[ROVERNET - UK] Response to Dennis' not so well intended comments

Glen Wilson rovercar at comcast.net
Sun Mar 30 04:10:23 BST 2008

Brooks wrote:
> I know what I have for Rovers Glen...and that is the point...you can't 
> admit that you might be wrong...NEVER...and yes there have over the 
> years been MANY who have said exactly how they feel about you bullshit 
> !!...and most of them have made the posts very clear to you as 
> well...so don't play the loveable one.. I have been here for years and 
> you sometimes make sense and then you revert to this crap.
The last time someone went off on me like you, you spoke up and bemoaned 
the character assassination.

> If you care to look back ...it was only a short while earlier today 
> that you mindlessly insulted another fine gentleman who spoke contrary 
> to your wealth of knowledge.
The difference between you and David, is that David and I are friends 
and have already talked it out. I didn't mean to insult him or Slats who 
is also my friend, but sometimes smileys don't communicate enough.

I don't know what your insecurities are. I know some of my own. I don't 
claim a wealth of knowledge. Most of what I do know, I know from 
listening to people on this list and from reading the same literature we 
all have read: James Taylor's books and service manuals, mainly. When I 
sound like I have an encyclopedic knowledge of the subject, it's because 
I am quoting the encyclopedia that's right in front of me, as I told 
you. I was hoping to hear from some of the weightiest Rover people out 
there about their experience with oddball parts they found on their cars 
or what might constitute a factory difference. Unfortunately, when 
someone starts screaming and cursing, it has a chilling effect. Four 
people contacted me off list with input and said they didn't want to get 
in the middle of this mess. Maybe you should just chill out and 
communicate in a rational manner.

Maybe they are all keeping quiet, but I didn't hear many specific 
examples of "factory differences" popping up.  I also didn't hear a lot 
of people reporting non-3500S  equipment fitted to their 3500S's at the 
factory. You should consider the possibility (just the possibility) that 
some of those parts on your cars weren't there when they left the 
factory. I didn't know you had two cars since you only supplied one VIN. 
If your dad bought his from the dealer and it had bumpers and other 
equipment that were substantially different than what was specified in 
the catalog, then I'll take your word for it that the car came from the 
dealer like that. If it was the other car that came to you third hand, I 
don't know how you can state so forcefully and with such utter 
conviction that it left the factory like that. You simply have no way of 
knowing. In that case, it would be much more likely that the car was 
altered after it left the factory than that it left with the wrong 
fenders and bumpers on it. But if it means that much to you, believe 
what you want to. I wouldn't have go so far as to mention it if you 
hadn't jumped all over me. I'll wager that the silent majority out there 
have already concluded that these non-standard fenders and bumpers are 
probably parts from some 2000TC, not a secret factory prototype. A 3500S 
is the sum of its parts. The unique parts are what make it special.
> I seldom participate in this forum because of your attitude and 
> constant misguidance...
Does that tell us something about me or about you?
> I know you are well intentioned however you are an idividual whom I 
> carry little respect for....
My character is being assassinated again. Or is that feint praise?
> Throughout the years you have constantly been at the forefront of 
> several controversial situations...I don't need or wish to be 
> concerned about...however agruments do seem to pop up a lot when you 
> enter the scene.
I can think of four or five of them. One of them was with you, untold 
years ago. A couple were personal things that had nothing to do with the 
Rovernet where one or two people decided they would benefit by smearing 
it all over the Rovernet. Other people involve showed much more class 
and maturity. And there were a few more times when I should have kept my 
mouth shut and didn't. I never cursed anyone out told them I had no 
respect for them, called them an asshole or made statements implying 
that someone's friends were saying horrible things about them behind 
their back. That's just cruel and childish, and that's the side of you 
I, for one, am seeing.

