# Kadees on my new E8



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Well, after all the snafu on the Aristo forum about the couplers not fitting on some of the E8 pilots, I had to knuckle down (ha ha) and fit my 2 locos with Kadees. After all the furor, I figured it would be heck.

Well, turns out the install was pretty simple.

I have a full page on it on my web site:
http://www.elmassian.com/trains-mainmenu-27/motive-power-mods-aamp-tips-mainmenu-35/aristo-motive-power-mainmenu-72/e8/kadees-for-the-e8

Basically used a 787 for the rear coupler, and it close couples nicely.

The front was a challenge to try to get the coupler height right, and reach through the pilot, and not have to trim any of the loco.

Turns out using a Kadee 832 box, with an 835 "zero offset" coupler worked great.

See my site for details, but the install came out really clean, and no shims or modifications to the loco.

Sorry for the big picture, all pix on my site are 800 x 600 so the detail shows.










Regards, Greg


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Looks good Greg. I bet they sure pull good now that you added weights to both. Later RJD


----------



## Jim Agnew (Jan 2, 2008)

Wow, what an improvement over that other ugly coupler.


----------



## Steeeeve (Sep 10, 2008)

I saw a few pictures of the new Amtrak E8 (proto). I was a little upset they included the port holes on the side. Not one Amtrak E8 has this but I guess you can't make another mold just for one paint


----------



## Guest (Oct 7, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 10/05/2008 6:06 PM
Well, after all the snafu on the Aristo forum about the couplers not fitting on some of the E8 pilots, I had to knuckle down (ha ha) and fit my 2 locos with Kadees. After all the furor, I figured it would be heck.

Well, turns out the install was pretty simple.

I have a full page on it on my web site:
http://www.elmassian.com/trains-mainmenu-27/motive-power-mods-aamp-tips-mainmenu-35/aristo-motive-power-mainmenu-72/e8/kadees-for-the-e8

Basically used a 787 for the rear coupler, and it close couples nicely.

The front was a challenge to try to get the coupler height right, and reach through the pilot, and not have to trim any of the loco.

Turns out using a Kadee 832 box, with an 835 "zero offset" coupler worked great.

See my site for details, but the install came out really clean, and no shims or modifications to the loco.

Sorry for the big picture, all pix on my site are 800 x 600 so the detail shows.










Regards, Greg


Greg,
Looks good, i will keep this in my hold file till i receive my E-8s. anymore close up pictures of underneath frt coupler on pilot end?
Nick


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Nick, did you click on the link in the beginning of my post? 2 pix of the rear coupler and 2 pix of the front... 

If you did, then maybe I need to do a side view of the coupler or I'll take the coupler assembly apart... would that help? 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2008)

Got it, thanks








Nick..


----------



## Santafe 2343 (Jan 2, 2008)

*Greg,* One thing I did on all my Santafe's, witch is prototypical for Santafe was to paint all the Kadee's with chrome paint. They look great that way. Hey, that engine look like the one I used to have  Thanks Rex


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Hah! Strange times we are in Rex, one day you have one road number, and the next day it's different! 

What paint did you find that sticks well to the Kadee plastic? It does not seem to be the same plastic as the Aristo couplers. 

By the way, 6 pounds of lead shot helped a lot... of course if I had a B unit, I would not have had to weight the 2 A units! 

But, I hear the B units were made of the element "unobtanium"! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Santafe 2343 (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg,
I actully used a chrome hobby paint from Hobby Lobby. If you look between the units you will see the silver couplers. I also have full weights in all three units, they will pull your arm off. Thanks Rex


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

I use Testers spray silver paint. Later RJD


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Rex, how much weight (and which ones) did you use in your E's? 

I'm getting the silver paint, looks a lot better. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Rayman4449 (Jan 2, 2008)

Great great info, thanks for sharing Greg! 

I don't own one of these yet (and may not if a B unit never shows up) but it's good to know I can get Kadees on the front and back without engine modification.










Raymond


----------



## Rayman4449 (Jan 2, 2008)

Beautiful B unit. Wish I could do model work like that...










