINAL not a kit car), and I was told the paint was "like new" and "sweet" and the car was in EXCELLENT condition, and I finally receive the car and the driver side had terrible bondo work and a $150 MACCO paint job, i'd be pissed too...

Yeah $50k for an original 65 shelby is an awesome deal, and I am sure I could flip it and get my money back (or even more)... but thats not what I bought and that not what I wanted, I wanted an EXCELLENT '65 shelby with like new paint.


IT DOES NOT MATTER IF ITS A SWEET DEAL... IT WAS NOT AS DESCRIBED. (Even if that wasn't your intention..)

E N D - O F - S T O R Y ! ! ! !

And I find it very odd that you mention wear on the bottom of the battery, but not a single mention of the damage he has CLEARLY shown...

[UThomas]

"and I finally receive the car and the driver side had terrible bondo work and a $150 MACCO paint job, i'd be pissed too..."

That is not analogous to this because the gun is in great shape. Which will be apparent if you look at the high res pictures of the gun I posted, watch the gun in the video clip I posted, OR he takes pictures of the whole gun in a natural light as he asked me to do.

That does not support his narrative though. It is similar to him saying the gun "was full of paint" when in fact the whole exterior, the breach, valve, and inside of the grip frame have been shown to have no paint on it what-so-ever. So I suspect he found a spec on the back of the trigger (I cleaned the gun with q-tips and windex like I do all my gear) and then posted that. Similar to "well, you can't really see this atrocious damage until I get an inch away and shine a light directly on to get a reflection."

In fact, if he takes me up on my refund offer I will immediately take a video of the entire gun and I think a lot of people will change their tune very quickly.

Thomas

[UThomas]

I'll add that when I do sell it, I will return to him the difference between what I paid him and the sale price. So I won't be making extra coin off the 90% buy back.

[Thordic]

Here's a solution.

Who out there owns what they consider an "excellent" gun? One that they would descibe as excellent, but has been actually used and is not "NIB" or "LNIB".

Stick it under harsh angled lighting. A bare lightbulb reflecting off the anno at an angle so every flaw is apparent. Take some high-res pics. Then post them.

If your "excellent" gun has visible flaws, maybe UThomas isn't so full of **** after all.

If your "excellent" gun still looks pretty flawless, then he is full of crap and deserves the abuse he is getting.

Problem solved.

[Drix]

That is not analogous to this because the gun is in great shape.

Thomas

Great is not excellent- And not so much

[OPBN]

With the reputation for quality that AGD has always had, I would find it hard to beleive that this left their hands in this pitted and/or dinged up condition. If this is in fact factory anodizing, I wonder if it was a reject that got back doored?

[SCpoloRicker]

11/02/10 09:38 AM

Reported.

[CatoRockwell]

I have an E-Tac that was annodized earlier this year, I've used this gun almost exclusively since I got it back and I would say it is in excellent condition with the exclusion of 1 scratch that is on the rail near where the SS hose fitting goes into the valve, and the fact that the battery casing must have been a slightly different metal due to the fact that it annodized a shade lighter than the rest of the marker. I'd be willing to take some pictures of it up close.

[Thordic]

I have an E-Tac that was annodized earlier this year, I've used this gun almost exclusively since I got it back and I would say it is in excellent condition with the exclusion of 1 scratch that is on the rail near where the SS hose fitting goes into the valve, and the fact that the battery casing must have been a slightly different metal due to the fact that it annodized a shade lighter than the rest of the marker. I'd be willing to take some pictures of it up close.

Go for it. I may do the same tonight on my old mag. It's in great shape as I stopped playing shortly after I built it.

[UThomas]

A good example of how high glare lighting effects the pics on a gloss black marker:





These are both his pics. Do you believe those are the same markers? Do you feel the same way about the condition based on these pics? He states "The damage is very visible."

I first saw the first one and thought "Holly cow - time to call USPS and file a claim because someone tore that gun up." Then the part of the 2nd pic (of the same section without the glare) - shows what the my eye sees - a even deep gloss black finish capable of mirroring a reflection. It also shows what my pics show, and what my video of the marker show, and what I described.

Here is another of his pics of the WORST part of the marker:



Here is the pic I sent him - was ~4 meg in size and taken in natural light. Detailed enough to see my finger print on the section in question. He says the "The damage is very visible." Then again, he also says the "was full of paint."

http://home.roadrunner.com/~thomas_mitchell/images/x1.JPG

Like I said, if I took a vid of the gun you might have a very very different perspective on it's condition compared to what he has chosen to share here.

Here, for example - is a lower res pic of the other side of the marker (I have it in ~3000x2000 uncompressed also).

Does anyone disagree that this anno is excellent here? Army hasn't even.

http://a.yfrog.com/img220/7632/img0660vq.jpg

with some glare (but not point blank) from the original add:

[CatoRockwell]

I think you guys should agree to some 3rd party that you both respect who has a long history in the industry with selling/purchasing, ship the marker out to him, have him make a personal determination on quality.

[BigEvil]

Send it to Tuna, let him size it up, and make a call.

[SockMonkey]

I think one big problem here is the different (maybe particularly your) view of 'excellent'. That last pic of the marker is a bit more representative of actual condition, but I would not call that marker 'excellent', maybe 'great condition' but not excellent..

There is a big difference in wording between "its in excellent condition for its age and how much use it has had" and "this marker is in excellent condition".

[UThomas]

SockMonkey - totally agree. I think one thing that hasn't been clear to people is we are not arguing over if the marker is in "excellent" cosmetic condition or "trashed." It is "excellent" vs "very good" vs "mint" vs "good." I think that is an important distinction, especially as it relates to some of the more... passionate posters :)

Would love to see Army post some pics of the full gun, both sides, in normal natural lighting.

Thomas