327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

[Michael W.]

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.

The rules are consistent though- a deduction has to be justified no matter what. It's also a fact that bad pads have slipped through while perfectly good pads have been called.

Given the time limitations and physical constraints of most judging meets, it would be foolish for a person to hang his hat on accurate assessments each and every time.

[Michael G.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

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. ..ARA

We're hopefully not that naive, though, there is a very significant unintended effectnothing

[Joseph S.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Mike, Without knowing, you have just publicly voiced a point I have been trying to make for years. Ara, you will certainly understand this statement: If NCRS and the other big Show would do away with making a judgment of engine pads and the stamps placed on them, the only people who would RE-Broach and RE-Stamp an engine pad for a Corvette would be someone who would be looking to deceive for monetary purposes.

Today, this process is done on nearly half or more restorations in order to gain more points on the judging field. At times this is done for historic accuracy, and at times it is done for monetary gain. If we were to eliminate this judging entirely NCRS would not be held culpable for certifying an engine or stamp pad. There has been and always will be too much controversy over this aspect of judging. Making for bad judging experiences for both the owners, and for the judge. I guess right up to the team leaders and judging chairperson. It's a subjective process with little evidence given for point deductions. Huge dollars are spent by many to try to do the right thing only to be told, SORRY, poor job! Yet no one will tell the owner what aspect about the job is incorrect. Just another reason to do away with judging pads.

Let's let the buyers and investors find a way to determine if the car has "The Real, built with, original engine block"! Yes, we are talking only about the engine block only. Other than the tires, battery and spark plugs, probably the most common item to fail during the regular use of these cars! We should only be concerned with the Restoration and Preservation of these Corvettes. Not the investment values!!

I guess I am done for now!

[Gene M.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Mike, Without knowing, you have just publicly voiced a point I have been trying to make for years. Ara, you will certainly understand this statement: If NCRS and the other big Show would do away with making a judgment of engine pads and the stamps placed on them, the only people who would RE-Broach and RE-Stamp an engine pad for a Corvette would be someone who would be looking to deceive for monetary purposes.

Today, this process is done on nearly half or more restorations in order to gain more points on the judging field. At times this is done for historic accuracy, and at times it is done for monetary gain. If we were to eliminate this judging entirely NCRS would not be held culpable for certifying an engine or stamp pad. There has been and always will be too much controversy over this aspect of judging. Making for bad judging experiences for both the owners, and for the judge. I guess right up to the team leaders and judging chairperson. It's a subjective process with little evidence given for point deductions. Huge dollars are spent by many to try to do the right thing only to be told, SORRY, poor job! Yet no one will tell the owner what aspect about the job is incorrect. Just another reason to do away with judging pads.

Let's let the buyers and investors find a way to determine if the car has "The Real, built with, original engine block"! Yes, we are talking only about the engine block only. Other than the tires, battery and spark plugs, probably the most common item to fail during the regular use of these cars! We should only be concerned with the Restoration and Preservation of these Corvettes. Not the investment values!!

I guess I am done for now!

If you stop doing engine pad numbers then why not stop doing all the numbers on the car? The only owners that are concerned about the engine pad are the guys that don’t have one done by GM workers. It should just be a formality just as any other number on the car is. But if you have some fabricated pad you should have an automatic deduction.

Consider a fabricated casting number or date the judging says a full deduction. Why is the engine pad different? Why is the pad called restoration but the casting number is not? Both cases are putting numbers different than what was there on the block being used prior to their removal. In each case the part is not from that car. It has become a representation of what GM built originally, but not correct in every way.

[Don H.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

This subject speaks to the reasons this club was formed, and how it sets the standard for judging classic cars, restored or not. It should be important to anyone passionate about older corvettes. Differing viewpoints on this subject well articulated by the highly experienced members contributing to this thread can only serve to benefit anyone reading these posts. Carry on, gentlemen.

[Michael G.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Gene and Roy, both your replies tend to extrapolate a bit too far. Nothing in my suggestion alluded to anything but the pad and there is no reason to assume that changing just one thing leads to a slippery slope of eliminating all number review or just sending in pics. The cold war domino theory doesn't apply to this.

As we all well know, the engine pad, in particular, much more than any other number or feature, says "original" to a potential buyer and is a much bigger issue than anything else. It goes well beyond "appearance" of originality. I didn't make this up, it is what it is.

I'm not suggesting ignoring the pad during flight judging, certainly the numbers there mean something in a restoration and should be judged for content "correctness". However, we can't have it both ways. We can't be protected from lawsuits by claiming only appearance of correctness, then wink when we review the pad with significantly greater scrutiny, such that it "appears" that we are judging originality. Well, we can, and some think we do, but we shouldn't.

