Quote:

---

I see the distinction between stock restored and OE Gold classes as two entirely different animals. It's like comparing a Div-1 basketball team to a Div-2 team, they do the same thing, but are not equal.

My take is if you are in an 'original stock restored' type class, where the owner/restorer did not prep the car for the OE concours correct paint daub, factory original NOS air in the tires and velvet glove class, that reproduction parts should look correct and no points taken if they are used. In the event, that two equal cars make it to the top, then would be the time to take special consideration as to whether its OEM or Repop. (tie breaker situation)

---

Quote:

---

Again, it really depends on the judging body , they all judge using different criteria, and from what I've seen most "show field" judinging is HIGHLY subjective to the guy holding the clip board's opinion.

---

Quote:

---

"In original class judging"

---

Hi Mark,
I think the category or class quoted above answers the basic question. In the Ford World their class for originality (similar to OE) is the THOROUGHBRED CLASS. The problem there was some of the judges were allowing certain items to slip through because they were considered too difficult to find. Things like the original Battery, Tires, Exhaust, etc.... the perishables! So what did they do? They "watered down" the criteria by allowing those items to compete on an equal level with cars that DID NOT incorporate those particular original pieces. About 9 years ago I was shocked to see an all original Boss 302 get the same Gold classification as another participant who had a reproduction battery, tires and exhaust system. There was so many disgruntle people complaining that they decided to come up with a new class called the PLATINUM THOROUGHBRED. The "Thoroughbred Class" originally stated that not ONE part could be a reproduction and be allowed to participate in that venue. They basically did what I stated in the other thread and changed their definitions to accommodate their agenda! There are some participants who can now "brag" that they have a "THOROUGHBRED" car even though in reality, they do not!! I've said it before and I'll say it again....HISTORY does not change, only our awareness and perception of it. I guess you can apply that to certain definitions. If they don't include or make you feel good, someone will simply move the fences!!

Quote:

---

OK, i took this approach with my Challenger.

if the NOS part was obscenely expensive, i used repo parts.

if it's visible and you can noticeably tell the difference between the two, I went with NOS

i looked for a lot of original parts, cleaned them up and they looked and are correct.

i wanted to drive my car, so ALL NOS parts would be a waste of money for me.

i only had two frivolous NOS buys so far

NOS left fender - $700
NOS 14" trim rings - $600


as for the judging thing, i can give a rats a** what people think and say about my car. it's mine and not theirs. if they have a negative comment then go build you own. judges can keep all the trophies, I'm out to meet people and have a good time!

---

That's great, everyone should enjoy the hobby and thier cars to meet thier personal level of satisfaction.

That being said, if you bring your car to be judged (meaning that nobody is "judging" your car unless you asked for it to be judged), don't blame the judges for pointing out things that are incorrect due to the personal choices you made in restoring your car.

Bluestar, I agree with you, cars that have correct parts (NOS production line correct parts, properly restored original, etc.) should recieve higher scores than those that have the same parts replaced with a reproduction or incorrectly restored original parts.

The ICCA OE Gold judging body is developing a system which leaves room for both types of cars, those restored with a high number of reproduction parts, and those which have a higher number of original/NOS parts used in thier restoration. I won't go into depth here because detailed perameters have not been set in stone yet. Basically what is done is that there are colors assigned to the points.

For example a black point would be for an original componant, and a red point is assigned to a reproduction componant.

At the bottom of the score sheet the black and red points are totalled seperately then combined for a total score, a car using a high number of correct original parts might have a total of 96 percentage points (most cars have 2-3,000 total points possible) which would make the car an "OE Gold" scoring car. Since most of it's componants are originals, most of that 96% (say 80%) would be "black" points, and the remaining (16%) would be red. Where as the car using more reproduction parts might have the same 96% OE Gold score but that score would have a larger number of "red" points, say 56% red and 40% black.

In the above scenario a hobbiest could still build a car to an "OE Gold" level, but do so affordably using less expensive/available parts. This system is also fair to the other person who went the all out and spent the time and money to do his car using as much NOS as possible because the ICCA keeps permanant records of how each car scores. The higher "black" point cars will always be recognized as being more historically correct.

Two scenarios for the above owners:

Reproduction parts user: "I have a car that scored 96% OE Gold in ICCA show judging, it's a 56% black point car"

OEM parts user: "I have a car that score 96% OE Gold in ICCA show judging, It's an 80% black point car"

Both people have bragging rights to an OE Gold car and a person considering which car to use as a reference restoration model would then have a clear understanding of which car really was more accurate to what rolled off the assembly line when doing his own car. Personally I see it as a win/win for all involved.

Quote:

---

as for the judging thing, i can give a rats a** what people think and say about my car. it's mine and not theirs. if they have a negative comment then go build you own. judges can keep all the trophies, I'm out to meet people and have a good time!

---

I know this part of a quote was not yours Scott (and you briefly referenced it) but I could only laugh and shake my head when I read it. Judges simply do their job......they judge what is brought WILLINGLY to their venue/event. Why would anyone take such a hostile stand against a group of people that do what they are assigned to do? Judges do not scour the shows looking to criticize and put cars down for displaying personal characteristics! They don't care what people do to their cars!!! Their job is simply to determine if a vehicle exhibits the necessary characteristics to be deemed worthy of a predetermined set of standards! I have yet to see ANY judges on a mission to find show participants so they can "have a negative comment" about what they bring to a show. If you don't want the critique of a judge....don't put your car in a judged event.

Quote:

---

Bluestar, I agree with you, cars that have correct parts (NOS production line correct parts, properly restored original, etc.) should recieve higher scores than those that have the same parts replaced with a reproduction or incorrectly restored original parts.

The ICCA OE Gold judging body is developing a system ....
In the above scenario a hobbiest could still build a car to an "OE Gold" level, but do so affordably using less expensive/available parts.
Both people have bragging rights to an OE Gold car and a person considering which car to use as a reference restoration model would then have a clear understanding of which car really was more accurate to what rolled off the assembly line when doing his own car. Personally I see it as a win/win for all involved.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

as for the judging thing, i can give a rats a** what people think and say about my car. it's mine and not theirs. if they have a negative comment then go build you own. judges can keep all the trophies, I'm out to meet people and have a good time!

---

I know this part of a quote was not yours Scott (and you briefly referenced it) but I could only laugh and shake my head when I read it. Judges simply do their job......they judge what is brought WILLINGLY to their venue/event. Why would anyone take such a hostile stand against a group of people that do what they are assigned to do? Judges do not scour the shows looking to criticize and put cars down for displaying personal characteristics! They don't care what people do to their cars!!! Their job is simply to determine if a vehicle exhibits the necessary characteristics to be deemed worthy of a predetermined set of standards! I have yet to see ANY judges on a mission to find show participants so they can "have a negative comment" about what they bring to a show. If you don't want the critique of a judge....don't put your car in a judged event.

