C2 flat capped U-joints

[Patrick H.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Interesting spreadsheet.

I think that it would be extremely beneficial for both owners and judges if a set of these were made for each year grouping.
They wouldn't have to be used to judge, but for possible reference?
It surely would promote consistency.

[Joseph S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Wow Mark! That's a LOT of work you've done. Impressive.

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Interesting spreadsheet. I think that it would be extremely beneficial for both owners and judges if a set of these were made for each year grouping. They wouldn't have to be used to judge, but for possible reference? It surely would promote consistency.

Hi Patrick,

When you say "a set...for each year grouping do you mean all of the ones shown below?

When I did my original spreadsheet, I hand-typed everything in there...rather time-consuming.

If electronic text versions of them could be provided (not pdf's), I could start doing some of them...Column I (Scoring Item and Line Item) is the real bear to create. Columns S and U need to be entered, too...but numbers are much easier to deal with than all the text.

As you know better than me, the biggest issue with this is assigning the % weighting after the individual line items are figured out...what's in there now is one man's opinion (mine) and as Gary already pointed out (and I agreed with) some, or many of the % assignments may be off when others look at them.

1953-55	1956-57	1958-62	1968-72	1973-77	1978-82
Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis
Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior
Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior
Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical
1984-86	1987-89	1990-91	1992-93	1994-96	1997-02
Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis	Chassis
Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior	Exterior
Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior	Interior
Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical	Mechanical

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Wow Mark! That's a LOT of work you've done. Impressive.

Thanks, Joe...appreciate the vote of confidence!

[Tony S.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

My post was intended only as a service to members who have often told me that they are looking for flat capped U-joints. I found them and passed along the word. Friendly message sent.

I'm not going to engage in the "Math discussions". Suffice it to say that evaluating a line item is more than just adding up the components because some components on a line item may carry more weight than other components on the same line item. For example, the lower A-arm on a C2 carries 5 total originality points. There are nine separate components with the lower A-arm. If the body of the A-arm itself...which is suppose to be painted gloss black...is left raw metal and unpainted but the other eight components are the correct finish, are you honestly going to argue that no FINISH deduction should be taken because only one of nine components has a "FINISH" issue? Good luck with that. You'll get a 1 point finish deduction, and the Team Leader won't reverse the deduction. I'll just leave it at that. An originality deduction for smaller items on a line item doesn't amount to a deduction, but the weightier items might. Staying with the lower A-arm, if the A-arm body is properly painted gloss black but the two ball joint rivets were mistakenly painted (they should be unpainted), no finish deduction should be taken for painted rivets because that feature is just too minor. Line items are taken on a case-by-case situation. It is valid to add up the components on a line item as some have suggested here, but don't assume that all components on a line always have equal weight. They don't. I can give numerous other examples to demonstrate that, but I'm going to leave this as....there are flat capped U-joints being sold at Paragon. Grab them while you can because the production U-joints on C2's and early C3's were flat capped.

Enjoy your day. Tony

[Patrick H.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Hi Patrick,

When you say "a set...for each year grouping do you mean all of the ones shown below?

Yes, that's what I meant.

I know, a lot of work. I was not inferring you would do it.
However, once done it would be "good" for a long time since the assigned points don't change when the JG's get revised.

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Yes, that's what I meant. I know, a lot of work...However, once done it would be "good" for a long time since the assigned points don't change when the JG's get revised.

initial cutoriginality points possible, condition points possibleScoring Category and Line Item DescriptionThen, following that, the column that has the greatest impact on all of any proposed CDCIF guidelines IMO is the 4^th one (D): - the each split-out line item is given.Data Needs to construct Single-Line Item CDCIF Guidelines for Scoring Sheets TDB_001.jpg

[Mike D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

That is awesome work on Mark's part. So, we have these spreadsheets loaded on an Ipad that has VIN, trim tag info, etc, then click on the box giving a deduction. The computer subtracts the deduction( be it 1 or .2 points from the line item total. At the end of judging you will have a more accurate score for the car. You eliminate the "write a comment but take no deduction" on the line item. hmmmm

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

...So, we have these spreadsheets loaded on an Ipad that has VIN, trim tag info, etc, then click on the box giving a deduction. The computer subtracts the deduction( be it 1 or .2 points from the line item total. At the end of judging you will have a more accurate score for the car. You eliminate the "write a comment but take no deduction" on the line item. hmmmm

Hi Mike (and thank you),

Hmmm...what an interesting concept - and I have thought about it; but it also may be a logistical can of worms...?