Raymond


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I have not seen it in person, but Rex's cutting skills seem to rival a surgeon! 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Torby (Jan 2, 2008)

It's easy to mount an Aristo there too. Just clip the release lever shorter with a pair of wire cutters.


----------



## Stan Cedarleaf (Jan 2, 2008)

Greg, I did that image of Rex's B unit. Would you like the Hi Res file to see if you can find the cut line?









I looked very, very closely at the unit and finally did find the line. It's an awesome merger....


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Tom, 

1. Who gives a rat's (blank) about the aristo coupler, please go start a thread on Aristo couplers if you want to. 
2. In your hurry to post something, you forget that this loco COMES with an aristo coupler ALREADY mounted on the front. 
3. This loco has the shorter pilot, which uses the stock "long" E8 coupler, not the long pilot road name where an extended coupler is needed (and not available) 
4. Trimming the coupler is not necessary for the reasons above. 

Please, (I could not say this on the Aristo forum I cannot say this because I am a bad guy).... put something either helpful or funny here, not something worthless, or to butter up Aristo. 

For you folks who do not know, my comments about the front pilot coupler snafu on E8's got me banned for calling them out in a lie, and Tom is just trying to egg me on. 

So, I have a bad taste in my mouth, and Tom, take it elsewhere, I am defiinitely not in the mood. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2008)

Posted By Greg Elmassian on 10/22/2008 9:55 AM
Tom, 

1. Who gives a rat's (blank) about the aristo coupler, please go start a thread on Aristo couplers if you want to. 
2. In your hurry to post something, you forget that this loco COMES with an aristo coupler ALREADY mounted on the front. 
3. This loco has the shorter pilot, which uses the stock "long" E8 coupler, not the long pilot road name where an extended coupler is needed (and not available) 
4. Trimming the coupler is not necessary for the reasons above. 

Please, (I could not say this on the Aristo forum I cannot say this because I am a bad guy).... put something either helpful or funny here, not something worthless, or to butter up Aristo. 

For you folks who do not know, my comments about the front pilot coupler snafu on E8's got me banned for calling them out in a lie, and Tom is just trying to egg me on. 

So, I have a bad taste in my mouth, and Tom, take it elsewhere, I am defiinitely not in the mood. 

Regards, Greg





DAAAAAAAAAAAAM, WOW, OH MY GOD, IM speeechless Im such a proud papa rite now..... people are finally speaking there minds and the truth..... go gettum Greg.......







Tom Toms in trouble...... if you grab the bull most of the time you get the horn... by the way we always knew that place has a hard time telling all the facts, just more and more facts are comin to the surface...







for a change..
Nick...




THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED WHEN TALKING TO THAT COMPANY


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'm going to apologize here to the forum, I'm pretty testy on this one, and I'm frankly tired of the rah rah crowd. Tom knows what he is doing by saying this. 

Sorry to make it public, and to get hot under the collar, but I have had it up to here with this stupid coupler thing. 

By the way, there are other E8 road names that have a DIFFERENT pilot, a "passenger" pilot more extended than the freight pilot on the Santa Fe. 

These will not work with even the extended coupler supplied by Aristo (after 1-1/2 years of waiting) unless you chop off almost all the latching mechanism of the Aristo coupler. 

I have not fitted a Kadee to this extended pilot yet, and I suspect you will have to make a mount to do this to get it further forward. 

Again, I apologize to the forum for my outburst, getting banned from the Aristo forum for quoting Aristo posts in the Aristo forum is just not sitting well with me. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Seeing how we have gone of track here a bit I will also say that hanging around with Greg will get you in trouble.







Yep I also got banned from that forum also for expressing my opinion about the couplers. I along with another forum member brought this to the attention of AC over a 1 1/2 years ago. They then failed to make a follow up. Enough said as I thought that one had freedom of speech not so . Here to the folks that monitor this forum if I have made any offensive remarks then I apologize. If i am wrong on being able to express ones opinion then the constitution is gone. Later RJD


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By aceinspp on 10/22/2008 4:21 PM
Seeing how we have gone of track here a bit I will also say that hanging around with Greg will get you in trouble.







