NCRS judging philosophy question

[terry plata]

It's no mystery by now that I am doing a frame up an a '57 fuelie. So I jumped at the chance to inspect and photograph a NCRS top flight '57 this past weekend about 45 minutes from my home. I admit I am a perfectionist and purist so bear with me. Although this '57 had all the right stuff including the mandatory stamps in appropriate locations and N.O.S. 1957 firestone tires, the body panel fit and finish was not what I expected from such a senior car.
QUESTION: Do the judges expect and excuse wavy body panels and ill fitting doors as part of the car's original character? I am not degrading the Corvette I inspected, it was truly a beautiful car, just wondering if I am wasting my time and ruining my chances at a high point car? Thanks for understanding....Terry Plata

[Dennis C.]

Re: NCRS judging philosophy question

Terry - Your description of wavy body panels and ill fitting doors is quite likely absolutely accurate of the factory fit and finish of the Corvettes of the era. Many owners/restorers cannot bring themselves to duplicate this reality, but it is reasonably accurate. Current human nature demands perfection. Fact is, it didn't exist then. Most good NCRS judges try to keep this is mind while judging. Of course, we all (for the most part) want to see a perfect car. Most realize they were not. Best, DC

[Roy B.]

Re: NCRS judging philosophy question

All C1's will have some wave looking down the fenders and if you look can see where the fire wall connects to the front fenders.That would be a original body unrestored .When a person that gets that $10.000 paint job , all original body character is usely lost.Body fit on all C1's even the 53 was good to vary good,and not what most people thinking, that they were a poor fit. %99 of poor fitting body's usely comes after a body R and R. because many people and restorer's don't understand how to fit the body back on.Stop and think of the many Corvettes restored where the doors, hood, door post,soft top lid and windows fit like sh%$#t. Many C1's seat backs cushions with the soft top lid closed you can reach back in with your hand at the seat top area.WHY? Grill shell showing lower cut outs in the body and corners 53-57. WHY? Hoods 1/2 above the front body line 53-57. WHY? Door post not matching the windshield 56-62 WHY? Side windows don't fit 53-55 WHY? Dash rail miss-aline with the doors 53-57 WHY? Oh yes! many people say they came that way "NOOOO".

[Todd H 26112]

"Current human nature demands perfection"?

Huh!?

[Dave Suesz]

I have seen many over-restored...

ie., perfectly smooth panels, mirror smooth hand rubbed paint, razor straight seam caulk, etc. The people who built these cars were on a shedule, and the idea that seam caulk was carefully aligned and perfectly smooth-hah! The 4" section between the RH door and top cover on my '55 is 1/2" too high, and always has been. I have never seen a 53-55 which did not have the lower rear corner of the doors protruding a little bit. The only way these problems could have been fixed (when I finally had the body restored) would have been to saw through the offending panels and re-glass them to a new shape. A friend of mine just had his '64 one-owner "other" car restored, and he freely admits it is better than new. Hard to avoid when you are NOT on an assembly line.

[Terry F.]

Re: NCRS judging philosophy question

I would like to know how it was determined that these cars were that wavy? I can imagine that some had poor fitting doors and hoods, etc. But, I don't think GM would have made BODY PANEL MOLDS with waves in them, even back then. I suspect that most of the waviness came as the car bodies aged and the body panels shrank unevenly through the years. They do that because it was difficult to control the exact uniformity of the resin and fiberglass across the entire panel, probably just one of the several reasons these materials were abandoned by GM. Waviness in a survivor car would help authenticate the "original aged condition" of the survivor car. But, I believe that actually using such a car in as a reference for a paint restoration would be a mistake and would contradict some of the other arguments that heard on this message board about restoring the cars to "like factory condition." I would like to know if that has been considered in this process? Regards, Terry

[Art B.]

Re: I have seen many over-restored...

Some of the body panels on my '57 and '61 fit rather poorly and others are almost perfect. When Corvettes get this old it is hard to know what the previous owners did during their restorations. Both of mine had been painted before I purchased them and I suspect that, depending on the expertise of the person doing the work, either they got worse as Roy has stated, or else they were over-restored as Dave has stated. My experience with NCRS judging meets is that the judges tend to be more critical on these solid axle Corvettes as to fit and finish. Just my opinion.

[Wayne W.]

Re: I have seen many over-restored...

I think that the truth lies somewhere in between. As Roy says there are a lot of things out there that are the result of damage or poor repairs. The bodies were not generally that bad. At the same time the materials and methods used made perfection an impossibility. The molds may or may not have had waves, but the panels surely did. Panels just removed from the molds were not perfect. ItIt is true that aging and natural stresses not associated with repairs cause waving especially where cowls or bonding areas are, but these things are natural and showed up almost immediatley. It is after all FRP (Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic). The definition of PLASTIC indicates that it is a material that deforms with stress. So when judging, the judge needs to determine the cause of such problems. Deductions for natural causes should be minimized and for damages should be maximized.

[Ed Jennings]

Re: I have seen many over-restored...

All the panels on my probably no-hit 62 fit pretty well. I looked closely at an unrestored 61 the other day, and all it's panels fit pretty well also. It seems the later model C1's had at least a few (but not all) of the kinks worked out.

[Dick W.]

Re: NCRS judging philosophy question

I bought a '61 that was less than one year old. I remember how crappy the body was. I had friends that bought new cars in that era and all of them were "rough" in today's terminology

[Terry F.]

Re: NCRS judging philosophy question

Thanks for the feedback. Terry

[Dave Suesz]

There were no "prior" owners in my case...

Uncle, Dad, me. The complete owner history of my car. And my Dad did the maintenance from day one, my uncle was no "car guy". Slight curb damage behind the RR wheel, the usual stress cracks. The complete body damage history of my car. Dad had the car painted (deluxe oven baked!) by Earl Scheib of Cincinnati in 1964. I had it stripped, gel-coated, and painted in 1988. The complete bodywork history of my car.

Back in the day, the Mike Hammer of the movies had a black '54. So cool, my Dad wanted to paint his '54 black. Then he saw one, only a year old, that had been changed to black. The black brought out the waves so bad it looked like ****. I submit that since they had a reputation for waves in 1955, the waves we see today are not ALL due to age.

[Loren L.]

Terry for example: the mold for the lower

right rear fender on 1961/2 was made wrong. On any unrestored & original car, you can run your hand up and down on the part of the panel just forward of the wheel well and behind the door - it will have a distinct dip. Restorers routinely remove it.;

[Loren L.]

For a REAL dose of "reality", I would refer you

to the Feb '67 issue of Road&Track for an article by Ron Wakefield, an R&T staffer, where he reports on the 36,000 mile anniversary of the 1964 Corvette convertible he bought new in June 1964. Remember, this is a member of the automotive PRESS taking delivery in Birmingham MI; on page 74:

"The car was delivered to me with no more than a wash job, apparently. Problems: a broken spark plug; the side windows wouldn't
roll up with the doors shut; splotchy paint on the top cover panel; the top didn't fit properly; leaks around the windshield; and the steering had a massive squeak in it.".

[Terry F.]

Re: Terry for example: the mold for the lower

I appreciate you comment. Thanks, Terry