---

it's not hostile, it's my opinion. you taking it the wrong way

let me clarify, it was a run on, i should have started a new paragraph.

i didn't mean the judges opinion of my car. i understand their job. what i meant was, i've seen so many people tear other people's cars apart, this is not correct, that's not factory, this is painted the wrong color, a factory stamp is not where it is suppose to be, you don't have the right air in the tires, etc. etc. for that, go do your own car, this is mine!

Quote:

---

what if the same mfg company was found and they started making widgets again with the same materials and same tooling, is that a reproduction??

---

I have always said that NOS parts that were made to repair or replace original parts were nothing more than reproduction parts. They are definitely "period correct" but they were reproduction replacement parts that were commissioned and sanctioned by Chrysler. The NOS mufflers that most everyone uses today (including myself) are NOT like the ones that originally came on our factory cars. Arin was the independent subsidized manufacturer who was awarded the bid to provide the assembly line mufflers and I believe Maremont ended up getting the secondary contract to make the mufflers that were used for repairs and/or replacements. Both styles were made using engineering specifications supplied by Chrysler. This line of thinking really opens up various trains of thought for OE judging and what should or should not be acceptable.

Quote:

---

This line of thinking really opens up various trains of thought for OE judging and what should or should not be acceptable.

---

I don't see this as a new train of thought at all. When I judge a car I only scrutinize and compare the parts with parts that would have come on the them on the production line, there is no other "correct" period (IMHO). Anything else with a visible difference of any kind is a deviation of one sort or another and would lose points accordingly.

On the topic of a part being classified as a reproduction part vs a service replacement/continuation part. That's a little harder to define and I'd agree there are points where the lines get blurry for sure. Another blurry line would be the subject of which reproduction part or continuation part is the "best" in terms of matching a production line example. Since VERY few "Perfect" reproduction parts (Perfect being that they are indistinguishable to ANY degree as compared to production line examples) exist, there is a bit of subjectivity involved in making a call on which of them is the best replacement part, and along that line, which of them might garner more points in a judging situation.

Quote:

---

This line of thinking really opens up various trains of thought for OE judging and what should or should not be acceptable.

---

I don't see this as a new train of thought at all. When I judge a car I only scrutinize and compare the parts with parts that would have come on the them on the production line, there is no other "correct" period (IMHO). Anything else with a visible difference of any kind is a deviation of one sort or another and would lose points accordingly.

On the topic of a part being classified as a reproduction part vs a service replacement/continuation part. That's a little harder to define and I'd agree there are points where the lines get blurry for sure. Another blurry line would be the subject of which reproduction part or continuation part is the "best" in terms of matching a production line example. Since VERY few "Perfect" reproduction parts (Perfect being that they are indistinguishable to ANY degree as compared to production line examples) exist, there is a bit of subjectivity involved in making a call on which of them is the best replacement part, and along that line, which of them might garner more points in a judging situation.

---

O.K. Now we're getting to the heart of the matter. What really constitutes an NOS part? Something thats been sitting on a shelf for 20 to 40 years, or something of recent manufacture that is Licensed and built to the Manufacturers Specifications by a licensed Parts supplier?

As most of you probably don't know every Auto Mfg. has / had multiple suppliers for the same parts. Each supplier was given a set of "Blueprint Specifications" and built the parts to those specs. However there are plus / minus tolerances within all specifications, so you could end up with a part that didn't fit eactly right during production and afterward when the Vendor/supplier made replacement parts. that's why you see variation within the same part when looking / comparing multiple examples of like parts. ie. '70 Cuda Grills variation in the argent paint color - some light, some darker ! Which one is Correct? They both were ... LOL

So how can anyone reasonable say "What is Right" for these cars?

In my opinion after 34 years of working in an Auto Mfg. Plant, I believe that any part manufactured under License and built to the Manufacturers specifications constitures an "NOS" part. Regardless of build date.

Most of you out there call them Repo parts, but suppliers like BEA (as an example) that are licensed and provide the part numbers cast or stamped/painted into the parts and built to Manufacturers Specifications are building NOS parts.

The distinguishing difference is the Date of Build that is generally cast or stamped on a part.

That in IMHO is the only way to seperate the two.

However now you can get correctly date coded NOS / Repo parts for the cars so if they are cast with the part numbers and proper dates, one would have to reasonale accept them as OEM or NOS as long as they are produced under proper licensing and built to spec.

Not trying to step on anyones toes, just expressing a different perspective on this subject.


Just my worth.

Bogusracer

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

This line of thinking really opens up various trains of thought for OE judging and what should or should not be acceptable.

---

I don't see this as a new train of thought at all. When I judge a car I only scrutinize and compare the parts with parts that would have come on the them on the production line, there is no other "correct" period (IMHO). Anything else with a visible difference of any kind is a deviation of one sort or another and would lose points accordingly.

On the topic of a part being classified as a reproduction part vs a service replacement/continuation part. That's a little harder to define and I'd agree there are points where the lines get blurry for sure. Another blurry line would be the subject of which reproduction part or continuation part is the "best" in terms of matching a production line example. Since VERY few "Perfect" reproduction parts (Perfect being that they are indistinguishable to ANY degree as compared to production line examples) exist, there is a bit of subjectivity involved in making a call on which of them is the best replacement part, and along that line, which of them might garner more points in a judging situation.

---

O.K. Now we're getting to the heart of the matter. What really constitutes an NOS part? Something thats been sitting on a shelf for 20 to 40 years, or something of recent manufacture that is Licensed and built to the Manufacturers Specifications by a licensed Parts supplier?

As most of you probably don't know every Auto Mfg. has / had multiple suppliers for the same parts. Each supplier was given a set of "Blueprint Specifications" and built the parts to those specs. However there are plus / minus tolerances within all specifications, so you could end up with a part that didn't fit eactly right during production and afterward when the Vendor/supplier made replacement parts. that's why you see variation within the same part when looking / comparing multiple examples of like parts. ie. '70 Cuda Grills variation in the argent paint color - some light, some darker ! Which one is Correct? They both were ... LOL

So how can anyone reasonable say "What is Right" for these cars?

In my opinion after 34 years of working in an Auto Mfg. Plant, I believe that any part manufactured under License and built to the Manufacturers specifications constitures an "NOS" part. Regardless of build date.

Most of you out there call them Repo parts, but suppliers like BEA (as an example) that are licensed and provide the part numbers cast or stamped/painted into the parts and built to Manufacturers Specifications are building NOS parts.

The distinguishing difference is the Date of Build that is generally cast or stamped on a part.

That in IMHO is the only way to seperate the two.

However now you can get correctly date coded NOS / Repo parts for the cars so if they are cast with the part numbers and proper dates, one would have to reasonale accept them as OEM or NOS as long as they are produced under proper licensing and built to spec.

Not trying to step on anyones toes, just expressing a different perspective on this subject.


Just my worth.

Bogusracer

---

OK,

But then can we at least throw out the parts that are made in China?

