Judging Protocol Question

[David R.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

I disagree. There is an answer. To be blunt, your car was not judged in accordance with the rules that govern addition/deletion of owner or dealer inspired options. Instead it was judged in accordance with the rules that govern addition/deletion of GM RPO equipment. Two very different animals indeed. That explains the large discrepancy in scores between your car and the '67.

The error should have been caught on the judging field.

I would agree with this. It appears that a car may have been denied a Top Flight due to inconsistent and/or incorrect interpretation of the NCRS judging guidelines. Although all instances of inconsistent judging are subject to human error, they should be minimal, not based on what some judges "like to see" and some do not. That's a matter of judge education, an ongoing subject that the NCRS is in fact continually (if not always successfully) addressing. On the other hand, how additions to the car that are clearly not factory installed, and are called out by the owner to be so should not be judged as though they were. Yes, there will rightly be deductions for modifications to the factory-correct car to accommodate the non-factory equipment, but as I understand it, the equipment itself is outside the scope of the standard.

It has always been interesting to see a car, not having been changed at all, be judged on two or three separate occasions by different judging teams. It would be nice if such cars scored very consistently, with a small margin of variation to allow for the human factor. When the difference is substantial, and potentially results in a Second Flight rather than a Top Flight because it appears a different set of judging guidelines may have been followed, well . . . obviously some work remains to be done. Judging these cars is a thankless job at the best of times, and by and large the judges do a universally admirable job. Starting with as level a playing field as possible is in both their and the car owner's best interests. That's what we all want. It's one of the more important reasons that the NCRS exists - Competent, consistent judging adhering to clearly delineated guidelines.

Just my opinion, of course.

[Chuck G.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

No, it sounds like some errors were committed. There is no direct deduction for having an aftermarket accessory installed but deductions are made for the modifications done to the car to make it fit.

Best example- no deduction for having a passenger side mirror, just a tiny deduct for having drilled holes in the body to attach it.

I'd address this with the Judging Chairman, especially since you stated in advance that this was not a factory AC car.

It does not apply. The rule is for adding/deleting 'GM' RPO components after the fact, not aftermarket stuff.

I disagree. There is an answer. To be blunt, your car was not judged in accordance with the rules that govern addition/deletion of owner or dealer inspired options. Instead it was judged in accordance with the rules that govern addition/deletion of GM RPO equipment. Two very different animals indeed. That explains the large discrepancy in scores between your car and the '67.

The error should have been caught on the judging field.

I agree 100% with Mike Ward, Frank.

[Joe C.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Team leader should never have signed off on that judging sheet. It appears to have been judged as an original air conditioned car.

Deductions should have been made only to the extent that original parts have been modified or deleted to accommodate the installation, not for additional parts that weren't in place originally.

[Reba W.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

We had a case exactly like this at a chapter meet two years ago. We eventually got Dave Brigham involved and he did provide an answer. I suggest that you contact him as his is the only opinion that matters.

[Dan A.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

I understand the need for consistency.

I think I understand the policy regarding add on items.

I see the reasoning questioning the Team Leaders support of the deductions.

I think I understand being close to the next higher flight award and possibly losing out to inconsistent judging. Or did he?

If I remember correctly the owners car is a '63. I do not know who the Mechanical team was but I suspect one of the members of that team was a well respected long time member with vast judging experience who has demonstrated his hands on talent as a restorer of his own cars.

Considering the Team Leader supported the deductions and the probable Mechanical Team I wonder if we have the whole picture. Paint and stamp pads are the two most contentious items. Since the owner asked questions here on the discussion board how to "doctor" his cars paint just prior to the event I feel compelled to ask the owner what transpired with the judging of his cars paint.

I'm wondering if a broader view might shed a different light.

I note that the owner did report on the Operations judging with regard to the add on a/c which he had asked about prior to the event.

[Ralph E.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

My opinion is that what has happened to Frank may be the reason why the number of cars to be judged at each event is down across the board.
Look at Lakeland and other recent meets and the numbers are down.

[Gene M.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Team leader should never have signed off on that judging sheet. It appears to have been judged as an original air conditioned car.

Deductions should have been made only to the extent that original parts have been modified or deleted to accommodate the installation, not for additional parts that weren't in place originally.

