Hi Dave, thanks for the useful clarifications. As the owner of an Evo Leva Mk I (#25), I concur that ACS builds quality machines, and spends money where it matters rather than on superficial things… with little maintenance required.
My machine has some flex and some rattles, a few hidden scratches and decolorations around welding points, a bent underframe… but it has proven 100% reliable, and those cosmetic issues are highly unlikely to cause a real problem down the road, and to the non-obsessive eye, it looks in perfect shape. Some of the weaknesses I experienced have been addressed since (stronger frame rail underneath, brace to almost eliminate flex), and some things could be remedied if I cared enough (a rubber pad here or there, offsetting the bend in the underframe…)… some ‘issues’ have also faded with time (some noises from the springs and the level roller bearings)… Drawing a parallel with the audio world, the Evo Leva belongs in the pro world where cosmetics do not matter as much as with consumer/lifestyle appliances, but where reliability is key.
Some of the recent enhancements might not be perfectly honed, and I can understand the disappointment there (I’d add that the second LCD display doesn’t quite match the design of the first one and some of the new features seem to have some quirks), but I’d rather have this than a machine stuck in the past.
It is a bit frustrating to see all the enhancements of the newer machines, but I do like the fact that there is at least a partial upgrade path for the older machines. Very few companies do this (One can’t add the new camera to an old iPhone 😉)
In short, Paolo and Dave… keep up with your excellent work and dedication !