If you want to write to me off the Rovernet and call me anything you 
choose to, feel free. If you want to call me on the phone and swear at 
me, you have my number. Leave it off the Rovernet.
>   I sincerely do appologize for my rant...however I think someone 
> needs tolet you know that you are full of hot air ...at least every 
> once in a while...and today's your lucky day !!
Sounds sincere to me! And civil, too.
>   If everyone else wants to let you spew things that are only half 
> truth's...let them...if they wish to kiss your feet ...I really don't 
> care...however I do know what I am talking about and I am not about to 
> let a twitt like you dispute facts that you have no knowledge about 
> whatsoever.

Twitt.  Now, that's going too far. Some of my foot-kissing supplicants 
may track you down and seek redress for that. I can't control them all.

>  I now shall retreat back to my humble position lurking in behind the 
> scenes...Most who are supporters of my feelings will not likely 
> surface...however why should they...I've pretty well said what needed 
> to be said...lol
Am I not humble enough? Does it bother you that I have a website and 
five or ten people complimented me on it? Am I conceited and out of 
control because I've put pictures of cars up on the web? If you look at 
the website, that's all it is. A list of clubs, a list of part suppliers 
and a bunch of pictures. There are no editorials, no autobiographical 
stuff. I'm not up there saying I'm great. All I'm doing is trying to 
make it easier to find information about Rovers. You shouldn't hate me 
for that, Dennis. You've apparently got a lot of better reasons than that.

I'd prefer that you keep participating in the Rovernet, and I'll try to 
stay clear of you. Frankly, it gives me the creeps to think of you out 
there just sulking and fuming about every message I post.


