Interesting..
10-03-2003, 09:45 PM
#61
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 24
Also...I find it interesting that RE could miss the fact that the motors didn't get ground down but RE can ensure top quality products leave the building. 
I really hope your QC is not the same for both.
[ October 03, 2003, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: dredfunn ]
I really hope your QC is not the same for both.[ October 03, 2003, 10:46 PM: Message edited by: dredfunn ]
10-03-2003, 09:57 PM
#62
500 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 548
Originally posted by Orion_95:
[/qb]
[/qb]
Amen brother.
10-03-2003, 10:22 PM
#63
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 57
This is the biggest load of crap I have heard in a very long time. basically what happend here is that RE got caught in a game they thought they were winning. If you got busted with this little cover-up, who knows how many other things they are hiding from their customers.
I don't care how RE words it, but taking parts from other companies that don't meet quality expectations and selling them as new is simple fraud. Plain and simple. There is no way in hell you can buy a part that was built for another company (especially when it doesn't pass QC) and turn around and sell it as "Your new product".
I'll give you an example. Car company X makes motor for their car, but their motor doesn't pass QC for whatever reason. Now instead of taking these motors to scrap, some small car company, company Y, decides that it would be a good investment. He takes off any badging on the motor and replaces it with their own. Can this car be sold as "Company Y's" car? Um no.
If I was RE, I would do a little more as a company then come on a message board and appologise for the "oooppps". I have a really hard time believing that this was a simple oversite. Someone had to put the backplates over the logo. Do you have the blind doing your work for you? This is got shady written all over it.
I don't care how RE words it, but taking parts from other companies that don't meet quality expectations and selling them as new is simple fraud. Plain and simple. There is no way in hell you can buy a part that was built for another company (especially when it doesn't pass QC) and turn around and sell it as "Your new product".
I'll give you an example. Car company X makes motor for their car, but their motor doesn't pass QC for whatever reason. Now instead of taking these motors to scrap, some small car company, company Y, decides that it would be a good investment. He takes off any badging on the motor and replaces it with their own. Can this car be sold as "Company Y's" car? Um no.
If I was RE, I would do a little more as a company then come on a message board and appologise for the "oooppps". I have a really hard time believing that this was a simple oversite. Someone had to put the backplates over the logo. Do you have the blind doing your work for you? This is got shady written all over it.
10-04-2003, 01:08 AM
#64
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1
Originally posted by chaos:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JeepBeats:
What sub is that?
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JeepBeats:
What sub is that?
Dunno if it has been fixed.
Regarding the RE issue.. I can see why you are all angry with RE.. but you all seem to be happy with the performance and quality..
Personaly.. not a fan but if you are happy, does it matter?
Amit
10-04-2003, 02:14 AM
#66
Yankee
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10
Saw this and HAD to register.
I was wondering, whats really the big deal. Company A found product defective for some reason. Company B bought them. I'm sure RE will support them. And I'm sure it happens ALOT in all industries. Bad form yes, but lets be realistic. How many monitors use a Toshiba or Sony tube? Probably 80% of them....
Perhaps Onyx intended the motors for their top of the line subs, wouldnt cut it so RE grabbed them for the lower lines where tolerances dont need to be as tight.
I think its safe to say RE's track record should stand for itself.
My .02 cents
I was wondering, whats really the big deal. Company A found product defective for some reason. Company B bought them. I'm sure RE will support them. And I'm sure it happens ALOT in all industries. Bad form yes, but lets be realistic. How many monitors use a Toshiba or Sony tube? Probably 80% of them....
Perhaps Onyx intended the motors for their top of the line subs, wouldnt cut it so RE grabbed them for the lower lines where tolerances dont need to be as tight.
I think its safe to say RE's track record should stand for itself.
My .02 cents
10-04-2003, 02:28 AM
#69
0 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1
Originally posted by Specop_007:
Saw this and HAD to register.
I was wondering, whats really the big deal. Company A found product defective for some reason. Company B bought them. I'm sure RE will support them. And I'm sure it happens ALOT in all industries. Bad form yes, but lets be realistic. How many monitors use a Toshiba or Sony tube? Probably 80% of them....
Perhaps Onyx intended the motors for their top of the line subs, wouldnt cut it so RE grabbed them for the lower lines where tolerances dont need to be as tight.
I think its safe to say RE's track record should stand for itself.
My .02 cents
Saw this and HAD to register.
I was wondering, whats really the big deal. Company A found product defective for some reason. Company B bought them. I'm sure RE will support them. And I'm sure it happens ALOT in all industries. Bad form yes, but lets be realistic. How many monitors use a Toshiba or Sony tube? Probably 80% of them....
Perhaps Onyx intended the motors for their top of the line subs, wouldnt cut it so RE grabbed them for the lower lines where tolerances dont need to be as tight.
I think its safe to say RE's track record should stand for itself.
My .02 cents
Im still planning on buying RE subs!
10-04-2003, 02:37 AM
#70
i have seen the same practices used in automotive manufacture,it really is not a big deal.RE most likely produces its own v/c former,or a motor stucture that may be more tollerant of clearances. i think it is smart business practice,which saves product costs.many companies creat a sister company to use surplus parts, what's the problem with an outside company doing the like..eg: crane cams & cam dynamics,ford motorcraft & holley,hyundai& kia..as i'm sure RE has a warranty, they must be confident in their product. ask people that have used the product for a testimonial,if it works(and good at that)wtf is the problem,some guys complain about the craziest things...its like a cardboard box with fingerprints on it, if the part inside is good i really could care less...just my $.02..
[ October 04, 2003, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: Loud Brown Kicker Colt ]
[ October 04, 2003, 03:38 AM: Message edited by: Loud Brown Kicker Colt ]