Joe,
You and others are missing the point. First I will inform you I have VINTAGE AIR in my car. There fore I am very intimate with the requirement of it's installation on a mid year. There are many modifications , parts removal and parts replacement for installation. I will go into detail of the install.

1. the alternator needs to be relocated to the left side of the car, loss of original mounts (67 style works here)
2. the wire harness modified to fit LH alternator and remove blower motor harness
3. voltage regulator and horn relay relocated or re configure the forward harness.
4. removal interior heater box and upper duct
5. removal under hood heater box
6. remove blower motor
7. remove passenger floor air vent grill, door, and cable
8. remove both side radio panels and replace with kit items
9. remove both cable control knobs and assemblies for heater and defroster and replace with electronic units
10. remove inner glove box and replace with shorter plastic unit
11. install block off plate for heater box
12. remove heater hoses and install & rerouted longer hoses thru passenger air duct
13. added fuse inline for compressor
14. added hoses, compressor, compressor braces, condenser, brackets on condenser, dryer, dryer brace, under hood harness, drive pulley and belt
15. interior ducting is total cover up on passenger side for data plates, some repositioning of under dash controls

From an operations point there is NO THREE SPEEDS FOR BLOWER, there is NO PULL FOR THE DEFROST KNOBS (it is all electric) There is a third knob to control temperature selection that on the lower radio panel totally not original configuration. And total loss of pass vent control. All these were not addressed, as it was stated all had passed.

Be informed there is nothing wrong it the celebration of a second flight. When one knowingly goes in with major issues of originality expect deductions. It is not good taste to assume the judging was unfair or improperly executed.

[Michael W.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Joe,
You and others are missing the point.

No, you've glossed over the part where the judges inspected the Vintage Air components and scored them as though they were GM RPO components.

That's the important bit.

[Albert C.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

I have one regional top flight two chapter top flights the last regional was at the WIS Midwest meet in Oconomoc WIS Last Sept our name Kent Curtis and car is in the new restorer mag that said.Every item on the judging sheet that recived a total deduct has a judges Initals and explaination in writing on the blank line after the deduction then the judge explains to the owner what the reason for the deduction is on every item the judge has the owner sign the sheet,That is the time to Question the decutions.Our car recived total points loss on vin derivative / assembly stamp /pad finish also the paint is base coat clear coat .We lost 202 total points .0 ops/interior 30/exterior 36 /mechanical 128 /chassis 8 TOP FLIGHT 95.7 .So Frank What Were Your Points Lost ? on Ops/interior/exterior/mechanical/chassis ? there must be more than 85 points total deduct on paint 45 total deduct on air conditioning .I looked at your car in the hangar the paint and interior every thing looked good to me.
PS. I left a plastic side pipe protector and a piece on rug in the jack storage compartment and got a deduct for NTP on the items.
AL CURTIS NCRS # 18808 1967 435 CONVERT MARINA BLUE /BLUE/WHT TOP

[Joe C.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Joe,
You and others are missing the point. First I will inform you I have VINTAGE AIR in my car. There fore I am very intimate with the requirement of it's installation on a mid year. There are many modifications , parts removal and parts replacement for installation. I will go into detail of the install.

1. the alternator needs to be relocated to the left side of the car, loss of original mounts (67 style works here)
2. the wire harness modified to fit LH alternator and remove blower motor harness
3. voltage regulator and horn relay relocated or re configure the forward harness.
4. removal interior heater box and upper duct
5. removal under hood heater box
6. remove blower motor
7. remove passenger floor air vent grill, door, and cable
8. remove both side radio panels and replace with kit items
9. remove both cable control knobs and assemblies for heater and defroster and replace with electronic units
10. remove inner glove box and replace with shorter plastic unit
11. install block off plate for heater box
12. remove heater hoses and install & rerouted longer hoses thru passenger air duct
13. added fuse inline for compressor
14. added hoses, compressor, compressor braces, condenser, brackets on condenser, dryer, dryer brace, under hood harness, drive pulley and belt
15. interior ducting is total cover up on passenger side for data plates, some repositioning of under dash controls

From an operations point there is NO THREE SPEEDS FOR BLOWER, there is NO PULL FOR THE DEFROST KNOBS (it is all electric) There is a third knob to control temperature selection that on the lower radio panel totally not original configuration. And total loss of pass vent control. All these were not addressed, as it was stated all had passed.