MB

Quote:

---

I don't see this as a new train of thought at all. When I judge a car I only scrutinize and compare the parts with parts that would have come on the them on the production line, there is no other "correct" period (IMHO). Anything else with a visible difference of any kind is a deviation of one sort or another and would lose points accordingly.

---

It doesn't matter how the part is classified/named, etc.; Reproduction, NOS, Continuation, etc. If it has any visible differences as compared to what came on them on the assembly line they will get points deducted.

If choosing replacement parts for my own car I look for parts that (IMO) match the production line examples the best. While this is somewhat subjective, I have found that if there happens to be several parts to choose from (current reproductions, old service parts, continuation parts still produced, etc.) that there is usually one that most agree is the best match for production, and on occasion, some that are 100% perfect matches to production examples. It's all about educating yourself on the variables and selecting what you feel is the best.


When it comes to defining what "NOS" means, in my opinion it means "New Original Stock" or "New Old Stock". I first remember the term being used MANY years ago in reference to old dusty long obsolete dealer inventory, etc. long before many reproduction parts ever existed. Since there is no hard & fast definition these days it seems many would like to assosiate the term with thier "new" parts in an effort to boost thier perceived values.

Quote:

---

---

O.K. Now we're getting to the heart of the matter. What really constitutes an NOS part? Something thats been sitting on a shelf for 20 to 40 years, or something of recent manufacture that is Licensed and built to the Manufacturers Specifications by a licensed Parts supplier?

As most of you probably don't know every Auto Mfg. has / had multiple suppliers for the same parts. Each supplier was given a set of "Blueprint Specifications" and built the parts to those specs. However there are plus / minus tolerances within all specifications, so you could end up with a part that didn't fit eactly right during production and afterward when the Vendor/supplier made replacement parts. that's why you see variation within the same part when looking / comparing multiple examples of like parts. ie. '70 Cuda Grills variation in the argent paint color - some light, some darker ! Which one is Correct? They both were ... LOL

So how can anyone reasonable say "What is Right" for these cars?

In my opinion after 34 years of working in an Auto Mfg. Plant, I believe that any part manufactured under License and built to the Manufacturers specifications constitures an "NOS" part. Regardless of build date.

Most of you out there call them Repo parts, but suppliers like BEA (as an example) that are licensed and provide the part numbers cast or stamped/painted into the parts and built to Manufacturers Specifications are building NOS parts.

The distinguishing difference is the Date of Build that is generally cast or stamped on a part.

That in IMHO is the only way to seperate the two.

However now you can get correctly date coded NOS / Repo parts for the cars so if they are cast with the part numbers and proper dates, one would have to reasonale accept them as OEM or NOS as long as they are produced under proper licensing and built to spec.

Not trying to step on anyones toes, just expressing a different perspective on this subject.


Just my worth.

Bogusracer

---

Very well put, we are fighting a battle that can not be won. Whether we like it or not, the term “OE” means original equipment and nothing less than that. "OE" parts are assembly line when built parts a not a part that was made a day after the vehicle build date.

Judging, oh boy, hope this isn’t taken the wrong way. There isn’t a judge on the planet qualified to judge an entire car to a true absolute "OE" status. Lets face it, unless you put together a group of guys that live and breath a specific model, say an ebody, that can “Helen Keller” a screw and tell you where it goes, with documentation, not to mention different years there will always be room for opinions to contradict the judging. I’ve been working on ebodies all my life, I don’t consider myself anywhere near an expert.

I truly understand the thought process that Dave Wise had when developing his judging criteria using red/black points and I applaud him for that. It allows more people to restore their cars and participate in this awesome hobby we all get so snotty about. I am grateful for what he has been able to accomplish and share with us. However, there is a big difference between true "OE" and what is being judged under their "OE" judging criteria. The term “OE” has no business in this type of judging, call it something else, anything but “OE”.

We complain about the guys that have the knowledge and finances to achieve “true” gold, it’s not for everyone, fact is, I’ll bet of all the cars judged gold many would not make the grade if judged with the absolutes it takes to get there. Let’s not dilute the true meaning of “OE Gold”, lets applaud the ones that have made it there. Let’s face it, 99% or more of us restoring cars, myself included, don’t make the grade to walk in that upper echelon of factory perfection.

---

Both of you ,,,VERY well said.
Thats worth both and

Quote:

---

.....to keep our Cars and Hobby alive.

---

I want to thank you Jeff for taking the time to share your thoughts as they relate to this topic. It is good to hear the views of those who represent the Heart and Soul of our Industry. I want to take just a moment to convey a thought regarding the input and continuation of our Hobby. Our group of guys (Steve Been, Dave Stuart, Tom Barcroft and myself) have been classified as a little eccentric (aka; crazy) for how we handle our restorations. These cars are NOT being restored for a "wow factor" or any other self serving purposes. It is however, very interesting to research and document the history of these classic machines! In order to better serve the Hobby a manufacturer/supplier should know first hand the trials and turmoil that a person experiences when restoring these vehicles. Unless you are intimately involved with the processes there is no way to truly relate with your target market. Researching factory processes to the "nth" degree provides a test bed for new products and ideas that can hopefully help others with their projects. Eleanor Roosevelt was quoted as saying, "people should learn from the mistakes of others since you can’t live long enough to make them all yourself". Believe me when I say that our group has encountered a tremendous amount of mistakes along the way. If we are able to come up with new ideas and concepts to help others with their projects then all of the sacrifice and hard work is worth it. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts Jeff!!

Quote:

---

These cars are NOT being restored for a "wow factor" or any other self serving purposes. It is however, very interesting to research and document the history of these classic machines! In order to better serve the Hobby a manufacturer/supplier should know first hand the trials and turmoil that a person experiences when restoring these vehicles. Unless you are intimately involved with the processes there is no way to truly relate with your target market. Researching factory processes to the "nth" degree provides a test bed for new products and ideas that can hopefully help others with their projects. If we are able to come up with new ideas and concepts to help others with their projects then all of the sacrifice and hard work is worth it.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

what if the same mfg company was found and they started making widgets again with the same materials and same tooling, is that a reproduction??

---

I have always said that NOS parts that were made to repair or replace original parts were nothing more than reproduction parts. They are definitely "period correct" but they were reproduction replacement parts that were commissioned and sanctioned by Chrysler. The NOS mufflers that most everyone uses today (including myself) are NOT like the ones that originally came on our factory cars. Arin was the independent subsidized manufacturer who was awarded the bid to provide the assembly line mufflers and I believe Maremont ended up getting the secondary contract to make the mufflers that were used for repairs and/or replacements. Both styles were made using engineering specifications supplied by Chrysler. This line of thinking really opens up various trains of thought for OE judging and what should or should not be acceptable.

---

Quote:

---

Between your exhaustive efforts and great results with your Challenger and now your Valiant, what products have you been able to develop and offer for public consumption?

---

Quote:

---

Why have none of you guys in the know responded to my post? Is it still the same and a touchy suBject?