>> Dennis,
>> You really do know how to keep things civil, that's for sure.
>> I'm not claiming a vast knowledge. I'm just sitting here with three 
>> owners manuals and James Taylor's book. You don't have Federal 3500S 
>> bumpers or front wings on your car. You said it yourself, and all 
>> anyone has to do is look at the pictures. I can't help it if your car 
>> has parts on it that are inconsistent with the VIN, what's on all of 
>> the other Federal 3500S's in North America, and what's in the Rover 
>> parts manual.
>> If, as you say, I'm an ass, if people are tired of my bullshit, if 
>> I'm a jerk and a freaking asshole...well, maybe you're right and I 
>> should go away. There certainly must be a lot of people talking to 
>> you about me and burning up the wires off-list. But if your sort of 
>> language and abuse is the sort of thing that people on the Rovernet 
>> and in the wider Rover community want to sanction, maybe I should 
>> find an Edsel or DeSoto list.
>> Maybe I'm a little bit annoying once in a while, but I don't think 
>> people hate me that much. I have certain redeeming characteristics. 
>> For one thing, I don't swear at people if I differ with them on a 
>> point of fact.
>> Did I use abusive language? Did I attack you personally? Did I use 
>> inappropriate language and swear words in any of my messages?
>> I think you ought to look in the mirror and apologize to everyone on 
>> this list, including me. You might as well apologize to the Rover Car 
>> Club of Canada while you are at it since they are the hosts here.
>> Glen
>>> Glen...
>>> In the interest of keeping this civil...you are so far off base that 
>>> I don't think your vast wisdom and the truth will ever get the 
>>> chance to meet again. Like usual ...you only read and absorbed parts 
>>> of what was said... The VIN was from only one of TWO cars with 
>>> factory differences...
>>> I have never in my life heard anyone spout as much nonsense...no 
>>> damn wonder people are sick sore and tired of your bull shit !!
>>> For once in you life will you get down from your mountain of 
>>> nonsense and listen to someone who has the freaking evidence sitting 
>>> in the driveway !!... you are an embarrasment !! ...take a hike 
>>> ...I'm far from alone in my thoughts at this moment...Rover owners 
>>> around the world know what an ass you are ... but you didn't really 
>>> need to show everyone that you like being one !!
>>> If you knew even half of what you think you knew...you would be a 
>>> Rover genius...but all I see is a jerk !!
>>> If it were not for the wisdom of other Roverites that by the way 
>>> ...see you as a freaking asshole...I'd have left this circus a long 
>>> time ago...
>>> Have a nice freaking day ....
>>> Dennis Brooks...
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glen Wilson" <rovercar at comcast.net>
>>> To: <rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com>
>>> Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2008 6:54 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [ROVERNET - UK] Response to Glen's well intended comments
>>>> Well, I was patiently answering questions as you can read below, 
>>>> but in terms of recanting...
>>>> Your car has a Federal 3500S VIN according to Taylors book.
>>>> Your car does not have Federal 3500S front wings.
>>>> Your car does not have Federal 3500S front bumpers (or, I assume 
>>>> rear bumpers?)
>>>>                (scroll down re bumpers)
>>>> You did have the metal pieces at the bottom of the front fenders.
>>>> Your car does not have the floor dimmer mentioned in the 3500S 
>>>> operation manual.
>>>> Your car does not have Fed 3500S directional indicators.
>>>> Your car does not have the steering column stalks described in the 
>>>> 3500S manual.
>>>> So what are we saying, here. That your car has factory differences? 
>>>> That on the day your car was put together they didn't have NADA 
>>>> bumpers, fenders, indicator lights, floor dimmer switches or column 
>>>> switchgear?
>>>> How could this car possibly be a Federal 3500S that has not been 
>>>> altered?
>>>> Sounds like a lot of parts that don't belong on a car with your 
>>>> VIN, Dennis.
>>>> Glen
>>>> Brooks wrote:
>>>>> Lots of good questions raised there Glen...I will do my best to 
>>>>> answer most of them...
>>>>> "Did Canada get a hodge-podge of parts because they had less 
>>>>> specific laws than the
>>>>> United States? "
>>>>> I don't know what the US regulations were at that time...however 
>>>>> today the regulations seem to be even more strict here...as most 
>>>>> US destined vehicles need to be modified to meet Canadian 
>>>>> standards before importing.
>>>>> The P6B that I am refering to NEVER had under the bumper turn 
>>>>> signals...The signals were wired into the front wing much like the 
>>>>> 3500 that was built for the home market in England....
>>>> Just to be specific, the P6B you mention is a Federal 3500S, right? 
>>>> I'm sure there are tons of P6Bs without the bumper directionals.
>>>>> the wings were not the same as fitted to the P6 ...however they 