Yep I also got banned from that forum also for expressing my opinion about the couplers. I along with another forum member brought this to the attention of AC over a 1 1/2 years ago. They then failed to make a follow up. Enough said as I thought that one had freedom of speech not so . Here to the folks that monitor this forum if I have made any offensive remarks then I apologize. If i am wrong on being able to express ones opinion then the constitution is gone. Later RJD 


The Constitution is not "gone" in any way. Not even the amendments thereto (well except for the one that was repealed after being added). You are free to express your opinion in any way you want... with some specific exceptions... 

To wit: If you come into my house and start to espouse demonic worship, it is within my legal right to throw you out on your ear, in direct contradiction to your Constitutional rights to express yourself about the subject. You cannot stand on the public street and yell your desire to drink yourself to oblivion... there are laws against disturbing the peace, the Constitution expressly allows such laws to exist. You cannot speak or write a desire to kill the President of the United States... that is expressly forebidden. You cannot, on THIS web forum (MLS) use obscene or foul language, or slander/libel any individual, you cannot blatantly advertise products or services for any commercial gain unless you pay for that priviledge, except in some limited and rare circumstances.

The Aristocraft forum is NOT a "public forum", it is the property of the corporation that sponsors it and they have the right to limit what ideas are expressed on it and "freedom of speech" does not apply to anyone in that realm. If you wish to discuss the merits of that, or any company's, products or executive descisions, you are free to obtain web space and do so, up to, but not including, Libel against that company or its principals, representatives, employees, customers and/or enemies. If you commit that Libel, then you are subject to Constitutionally guaranted redress against you for doing so.


----------



## aceinspp (Jan 2, 2008)

Your opinion is well excepted but kind of off track . Not what was intended or implied in my reply. Later RJD


----------



## Guest (Oct 22, 2008)

Posted By Semper Vaporo on 10/22/2008 5:07 PM
Posted By aceinspp on 10/22/2008 4:21 PM
Seeing how we have gone of track here a bit I will also say that hanging around with Greg will get you in trouble.







Yep I also got banned from that forum also for expressing my opinion about the couplers. I along with another forum member brought this to the attention of AC over a 1 1/2 years ago. They then failed to make a follow up. Enough said as I thought that one had freedom of speech not so . Here to the folks that monitor this forum if I have made any offensive remarks then I apologize. If i am wrong on being able to express ones opinion then the constitution is gone. Later RJD 


The Constitution is not "gone" in any way. Not even the amendments thereto (well except for the one that was repealed after being added). You are free to express your opinion in any way you want... with some specific exceptions... 

To wit: If you come into my house and start to espouse demonic worship, it is within my legal right to throw you out on your ear, in direct contradiction to your Constitutional rights to express yourself about the subject. You cannot stand on the public street and yell your desire to drink yourself to oblivion... there are laws against disturbing the peace, the Constitution expressly allows such laws to exist. You cannot speak or write a desire to kill the President of the United States... that is expressly forebidden. You cannot, on THIS web forum (MLS) use obscene or foul language, or slander/libel any individual, you cannot blatantly advertise products or services for any commercial gain unless you pay for that priviledge, except in some limited and rare circumstances.

The Aristocraft forum is NOT a "public forum", it is the property of the corporation that sponsors it and they have the right to limit what ideas are expressed on it and "freedom of speech" does not apply to anyone in that realm. If you wish to discuss the merits of that, or any company's, products or executive descisions, you are free to obtain web space and do so, up to, but not including, Libel against that company or its principals, representatives, employees, customers and/or enemies. If you commit that Libel, then you are subject to Constitutionally guaranted redress against you for doing so.







While the site is private so you say anyone can join and express an opionion based on fact and not misreprentation of there items for sale....the products are public along with there defects and are fair game, and not one sided as you think...so all is fair game, maybe you should get your facts correct before posting...ALS0 you should be happy someone is pointing out the short comings of a product SO you dont get SCREWED......








Nick...


----------



## Semper Vaporo (Jan 2, 2008)

Posted By nick s. on 10/22/2008 7:31 PM
Posted By Semper Vaporo on 10/22/2008 5:07 PM
Posted By aceinspp on 10/22/2008 4:21 PM
Seeing how we have gone of track here a bit I will also say that hanging around with Greg will get you in trouble.