I guess I viewed what I was doing as a "tool" judges and owners could use to understand where they are under the CDCIF judging system. I was not envisioning the paper judging sheets ever disappearing (if that is where you were going?)

What you suggest (computerized recording of judging results on the field) is possible with today's technology, but probably rather impractical right now for implementation on the judging field for several reasons that pop into my mind right off the bat:

• Not all judges have IPads, or other devices that could do this
• Not all judges are computer-motivated(?)
• There are 4 Teams (I, E, M and C) that would all need to have "synced" IPads to pull all results together in a useful way at an event for one car
• My guess is no matter how computer-dexterous the IPad user is, this would slow down the judging process, which is always something to consider

All that being said, it's entirely possible - even if it involves some more complicated equations. Your comment prompted me to create the attached example (originality only), which shows how it might work...maybe it's just something those who want to use it can - and others who don't won't?

Thanks for your input!

CDCIF Single-Line Item Scoring Sheets with IF statements TDB_001.jpg

[Terry M.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Too bad there is not a "like" button ;like that infamous place. The number of "likes" might give one some indication of how high on the flag pole this idea would go.

I would be in for a test run.

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Too bad there is not a "like" button...The number of "likes" might give one some indication of how high on the flag pole this idea would go. I would be in for a test run.

Thanks, Terry

PS - I fixed the "IF" statements for Row 10...that should have been a full deduct (all 5 CDCIFs checked)...

CDCIF Single-Line Item Scoring Sheets with IF statements TDB(1)_001.jpg

[Patrick H.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

What you suggest (computerized recording of judging results on the field) is possible with today's technology, but probably rather impractical right now for implementation on the judging field for several reasons that pop into my mind right off the bat:

• Not all judges have IPads, or other devices that could do this
• Not all judges are computer-motivated(?)
• There are 4 Teams (I, E, M and C) that would all need to have "synced" IPads to pull all results together in a useful way at an event for one car
• My guess is no matter how computer-dexterous the IPad user is, this would slow down the judging process, which is always something to consider

All that being said, it's entirely possible - even if it involves some more complicated equations. Your comment prompted me to create the attached example (originality only), which shows how it might work...maybe it's just something those who want to use it can - and others who don't won't?

Thanks for your input!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]108202[/ATTACH]

I've said for many years that starting with the C4 and later we should judge using a scan tool given all the bar codes on the parts. It might make it much faster and more accurate.

I would guarantee you that an app could be written that would sync all 5 teams together and combine the results.

I find that writing down the comments usually takes longer than the judging.
If I could type them it would be faster and more legible.

[Mike D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

Actually, if the CDCIF deduction already has been established, the judge doesn't have to take the time to come up with a number, the computer has already done that. 20 years in the future, George Jetson has the NCRS Ipads with VIN and trim tag already entered by the team leader. Click, click, on the deduction squares, scroll down the list for the comment on the deduction, click, then tab to next item.
No need to take all that time writing the reason for the deduction and best of all, poor handwriting is eliminated. Scores then sent to judging chairman, and they are in the data base forever. This corvette scored 97.5 in 2027 on this date.... Should George Jetson have been George McFly???Ha Ha

[Mark F.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

...C4 and later we should judge using a scan tool given all the bar codes on the parts. It might make it much faster and more accurate...sync all 5 teams together and combine the results...faster and more legible.

...George Jetson (the judge) doesn't have to take the time to come up with a number...Click, click, on the deduction squares, scroll down the list for the comment on the deduction, click, then tab to next item...and best of all, poor handwriting is eliminated...

Patrick, Mike and others - all excellent points!

Questions:

1. I think this post has gone far afield from what Tony started in his OP (sorry, Tony - I did not intend to hi-jack your string!). So, should this become a separate post?
2. Whether it might be used on the judging field sometime down the road, or if it is simply a resource for judges and owners to consult as they wish - there seems to be some interest in the concept. Either way, what do you think are the next steps if there is enough interest to get it run up someone's flag pole? (thx, Terry!)

I know what I can do on the Excel side if I'm given the electronic data...
Thanks for all the input!

[Mike D.]

Re: C2 flat capped U-joints

At our last chapter judging event, we wrote a lot of notes for NTP, but didn't deduct any points. A part worth 1 point then using CDCIF, takes time to process. Just figuring out that part is worth 1 point takes time. We have a new chapter with new judges with CDCIF a foreign language to some of them. I heard from 1 member that members don't want to judge because it is too hard. What if these spreadsheets were in Frisco TX in 4 weeks, and we had time to look them over and have a discussion? I am game on 10/21 since we will be shaking hands and talking corvettes anyway and I don't believe I will be judging ops.