>>>>> did have a small piece of stainless (I believe) fitted to the 
>>>>> lower portion of the wing next to the rocker panel (is this also 
>>>>> seen on 3500 cars made for the home market ?
>>>> Those pieces were original to the Fed 3500S, and I'm pretty sure 
>>>> they were aluminum. Why they didn't just paint the fender, I don't 
>>>> know...
>>>>> "Seems like some rewiring would be involved in deleting
>>>>> the under bumper lights"
>>>>> Again...not really ...as the lights were actually an addition as 
>>>>> you noted for the NADA market....wether it was required by law is 
>>>>> a bit doubtful when you consider the other cars sold in the same 
>>>>> market at that time .
>>>> I think they just spliced in wires that ran down to the under 
>>>> bumper lights. I know I read somewhere that those things were added 
>>>> to meet regulations, but I can't find where I read it, so that's 
>>>> hearsay!  ;-) They appeared first on the TC that preceded the 3500S 
>>>> and might have arrived along with the side marker lights which were 
>>>> definitely federally mandated down here. Maybe the ones up top were 
>>>> simply not bright enough or didn't have enough visibility from an 
>>>> angle.
>>>>> I have a P6B with a unit that is completly different from any I 
>>>>> have seen ...it's reversed to the opposite side like we have in 
>>>>> todays cars...also it came with a high beam flash plus on the unit 
>>>>> you have the feature of hi-lo beam switching ...not a dimmer on 
>>>>> the floor. The floor mat has never even had the hole for the 
>>>>> dimmer punched out in order to install the unit.
>>>> Now. we're cooking with gas. What's the VIN on that car? Let's 
>>>> sleuth it out. I'm still not clear on the setup. The '69 brochures 
>>>> I have show the directional on the right. The left stalk will flash 
>>>> the high beams when pulled back if lights are off or in low beam. 
>>>> The lights are turned on using the rotary switch on the dash. High 
>>>> beams by floor button.  The much older 2000 manual from 1964 shows 
>>>> the hi/low selection being done by the left stalk.  If you read 
>>>> between the lines, it looks like they left that same switch at the 
>>>> base of the left stalk even when they finally only using a single 
>>>> function of it to flash the lights.  Someone can check a parts 
>>>> manual, but it might have been pretty easy to just hook up that 
>>>> switch to operate like it did on the old cars, especially if the 
>>>> wires were still in the harness.  If that's the case, the dealer 
>>>> would not have had to change the switches on the column because 
>>>> they never changed (just didn't get hooked up).
>>>>> "The directional indicators and horn are on the right side,
>>>>> the headlight flasher control on a stem to the left."
>>>>> Not true on all P6B cars...as I own one that didn't come that 
>>>>> way...My Dad removed the unit and refitted it to another P6B that 
>>>>> he was driving.
>>>> Not clear what you mean, here. If it "didn't come that way" did you 
>>>> have one that had the directional lever on the left and the flasher 
>>>> on the right?
>>>> Again, are we talking Fed 3500S here, or just generic P6B? There's 
>>>> lots of P6Bs, but there are only 2000 Fed 3500S's. Did you guys get 
>>>> any 3500 models up there before they brought the Fed 3500S over?
>>>>> "Have you definitely seen 3500S's in
>>>>> Canada that don't have the dimmer footswitch on the floor? To me, it
>>>>> seems much more likely that such a car was modified by some owner 
>>>>> than
>>>>> that it was manufactured that way at the factory."
>>>>> Yes...I own it...and before me Ben Rogers owned it....at the time 
>>>>> of purchase Ben told me that everything was the way he bought the 
>>>>> car...and I can't really see anyone going to such trouble as to 
>>>>> remove the foot dimmer hide the holes where it would be fastened 
>>>>> ...change the wiring and replace the floor mat with one that was 
>>>>> never cut for a floor mounted dimmer....it's just too much of a 
>>>>> strech to make.
>>>> Again, share the VIN on that car.
>>>>> "Even in 1964, NADA P6's had foot dimmers. "
>>>>> I'm sure the '64 Mustang did as well...but eventually things 
>>>>> evolve...so I am not sure what your point is  ....most of the P6B 
>>>>> cars had foot dimmers....but I have one that does not...and never 
>>>>> did.
>>>> Point is that if the foot dimmer was standard on NADA cars since 
>>>> 1964, why would they  make yours without one? Unless it wasn't 
>>>> intended for this market...
>>>>> "The bumpers of a 3500S are unique to the 3500S and so are the front
>>>>> wings to match them. If a 3500S was shipped with non-standard front
>>>>> bumpers, they would have to have been 2000TC bumpers which would mean
>>>>> the car had 2000TC front wings, as well. How could the factory 
>>>>> send out
>>>>> a car like that?"
>>>>> That's making a lot of unfounded presumptions Glen
>>>> Not if it's an NADA Federal 3500S. Why does your car have so many 
>>>> anomalies?
>>>>> ....I actually think it was fitted with a front bumper from the 