Yep I also got banned from that forum also for expressing my opinion about the couplers. I along with another forum member brought this to the attention of AC over a 1 1/2 years ago. They then failed to make a follow up. Enough said as I thought that one had freedom of speech not so . Here to the folks that monitor this forum if I have made any offensive remarks then I apologize. If i am wrong on being able to express ones opinion then the constitution is gone. Later RJD 


The Constitution is not "gone" in any way. Not even the amendments thereto (well except for the one that was repealed after being added). You are free to express your opinion in any way you want... with some specific exceptions... 

To wit: If you come into my house and start to espouse demonic worship, it is within my legal right to throw you out on your ear, in direct contradiction to your Constitutional rights to express yourself about the subject. You cannot stand on the public street and yell your desire to drink yourself to oblivion... there are laws against disturbing the peace, the Constitution expressly allows such laws to exist. You cannot speak or write a desire to kill the President of the United States... that is expressly forebidden. You cannot, on THIS web forum (MLS) use obscene or foul language, or slander/libel any individual, you cannot blatantly advertise products or services for any commercial gain unless you pay for that priviledge, except in some limited and rare circumstances.

The Aristocraft forum is NOT a "public forum", it is the property of the corporation that sponsors it and they have the right to limit what ideas are expressed on it and "freedom of speech" does not apply to anyone in that realm. If you wish to discuss the merits of that, or any company's, products or executive descisions, you are free to obtain web space and do so, up to, but not including, Libel against that company or its principals, representatives, employees, customers and/or enemies. If you commit that Libel, then you are subject to Constitutionally guaranted redress against you for doing so.







While the site is private so you say anyone can join and express an opionion based on fact and not misreprentation of there items for sale....the products are public along with there defects and are fair game, and not one sided as you think...so all is fair game, maybe you should get your facts correct before posting...ALS0 you should be happy someone is pointing out the short comings of a product SO you dont get SCREWED......








Nick...








Not quite... I said you can say anything you want on YOUR site (or any site that allows you to say anything you want) with the caveat that you can get sued for Libel if what you say is untrue... if you are right then it is not Libel!... it is only Libel if what you say is UNTRUE... the lawsuit is first an argument of what the truth is, then if it is found that you lied, then the argument is what your untruth cost them. If you claim their product is faulty and they prove it is not faulty, then they get to show that what you said cost them sales which they can do by having a representative sampling of potential customers state that they did not purchase the product based on your comments. If they cannot come up with enough people to say that, then they don't get much of your wealth as compensation.

If you Libel a "person", then things change somewhat in that it is harder to quantify the worth of the person's "reputation" and some awards can get ridiculous (in both directions!).

Also, if it is THEIR site, then they have the right to censor it anyway they want, as long as they don't Libel another person in the process. Their simplest recourse is to delete what someone says and to keep from having to do that a lot, they can choose to "Ban" them. Only in certain circumstances can a company be required to publish detrimental information about themselves, as in possible life threatening circumstances (pharmaceuticals, food, child choking hazards, automobile accident probabilities, etc.). They do not have to allow testimonials from customers.

If they sold you the rights to comment on their site, then that complicates things a bit more. Newspapers can be required to sell space to you to make remarks against the newspaper, usually only if it is the only media available in the market served... they can also be required to publish letters to the editor that are not favourable to the newspaper, but I don't know if that requirement has ever been extended to a web site. They can fire reporters that produce defamatory articles about the newspaper itself.

By the way, I am NOT a lawyer (I don't even play one on TV!), I am basing my comments on personal experience and how it was explained to me, and on the experiences of some of my acquaintances. I had a Lawyer that had another client that she said was a "Litigious Person"... (the receptionist said he was "Sue Happy!")... and he had sued people for comments in letters to the editor and on web sites and he had won some of the lawsuits. (She said she had talked him out of "literally dozens" of lawsuits.) I understand he got published retractions and apologies with monetary awards of as little as $10.00 (plus court costs and legal fees) and as much as $10,000.00 (sans court costs and legal fees), but I don't know how much he has actually collected (or what the Lawyer got). 


