C2 flat capped U-joints

[Tony S.]

Paragon is now selling half shaft U-joints with flat caps and no zerk. Good way to avoid a 1-point deduct for configuration on your half shafts. Not sure how long the supplies will last.

[Alan D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Still lacks part numbers & bowtie, what does retainer look like? Still should be something taken since it's not as factory made. comments???

[Tony S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

That's true, but from a judging standpoint when the U-joints are installed you can't really see those features anyway. From what I've been seeing as a Regional and National judge for 63 to 66, I've been mostly seeing stepped capped U-joints which get an automatic 1-point config deduct. If anyone installs this Paragon variety, they'll get full credit. My judging partner and I don't spend more than 5 seconds looking at half shafts and U-joints, so it's a quick scan and move on to the next line item. Tony

[Joe L.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Still lacks part numbers & bowtie, what does retainer look like? Still should be something taken since it's not as factory made. comments???

Alan------

Not all original half shaft u-joints had "bow-tie" or GM part numbers. These were 1350 series u-joints which were used for a wide array of other GM applications of the day. They were manufactured by Spicer as well as by internal GM Divisions and, perhaps, others.

[Gary B.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

That's true, but from a judging standpoint when the U-joints are installed you can't really see those features anyway. From what I've been seeing as a Regional and National judge for 63 to 66, I've been mostly seeing stepped capped U-joints which get an automatic 1-point config deduct. If anyone installs this Paragon variety, they'll get full credit. My judging partner and I don't spend more than 5 seconds looking at half shafts and U-joints, so it's a quick scan and move on to the next line item. Tony

Tony,





Driveshaft: qty=1
Halfshafts: qty=2
Driveshaft front yoke: qty=1
U-bolts (plus 12 lock washers and 12 nuts): qty=6
French locks: qty=2
U-joints: qty=6
Outboard halfshaft flanges: qty=2
Spring clips: qty=6





Gary

[Alan D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Yes, really can not argue on the judging points.
Thanks Joe, did not know others were used (not surprised), just remember I id mine since they had
"bow-tie" & GM part numbers

[Joseph S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Well stated Gary! We actually use this example in the Judges Retreat class. Specifically to point out how hard it is to get to a full 1 point deduction. There are so many pieces there for the caps to worth a full point.

[Harry S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

It's either judges don't understand CDCIF, don't want to use it or are mathematically challenged.

He is another example. 1963 Dash Pads 12 originality and 8 for condition. The right pad plastic insert was installed improperly. Let's do the math, 6 points per pad (the easy part), 20% of 6 points for installation = 1.2 points or a total of a one (1) point deduction. (another easy calculation).

The 400 level judge took a 3 point deduction, a 50% deduction instead of 20%. The deduction stayed, amazing!

I just looked at the sheets just to make sure of the numbers.

[Dave S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

It's either judges don't understand CDCIF, don't want to use it or are mathematically challenged.

He is another example. 1963 Dash Pads 12 originality and 8 for condition. The right pad plastic insert was installed improperly. Let's do the math, 6 points per pad (the easy part), 20% of 6 points for installation = 1.2 points or a total of a one (1) point deduction. (another easy calculation).

The 400 level judge took a 6 point deduction. The deduction stayed, amazing!

These examples are why the NCRS judging process has a bad name and rightfully so. Experienced judges looking to take deductions for anything and everything weather factual, perceived or subjective. It should be a process where things are 1/2 full and not 1/2 empty.

There are all to many examples like these.

[Mike D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

We will spank Tony at the next regional. Sometimes the owner needs to school the judges. I use CDCIF except on std deduction items. More judging schools on CDCIF? Items like the example above are noted as non typical but no deduction, in my opinion.

[Gary J.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

It would be nice if the judging sheets were broken down like that, but I don’t see that happening. It could be done.

[Patrick H.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

More judging schools on CDCIF? Items like the example above are noted as non typical but no deduction, in my opinion.

I think that many "experienced" or "seasoned" judges don't pay attention to the schools, and do the same thing as always once they hit the judging floor.

This is why in my judging schools I tell the owners that they need to know their cars better than the judges. The owner should catch deductions like this and attempt to have them corrected. Many of the "not paying attention" judges will correct their score once they see that taking 1 point on a 3 point item (for example) makes little sense from a CDCIF standpoint.

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

It would be nice if the judging sheets were broken down like that...It could be done.

very unwieldy and probably ill-advised for judging field use^stOriginality Point CDCIF Percentage WeightingOriginality Points Possible. I have broken out all the multi-element line items in the 2012 version of the C2 judging sheets into separate rows for each element listed. Light yellow rows show multi-line items with 23 or more

[Gary B.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Mark,

Downright amazing!

For the driveshaft and halfshafts line item I see you gave 75% to the driveshaft and 25% to the halfshafts; Yielding 1.3 pts for everything associated with the halfshafts. Not much there to deduct for the end cap face configuration.

For each of the driveshaft and halfshaft items the granularity could of course be increased to list each sub-item. But then the spreadsheet would be 5 or 10 times longer and totally unwieldy.

Gary

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Mark,...For the driveshaft and halfshafts line item I see you gave 75% to the driveshaft and 25% to the halfshafts...For each of the driveshaft and halfshaft items the granularity could of course be increased to list each sub-item. But then the spreadsheet would be 5 or 10 times longer and totally unwieldy. Gary

Agree - UNWIELDY indeed!

When I built this, I used the exact wording on the scoring sheets and did not dive deeper into sub-components if they were not listed on the scoring sheets.

And now that you point that out for the drive shaft and half shafts I think the split there probably should have been 50% 50% - or maybe some might say 33%-33%-33% (1 driveshaft, 2 halfshafts)?

I know my car very well and I have always been very impressed with the consistency and fairness in how it has been judged...10 different guys + the NTL at each of three different events (33 "person-judgings" in all)! CDCIF started making more sense to me when I looked at those judging results and read the comments about why there were deductions...

I did a separate version where I rounded the decimal numbers up or down - didn't like that...and quite frankly, you could go nuts with all of these numbers!