"I personally have absolutely no interest in restoring a car with the intentions of having it judged in an OE or any other kind of class, but here is my take on all of this.

---

Hi Darryl,
What response were you looking for? It is certainly your prerogative NOT to be involved with OE vehicles or to feel upset about the judging programs. One question I have after reading your view is......why request or rely on a judging manual when you pretty much have concluded that there is too much "latitude" in the process? One thing to remember is that Corvettes are the exception when it comes to "manuals" and protocol for factory procedures. They were ALL built at one location so it is fairly simple to accurately document how things were done. There was also just one platform or model of vehicle being built at that Corvette facility. All other "non specialty" cars were built in various plants scattered across the country and MANY different models were constructed under one roof. Confusion and process overlap were build characteristics that showed up on many of the original Chrysler vehicles.

If you rely on someone's lead, opinion or rule of thumb, two things usually take place. Number one you are investing significant time and money on concepts that might or might not be correct. Second, you cheat yourself of knowledge that is gained from the "personal" aspect of the project. It takes more time and effort but in the end you won't be sitting on pins and needles waiting to find out whether or not your efforts have been in vain! If you do the research with no preconceived expectations and document the original characteristics for what they are, then no one can argue whether or not it is correct. Do the research, accurately process and document the facts, incorporate them accurately in your restoration and you have won the battle! It doesn't leave much room for judging interpretation or error does it!?

Quote:

---

How many pages before the mod locks this one up?? :hammer

---

For What?





I want to clear up a comment I made in a previous thread. Chrysler did not manufacture terrible vehicles! There were many cars that had built in variations due to human repetition and habits on the assembly line. There was another thread a few days ago where someone inquired about the correct direction of shackle bolts. Another member was kind enough to show a factory drawing that illustrated an exploded view of the shackle assembly. It showed the shackle bolt nuts facing to the inside of the vehicle. That is how the factory INTENDED for the vehicles to be built. On our valiant project the set up is opposite to what those drawings show. The attaching nuts are facing the OUTSIDE of the vehicle! It does not hurt or impede the functioning of the car but it is a deviation of the original engineering instructions. That type of "Confusion" characteristic will need to be shown to the judges in the photos that were taken during our documenting stage.

(Thanks for the conversation and correction Korey! I hope this clarifies the other post.)

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

How many pages before the mod locks this one up?? :hammer

---

For What?





I want to clear up a comment I made in a previous thread. Chrysler did not manufacture terrible vehicles! There were many cars that had built in variations due to human repetition and habits on the assembly line. There was another thread a few days ago where someone inquired about the correct direction of shackle bolts. Another member was kind enough to show a factory drawing that illustrated an exploded view of the shackle assembly. It showed the shackle bolt nuts facing to the inside of the vehicle. That is how the factory INTENDED for the vehicles to be built. On our valiant project the set up is opposite to what those drawings show. The attaching nuts are facing the OUTSIDE of the vehicle! It does not hurt or impede the functioning of the car but it is a deviation of the original engineering instructions. That type of "Confusion" characteristic will need to be shown to the judges in the photos that were taken during our documenting stage.

(Thanks for the conversation and correction Korey! I hope this clarifies the other post.)

---

Quote:

---

How many pages before the mod locks this one up??
Anyhoo,I am doing up a 68 C body.
I have to take the time to search for NOS trim parts since there are no reproductions available.
I am using some repop that interchanges from B body,that's it.(door handles,window cranks,arm rest bases)
I am not going for gold,yet NOS is priced like gold.
I am documenting all the NOS I use,should I enter a judged show.
I am doing it mainly for myself and do not care what judges think.
In fact judges are not well versed in C bodies anyways.

When the little kids says "Nice car" or Gramps says "I had one just like it" I am a winner every time..

I always admired the high quality restorations,the efforts put into them and the owner's time and money involved entering a OE class.
It inspired me to do the best I can on my own car-and still enjoy it as hobby-even though it is just a C.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Why have none of you guys in the know responded to my post? Is it still the same and a touchy suBject?

"I personally have absolutely no interest in restoring a car with the intentions of having it judged in an OE or any other kind of class, but here is my take on all of this.

---

Hi Darryl,
What response were you looking for? It is certainly your prerogative NOT to be involved with OE vehicles or to feel upset about the judging programs. One question I have after reading your view is...... why request or rely on a judging manual when you pretty much have concluded that there is too much "latitude" in the process? One thing to remember is that Corvettes are the exception when it comes to "manuals" and protocol for factory procedures. They were ALL built at one location so it is fairly simple to accurately document how things were done. There was also just one platform or model of vehicle being built at that Corvette facility. All other "non specialty" cars were built in various plants scattered across the country and MANY different models were constructed under one roof. Confusion and process overlap were build characteristics that showed up on many of the original Chrysler vehicles.

If you rely on someone's lead, opinion or rule of thumb, two things usually take place. Number one you are investing significant time and money on concepts that might or might not be correct. Second, you cheat yourself of knowledge that is gained from the "personal" aspect of the project. It takes more time and effort but in the end you won't be sitting on pins and needles waiting to find out whether or not your efforts have been in vain! If you do the research with no preconceived expectations and document the original characteristics for what they are, then no one can argue whether or not it is correct. Do the research, accurately process and document the facts, incorporate them accurately in your restoration and you have won the battle! It doesn't leave much room for judging interpretation or error does it!?

---

Quote:

---

Having worked in auto assembly plant for 18 years(unfortunately in the 90's-2000's) I know firsthand that engineering blueprints are just "plans" for how it should be done. Everyday the plan needs to change to keep the line moving efficiently and many times a worker is moved to a new job to cover for an area that is short handed that day.
Many times when the worker is moved to a new job he only gets about 10 minutes to learn the job and then is left to figure it out as he goes. Many times when this happens he is just trying to keep up with the line( new car every 49 seconds) so as not to get behind and if the part fits(even if it doesn't) he sends it down the line just trying to survive.
Many other times there can be a part shortage or even a running change to improve flow and parts or processes change accordingly.
As far as a manual for restoring a certain model goes, wouldn't that be nice? But then everyone would be an expert!!!!!

---

Quote:

---

I am still trying to get an answer regarding if the judges in this venue still have laditude and don't have to adhere strictly to the judging manual? No one seems to want to address this, why?

---

Quote:

---

Dave I certainly was referring to any one of your cars...

The point I was trying to make was...if the bolt is proven correct for "one" car VS the norm of several cars...what happens if I choose the copy that "one" car ?
Again I refer to ME as coping because in 26 years of Mopars I've NEVER dismantled a 100% origianal car, they've all been nothing more then a bucket of bolts.

In many cases....What was proven to be correct on "one" car has been copied and copied and copied on to several other cars ...leading us to a "norm" which has been generally accepted by the judging public for years ... when it may not have been 100% correct in the first place

---

Quote:

---

Can a judge tell you it's wrong, because he or she has not seen that on other cars or in a manual?