As for being a fully informed consumer.. that is why I haunt this place! The only censoring here is for civility and decency. There is good information here even though some of it is not good for the companies it is about...as long as the information is truthful then there is nothing to worry about. I, as a good consumer, should take most of what I read as being individual experiences and it is up to me to decide if the information is significant in my situation.


----------



## Guest (Oct 23, 2008)




----------



## Steeeeve (Sep 10, 2008)

Haha, a fun law discussion. As an accountant I had to take a few business law classes and libel is a big issue (along with defamation) 

Libel is not saying something that is untrue...it is saying something untrue with malicious intent and in a damaging way. If you say "aristocraft sucks" to your friends than this is not libel. Even if you say "Aristocraft makes their products using slave labor" to a friend, it is still not libel (not made public). You have to show a damage, a malicious intent, that it is untrue and is knowingly untrue to the person. It is not an easy standard to achieve. 

As for the 1st amendment. This one is easy. It says "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" which was later extended to the states. Any private situation can limit your free speech on their own turf; be it a website or your own house. So basically you have no "free speech" rights on this forum nor the aristocraft forum...after all, they paid for it.


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

I'd like to hear what you learned about defamation.... I was told my comment about a particular "weak design" was defamatory... 

Defamatory, AFAIK, basically communicating (my web site) a statement that can give a negative image (weak design). The defense from an accusation of defamation is that the statement reflects facts. Well, I can prove that. 

Interesting. 

Thanks, Greg


----------



## Steeeeve (Sep 10, 2008)

Defamation is a hard thing to prove and no company should be threatening this unless they are unethical. 

The main thing protecting you is that everything you say is an "opinion" and cannot be factually proven. If you think something is a "weak design" than how can you really prove that? What is the standard for a good design versus a weak design? Who had authority to make such a standard? For example, if I go around posting signs saying "Greg stole Marty's train because he is a POS" than you could probably sue me an win because you can easily prove you didn't steal anything or I had no proof you did. If you go around telling everyone you think Marty smells bad than this is merely your opinion and there is no standard on smell and cannot be proven either way. 

I used to review computer cases and computer equipment. I can post whatever I want about that product as it relates to my views on it. If I think a design is terrible than I can write that. This is exactly what you have done on your website. 

In short, you express opinions and provide advice. If you got sued a judge would laugh whomever sued right out of the courthouse without even hearing evidence. We aren't totally controlled by our government yet " align="absmiddle" border="0" />


----------



## NYC Buff (Sep 21, 2008)

Contrary to comment in another post on this subject, a design can be proven "weak" with relative ease. The term "weak" does require some definition as 'weak" is a relative term having nuances of meaning to each individual seeing or hearing it in context. "Weak" for the purpose of this note is defined as lacking the robustness to meet claim, specification or reasonable expectation.

The first proof of "weak" design is failure to satisfactorily demonstrate regular compliance to stated claim.
e. g. This coupler never fails to couple with like couplers or similar couplers. The coupler is easily installed;even a novice will have no problems with installation.

A second proof is demonstrated lack of durability in the absence of any specific claims.
e. g. The mean time to failure for the coupler mechanism is 20 accuations when a reasonable although unstated expectation for the design is 1000 accuations.

A third proof is the use of standard laboratory test regimens to determine performance of a critical to quality characteristic.
e. g. The material comprising the entity studied does not meet the expected physical standard set for that material for given performance (i. e. tensile strength, electrical conductivity).

A fourth prooof is comparative performance against existing alternative designs purported to provide the same function.
e. g. Repetitive accuation of the various devices under rigorously controlled conditions to determine the mean time to failure (MTTF). If the respective designs have different MTTFs that are statisticall significantly different, the largest number of repetive events or longest duration is the strongest design. All other designs are then relative to that design in some degree can be judged weaker.

A fifth proof is "expert" analysis. This is the most controversial proof as often it relies on opinion based on eduaction and experience. The "expert" needs to provide credentials satisfactory to both sides of a design dispute.


----------



## Steeeeve (Sep 10, 2008)

Well, one would be an idiot to try and prove the claim rather than saying it is mere opinion. 

