Vector WX8.

[bruxell]

and the ability to spontaenously combust!

Have you actually read where that whole story came from? Vector were forced to deliver a car that was only about three quarters built to Andre Agasi. They told him not to drive it because they thought it would burst into flames, he went ahead and drove it, and it did burst into flames. Weigert offered to re-fund the money to keep the story out of the press, Andre took the money, then went to the press anyway. It's not like the W8 was a hyper-sonic Pinto.

Now there's an idea...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

What kind of company delivers a 3/4 built car that catches fire when driven?

you can't be forced to deliver something that isn't what it says on the tin - that gets you sued.

[bruxell]

What kind of company delivers a 3/4 built car that catches fire when driven?

you can't be forced to deliver something that isn't what it says on the tin - that gets you sued.

Agasi bitched and whined because he wanted the thing in time for his birthday, supposedly as a static display piece. He has a lot of money, and I think basically told them he wouldn't take delivery otherwise. In any event, they told him not to drive the damn thing because they knew it wasn't ready, and the moron went right on his mary way. I wouldn't have much sympathy if he'd burned up with it, it was a bonehead move, and clearly not Vector's fault.
That said, I really don't like the W8, or think it was a very well built car. I just think that this story dosen't really falls into the catagory of "Oh Gerald, when will you ever learn?" This was a preening tennis star who was going to do whatever he wanted, regardless of the consequences, and regardless of what people who knew better had told him. If I had been Weigert, I'd have slammed the door in his face.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Bluntly - if the cars not ready, it's irresponsible of Vector to have taken money for the vehicle. which was in it's received state undriveable.

and how is delivering a vehicle - warned or not - which catches fire NOT Vector's fault?

[bruxell]

Bluntly - if the cars not ready, it's irresponsible of Vector to have taken money for the vehicle. which was in it's received state undriveable.

and how is delivering a vehicle - warned or not - which catches fire NOT Vector's fault?

I don't see that delivering an incomplete vehicle to a valued customer is a bad idea, if they only plan to use it for static display. Bluntly, it's not Vector's fault that the moron went out and drove it AGAINST THE ADVICE AND INSTRUCTIONS OF THE CARMAKER. Agasi asked for the vehicle to be delivered ahead of schedule for his birthday, on the understanding that he wouldn't drive the car, and that it would be returned to the factory for finishing. He then proceeded to drive the car anyway. This, to my way of thinking renders him responsible for what happened next, which was exactly what Vector told him would happen. Put bluntly that is...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

ok. for one thing. it's Agassi. if you are going to lambast him, do it properly.

secondly - if the agreement was for him not to drive the car, a good way to prevent that is to make sure there is no petrol in the car or fluids, or a battery.

a Valued customer? I suppose any customer is valued - but seriously, even static displays don't catch fire.

Should the blame fall on a person who is paying, or the manufacturer who couldn't deliver a working car? there is no guarantee that the finished car wouldn't catch on fire either

[bruxell]

ok. for one thing. it's Agassi. if you are going to lambast him, do it properly.

Sorry, I really don't care how his name is spelled. he still could have gotten himsel killed doing something that the manufacture told him not to, and then got his money back for a car he destroyed. that's lame.

secondly - if the agreement was for him not to drive the car, a good way to prevent that is to make sure there is no petrol in the car or fluids, or a battery.

I can only think that they wanted to get it on and off the transporter easily, and under the supervision of a factory mechanic.

a Valued customer? I suppose any customer is valued - but seriously, even static displays don't catch fire.

I think when you've spent twenty years tring to produce your own supercar, any customer is valued, but one with a high profile has to be of more value. And yes, some static display cars do catch fire, when you try to start and drive them. The Tucker Torpedo comes to mind. The car wasn't a static display car, it was the car schedualed to be delivered to Andre at a later date. He asked that the delivery be moved up for his birthday, with the understanding that it wasn't complete. Then he went against factory instructions and drove the car. That's just stupid, and he deserved to lose the money he put into the car.

Should the blame fall on a person who is paying, or the manufacturer who couldn't deliver a working car? there is no guarantee that the finished car wouldn't catch on fire either

Don't be stupid, read the whole story.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Sorry, I really don't care how his name is spelled. he still could have gotten himsel killed doing something that the manufacture told him not to, and then got his money back for a car he destroyed. that's lame.

how is that lame? it didn't do what the product said on the box.

and you don't care about how his name is spelt....right. obviously a big deal then.

I can only think that they wanted to get it on and off the transporter easily, and under the supervision of a factory mechanic.

if they could only do that (and under the supervision of a Factory mechanic) how was Agassi allowed to drive the vehicle?

I think when you've spent twenty years tring to produce your own supercar, any customer is valued, but one with a high profile has to be of more value. And yes, some static display cars do catch fire, when you try to start and drive them.

Static displays aren't meant to be driven. this car was described as a customer car.

an unfinished customer car. doesn't sound like a valued customer.

The Tucker Torpedo comes to mind. The car wasn't a static display car, it was the car schedualed to be delivered to Andre at a later date. He asked that the delivery be moved up for his birthday, with the understanding that it wasn't complete. Then he went against factory instructions and drove the car. That's just stupid, and he deserved to lose the money he put into the car.

And we all know how much of a debarcle that turned out to be. indeed. we all know how much of a reputable company that was as well. poor example.

Don't be stupid, read the whole story.

Stupid? the only stupidity was delivering a deathtrap to a customer. they were lucky that all they had to give was a refund, and not damages.