---

Quote:

---

Do the Mopar Nationals OE judging use the ICCA judging format or are they still judged without an available to all judging manual?

---

From an earlier post:

There are manuals, fliers, books, reference guides, etc.... that show how things were done at the factory. These instructional guides convey how a paint job was applied, how an "Assembly" was pieced together or which correct parts were required. No manual or reference material is going to tell ANYONE where drips should or shouldn't be, what scratches should be found on certain assembly parts, etc...etc.... If you are looking for specifics regarding the "signature" characteristics of an assembly line employee you will never find it unless "A PARTICULAR VEHICLE" is used as your reference. ....I don't know how I can be any clearer.


I personally do not know why there would ever be the need for an OE judging manual when the format or extent of involvement is basically up to the participant. On a personal level, having a "manual" or instructional guide would have hindered most of the findings that my personal research uncovered! I would not have wanted to follow the restrictions of a predetermined set of ideas or concepts! That is not what restoring an OE vehicle is all about. It isn't a true/false exam where you can get an accumulation of (abbreviated) data for a quick reference. The subject matter is too broad and takes much more than a little information here or there to allow full understanding of the concepts! If you are looking for a "quick reference" as a shortcut to get into the OE arena, you are probably interested in the wrong venue. You might be better suited for the programs that spell out what they would like for your car to represent, in spite of all the various individual characteristics. Once again, there ARE manuals that tell you how to build these cars. However, YOU WILL NEVER FIND ABSOLUTE MATERIAL THAT PROVIDES A BLANKET CONCEPT REFERENCING ALL THE NUANCES AND INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT A CAR WAS BORN WITH! If you drop a glass jar of Jelly on the concrete, a "manual" can tell you that it will break and cause a mess. It can't provide absolute specifics as to where every drop of jelly is going to end up splattering! If there was a "Manual" for OE judging it would be very short and to the point:

Perform personal research, provide personal documentation and invest whatever personal time is necessary to learn the intricate processes involved. OE does not consist of "cookie cutter" instructions like you get when you purchase a plastic model car. If you don't like to do the research or WORK for an end result, find a different area of interest. It is what it is!

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Do the Mopar Nationals OE judging use the ICCA judging format or are they still judged without an available to all judging manual?

---

From an earlier post:

There are manuals, fliers, books, reference guides, etc.... that show how things were done at the factory. These instructional guides convey how a paint job was applied, how an "Assembly" was pieced together or which correct parts were required. No manual or reference material is going to tell ANYONE where drips should or shouldn't be, what scratches should be found on certain assembly parts, etc...etc.... If you are looking for specifics regarding the "signature" characteristics of an assembly line employee you will never find it unless "A PARTICULAR VEHICLE" is used as your reference. ....I don't know how I can be any clearer.


I personally do not know why there would ever be the need for an OE judging manual when the format or extent of involvement is basically up to the participant. On a personal level, having a "manual" or instructional guide would have hindered most of the findings that my personal research uncovered! I would not have wanted to follow the restrictions of a predetermined set of ideas or concepts! That is not what restoring an OE vehicle is all about. It isn't a true/false exam where you can get an accumulation of (abbreviated) data for a quick reference. The subject matter is too broad and takes much more than a little information here or there to allow full understanding of the concepts! If you are looking for a "quick reference" as a shortcut to get into the OE arena, you are probably interested in the wrong venue. You might be better suited for the programs that spell out what they would like for your car to represent, in spite of all the various individual characteristics. Once again, there ARE manuals that tell you how to build these cars. However, YOU WILL NEVER FIND ABSOLUTE MATERIAL THAT PROVIDES A BLANKET CONCEPT REFERENCING ALL THE NUANCES AND INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT A CAR WAS BORN WITH! If you drop a glass jar of Jelly on the concrete, a "manual" can tell you that it will break and cause a mess. It can't provide absolute specifics as to where every drop of jelly is going to end up splattering! If there was a "Manual" for OE judging it would be very short and to the point:

Perform personal research, provide personal documentation and invest whatever personal time is necessary to learn the intricate processes involved. OE does not consist of "cookie cutter" instructions like you get when you purchase a plastic model car. If you don't like to do the research or WORK for an end result, find a different area of interest. It is what it is!

---

Well, what is not clear to me is that you did not answer my questiona. So, I will brake it apart for you.

1. DO THE MOPAR NATIONALS OE JUDGING USE THE ICCA
FORMAT?

I assume you are trying to tell me no, which would be the short simple answer and all I needed to know.

2.IS THIS INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO ALL THAT WANT
TO RESTORE AND HAVE THEIR CARS JUDGED?

NOW this is in reference to the items you listed above as used. Unless things have changed, I will ASSUME the answer is NO.

Why would someone want a judging manual? It is simple, just as with other makes and models that have OE judging, they want everyone to have the items they will be judged on BEFORE they spend a bunch of time and money doing something wrong that will cost them points in judging. The others WANT people to be able to restore their cars to the best possible example for competition.

The general complaints that I heard about the Mopar Nationals judging was that there was no guide for people to use to prepare their cars, and they were being judged by judges that were also judging cars that THEY had restored for others in the same competition. This is totally unacceptable to anyone with a brain. Further more, your right, why do you need a judging manual if the judge doesn't have to adhere to it and can make his own call on what they think is right or wrong, you certainly don't need a manual. Of course this can mean the same car without any changes from one year to another can be scored differently because of different judges scoring the car. OH YEAH, that makes PERFECT sence to me.

Now I am sure I will get another discertation talking in circles justifying this and maybe some excuse as to why the ICCA judging format WITH available to all manuals are no good, or lacking in someway, or some other excuse. However the bottom line is that it would be FAIR to all being judge to know what is expected in advance, and have concrete rules as to how the car is judged rather than it being a total judgement call by a particular judge. It also allows for many more people to BE judges because there is a written format to follow.

Other make's judging manuals have evolved over the years and are always subject to change with the uncovering of new fact based factory information that sometimes comes to light after years. This allows for cars that were scored in the past to later be wrong or right with regards to recently discovered information. These cars can then be judged again with a new score. It allows those that had things wrong to correct them and for those who were correct in the first place to get the points they were denied in the past. So why can't the Mopar Nationals adopt a written manual to use with this in mind that should satisfy the neighsayers that want to keep things that same in a same circle? With this venue in place it also opens up the possibility of REGIONAL OE judging just as it does with other models.

Feel free to now go ballistic.

Quote:

---

. DO THE MOPAR NATIONALS OE JUDGING USE THE ICCA FORMAT? I don't believe so

2.IS THIS INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO ALL THAT WANT
TO RESTORE AND HAVE THEIR CARS JUDGED? Yes

---

http://www.iccahome.org/

I'll add my

As with any printed literature, use it for what it's intended to be, a guide.

Anytime you use any printed format to restore a insert your preferred subject matter here opens up a possibility for speculation.

I firmly believe the only true source of the end all, no speculation, no questions asked information is the car your working on as 'the' source.

