NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

[Edward M.]

A discussion in another thread brought up a question in my mind...

It relates to restamped engines, and whether or not the owner admits to this. It really could be about ant part of the car, but let's just focus our hypothetical scenario on a restamped engine.

It has been quite a while since I was involved in judging, and I am not sure what the current policy / procedure is on this, so please help educate me (and others).

Let's say a car is presented for judging. Lets also say that one of the judges has personal knowledge that the engine has been restamped. However, that fact is not detectible. In other words, the engine stamp is typical of factory production. Owner says nothing.

How is that situation handled these days? I was taught that personal knowledge of a vehicle was not to be used in the judging process. As a judge, I had to be able to point out something specific in order to make a deduction. Is that still the case?

Lets take it one step further. The owner states up front that the engine is a restamp, but there is still nothing detectible about the engine stamp. Does the owner's statement change the situation any?

So, to relate this to a personal note; I judged a 68 L-88 many years ago at Cypress Gardens. I casually knew the owner, and the owner told me out of school that the engine was a restamp. The original engine was in a racing boat, and the owner of the boat would not sell it. However, the owner of the car was able to get every piece of information about the original engine. The car owner had high resolution pictures of the engine pad of the engine in the boat, plus date codes on every part of the engine that was still there.

The car owner located a virgin block with the same casting date as the original engine, had it stamped, and so forth. I saw the engine pad in this car, and I saw the high res photos of the original engine pad. It was a well executed restoration engine. I could not see anything that would cause me to make a deduction for the engine pad.

Fortunately for me, I was judging exterior, not mechanical. The mechanical team was not aware that the engine was a restamp, and I did not share that knowledge. I do not know if the owner ever shared that info with the mechanical team, but I do know that no deduction was made for the engine.

Had I been on the mechanical team, I would have at the very least had to go to the team lead and get some guidance on my personal knowledge of this engine situation.

So, long way around the barn, where does "personal knowledge" come into play or not as the case may be?

[Harry S.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Ed, I look at it very simply. I judge the car as presented. I forget what I know about the car. I believe this is today's standard.

[Larry E.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Ed, I look at it very simply. I judge the car as presented. I forget what I know about the car. I believe this is today's standard.

Harry: If that is the case (which I agree with) why does NCRS keep a counterfeit list on past history of the cars? Should not those cars be judged "as presented"?? Larry

[Harry S.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Harry: If that is the case (which I agree with) why does NCRS keep a counterfeit list on past history of the cars? Should not those cars be judged "as presented"?? Larry

Counterfeit cars are different. In Ed's example the owner did not grow his engine by 100 cubic inches. The engine in the car is the same as the one it was born with. Therefore changing the trim tag, VIN tag, adding FI, etc drives a car into the counterfeit arena. One of our fundamentals is that we judge a car as it was built when it left the factory, including normal prep but not including dealer installed options.

[Larry E.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Counterfeit cars are different. In Ed's example the owner did not grow his engine by 100 cubic inches. The engine in the car is the same as the one it was born with. Therefore changing the trim tag, VIN tag, adding FI, etc drives a car into the counterfeit arena. One of our fundamentals is that we judge a car as it was built when it left the factory, including normal prep but not including dealer installed options.

Harry: Thanks for the reply but I guess I just do not understand the difference. In Ed's example the engine may be the same but it is not "THE ENGINE" that came with the car from the factory. JMHO-Larry

[Michael W.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Harry: Thanks for the reply but I guess I just do not understand the difference. In Ed's example the engine may be the same but it is not "THE ENGINE" that came with the car from the factory. JMHO-Larry

Flight Judging does not attempt to establish whether the component in question is the 'original born-with' item, VIN and trim tags excluded. This is why it is complete folly to say that a car has been authenticated or certified by NCRS.

[Sal C.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Larry, The car in Ed's example probably did not have the bumpers, grilles, wheels, tires, exhaust, etc. that came with the car from the factory either. If everything was deemed as "typical" there should be no difference
.

[Joe C.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Harry: Thanks for the reply but I guess I just do not understand the difference. In Ed's example the engine may be the same but it is not "THE ENGINE" that came with the car from the factory. JMHO-Larry

Larry,

Non original (restamped) engines are OK in NCRS, as long as it cannot be proven that the original engine was one of lower horsepower or lower displacement. The only deductions to be made on reproduction engines are those related to the degree that the current configuration differs from original in appearance.

There are lots of deductions taken on original engines as well. This is not an exact science, and a judge can and does make mistakes. The only way to know, FOR SURE if an engine is original to a car is by using a database such as that compiled by Al Grenning.

