Quote: "I was deducted for having a repo VIN on the Challenger so I needed to keep the original on this car."
Dave, I'm a little confused, if the door sticker was indistinguishable from the original, except for the fact it was to new looking, why the deduction in points? I thought the Challenger scored perfect on the paint and that obviously wasn’t original. How does that work in the Mopar National judging criteria?
Is it true that if you use repro parts 1 point is taken off automatically?
Hi Bob and Mike! If you guys don't mind, I will address both points in this one post. Yes Bob, an automatic one point reduction occurs if the part is not original Mopar issue. You get one point for originality and one point for the condition or appearance of the part. If the part is original and looks new, you get two points for the part. If it is reproduction, only one point can be earned for just the overall appearance of the part.
Mike, I have wondered for years how a vehicle can be judged with an inconsistent view throughout the SAME vehicle!?! I am not referencing the OE judging specifically but I really don't know how to answer your question. I agree 100% with your rationale even though I criticize my own vehicles by doing so. Right is right and wrong is wrong. If one aspect of the car is scrutinized and docked because of the reproduction status of a part, why isn't the replacement or "reproduction" paint given a one point deduction? It isn't original! Wouldn't you assume that the same judging characteristics would apply for EVERY part or aspect of the car? If the judges say that the decal appears to be too new and therefore receives a deduction, wouldn't the beautiful new appearing paint job fall within the same category of scrutiny?
Concerning the VIN decals, I really think that what we provide is every bit as good or "original" as the ones that were manufactured many years ago. Before everyone jumps all over that comment let me explain the reasoning behind it. In 1970, Chrysler used an independent, subsidized manufacturer to produce their VIN safety standard decals. The company they commissioned was given a license and the approval to provide these labels/decals to the car industry. In 2002, ECS (an independent, subsidized manufacturer) was given licensing rights to manufacture VIN safety standard decals for the Chrysler market. We have the original blueprints and specifications that were given to the same company who originally provided the service/product in 1970. Unless someone has a need or love affair with 40 year old generic materials, compared to the exact same materials we use today, what is the real difference? Ninety five percent of the NOS replacement parts we buy today were manufactured AFTER the cars were produced on the assembly line. Aren't those parts simply reproduction parts that were manufactured at a later date by an independent, subsidized (licensed) manufacturer? NOS parts were not made by Chrysler. They were made under contract just like the parts that people like BE&A and I, are authorized to manufacture. If someone wants to argue that the "old" reproduction NOS replacement parts have a more "correct" status, I need to ask based on what? If it was made after the fact and not a factory installed piece, are we to assume that one degree of incorrectness takes precedence over an "acceptable" or alternative degree of incorrectness? A piece that was made 35 years ago by a subsidized independent manufacturer (for Chrysler) is still just an older version of a reproduction replacement part!!
let me explain the reasoning behind it. In 1970, Chrysler used an independent, subsidized manufacturer to produce their VIN safety standard decals. The company they commissioned was given a license and the approval to provide these labels/decals to the car industry. In 2002, ECS (an independent, subsidized manufacturer) was given licensing rights to manufacture VIN safety standard decals for the Chrysler market. We have the original blueprints and specifications that were given to the same company who originally provided the service/product in 1970. Unless someone has a need or love affair with 40 year old generic materials, compared to the exact same materials we use today, what is the real difference? Ninety five percent of the NOS replacement parts we buy today were manufactured AFTER the cars were produced on the assembly line. Aren't those parts simply reproduction parts that were manufactured at a later date by an independent, subsidized (licensed) manufacturer? NOS parts were not made by Chrysler. They were made under contract just like the parts that people like BE&A and I, are authorized to manufacture. If someone wants to argue that the "old" reproduction NOS replacement parts have a more "correct" status, I need to ask based on what? If it was made after the fact and not a factory installed piece, are we to assume that one degree of incorrectness takes precedence over an "acceptable" or alternative degree of incorrectness? A piece that was made 35 years ago by a subsidized independent manufacturer (for Chrysler) is still just an older version of a reproduction replacement part!!