Sure there were assembly procedures that were designed to be adhered to. But just like anything else made with human hands. There are going to be variables from one car to the next built on exact same line and the exact same day and the exact same person. It's human nature to seek an easier, faster , better way to do things that are done on a repetitive day in day out scenario.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

. DO THE MOPAR NATIONALS OE JUDGING USE THE ICCA FORMAT? I don't believe so

2.IS THIS INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO ALL THAT WANT
TO RESTORE AND HAVE THEIR CARS JUDGED? Yes

---

---

Quote:

---

Bill,
Regarding #2 when did this change? As stated earlier, in 2000-01 I asked for this information and was told it was not available.

---

Quote:

---

It is important to understand that this World Class Reference Manual is not the final word in Restoration or Judging. It is just the beginning of the assembly of objective information. This information will be used to assist in the restoration and impartially evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of a Mopar!

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bill,
Regarding #2 when did this change? As stated earlier, in 2000-01 I asked for this information and was told it was not available.

---

At that time frame , it's wasn't avail.

Taken directly from Dave's ICCA site

Quote:

---

It is important to understand that this World Class Reference Manual is not the final word in Restoration or Judging. It is just the beginning of the assembly of objective information. This information will be used to assist in the restoration and impartially evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of a Mopar!

---

---

Quote:

---

Exactly the way it should be, so if not, why aren't the Mopar Nationals using that format?

---

Quote:

---

The general complaints that I heard about the Mopar Nationals judging was that....they were being judged by judges that were also judging cars that THEY had restored for others in the same competition. ....

---

Discussing that comment is about like discussing the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy or some other imaginary happenstance. No one at the Nationals restored a vehicle and then proceeded to judge that car. You might actually be confused WITH the ICCA. They are the venue that has Professional Restoration people involved with their judging programs....not the Nationals OE judging staff!

Quote:

---

Now I am sure I will get another discertation talking in circles justifying this and maybe some excuse

---

It has become quite apparent that you have never been involved with the restoration of an OE vehicle! Why don't you take the time to investigate the specifics before criticizing them and you will realize just how ridiculous your sarcastic sentiment has sounded. Trying to discuss this with you is like speaking German to a person that doesn't understand the language. Just because you don't have the vaguest idea about what is involved (in doing an OE vehicle) doesn't mean that it wasn't properly explained. Your warped interpretation of the scenario has somehow become self proclaimed FACT! Why don't you make idiots of all us guys who have actually been involved with the OE venue for all these years! Take a couple of minuets to write up an instructional manual and make a fortune selling "An Absolute OE Restoration Guide" that morons like myself were unable to grasp!

Quote:

---

Why would someone want a judging manual? It is simple, just as with other makes and models that have OE judging, they want everyone to have the items they will be judged on BEFORE they spend a bunch of time and money doing something wrong that will cost them points in judging. The others WANT people to be able to restore their cars to the best possible example for competition.....concrete rules as to how the car is judged rather than it being a total judgement call by a particular judge. It also allows for many more people to BE judges because there is a written format to follow.......

---

Quote:

---

I personally have absolutely no interest in restoring a car with the intentions of having it judged in an OE or any other kind of class.....
.....from reading your posts I have to think that your are somewhat of an eccentric and go WAY overboard on things.

---

You might need to take a look in the mirror when claiming that I have went "WAY overboard" with my commentary Darryl. Take a look at YOUR original quote above. You initially claimed to have had "absolutely no interest in restoring a car with the intentions of having it judged in an OE...." Please don't take this the wrong way but you are either a blatant liar or simply enjoy arguing about things you don't care or know anything about. You sure have been vocal and posted quite a bit about having absolutely no interest in the OE World! You even started a POLL about a subject that you have claim to have absolutely no interest in. It appears you might have actually beat me on that "WAY overboard" concept! Funny how things come full circle to bite you when you least expect it! This usually happens when you can't keep a constant train of thought or recall what you said just a few days ago! Yes Darryl, it looks like the "OE mentality" doesn't suit your personality very well. You might want to actually consult a "Manual" about contradictory thoughts and actions!

Quote:

---

Because "I" don't have an interest in doesn't mean I can not comment on what I think is right or wrong for the good of the hobby in this matter............We will see what others think when the poll ends.

---

No one is debating that you have a particular view about a subject. Your problem is that you know nothing about the program yet you want to argue concepts with those who have been involved with it for years! Here is another perfect illustration of the type of person that you are.....remember saying this in another thread?

"Let me ask you this, if you are a meat lover do you have to raise your own steer, butcher it your self, store the complete carcass in your meat locker and cook it yourself to be able to eat it and be considered a meat lover?"

Your problem isn't that you can't be a "meat lover", your problem is that you want to debate the specifics! You want to argue with the Rancher about how they should raise the steer! You want to argue with the butcher about how they should correctly cut the meat. You want to argue with the cook about how they should correctly prepare the meat! The problem with you is that YOU NEVER DID ANY OF TASKS THAT YOU WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT! You ADMITTEDLY don't want anything to do with OE or ANY Judging but you want to change the judging program! Are you ?

I would imagine that you would tell Babe Ruth how to hit Home runs if he were alive today! The fact is you have no idea what it takes to research or restore an OE Car and all the ridiculous POLLS in the World will never change that fact. Do you think that getting a consensus from other people who never went through the OE program will change anyone's mind? Why don't you POLL those who have been through the program? Are they not the only qualified people to provide you with an accurate opinion poll? Quit wasting your time trying to change something you don't understanding or care anything about.

Quote:

---

I usually say that Dave is the polemical one, but it appears that other members seem to have caught the disease. Now Dave is the voice of reason. This is a backwards thread.

---

I think it's safe to say that Dave has re-written the books on the depth of OE Restorations....And if you keep agreeing with Dave we WILL have to lock this post

Quote:

---

Back in 2000 I bought a second owner 1968 Hemi Charger that was all numbers matching with history to the original owner that need restoration. I began looking around for a judging manual for OEM cars. I just wanted to have a guideline to make sure I didn't spend time and money doing something wrong during resto to this great car.

---

One final point Darryl, read your above quote a few more times! Your appeal falls on deaf ears. You've had these cars since 2000. I didn't get my first Chrysler until 2002 and didn't even know HOW to spell MOPAR! Since that time I am on my third OE restored vehicle. The first two both won Gold awards in the OE Judging. I didn't have an OE Manual!! So whats your excuse? You have sat around for 10 years griping and complaining about how inept the OE program is because it won't "give" you a Manual. It all goes back to what I said in an earlier post, " The bottom line is that guys like you are looking for the easy way out. You are either too lazy to do the work..."

Where was the "Manual" for Paul Jacobs? He has more GOLD awards that anyone I know in the OE venue. If you want an "OE Manual" get off your rump and go make one! There have been plenty of people who have been successful without a "Manual" to this point. You want to know why? Because they made the commitment to do whatever it takes to accomplish their goal. You don't care about OE procedures Darryl! If you did.....YOU would be forging ahead and no one could stop you.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bill,
Regarding #2 when did this change? As stated earlier, in 2000-01 I asked for this information and was told it was not available.

