327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

[William F.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Roy,
I appreciate your discourse on this subject and understand. However, I feel a car with the engine it was born with is more valuable IF it can be documented that this is so. This said, do you think anyone, including those services that have a catalog of stampings that they believe to be genuine and used to compare with another BB's stamp can say with certainty that a particular stamp is factory or a restamp what with the restampers skills being what they are today?

[Roy S.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Roy,
I appreciate your discourse on this subject and understand. However, I feel a car with the engine it was born with is more valuable IF it can be documented that this is so. This said, do you think anyone, including those services that have a catalog of stampings that they believe to be genuine and used to compare with another BB's stamp can say with certainty that a particular stamp is factory or a restamp what with the restampers skills being what they are today?

I would agree with you implicitly, in a perfect world, the ideal car in our hobby is an original motor, unhit body, original trim tag, rare option combination, etc, etc. all off those features command a premium and a combination makes the desire even higher.

First an obvious fact in my mind, we are all human, humans do make mistakes.

Second let’s limit this discussion to big block cars.

I believe with my heart and soul, that there are individuals that can detect an original pad or non-original pad with 99% accuracy, and I would take their word to the bank.

With that said let me play what may appear to be the devil’s advocate for a moment, let’s suppose that thirty years ago an individual who was a interested in minutia started taking photos of big block engine pads. Where do you think he would start? Probably the biggest collection of like grouped cars he could find, either the earlier mentioned privately owned organization or the hobbyist owned organization, or both. Now let’s suppose he took all those pictures for the first 15 years at both places, then in 1992 the hobbyist organization started recognizing unrestored cars, but only 4 per class per event at one event per year (and for the first year no big blocks were judged simply because mid years were not accepted at that time for the class), while there were still in 1992 twenty big blocks per class in some cases of the restored cars at the one event.

In my earlier expose I indicated that 66% of the pads at a specific event were bad, I think that number is representative of the time frame, I do not think a larger percent of original motor cars exist today than did then. If 66% of the pads being photographed were bad, and let’s assume there was at the time one major player stamping motors, you could have 33% GM, 66%xy it really was not that bad there were two or three stampers but only one was a major player. When you compare them all what will you find. Is it possible the xy becomes accepted as right while GM appears to be the inept fraud? So while I think there is a definite advantage to a photo library when it comes to characteristics or tendencies or font or miss stamps, I also think because the original sample was tainted it is not bullet proof. I know for a fact restamp motors have passed the scrutiny of even the best, and frankly when they get that good, there is not much we can do about it. You can answer your own question now.

With all this said, remember my comment above: I believe with my heart and soul, that there are individuals that can detect an original pad or non-original pad with 99% accuracy, and I would take their word to the bank.

[Michael G.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

I think that in Roy excellent analysis' there is one rather large elephant lurking...

I don't really understand why, at this advanced date, given Roy's discussion, that either the "hobby" group or the "privately owned" group still makes any effort whatsoever to review the numbers on the pad for anything but their content, i.e. what the numbers mean rather than who put them there. A glance during judging should should identify the vehicle, date its engine's manufacture, and reference its horsepower. If it does so, why bother to guess (and in spite of our highly skilled judges expertise, often it amounts to a guess) at more about the pad's history than that? Ego?

Given the probability that today almost any judge can, and increasingly will, at one time or another, be presented with an bulletproof fake and be fooled as to the "genuineness", why do we still bother to take, what is best deemed "an educated guess". If we're wrong, it may cost someone who unknowingly thinks our analysis is above reproach, a lot of money. To what end, other than support those who would profit from our judges expertise and/or the profiter's own ability to fool them? Do the organizations, in general, care what the value of the cars really is; I think not, we want the car to be representative of the way it was manufactured, so why are we involved in perusing pads?

If both organizations were to abandon any reference to how the pad 'appears', then both organizations would immediately stop being the arbiters in this never-ending argument; we are not in the used car market, why do we insist on putting ourselves in the middle of something we make no profit from? To what end, in judging a vehicle, do we insist that its pad appearance detracts from its restoration? It only effects value.

From a practical view, for judging, a glance at the pad during judging should give the only pertinent information, not a puzzle to be solved. Let the purchaser of every car do his or her homework, or alternatively, pay for the appropriate services to validate originality and let the people who sell that validation service make the money and take the risk. Let's get out of the used car business.

[Wayne M.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

There'd be a lot more original '67 cylinder blocks out there today if it wasn't for this:



c

[Gene M.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

"Let's get out of the used car business."

Roy,
Realistically as long as an prestigious award is a fixed to the car's achievement you are in the used car business.

[Michael W.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

If it does so, why bother to guess (and in spite of our highly skilled judges expertise, often it amounts to a guess) at more about the pad's history than that? Ego?

Like almost every other facet and detail of the cars, the pad and it's numbers are evaluated for nothing more than resemblance to typical factory production. There's a world of difference between that and passing judgment on whether it is the genuine factory born-with pad.

The process used for judging pads is no different than that used for paint, interior, tires, glass. etc.

[Michael G.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Like almost every other facet and detail of the cars, the pad and it's numbers are evaluated for nothing more than resemblance to typical factory production. There's a world of difference between that and passing judgment on whether it is the genuine factory born-with pad.

You and I and most NCRS people clearly understand the difference between resemblance evaluation and an actual genuineness validation, so I'm not going to argue that with you. You should realize though, that for most non-NCRS people, your "world of difference" is really a very, very subtle, little understood, distinction.