In that regard, I think there's a revenue stream that we're missing: If we want to be the arbiters of pad originality, that's fine, we certainly have the experts and the ability to do so better than anyone, but we ought to separate that "service" from our flight judging, get errors and omission insurance, then do a very thourough inspection of the engine condition and documentation, all the way to head removal, if necessary, and charge, a lot, for that service. I'd pay to have my 63's pad thus validated by NCRS. Then there would never be a question, when someone said "NCRS" verified original engine, he'd have real NCRS documentation, not "implied' or "assumed" originality, just like he can do with the NCRS verification of the sticker today.

If we're worried about the prestige attached to the awards, I'd say that prestige would be enhanced, not damaged, by this, as then everyone, even those outside NCRS, would be clear on what we're certifying and what we're not certifying. That, in spite of the current prestige of our awards, isn't true today.

[Michael W.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

So much for this being a fun hobby if that's where it's going.

[Edward C.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Why would it be acceptable to accept a "reproduction engine stamp" but not acceptable to accept a reproduction trim tag?

You can't have it both ways without controversy. In fact, no matter what end result, some group will not be happy.

[Don H.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

I will hazard a guess on this one. Because an engine is a mechanical part, and can get destroyed or used up, and need to be replaced? A Trim Tag is not a part that should ever get used up or destroyed in normal use.

[Edward C.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

I will hazard a guess on this one. Because an engine is a mechanical part, and can get destroyed or used up, and need to be replaced? A Trim Tag is not a part that should ever get used up or destroyed in normal use.

That is one rational. And believe me I've heard it all before like most of us on here. But does that distinction really matter? The tag can still be damaged beyond repair in a accident. The point is then you have to make distinctions between what is required to be original to the car and what can be restored. And that means that the judging process does indeed make confirmations to some verification of originality. That will always cause confusion to those that do not know or to those that use that confusion to purposely misrepresent.

Difficult issue.

[Michael W.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Why would it be acceptable to accept a "reproduction engine stamp" but not acceptable to accept a reproduction trim tag?

Neither is accepted under NCRS judging. Both carry well thought out deductions.

[Edward C.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Neither is accepted under NCRS judging. Both carry well thought out deductions.

You get a deduct with a repro trim tag? I thought with a repro tag you get thrown out.

[Michael W.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

You get a deduct with a repro trim tag? I thought with a repro tag you get thrown out.

Sounds like you've been reading the CF version of judging rules. With a missing or non-original trim tag, judging simply stops as the configuration of the car as built cannot be determined. Can't judge the paint colour accuracy if you don't know what colour the car is supposed to be. The trim tag is the only component of the car that MUST be the factory original. VIN tags can be the orignal or state/province issued. No deduct.

'Reproduction engine stamps' don't get a free pass or any sort of special break. Much like most other components, if it's not TFP and the judge can quantify his reasoning, there's a suitable deduct. The deduct for a bad VIN or machine code is the same value as a non-function component (like the cigar lighter or clcok) during ops.

Because of the low points value assigned to the engine pad, I don't believe anyone who says they restamped it strictly for judging activities.

[Jim S.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Sounds like you've been reading the CF version of judging rules. With a missing or non-original trim tag, judging simply stops as the configuration of the car as built cannot be determined. Can't judge the paint colour accuracy if you don't know what colour the car is supposed to be. The trim tag is the only component of the car that MUST be the factory original. VIN tags can be the orignal or state/province issued. No deduct.

'Reproduction engine stamps' don't get a free pass or any sort of special break. Much like most other components, if it's not TFP and the judge can quantify his reasoning, there's a suitable deduct. The deduct for a bad VIN or machine code is the same value as a non-function component (like the cigar lighter or clcok) during ops.

Because of the low points value assigned to the engine pad, I don't believe anyone who says they restamped it strictly for judging activities.

Michael,
I post this for thought provoking discussion purposes only.

If in the case of a non original trim tag

[Edward C.]

Re: 327 & 427 for Same Car 194377S117307

Michael,
I post this for thought provoking discussion purposes only.

If in the case of a non original trim tag “judging simply stops as the configuration of the car as built cannot be determined”, how can judging continue if a stamp pad is determined as not TFP?
How can the engine ‘bolt on’ parts be judged if one doesn’t know what HP or accessories that engine was born with?

That is exactly the point I am trying to make. If they can say the engine numbers are TFP, why can't they also say the paint color is TFP even if the tag is a repro. If you make a 350 Vette into a 427 but the numbers look correct or even if they don't look correct judging continues.

Its a problem of philosophy not being consistent all across the board.