NOS Exhaust Pipes vs Reproduction

[Harmon C.]

Re: NOS Exhaust Pipes vs Reproduction

First let me say I hope Sheldon doesn't feel like I'm hijacking his thread. The discussion of NOS parts seems to fit.
Terry, I always appreciate your commentary. Especially concerning potential judging issues, your thoughts are always extremely helpful, and I appreciate them very much.
Very quickly, my definition of NOS parts. is a obviously new and unused part, that is verifiable with either a correct era, original (and aged) GM part sticker, or found still in a correct era, GM parts box, as sold over a GM parts counter, and a correct GM part number is obviously stamped on the box end panel (not written in pen as many "for sale" parts are). I am fortunate of having the personal experience of having purchased GM parts since about 1969, which aids me personally in verifing correct parts.
I agree 100% with you, that a service replacment parts sold in say,...1985, for a 1967 Corvette, may have some variations designed to help it fit additional models. And, could have variations such as embossed parts numbers, or lack of, such as is found in service replacement mufflers.
But, I gave a very good example of a Winters intake manifold I found, and purchased, that exibits an original foundry casting number exactly in the timeframe that the model it was installed on were rolling off the assembly line. Is it rare to find such a part?......yes. Is it impossible?.......no, I have a shop full of them.
My question to Lyle, if he agrees that such parts exist, as pretty much proven that parts are available for sale in dealerships for the current model year, would those parts be considered a "copy".
I've discussed this issue with many experienced judges. The majority have told me that when they encounter a component that appears to be a NOS part installed, they take the time to determine if the parts is correct in design (as ssembliy line installed parts). I have had (only a couple) of experienced judges, tell me that "NOS service replacement parts ARE different than original parts".
I consider Lyle's views on the mark, and hoped he would add some further detail to the comment about "copy of a copy".
As always, thank you for your invaluable help, as I learn the finer points of correct restoration of these cars, that all of us members dearly love. Ridge

Ridge
A part like the intake you used in your example could be 100% correct if made during the same model year as you stated and recive no deductions. If it was made 5 years later and as an example one of the molds put a line or hump on the finished product that was never seen on any factory installed manifold some judges could see fit to take a point or two for originalty. What I was pointing out in my comment was if I was spending the money to tool up and make a 100% correct part for NCRS judging I would not use a NOS part of any vintage but instead use a known factory installed original system to make the part as correct as I could.
I also know that in the parts factory I worked the NOS service replacement parts were made from the rejected parts that failed to pass inspection the first time around. In this case if an intake manifold had a small sand hole when tested. The repair made by a skilled welder may have passed GM's standard but an NCRS judge who never has seen a factory weld repair on a known original factory installed manifold could take a small deduction because welded parts were service replacements when ever they were made.
The best way to look at NOS parts is the way a good judge does. Is the part you see exactly like all the ones you have seen on known original cars? If it is their is no deduction. If you can write down on the judging sheet a reason it is not the same a deduction should be taken.

[James W.]

Re: NOS Exhaust Pipes vs Reproduction

Steve,

Even better is to become involved in judging. The system is not as complicated as it seems, although there is always room for disagreement. There is no such thing as a 100 point car, at least not at my house, so you balance whether points lost are worth money spent.

My friend had a 62 that had some of the worst looking parts you could imagine. He always Top Flighted, because he always got 100% of the originality points and took hits on condition.

One thing to be much more concerned with is Operations Judging. If you look at your score sheets you'll notice that many items have only on eline item. With 25 points per line, they can add up very quickly and can account for hundreds of points.

IMHO original in good to excellent condition is best, knowing that some points may be lost due to condition. You can get some points back by driving the car to meets, having a small NCRS sticker and a fire extinguisher when judged.

Jim

[Ridge K.]

Re: NOS Exhaust Pipes vs Reproduction

Ridge
A part like the intake you used in your example could be 100% correct if made during the same model year as you stated and recive no deductions. If it was made 5 years later and as an example one of the molds put a line or hump on the finished product that was never seen on any factory installed manifold some judges could see fit to take a point or two for originalty. What I was pointing out in my comment was if I was spending the money to tool up and make a 100% correct part for NCRS judging I would not use a NOS part of any vintage but instead use a known factory installed original system to make the part as correct as I could.
I also know that in the parts factory I worked the NOS service replacement parts were made from the rejected parts that failed to pass inspection the first time around. In this case if an intake manifold had a small sand hole when tested. The repair made by a skilled welder may have passed GM's standard but an NCRS judge who never has seen a factory weld repair on a known original factory installed manifold could take a small deduction because welded parts were service replacements when ever they were made.
The best way to look at NOS parts is the way a good judge does. Is the part you see exactly like all the ones you have seen on known original cars? If it is their is no deduction. If you can write down on the judging sheet a reason it is not the same a deduction should be taken.

Thanks Lyle, for that clarification. Sounds good to me. Ridge.

[Louie M.]

Re: NOS Exhaust Pipes vs Reproduction

. The systems that gardner is building is single wall but is supposed to have the same wrinkles and flat spots like originals.
Sheldon

I talked with Gardner today. They told me that the pipes they are now making for midyears will be flattened like the originals, EXCEPT where there are bends. This should be easy to spot compared to originals.