In any case, the market, as perpetuated by many, many car sellers, very deliberately looks to elevate such an evaluated "resemblance" to a monetary valuation or validation of genuineness. We don't need to continue to do such unnecessary pad evaluation in order to pursue our hobby, especially since it is so widely misused and misappropriated. Today, it is playing into their hands and hurting us not them.

[Michael W.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

most NCRS people clearly understand the difference between resemblance evaluation and an actual genuineness validation,

I'm afraid that I cannot agree, given the small percentage of members who actually judge.

[Ara G.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

I think that in Roy excellent analysis' there is one rather large elephant lurking...

I don't really understand why, at this advanced date, given Roy's discussion, that either the "hobby" group or the "privately owned" group still makes any effort whatsoever to review the numbers on the pad for anything but their content, i.e. what the numbers mean rather than who put them there. A glance during judging should should identify the vehicle, date its engine's manufacture, and reference its horsepower. If it does so, why bother to guess (and in spite of our highly skilled judges expertise, often it amounts to a guess) at more about the pad's history than that? Ego?

Given the probability that today almost any judge can, and increasingly will, at one time or another, be presented with an bulletproof fake and be fooled as to the "genuineness", why do we still bother to take, what is best deemed "an educated guess". If we're wrong, it may cost someone who unknowingly thinks our analysis is above reproach, a lot of money. To what end, other than support those who would profit from our judges expertise and/or the profiter's own ability to fool them? Do the organizations, in general, care what the value of the cars really is; I think not, we want the car to be representative of the way it was manufactured, so why are we involved in perusing pads?

If both organizations were to abandon any reference to how the pad 'appears', then both organizations would immediately stop being the arbiters in this never-ending argument; we are not in the used car market, why do we insist on putting ourselves in the middle of something we make no profit from? To what end, in judging a vehicle, do we insist that its pad appearance detracts from its restoration? It only effects value.

From a practical view, for judging, a glance at the pad during judging should give the only pertinent information, not a puzzle to be solved. Let the purchaser of every car do his or her homework, or alternatively, pay for the appropriate services to validate originality and let the people who sell that validation service make the money and take the risk. Let's get out of the used car business.

Mike, I have to chime in. I read your post a couple of times and I think, humbly, that some terminology you use in your post leads to me to think that you are melding two distinct "elephants". One being is the pad TFP, the other being is it the same exact engine with the same pad that it left St. Louis with. Those are 2 different things. Remember, NCRS judging ONLY judges the pad as whether it appears TFP. We do NOT certify cars, nor do we verify them as having their original motors that they left St. Louis with. The difference in these two tasks - TFP of pad verus if it's the original motor, is for a buyer to do. An original motor have a large effect on the value/price of the car, but for NCRS idealistic purposes, it matters not. A buyer may need/want to do his due diligence when purchasing an expensive 435 car (as he should), but original motor or not - NCRS does the SAME thing. We judge the pad as whether it meets the TFP criteria. If it does, it doesn't get a deduct. If it doesn't, the appropriate deduct is taken. Just because a presumed restamped motor comes to get judged doesn't mean he is laughed off the field and asked never to return. He may take the deduct and move on. Same principle applies to an owner who presents his car with reproduction bolt on wheels. We examine them to determine if they meet the TFP specs. There are 4500 points to use to make up for a pad call. This encourages more and more owners to bring their cars out for judging - regardless of whether they have the original motors or not. In my humble opinion (and there are a million members on here that know way more than I do) I think the NCRS has got it perfect as it relates to the judging of these fantastic cars. Just my two cents..ARA

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Bill Gould http://www.autoancestry.com/

THANKS ROY. All of your posts are spot on.

[Michael J.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Judging on my '67 L71 with the restoration NOM is always an adventure. Could be TFP so no deduction, or could be full 88 points, deduction for pad surface and both stamps, or once was in between, so kinda like a crapshoot.

[Gene M.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Judging on my '67 L71 with the restoration NOM is always an adventure. Could be TFP so no deduction, or could be full 88 points, deduction for pad surface and both stamps, or once was in between, so kinda like a crapshoot.

Mike,
Not a crapshoot, you are dealing with peoples knowledge which is more or less. A lesser pad knowledge, will over look what a more versed person knows on the subject. This is true for any area of the Corvette.
A good reason to present the car at different meets in various areas of the country. It gives you a wider perspective.

[Michael J.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Yes of course I know all that. But all the variations in judging experience doesn't help me, the owner, very much. Nothing to fix or correct like on my '64's judging over the years, just experience differences of judge on stamp pads, so good experience for them. Another reason I am hesitant to ever judge, no way I can see thousands of stamp pads to develop any expert distinctions. I'm way too old to start.

[Joseph S.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Michael, Sorry to say, but you are mistaken about the process for judging pads. Although it should be as you say, it is far from that. At the Regional and National Level, our judges are searching for "Original Engines" and judging accordingly. Agree with it or not, that is what is happening.

[Kenneth B.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Michael, Sorry to say, but you are mistaken about the process for judging pads. Although it should be as you say, it is far from that. At the Regional and National Level, our judges are searching for "Original Engines" and judging accordingly. Agree with it or not, that is what is happening.

Wonder how many of these judges were looking at stamp pads in the 50 & 60's when the Corvettes were new. They have been stamping pads since the mid 70's & given the few original blocks that were left I would like to know how they got thousands of picts/tracings of factory stamps. This stamping pad thing has gotten to be like a religion it's so because I say it is. My religion is the real one the other guys says he's full of crap he's the only that knows the true one.