Beyond that, the court doesn't care about anyones definition of "weak" unless it is an actual accepted standard...like if I say the car is red and, in reality, it is blue than everyone knows what blue is and can see that. "weak", "poor", etc are all very subjective terms as you yourself state and therefore the truth of the claim is irrelevant in a defamation case. 

We are discussing how it legally works and based on my non-expert opinion (but I did get an A in the class) defamation really requires something more than to call a product "weak".


----------



## Greg Elmassian (Jan 3, 2008)

Interesting information guys, I do appreciate all the knowledge here. 

A particular person was VERY upset when I stated there was a weak point in the "power conduction path" in a loco. In an email he indicated my statement was defamatory. 

I think, that not only is it really my opinion, but that I believe it would be easy to prove if someone was so inclined. Anything in the electrical path to the motor that measures 50 ohms (more than the motor itself), I think would pretty much prove "weakness", or as NYC says "lacking the robustness to meet claim" i.e. cannot carry the power to the motor. This was not observed on every wheel on the loco, but often on several per loco. 

In any case now that I have a better handle on the word "defamatory", while I can see that it was a veiled threat, I do not think I will be in jail soon over this. Banned yes, jail no. 

Regards, Greg


----------



## NYC Buff (Sep 21, 2008)

The point of the response regarding possible methods of proof was to show that mechanisms are available to prove that a design suffers from a fault "weakness" that compromised its robustness.

Any officer of a court who attemts to deny the laws of physics and mathematics and the rules of engineering is either a fool or has a malicious intent. Unfortunately, quite often the very laws that are immutable are suspended in courtrooms because physics, mathematics and engineering are ill understood and above all the majesty, logic and rectitude of the law has to be supported even at the expense of reason.

A veiled threat of defamation is an irrational response to a challenge of an individual's authority and subject knowledge. Often many of us cloak ourselves in an aura of knowledge about subjects we only have limited grasp of and limited working knowledge. It is particularly pernicious with many small manufacturing and sales organizations trying to maintain their existence in a highly competitive arena. They do not wish to appear incapable or ignorant because that can sully the reputation of their product and reduce their sales to the benefit of competitors. By the by all of these remarks apply to those making the challenge.

Additionally, mean time to failure differences that were statistically significant would weigh heavily as proof in a court and on that court. Any claim unsupported by verifiable data is nothing more than opinion. Verifiable data does rule because courts use data regularly in their deliberative processes. The most prevalent and often convincing data (e. g. fingerprint matches, DNA matches, radar velocity reports, breathalyzer reports) are commonly presented by the prosecution as evidence to support the charges brought. The only way they are not facts is if the purported data can be refuted as not verifiable because an impropriety occurred in the chain of custody, the method of determination, incorrect calculation etcetera which compromises that data's integrity by indicating a bias or reasonable doubt.

There are organizations that set standards all of the time. Among them the Congress of the United States, Individual state legilatures, goverment agencies at the federal, state and local level, The American National Standards Institute, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, The National Cancer Institute just to name a few. These standards are often used in courts in liability suits in conjunction with "expert" testimony.

Steeeve:
I yield to your superior knowledge of things legal as noted by your cogent comments. However, it is not foolish to have verifiable proof to support a claim.


----------



## Steeeeve (Sep 10, 2008)

Greg, 

Not only no lawsuit but it is laughable in any court of law. I actually went a step beyond and checked with my lawyer buddy and he pretty said "are you kidding me"...it is that crazy. 

NYC Buff, 

Thanks for the response. I think it is important to remember that "defamation" if not a criminal charge..it is a tort law...like contracts (if you break a contract you normally don't go to jail you pay damages). Laws of phyiscs and what not are important and would work but it is not clear cut what those terms mean so it wouldn't matter. Now "works" and "doesn't work" would matter as that is clear cut. I guess the main point is, you would never get this far as you just walk into court without a lawyer and say "it was my opinion" and the judge spends 5 minutes yelling at the company for wasting his/her time. 

and I am the farthest thing from an expert on the subject haha...I just happened to remember this since I ran a computer case review website and I was worried about it too. Sorry if I came across as a "know it all" 


Greg, 

post what you want and next time a company tells you that just say "you can contact my lawyer" and tell them you can provide information if they want. That normally scares them off. If they continue a threat, you can sue them!


----------