[bruxell]

how is that lame? it didn't do what the product said on the box.

and you don't care about how his name is spelt....right. obviously a big deal then.

Are you reading any of this before you respond? They delivered the car AHEAD OF SCHEDUAL AT AGASSI’S BEHEST. Vector told Agassi that the car could not be driven. The arrangement was made only so that he could display the car for his birthday celebration. When he drove the car, it did exactly what Vector said it would do.

if they could only do that (and under the supervision of a Factory mechanic) how was Agassi allowed to drive the vehicle? .

The car was left with him for a matter of days as I remember reading it. He was allowed to do anything he wanted with his property, but he was told what could happen ahead of time. They should have made the ass sign a waver.

Static displays aren't meant to be driven. this car was described as a customer car.

an unfinished customer car. doesn't sound like a valued customer.

Right, this was a customer car, delivered ahead of time, at the behest of the custome, on the understanding that it was incomplete. VECTOR WERE TRYING TO DO AGASSI A FAVOR BY LETTING HIM HAVE THE CAR EARLY, TO SHOW OFF. They told him not to drive it. So it was being released for static display.

And we all know how much of a debarcle that turned out to be. indeed. we all know how much of a reputable company that was as well. poor example.

I make no claims one way or the other as to the ethics of Preston Thomas Tucker; that was a complicated situation, and history doesn’t record his intent. The fact remains that the prototype caught fire at a motor show because it was under-developed.

Stupid? the only stupidity was delivering a deathtrap to a customer. they were lucky that all they had to give was a refund, and not damages.

Read…

[IBrake4Rainbows]

So you drew parallels to tucker why? to prove that underdeveloped cars catch fire?

I guess the big question is - who really cares? A vector caught fire. what else is new.

A car - delivered too early for the customers needs, catches fire because the customer tries to do what the car was originally designed for. albeit warned that it would catch fire.

what was so wrong with the car in this set up that it catches fire? was it shipped without a radiator or something?

[bruxell]

I guess the big question is - who really cares? A vector caught fire. what else is new.

You seem to care. You seem to think that they all did that or something.

A car - delivered too early for the customers needs, catches fire because the customer tries to do what the car was originally designed for. albeit warned that it would catch fire.

Agreed, customer was an idiot. Glad you’re coming along.

what was so wrong with the car in this set up that it catches fire? was it shipped without a radiator or something?

I believe it was something to do with it’s not being finished, with it being a car in the middle of assembly, and not at all road-worthy at that point. That’s why the y said things like “Don’t drive the car Andre.” And “The car will catch fire if you drive it Andre.” And “Remember, don’t drive the car, just let it sit there.” Seriously, these things were largely hand built, and they needed testing and development on an individual basis, like any hand built car. Stop trying to make this something it’s not. An idiot did something he shouldn’t have, and managed to get out of the consequences because he was famous.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

An Idiot certainly did - Wiegart let the car out of the factory unfinished.

What consequences? as I said, Vector was lucky not to be sued.

I agree handbuilt cars require tuning to prevent stuff-ups. but seriously.

Didnt they make a mock-up of the car for shows? why not give Andre that until such time as his car is actually ready?

Call me foolish- but it's not best policy - whether the customer requests it or not - to have an unfinished, untuned, positively dangerous beast delivered to a customer - even with an agreement to return it for final assembly - when the assumption will be that he'll want to get behind the wheel.

[2ndclasscitizen]

I'd be interested to know why it caught fire as well. It takes a special kind of **** up for a supposedly fully developed car to catch, and not being finished isn't it. Surely they could've finished everything mechanical and just not finished the interior etc.

[Falcon500]

a Valued customer? I suppose any customer is valued - but seriously, even static displays don't catch fire.

Should the blame fall on a person who is paying, or the manufacturer who couldn't deliver a working car? there is no guarantee that the finished car wouldn't catch on fire either

They catch fire if drivan with half as many radiators as they are supposed to have....And also it only caught fire after the engine seized locked up and crashed rather spectacuarly

The car was being finished and that diva had to have his car there and then for a display at least or he wont buy it.

Vector was sued because then someone could of gotten pinged for driving a unregisterd, non complianced car around and crashing it

The mock up was turned into a working one and later became on of the crash test cars.

I personally think they attempted to do as much for the customer as possible the customer was a tard and didnt do what was required of him. This is reminding me of the customer who had a vz SS and the fuse for the fan busted and kept going and he tryed to blame everyone else because he had to buy a new fuse and battery on a 3 year old car, he never once thought the car was acting abnormally mayby i should get it looked at or even ask some queastions.

[bruxell]

They catch fire if drivan with half as many radiators as they are supposed to have....And also it only caught fire after the engine seized locked up and crashed rather spectacuarly

The car was being finished and that diva had to have his car there and then for a display at least or he wont buy it.

Vector was sued because then someone could of gotten pinged for driving a unregisterd, non complianced car around and crashing it

The mock up was turned into a working one and later became on of the crash test cars.

I personally think they attempted to do as much for the customer as possible the customer was a tard and didnt do what was required of him. This is reminding me of the customer who had a vz SS and the fuse for the fan busted and kept going and he tryed to blame everyone else because he had to buy a new fuse and battery on a 3 year old car, he never once thought the car was acting abnormally mayby i should get it looked at or even ask some queastions.

This is what I've been saying... a lot! The car was fully developed, but not fully assembled, and Agassi agreed not to drive it until Vector could finish the car.