>>>>> three thousand five....it would fit directly and would easily 
>>>>> explain the lights in the front wings operating like the ones used 
>>>>> in the three thousand five model as well...I also think you may 
>>>>> find the front bumper of the 3500S is also a direct fit to the 
>>>>> three thousand five...contrary to your statement.
>>>> I don't know if it would bolt onto a 3500, but the Fed 3500S bumper 
>>>> was unique to the model. That's a definite fact. Someone in the UK 
>>>> or Europe would have to let us know if the 3500 had the same wings 
>>>> as the 2000. If so, the Fed 3500S bumper wouldn't bolt onto a 3500 
>>>> because it would be missing an attachment point on each side. In 
>>>> fact, I just looked at pictures of the 3500 and can confirm what I 
>>>> just said. You could fit 3500 bumpers to a 3500S, but you'd have an 
>>>> empty hole in each front wing. If you put the heavy wrap-around 
>>>> bumper on a 3500, the ends would not be supported.
>>>>> " Is it possible that the car you are remembering was a TC and not a
>>>>> 3500S? Maybe a non-NADA LHD 2000 or 2000TC was imported into 
>>>>> Canada by someone."
>>>>> An honest question...but not even a glimer of a chance....These 
>>>>> are not the same 3500 S units that I am noting differences ...but 
>>>>> they are certainly not "TC" models....I've owned and driven a 
>>>>> 3500S since 71' ....I am very familiar with the marquis and 
>>>>> believe me there are indeed many factory differences ...for 
>>>>> whatever reason...I can't tell you for certain ...but you are off 
>>>>> the mark when you try to explain those differences as after market 
>>>>> or dealer modifications.
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>>> "I'm not sure what you mean by finishing trims in the boot."
>>>>> Up until I saw the P6B that I bought fronm Quebec...I had never 
>>>>> seen stainless steel installed along the back edge of the 
>>>>> trunk...located just inside the lip where the carpet 
>>>>> stops....there was a full length of stainless installed there . It 
>>>>> was a match to the desigm used on the entry step of the main part 
>>>>> of the car...it was not something that was aftermarket ...it was 
>>>>> factory installed ...even the screws marched the rest of the 
>>>>> screws used on the cars other trim pieces....
>>>>> ................................................................................................... 
>>>>> "If I saw a car with a non-NADA spec headlight
>>>>> dimmer circuit, I would check the VIN to see if it was ever 
>>>>> intended to
>>>>> end up in North America."
>>>>> Sounds reasonable.....43301964A
>>>>> Once again Glen....it stands the test....perhaps you might care to 
>>>>> reconsider and recant....LOL
>>>>> .........................................................
>>>>> Now as a final thought....every car that came to canada had to 
>>>>> meet standards that were put in place effective Jan 1/1968...so 
>>>>> the bumper theory you have so clearly noted may indeed be only a 
>>>>> theory...because if it were factual ...then please explain how the 
>>>>> 1968 Rover 2000  was permitted to roam the streets of the USA ... 
>>>>> Just a little food for thought :)
>>>> Don't confuse the Clean Air Act requirements with the new auto 
>>>> safety requirements that came about a year later.
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>  Dennis Brooks
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rovernet mailing list
>>>>> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and 
>>>>> follow instructions:
>>>>> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
>>>>> Back-up list and photos at:
>>>>> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rovernet mailing list
>>>> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and 
>>>> follow instructions:
>>>> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
>>>> Back-up list and photos at:
>>>> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/
>>>> -- 
>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1348 - 
>>>> Release Date: 28/03/2008 10:58 AM
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rovernet mailing list
>>> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and follow 
>>> instructions:
>>> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
>>> Back-up list and photos at:
>>> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/
>> _______________________________________________
>> rovernet mailing list
>> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and follow 
>> instructions:
>> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
>> Back-up list and photos at:
>> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1348 - 
>> Release Date: 28/03/2008 10:58 AM
> _______________________________________________
> rovernet mailing list
> rovernet at lyris.ccdata.com
> To unsubscribe, go to this web page, look near the bottom and follow 
> instructions:
> http://mailman.nipltd.com/mailman/listinfo/rovernet
> Back-up list and photos at:
> http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Rover_net/

More information about the rovernet mailing list