Most counterfeits involve trim tag changes, and the reason for this is that since about 2003, it can be easily proven, forensically, that a trim tag is not original. Another big counterfeit item is sidepipes, because sometimes an amateur tries to pass off a half-@ssed upgrade as original. It is very difficult to prove that an engine option has been upgraded.

[Steve G.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

An interesting discussion. On the one hand, why would you differentiate between the engine and any other part when it comes to "born with" or indistinguishable replacement?

On the other hand, there are, I think, only 4 components (engine, frame, trans and body)that the manufacturer placed the vin number in addition to the other information found on many other components. I believe that these were identified as such for a security reason, not a production reason, to deal with theft. So then, that begs the question, why is the body treated differently than any of the other components the manufacturer felt that were so integral to the core of what makes up that car that they identified them with the vin derivative. Why does judging stop if a vin or trim plate discrepancy is uncovered and not any of the other items that were deemed so integral that they would be used for identification of the stolen vehicle? Why is altering any of the other identification points not seen the same way.

No answers here, just interested musings.

[Michael W.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

. Why does judging stop if a vin or trim plate discrepancy is uncovered

Understanding that a state issued VIN tag carries no penalty, a car without a state issued or GM issued could very well be of questionable legal status or maybe even 'hot'. I don't think the NCRS wants that kind of headache.

For the trim tag, this identifies the bones of the car at least with respect to interior and exterior colours. If the tag is not the original- how can the exterior and interior sections be judged?

[Steve G.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Understanding that a state issued VIN tag carries no penalty, a car without a state issued or GM issued could very well be of questionable legal status or maybe even 'hot'. I don't think the NCRS wants that kind of headache.

For the trim tag, this identifies the bones of the car at least with respect to interior and exterior colours. If the tag is not the original- how can the exterior and interior sections be judged?

As the devils advocate here, if the police could question the legality of a car with vin mismatching from body to frame to engine to trans, why would NCRS choose only one to question the legality?

[Michael W.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

As the devils advocate here, if the police could question the legality of a car with vin mismatching from body to frame to engine to trans, why would NCRS choose only one to question the legality?

NCRS doesn't inspect frame VINs.

[Joe C.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

An interesting discussion. On the one hand, why would you differentiate between the engine and any other part when it comes to "born with" or indistinguishable replacement?

On the other hand, there are, I think, only 4 components (engine, frame, trans and body)that the manufacturer placed the vin number in addition to the other information found on many other components. I believe that these were identified as such for a security reason, not a production reason, to deal with theft. So then, that begs the question, why is the body treated differently than any of the other components the manufacturer felt that were so integral to the core of what makes up that car that they identified them with the vin derivative. Why does judging stop if a vin or trim plate discrepancy is uncovered and not any of the other items that were deemed so integral that they would be used for identification of the stolen vehicle? Why is altering any of the other identification points not seen the same way.

No answers here, just interested musings.

Steve,

Some of your musings are not representative of the way things are. First, the point of NCRS FLIGHT judging (not Bowtie/Crossed Flags) is the APPEARANCE of originality. There is no difference in this aspect as applies to the engine or any other component. The only time a car is labeled as "counterfeit" is when intent to deceive is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. There are probably thousands of Top Flight cars with big blocks that were originally smallblocks. The reason that they passed judging is that intent to decieve could not be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, although deductions were probably taken for stamp pad or stamp appearance. This ain't fair, because it is very difficult to prove fraud with a NOM. It has always been my feeling that a car with a NOM should be relegated to no better than Second Flight for this very reason. Any NCRS judge worth his salt knows this (nod....nod....wink....wink). Bloomington had it right, up until a few years ago.

The VIN is stamped into the frame in 2 places. NCRS only judges a car (this does NOT apply to Bowtie/Crossed Flags judging) to the extent that things can be seen. The reason frame VIN stamps, axle and trans cast dates and stamps are not judged is because the judges are too old and fat to get underneath and see these areas. Same goes for trans linkage.

[Edward M.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

Steve,

The reason frame VIN stamps, axle and trans cast dates and stamps are not judged is because the judges are too old and fat to get underneath and see these areas. Same goes for trans linkage.

I was going to say because the cars are too low and sleek. I guess old and fat is just looking at the other side of the coin.

[Joe C.]

Re: NCRS Judging - Prior Knowledge - Owner's Statements

To borrow a term used by The Great Stephen Colbert: In all truthiness, the VIN stamps on the frame cannot be seen by the skinniest of judges unless he/she has a borescope.