---

At that time frame , it's wasn't avail.

Taken directly from Dave's ICCA site

Quote:

---

It is important to understand that this World Class Reference Manual is not the final word in Restoration or Judging. It is just the beginning of the assembly of objective information. This information will be used to assist in the restoration and impartially evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of a Mopar!

---

---

I have enjoyed reading everyone's view points on vehicle judging. Thank you for you comments and feedback.

We are always looking for the best and the brightest to assist our program in the documentation of the variations that are found with vehicles and how to judge them properly. The ICCA has developed a program that is dynamic and we are always trying to improve in process and information. I personally spend at least 40 hours per doing research on vehicles and developing documentation of as much as possible in a clear and concise format to share with everyone.

I'm personally committed to develop an objective judging system for the Mopar hobby to use. It is true that I have 50% of the individuals involved with the ICCA that restore cars. However, I consider them the best at their craft with a great deal of experience and knowledge on how Chrysler Vehicle left the factory. I’m leading the ICCA effort and I DO NOT RESTORE CARS FOR A LIVING. I research them.

Over 10 years ago I started out with a vision to create a uniform judging manual because the hobby needed one. I have judged cars for over 20 years and at every event people would ask questions that most experienced people in the hobby know but there are many other that do not. I cannot tell you how many times that I have pointed out something that is incorrect and they stated “If I would have only known I would have done it properly”.

The first E body reference manual that we developed over 6 years ago was 200 pages today that same manual is 1000 pages. The first fastener reference manual that we came out with 7 years ago was 50 pages today that same manual is 250 pages.

There has been over 50 people from all over the world that have contributed information that has been inserted into the applicable manual. This information has helped me document specific details on cars that I have never known with their assistance. The most recent information has come from Roger Wilson. He has provided the ICCA, and ultimately the hobby with information on GTX’s that were few known. That knowledge is captured in a manual for all to use. One of the primary contributors and an ICCA team is Byron Fettig. Byron has taken apart more Chrysler cars then anyone in the world. Him and I compare information found almost daily. Needless to say his applicable discoveries go directly into the applicable ICCA manual.

Please keep the positive feedback coming and I will do my best moving forward to craft out the best material and develop the most objective judging program available.

Stop by and visit with us at the Mopar’s in the Park in June and we can show you where the program is heading. We have an exciting ICCA event planned for that show and an event in Sept on the east that you will see information shortly on a news stand near you. Please keep in mind that we have a number of judging options available from basic advice to true O.E. (with out the RED points) as discussed earlier in the thread.

Thanks for you time.

Dave Wise 248.393.3970

Quote:

---

Maybe I can add some answers to some questions. The Mopar Nationals OE program has been in constant evolvement since 1990. It has been updated and expanded every year as more things are learned and the restorations have become better. The judging guidelines and score sheets are protected to prevent copycat judging, and to preserve the integrity of the system. Think of it this way. You could spend years and years perfecting a painting like the Mona Lisa. Then, someone comes along, and sells a paint by numbers kit that ends up as good as your painting. What was all your efforts worth, to be diminished instantly?

As Dave has clearly pointed out, and I agree 100%, if someone wants to compete in the OE field then it is THEIR responsibility to research on their own! Why should someone get a manual to tell them how to do everything, when people like myself, have spent 20 years learning all the intricate details? I realize in todays society everyone wants an easy way out, but even if their was a manual on the correct way a car should look, you still have to figure out how to make the finishes look right. Making a driveshaft look right is not as simple as sanding it down smooth and puting in NOS U joints!
Honestly, if there were a book to completely detail how to perform an OE restoration, it would take 25 books! Don't beleive me? I have 6-4" three ring binders of JUST PHOTOS of our latest restoration. Now just think if I documented the restoration of every component on that car, and the over 1000 hours. Just look at all the hard work Dave Wise has done on the fastener manuals, and how big they are.

Now to address some question about the judging staff judging cars they restore-THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN-PERIOD. As I have stated before, I have competed and judged in the Mopar Nationals program over 10 years. If a judge enters a car for competition, he must judge a totally different class. For instance, the years I enetered cars in the stock "concourse" classes, I judged Pro Street. I now judge the Young Guns class as I like talking to the younger kids just getting into this hobby. I have cars judged in another class (OE mainly). There is no conflict of interest if the participants and judges have INTEGRITY-which Keith Rohm demands!

Hope this helps a little.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Back in 2000 I bought a second owner 1968 Hemi Charger that was all numbers matching with history to the original owner that need restoration. I began looking around for a judging manual for OEM cars. I just wanted to have a guideline to make sure I didn't spend time and money doing something wrong during resto to this great car.

---

One final point Darryl, read your above quote a few more times! Your appeal falls on deaf ears. You've had these cars since 2000. I didn't get my first Chrysler until 2002 and didn't even know HOW to spell MOPAR! Since that time I am on my third OE restored vehicle. The first two both won Gold awards in the OE Judging. I didn't have an OE Manual!! So whats your excuse? You have sat around for 10 years griping and complaining about how inept the OE program is because it won't "give" you a Manual. It all goes back to what I said in an earlier post, " The bottom line is that guys like you are looking for the easy way out. You are either too lazy to do the work..."

Where was the "Manual" for Paul Jacobs? He has more GOLD awards that anyone I know in the OE venue. If you want an "OE Manual" get off your rump and go make one! There have been plenty of people who have been successful without a "Manual" to this point. You want to know why? Because they made the commitment to do whatever it takes to accomplish their goal. You don't care about OE procedures Darryl! If you did.....YOU would be forging ahead and no one could stop you.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Bill,
Regarding #2 when did this change? As stated earlier, in 2000-01 I asked for this information and was told it was not available.

---

At that time frame , it's wasn't avail.

Taken directly from Dave's ICCA site

Quote:

---

It is important to understand that this World Class Reference Manual is not the final word in Restoration or Judging. It is just the beginning of the assembly of objective information. This information will be used to assist in the restoration and impartially evaluate the historical correctness, workmanship, authenticity, and condition of a Mopar!

---

---

I have enjoyed reading everyone's view points on vehicle judging. Thank you for you comments and feedback.

We are always looking for the best and the brightest to assist our program in the documentation of the variations that are found with vehicles and how to judge them properly. The ICCA has developed a program that is dynamic and we are always trying to improve in process and information. I personally spend at least 40 hours per doing research on vehicles and developing documentation of as much as possible in a clear and concise format to share with everyone.

I'm personally committed to develop an objective judging system for the Mopar hobby to use. It is true that I have 50% of the individuals involved with the ICCA that restore cars. However, I consider them the best at their craft with a great deal of experience and knowledge on how Chrysler Vehicle left the factory. I’m leading the ICCA effort and I DO NOT RESTORE CARS FOR A LIVING. I research them.

