Re: Repop verses Original" Chuck"
The objective is to determine how close to an original Corvette the judged car APPEARS to be, rather than how much of it is reproduction. If you restored the car, or have owned it for a long time, you should already know how much of the car is reproduction.
In my opinion, judges don't have a priority of looking for repro parts; even if you identify a repro, you still have to document how the part is different from "typical factory production". Some reproduction parts are VERY GOOD, while others are not so good. No punches are generally pulled...if a judge recognizes the part as a repro (he may have personal experience with the part), he will look to find all the little deficiencies he expects that repro to have and deducts accordingly. It gets all the deductions it deserves. Judging is still done as objectively as possible.
During the judging process, the deficiencies found by the judges should have written comments detailing exactly what is wrong with the part. The simple statement "Repro" IS NOT ADEQUATE...judges should explain how the part fails to meet "typical factory production" and be able to offer the owner suggestions on how to improve the part. Of course, when the comments become more than the space and time available, sometimes it's easier to just "call a spade a spade", and recommend a source for a part that appears more original.
And, Roy, this IS the current judging system; I'm not making this up. How long has it been since you or your car was involved in judging?
The objective is to determine how close to an original Corvette the judged car APPEARS to be, rather than how much of it is reproduction. If you restored the car, or have owned it for a long time, you should already know how much of the car is reproduction.
In my opinion, judges don't have a priority of looking for repro parts; even if you identify a repro, you still have to document how the part is different from "typical factory production". Some reproduction parts are VERY GOOD, while others are not so good. No punches are generally pulled...if a judge recognizes the part as a repro (he may have personal experience with the part), he will look to find all the little deficiencies he expects that repro to have and deducts accordingly. It gets all the deductions it deserves. Judging is still done as objectively as possible.
During the judging process, the deficiencies found by the judges should have written comments detailing exactly what is wrong with the part. The simple statement "Repro" IS NOT ADEQUATE...judges should explain how the part fails to meet "typical factory production" and be able to offer the owner suggestions on how to improve the part. Of course, when the comments become more than the space and time available, sometimes it's easier to just "call a spade a spade", and recommend a source for a part that appears more original.
And, Roy, this IS the current judging system; I'm not making this up. How long has it been since you or your car was involved in judging?
Comment