Originally Posted by
joejack951
I'm not making an 'over the top semantic argument.' Did you read the information at the link I provided? I'm merely explaining (unfortunately to at least a few people whose panties easily bunch) why some people might question an unqualified 'Made in Italy' claim, especially when Italy is not well known for carbon fiber production.
If you actually read the link I posted, you'd see that an unqualified claim requires a substantial transformation of the raw materials to be considered non-deceptive. Is taking carbon fiber and forming it into a tube 'substantially transforming' it? That's arguable. Is taking coal tar or PAN and making carbon fiber substantial? Unarguably yes, in my opinion.
I'm not going to read the link right now because I'm a little busy, but I will just say that at some point you have to draw a line. For me, where the carbon sheets are made doesn't factor into the "made in ____"