Late '66 Owner's manual bag; repro vs. original?

[Gary B.]

Can anyone tell me if there are detectable differences between an original Owner's manual bag (the style with the big yellow key logo on it) for late '66 cars (part # 3834959, dated 3-16-66) and a reproduction bag, which has the same part number and date? I don't believe the repro bags state that they are a reprint, so how can one tell a repro bag from an original bag?

Thanks,

Gary

[Donald T.]

Re: Late '66 Owner's manual bag; repro vs. origina

Gary,

Someone wrote up a great guide on distinguishing repro from original. I have 3 originals and a repro and the info appears to be correct. Lots of repros being sold as originals on ebay, so you do need to be careful.

http://reviews.ebay.com/SPOTTING-A-REPRINT-CORVETTE-OWNERS-MANUAL-BAG-ENVELOPE_W0QQugidZ10000000000809476

Owners Manual Pouch

[Peter L.]

Re: Late '66 Owner's manual bag; repro vs. origina

Gary - Don't reference is great; but in general I find that the reproduction bags are made of a much clearer plastic than the original bags. That's my test. Pete

[Gary B.]

Thanks guys *NM*

[Rob A.]

Re: Late '66 Owner's manual bag; repro vs. origina

Don,

That's great info...thanks for the posting

[Joe R.]

Re: Late '66 Owner's manual bag; repro vs. origina

Hi Gary:

Well, this is an interesting thread. I have my original yellow-key bag, dated 3-16-66, which is in fair condition, and I also have a reproduction that I think I got from Paragon. I compared them when I got the reproduction and the reproduction looked pretty good, so I have been using it for flight judging.

I read the interesting web reference that Don provided, although that reference is for a different version of the bag than the 3-16-66 bag.

On my reproduction, the date is in the correct place and the "blue bar" is on the correct side, although the blue bar is about 1/2 inch from the edge on the reproduction and it is against the edge on my original. The thickness of the plastic is 2 mils on the original and 1 mil on the reproduction, which helps account for why the originals seem stiffer than the reproductions. As Pete said, the plastic on the original is not as clear as the reproduction, although it may be due as much to age as to a possibly different material.

[Gary B.]

Joe: How does the repro do during flight judging?

Joe,

Thanks for the added note. I just ordered a repro from LIC, so I'll see how that compares with my original, which is somewhat yellowed, as one might expect with 40-year old plastic.

How has your repro bag done during flight judging?

Gary

[Joe R.]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

No deductions so far during two chapter meets, but maybe things will get tougher at the Boston Regional this September. Of course, the entire contents of the glove box are worth only 5 originality points and 5 condition points, and there are about 5 items. So, a 1 point deduction for originality on the envelope would be equivalent to a full deduction for that item, which seems harsh given that the reproduction is a pretty good one.

[Gary #41345]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

You would think reproduction companies and owners alike would be rewarded for developing and manufacturing exact/as close as possible repos for all/any items that have become lost or damaged beyond repair over the last 40+years. Taking into consideration any and all parts that are no longer available by any means, instead they are compared and drilled on any irregularites regardless of how small in nature. Don't be so foolish to not give credit where credit is due, it takes countless hours and resources to design,develope and market any and all repo parts. The ones that compare the closest to the original versions should be honored for their attention to detail, and ability to produce for those in need. I for one, rather have a fine repo part than no part at all. JMO

[Mike E.]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

Gary--
Can't disagree with you at all. At the same time, in the judging process, how do you reward the person who has perfect original parts, if you don't deduct for inaccuracies in reproductions?

[Gary #41345]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

Mike.... First, I would break the cars into different classes. Original,Restored etc. Making a situation where all on judged on their own attributes and merits...creating a senerio where a owner may not be able to top flite in the original class but may be able to in the restored class. Depending on the quality of restoration and restoration parts which have replaced the "NO LONGER AVAILABLE ORIGINAL PARTS".

