Kent wrote:
>Jay, as much as you'd like to disagree with Ray,
>your post supports what he's claiming.
No. Whereas your misquote makes that attempt, my words do not support his
claims.
> You concede
>in your post that Lotus may have made some cars to
>custom-order.
"Customer order" is not the same thing as "custom order. Go back and look
at the passages you quoted from my post. Lotus was not alone in making
cars to _customer_ order. The practice was engaged in by Porsche,
Ferrari, BMW, Jaguar, Mercedes, Roll-Royce, and any number of other
manufacturers at that time. MOF, It's STILL done.
Ray claimed you could get "anything you want" on a Lotus ordered at the
factory, which is patent nonsense. You could NOT, for example, get an
emissions-illegal engine in a car being shipped to the US. Nor could you
buy a car that failed to meet US safety regs. That severely limited what
_any_ manufacturer could offer in this market.
Jay
|