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?

---