[Mike E.]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

Gary--
We already have that--the 4-star (or bowtie) judging is for cars that have had no restoration done.
Flight judging is for restored cars primarily.
Where I see your dichotomy breaking down is that 99 out of 100 cars has had some restoration done on it.
The stated criterion for all NCRS judging is "as it left the assembly plant". Whether a car is correct or not, to that standard, is the bottom line. Inaccurate reproduction parts need to lose points. Original parts whose condition is not as it left the factory need to lose points. Those who have perfect condition exactly correct parts need to be rewarded for that. The only way you reward that is by taking off points for inaccurate repros and imperfect originals.
I have also found that "no longer available original parts" are available if you look long and hard enough, and have money or rare parts to trade for them. And, I know, now comes the "if you have enough money you can buy a top flight" accusation. So what do we do? Dumb things down so everyone gets a top flight and feels good about themselves and goes home happy?
FWIW

[Gary #41345]

Re: Joe: How does the repro do during flight judgi

I understand your point Mike and agree with your comments, it's the "Inaccurate reproduction parts" that are of most concern to me and the subject of this post. To compare the various reproduction parts available from every supplier out there would be a daunting task if not impossible, but there are reproduction parts out there that would pass flight judging with high marks. With that being said there would be no need to spend countless hours and mucho dineros to try and acquire the original part. Save that money and use it on a needed original part that no repo part can take the place of and get you the points needed to top flight.

[Gordon Peterson #4961]

Identify All Reproduction Pieces

I want to be able to clearly identify A L L reproduction parts.

My reasons are to eliminate sales rip-offs by unknowing or unscrupulous people and to recognize owners with truly original cars.

If a car is missing an original piece, then it is judged/rated as such.

If a car has an original piece, then it is judged/rated at a higher level.

If a car is missing an original piece, and the owner has replaced it with a reproduction piece, then that car is also judged/rated at a higher level. But it is NOT as high a rating as the car with an original piece because it just plain NOT original.

JMHO.

[Gary B.]

Update on repro vs. original bags

Everyone,

This morning a friend and I compared his and my late '66 Owner's Manual bags to a repro bag from Long Island Corvette. The upshot is, the repro is a very close match to the original.

I measured the thickness of the plastic material at a shade over 0.004" for one original; right at 0.004" for the second original; and right at 0.003" for the repro. It may be this 0.001" difference in thickness that leads to the repro bag sagging more when held by one corner, but frankly it didn't sag by as much as the one shown in the website that Don provided the link to. But the repro bag does definitely feel more fleixble to the touch either original bag.

As fas as I can tell, all of the text, logos and small blue bar appear in the correct locations on the repro.

On the issue of clarity, the repro is definitely more clear. But I don't know how one can conclude that the originals didn't start out as clear 40 years ago. As a beginner judge, I would be hard pressed to tell an owner that because his bag looks too clear, I was going to conclude it is a repro bag. Also, isn't it possoble that the stiffness of the original plastic might have increased over 40 years due to aging? I'm no polymer chemist, but in some plastics I believe cross-linking of the long-chain molecules (and therefore stiffness) tends to increase spontaneously with aging and cross-linking may also decrease clarify.

When I looked at the bags with a magnifying glass, there are some minor differences in font related things like the apostrophe in DON'T INVITE CAR THEFT. The bottom tip of the apostrophe is sharper/smaller in the original, but I have to say I'm not sure I could detect this wihout having the two bags side by side. In my opinion, this is one of those items that I would find hard to jusfity paying $100 for an original, since the LIC repro costs $2.00 and it so very close.

From my inspection, the biggest give-away is probably the lower clarity and the increased stiffness of the original (due to the original being 0.001" thicker or due to aging?). But other than that, I would say that some vendor has done an excellent job at making a darn good repro bag at a very reasonable cost.

Based on the above, I don't see how a judge could deduct more than 20% or 40% of the originality points for just the bag, which means 20% or 40% of 1 point, doesn't it?

Perhaps as master judge, like Pete Lindahl, will chime in here and let us know what he would do in terms of deducts when judging such a repro bag.

Gary