Over 10 years ago I started out with a vision to create a uniform judging manual because the hobby needed one. I have judged cars for over 20 years and at every event people would ask questions that most experienced people in the hobby know but there are many other that do not. I cannot tell you how many times that I have pointed out something that is incorrect and they stated “If I would have only known I would have done it properly”.

The first E body reference manual that we developed over 6 years ago was 200 pages today that same manual is 1000 pages. The first fastener reference manual that we came out with 7 years ago was 50 pages today that same manual is 250 pages.

There has been over 50 people from all over the world that have contributed information that has been inserted into the applicable manual. This information has helped me document specific details on cars that I have never known with their assistance. The most recent information has come from Roger Wilson. He has provided the ICCA, and ultimately the hobby with information on GTX’s that were few known. That knowledge is captured in a manual for all to use. One of the primary contributors and an ICCA team is Byron Fettig. Byron has taken apart more Chrysler cars then anyone in the world. Him and I compare information found almost daily. Needless to say his applicable discoveries go directly into the applicable ICCA manual.

Please keep the positive feedback coming and I will do my best moving forward to craft out the best material and develop the most objective judging program available.

Stop by and visit with us at the Mopar’s in the Park in June and we can show you where the program is heading. We have an exciting ICCA event planned for that show and an event in Sept on the east that you will see information shortly on a news stand near you. Please keep in mind that we have a number of judging options available from basic advice to true O.E. (with out the RED points) as discussed earlier in the thread.

Thanks for you time.

Dave Wise 248.393.3970

---

Quote:

---

It is true that I have 50% of the individuals involved with the ICCA that restore cars.


Regarding the above bolded area of your post:

This is typical throughout all other makes OEM judging as well ...

---

Quote:

---

OEM judging should be judge against a standard, NOT against another car\.

---

Quote:

---

You surely already realize that?

---

Hi Steve,
It is quite obvious that this person has no clue concerning the OE judging process. There have only been about a half dozen people (who are deep in the program) that have tried to explain the intricacies of the program and why it is impossible to have a "one and only" manual for this particular venue. A few OE Judges have posted that manuals and printed data ARE readily available as it pertains to "protocol aspects" for these vehicles.

Dave Stuart, Steve Been and myself spent over 12 hours on Saturday trying to finish restoring the original Undercoating on the 1970 Valiant. The process and methods we were using were so unorthodox and unique that we were constantly joking about the "MANUAL" we would have needed for the process. It would have taken a large BOOK to explain what we were trying to accomplish for this ONE area and the next OE undercoat project may have required a completely DIFFERENT process depending on the starting point of THAT particular vehicle. Keep in mind that this guy ADMITTEDLY has NEVER been involved in an OE Restoration but continues to argue with those who have. I don't understand how a rocket-ship can make it to the Moon and back but I can assure you that I have better sense than to argue with a NASA engineer about specifics of how they should handle the Space Program or next mission! Like I said before, if this person ever takes the time to involve himself with an OE type restoration he will cringe with embarrassment from all the arguing and ridiculous comments he has made with regards to an OE "Manual". Until then it is like explaining trying to explain Calculus to a person with a level of first grade mathematics.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

OEM judging should be judge against a standard, NOT against another car\.

---

?? Nats OE Gold Certificate judging is done like that. So is the ICCA judging they have done so far. You surely already realize that?

So are you talking about some general show field of 200 cars all being judged against a standard?

Keith pointed out there were levels of judging they offer. As the levels go up, the number of cars judged goes down, and the time spent/allotted for a judge per car goes up. Pretty simple concept. And a pretty well thought out process.

If you want to judge 200 cars in a day to minute detail, spending 1 hour judging each car, rifling through some 50 page judging manual, with high level qualified volunteers... I just don't think that is practical and I don't think that is going to happen.

Putting manuals and judging bodies aside...

Do you have some idea of the level of attention, time, and detail that would satisfy you when your car is being judged?

---

Quote:

---

My comments and thoughts ablout this are what I have been speaking of all along in this thread. From what I understand of the Nationals judging is that there is too much laditude for judges to award points based on their thoughs of what is right rather than what a judging standard states.

---

OE is about being able to follow details and a specific criteria as it relates to originality. Take your spelling for instance! It is a tell tale sign that you have no inkling of what it takes to be involved with an OE process.
You really should have stopped at the beginning your second sentence. You have no understanding of the OE program or it's Judging!

Quote:

---

My comments and thoughts ablout this are what I have been speaking of all along in this thread. From what I understand of the Nationals judging is that there is too much laditude for judges to award points based on their thoughs of what is right rather than what a judging standard states.

---

Quote:

---

You guys make the modified classes look better and better!

---

Quote:

---

Honestly they are harder.

---

I don't think that is completely true. The judging may be more subjective but not the actual work on a vehicle. I have done 3 "modified" cars and 3 OE cars. The Modified vehicles were not as difficult because there were no "rights" or "wrongs" to comply with. The only concern was the "craftsmanship" of how things were done. The paint, assembly hardware, metal finishes, chrome, etc.... was completely determined by MY taste and desire. The OE cars offered ZERO latitude concerning the style or variation of how they were restored. The craftsmanship was STILL there but had to match an EXACT predetermined appearance of someone else's craftsman ship that was performed 40 years ago. I can't wait to start the 1969 T/A project because I can deviate from all the drips and runs and other "flaws" that were done at the factory. In some aspects it will feel like I am on vacation not having to stick with every little nuance that was performed by the assembly plant. The paint will be nice and slick! It will have beautiful triple plated chrome! Perfect fit and finish! Ah....just the thought of those tasteful "modifications" brings a sense of calm and serene joy to my soul!

Quote:

---

I can't wait to start the 1969 T/A

---

Were they making them that early?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I can't wait to start the 1969 T/A

---

Were they making them that early?

---

Pontiac Firebird T/A for cry-many sakes....Pontiac T/A...

Quote:

---

Speak ENGLISH! What does the code "Pontiac T/A" stand for? Were they building T/A Challengers in a secret plant in Pontiac Michigan or something?

---

Scott, thought you knew everything. Try the secret Chrysler plant in Pontiac Illinois, where all the prototypes were built a year ahead. If you want earlier, try Area 51.

Quote:

---

Speak ENGLISH! What does the code "Pontiac T/A" stand for? Were they building T/A Challengers in a secret plant in Pontiac Michigan or something?

---

That would be the ORIGINAL holder for the name T/A brother Scott! It stood for "TRANS AM". Pontiac had to pay the SCCA $5 for every "Trans Am" that was was sold to the public for using that name. (At that time, "Trans Am" was owned/trademarked by the SCCA racing series organization.) Pontiac did not think that it would cost them all that much in the overall scheme of things. Heck....they only sold 689 Hardtops and 8 Convertibles the very first year! By 1979 the amount paid from Pontiac to the SCCA organization was quite LARGE and numerous to say the least!
I thought you might want to know that little snippet of information Sir Scott!