Judging policy when the manual is "wrong"

[Michael H.]

Re: Tim: Captured belt; some elaboration please

Gary,

I agree 100%. I know (knew) of several completely original, one owner, 66 350 HP cars that had their original 3837810 belt. Car #6596, for example, came from it's orig owner and was completely unrestored/untouched in the 70's. It HAD the 810 belt. There were a lot more but I don't remember the VIN's.

[Gary B.]

Micheal, what can we do?

Michael,

It's been more than a year since this same issue was discussed on the NCRS DB and as far as I know nothing is still being done to correct the '66 TIM&JG. Do you have any ideas of ways to kick start the process? I believe that Pete Lindahl, who I think is a member of the '66 revision team, believes in the presence of the captured belt, but he's only one person on the team and while he can advocate for a change to the JG, he can't make it happen himself.

Gary

[Michael H.]

Re: Micheal, what can we do?

Gary,

I wish there was a simple solution but, unfortunately, there's not. The only way that I know of to make corrections/additions to any JG is to contact the team leader and suggest these changes. We have to understand his side of the matter though, and if only one or two people write to him, he's likely to veto any changes. I would feel the same way if I were in his position. However, if a larger number of people were to contact him with the same recommendation, I would have to think that the revision would have to be seriously considered.

If there's no change in the manual, I would gather as much info as possible and have it available for the judge to see during judging, if necessary.

The absence of absolute proof, one way or the other, should mean that the manual should at least state that "it's possible" that the idler belt was included in this particular engine combination. (I'm convinced that it was)

Did the brake caliper casting number problem ever get corrected in that manual?

[Gary B.]

Brake caliper casting #'s

Michael,

I don't have the 4th edition of the '66 JG in front of me, but I think the casting numbers are NOT correct in the 4th edition. They were correct in the 3rd edition, if memory serves me. Maybe they will be correct again, when a 5th edition appears...

I've just written to Pete Lindahl about the captive belt. I know he was looking into the issue last year and I know he was a believer.

Gary

[Gary B.]

Captive belt: letters to Ray Morrison

Michael,

Have you ever corresponded with Ray Morrison about the captive belt issue? I have and my correspondance clearly didn't persuade him. If you and others can add to the evidence pile, it might help.

Gary

[Roy B.]

Re: Judging policy when the manual is "wrong"

Bottom line with all this discussion is that you and the judges MUST go by the JM Right to wrong! It's been said if more people mention that a item is wrong it may help ( so sit and wait ) Hope, pray or what ever! But the larger number of members complies with the JM. When I had my 55 judged they say orange engine paint , but people that really know it's RED. So what do I do ? If I wont an award I play the game or take the hit.
If your going to enter the field do as the JM said or go Sportsman . Because this argument will NEVER end people.Never!

[Michael H.]

Re: Captive belt: letters to Ray Morrison

Gary,

I've never written Ray Morrison on the belt issue. I'll see if I can come up with some info on this and forward it to Ray.

Has anyone ever looked at the misc shipping list of parts included in the AIM for the 66-67 350 HP engine? I wonder if there's any info there?

[Tom Merkel]

Re: Captured belt

I've contributed to this discussion before. On my original owner '67 L-79 there was indeed a two-belt system in place as delivered from the dealer.

One belt is what is being referred to as the 'captured belt', which simply runs from crank shaft up to water pump, and nowhere else.

Tom

[Gary B.]

AIM; shipping list of parts

Michael,

No one has ever mentioned to me about checking the AIM for that. I'm not sure how that would work.

Gary

[Gary B.]

Tom: Captured belt; need letters to team leaders

Tom,

We need to communicate findings such as yours directly to the '65, '66 and '67 team leaders. Would you be willing to send e-mails to those 3 team leaders stating your findings?

The JG will neve get fixed if we just sit on this information.

Gary

[Gerard F.]

Judging Manual vs AIM

Wouldn't the AIM be a better reference for restoration especially in part numbers. Here's an example:

67 battery cables sold by Lectric Limited match the part numbers shown in the AIM. The Judging Guide shows different part numbers stamped on the cables.
I got some minor points off on this, so next time I'll have my AIM handy.

Wouldn't the AIM be the ultimate reference in part numbers? The Judging Guide possibly in finishes, although we have all seen a number of variances.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Joe R.]

Re: Judging policy when the manual is "wrong"

Hi Michael:

My question is not based on an actual judging experience. I'm simply trying to anticipate how a few things on my car might be handled during future judging.

If you want an actual example, one of the items I'm curious about is the part number stamped on the stainless exhaust tips of C2s. The TIM&JG states that the part number may be visible. Some knowledgeable people on this board have stated their opinion that factory installed exhaust tips did not have the part number on them.

In my case I have installed a pair of NOS tips that have the part number on them. At the time I purchased them, I thought I was getting "correct" parts. Now I'm not so sure.

I have a similar concern with the washer bag on my 67 A/C car. I have the original bag with the gray backing but it is in marginal condition and it leaks. I also have a NOS bag with a tan backing. The TIM&JG says that tan is acceptable, although some people question whether tan was ever factory installed.

These are both small items but they do offer specific examples of the policy question I asked about in my original posting. I'm sure that a very long list of similar (and possibly more significant) items could be compiled, because almost every judge I know, including myself, can name some items in the TIM&JG that he/she thinks are wrong.

In my view, if the NCRS wants to maintain an owner-friendly judging process that gives the owner the "benefit of the doubt," they should prohibit deductions for items that are specifically listed as acceptable in the TIM&JG, but should also allow judges to NOT make a deduction in cases where they feel the TIM&JG is wrong. Some people would argue that this approach is inconsistent, but I think it is the most user-friendly approach for owners.

[Tom Merkel]

Re: Tom: Captured belt; need letters to team leade

Gary - I'd be happy to relate info re: L-79 belts to anyone who has an interest.

Please advise how I can help.

Tom

[Michael H.]

Re: Judging policy when the manual is "wrong"

Joe,

I agree, it would be nice if there was some blanket policy that covered everything we've discussed. The problem, as you mention, is the fact that the judging guide is only as good as the information that's in it. In a perfect world, we could use the manual to make these important calls on the field. That's not the case, though.

On the other side is the fact that the judge that's using the manual may have a completely different idea of what's correct and what's not. In this case, the best manual possible would not be of any help, especially if that judge is wrong.

The fact that there are negatives on both sides would leave us with only one possible solution, for now. A middle of the road additude that allows some flexibility. This would require a JG that is absolutely as accurate as possible though, and judges that are knowledgeable and collectively in agreement with the contents of the manual. (that may be tough) There will ALWAYS be differences of opinion on many issues but the time has come to get as many of these things straightened out as possible, as fast as possible.

I know that some of the folks at NCRS headquarters may disagree but I still think this discussion board is one of the best ways that we have of collection accurate information. Once collected, it has to be presented to the team leader for each group. We also need team leaders that are willing to accept the fact that no one person can possibly know it all and there's a good possibility that something that is in the JG is indeed incorrect.

It's a long and difficult process but I can think of no other way to do it. These items have to be sorted out one at a time until the manual is as close to accurate as possible. In most cases, changing team leaders just starts the original cycle of problems all over again if that new person has a bundle of incorrect information. I believe most of these guys are open to comments and suggestions. Those that are not need to move on. They're definitely not doing us any good, at all.

The issue of part numbered tailpipes, for example, may a great place to start.

[Michael H.]

Re: AIM; shipping list of parts

Gary,

I just looked in the AIM. Unfortunately, there's no misc shipping list for L79. I'll see what else I can find.