1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

[Stan B.]

1971 L48 Automatic, AC, PS,PB,PW

I recently ordered a vacuum hose kit for the headlight and windshield wiper system from Zip. The kit came with, and calls out for, a yellow striped hose running from vacuum tank to the center post on the relay valve. But my hose colors are white striped and Green Striped.
I also noticed on page 213 fig. 2.6 of the 1970-1972 NCRS Technical Information Manual and Judging Guide that the hoses in that picture look Green striped and White striped just like the ones on my car now. The hoses on my car appear to be original.
So can anyone tell me, is it supposed to be yellow striped ore white striped? Did the yellow stripe fade to appear white?
Thank you

[Mike E.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

Stan, the originals were a pale yellow. The reproductions are too bright a yellow. You can tell that about the originals by looking under tape, ties, and clips, where they have been shielded from the sun. Good observation on your part!

[Stan B.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

Thank You Mike for taking the time to answer my question. That helps a lot. I was beginning to think I was color blind.
Does the replacement hose count against me on points toward restoration? Should I keep originals or replace?

[Edward J.]

[David H.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

Thank You Mike for taking the time to answer my question. That helps a lot. I was beginning to think I was color blind.
Does the replacement hose count against me on points toward restoration? Should I keep originals or replace?

Stan

Those hoses are judged for appearance of Originality and Condition under "Chassis" (Section 2). Link below has sample judging sheets you can download for your year car.

https://www.ncrs.org/services/judging-score-sheets.php

There are 3 Originality points and 2 Condition points associated with those Striped Vacuum Hoses. Stripping color would be a Configuration issue and non-typical colors would get a 20% deduction for Configuration. If ALL those hoses had non-typical colors, then 20% of 3 points would yield a 0.6 point deduction. A SINGLE hose with non-typical color would get a proportionately smaller deduction.

A full point seems too harsh, and sheets don't show partial points. In you case, I would identify the issue with only a note, YMMV with other judges.

Appearance of Originality and Condition are judged separately. You judge Originality without regard to Condition and judge Condition without regard to Originality. (First judge appearance of Originality, and if 10% of those points remain, then judge Condition.

In your case, keeping your original hoses would result in NO Originality deductions. However, you might loose points on Condition. As you're planning to replace them, I'm guessing you have condition issues.

A more pressing concern is OPERATIONS. Those vacuum hoses are integral to proper headlight function (#5 on your Ops judging sheet). Problems there could cost you 25 points.

Important for owners to understand NCRS's Flight Judging process as well as judges.

Hope this helps. (Me, I'd change those hoses to avoid Ops issues.)

Dave

[Jeffrey S.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

I would whole heartedly agree with Edward that it's only original once and with Dave that an ops failure is very expensive but I also respectfully disagree with Dave on the recommendation to replace the hoses. If, in preparation for judging, a failure is found to be due to a hose, most failures are due to a bad connection to the vacuum device and can be corrected by t******* off a small (1/2"?) from the end or wrapping a strip of duct tape around the device post where the hose attaches. Replacing should be the last resort. I have all the original hoses on my '69 and had no issues with originality or condition at any judging including a National event. And, as of the last time I drove the car, everything was working perfectly.
Just my 2 cents.
Jeff

[Stan B.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

Thanks everyone for the advice. Right now everything is operational. The short hose from the tank to the "T" has been cut on before so I thought I would just replace everything but at the same time. I would like to have the car judged in the future and don't want to hurt it's ratings.
I'll try the clean up method and keep in place for now.

We don't appear to have a local chapter here in Georgia. Is there a service I can pay for where someone would judge my car as it is today and give me a long list of things I would need to correct before attempting an actual event?

[Stan B.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

I would like to aske one more question about the hose color.
The ZIP kit I ordered list that both hoses going to the headlight vacuum valves are yellow, but in on my car and in the picture, one of the hoses is Green and the other is pale white (yellow). Which is correct??? Should I assume the ZIP kit is incorrect?

[Patrick H.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

Should I assume the ZIP kit is incorrect?

Yes, that would be a valid assumption.

[Richard M.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

IMO, Doc Rebuild has the best vacuum hose kits out there. I've acquired many of their C3 HL Vacuum kits over the years and his are tops!

Not sure if he's open yet but if you want the highest quality and properly configured kit he's your best bet.

Rich
PS I just checked. Geoff and his wonderful wife are not open for business yet.... Linky

[Stan B.]

Re: 1971 Headlight Vacuum Supply hose color differs from the picture in the TIM&JG

UUUGGGHHH
If it wasn't for the members of NCRS a guy could spend a lot of money with these vendors for nothing.
Thanks again everyone!