Be informed there is nothing wrong it the celebration of a second flight. When one knowingly goes in with major issues of originality expect deductions. It is not good taste to assume the judging was unfair or improperly executed.

Hi Gene,

According to the judging sheet posted in # 14 above (#17 Heating or Air Conditioning), all of the items shown were treated as "originally installed components" and all items received FULL deducts. Evaporator, condenser, compressor and drier should have not been judged and slashes through those items should have been indicated; all other items shown there should have been judged only to the extent that they diverge from original components. Although Frank Drano didn't not post the rest of his judging sheets involving interior components and chassis components associated with C60 configuration, then we must conclude that the entire car was judged as if it were an original C60 car as shown in the Mechanical judging sheet.

If the car was judged on the basis of an add-on Vintage Air option, then the sum total of deductions would certainly have been less. How much less? I have not the time nor the inclination to offer my subjective opinion versus the subjective opinion of another judge, relative to this.

[Scott K.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

BINGO!.. For example, when my 72 was judged, I got points off related to the luggage rack. It wasn't that a GM authorized rack was installed, but rather, the penetrations into the fiberglass to install the rack were deducts.

[Scott K.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

"Be informed there is nothing wrong it the celebration of a second flight. "

I'm always amazed at how participant's just assume they deserve a top-flight award. There is nothing wrong with 2nd flight. There is something very wrong when too many cars are top flight. I've seen some way "over restored" cars earn top flight. As these cars get older; the judging process needs to evolve to be a bit more practical. OR we may even need another flight level so that it's ok to make the modification to enjoy the car -- and be judged accordingly.

[Albert C.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

The Ops were judged in the parking lot before the cars were to enter the hanger .The Ops judge asked if the car will be judged as a air condition car ? Anser no he Aced the Ops judging 0 points deducted .Then inside the Hangar the Machanical judges took over they judged the air correctly.
45 points loss.85 total loss ? if Frank shows the full sheet. If the team leader was inforemed of this there would be a vaiance in writing on the sheets .The machanical judges are right in my opinion.
AL CURTIS NCRS # 18808

[Gene M.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

No, you've glossed over the part where the judges inspected the Vintage Air components and scored them as though they were GM RPO components.

That's the important bit.

The judges are not ignorant of what original air condition looks like. They are well aware it is an aftermarket system. Understand if you add options to a car that were production available it makes no difference if you use original, reproduction, aftermarket, junk yard scrap, or china pieces to compose the option it is still a full deduction. There is no requirement the system or separate parts be of any source. Assume somebody had Hooker side pipe headers on one car and expected it to be treated no deductions. Well no different with air condition. Full deduction. It is not presenting the car in the spirit of restoration. Next request would be vinyl decal to appear as big block hood on a small block.......... NO, it's a full deduction

[Gene M.]

Re: Judging Protocol Question

Hi Gene,

According to the judging sheet posted in # 14 above (#17 Heating or Air Conditioning), all of the items shown were treated as "originally installed components" and all items received FULL deducts. Evaporator, condenser, compressor and drier should have not been judged and slashes through those items should have been indicated; all other items shown there should have been judged only to the extent that they diverge from original components. Although Frank Drano didn't not post the rest of his judging sheets involving interior components and chassis components associated with C60 configuration, then we must conclude that the entire car was judged as if it were an original C60 car as shown in the Mechanical judging sheet.

If the car was judged on the basis of an add-on Vintage Air option, then the sum total of deductions would certainly have been less. How much less? I have not the time nor the inclination to offer my subjective opinion versus the subjective opinion of another judge, relative to this.

Joe,
I think the start of this post was stated as the car was NOT an air car. As I stated in my previous post "Understand if you add options to a car that were production available it makes no difference if you use original, reproduction, aftermarket, junk yard scrap, or china pieces to compose the option it is still a full deduction." There is no requirement in the judging reference manual that all or any of the parts are made by GM. Only that the GM available option be added or removed be a full deduction.

This is to keep cars restored in the spirit of restoration to replicate as produced originally. It is not how any person would like to have one's car optioned.