Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

[Don W.]

I have a related post and I'll post this as a more general question for all to see. Backgound info is the top and the question is at the bottom.




I asked: Since my fan, fan clutch, pulley and water pump are all incorrect, what are the most nearly accurate replacement parts and where should I look to find them. I figure I'll start aquiring the correct parts over the near-term so I can do a correct replacement sometime in the future when the water pump goes out.

Joe responded: Finding a correct waterpump is the easy part. You need a GM #3856284 casting if the car is a VERY early build 1969 or a GM #3940960. The 3856284 casting is easy to find; the 3940960 is a little more difficult. A source like Bill Mock or Arthur Gould can do a first class rebuild and can even supply you with a rebuilt pump of the correct casting number and date if you can't find a core. These pumps are dated, so if you want the most "correctness", you'll want one with a date 6 months or less prior to the car's build date. However, I don't think the dates are judged in NCRS Flight Judging.

For a fan clutch, the Eaton-manufactured GM #3916141 is the closest thing to original that you can get in a NEW fan clutch. In fact, the GM #3916141 was actually used in PRODUCTION for some 1969 Corvette big blocks. However, the configuration of it has changed slightly over the years so a current example is not 100% correct in every bit of detail.

For a fan, you need a GM #3888366. This is a 5 blade fan which has "66" stamped on the hub section. It's difficult to find and VERY expensive when you do find it. I've seen originals with asking prices of over $1,000. It is reproduced, though, and available for about $200.

For a waterpump pulley, you need a GM #3889372 to be 100% correct. Difficult to find and expensive but available in reproduction for about $200. You can also use a GM #3995644. It replaced the aforementioned pulley for SERVICE. However, it was discontinued quite awhile ago and is difficult/expensive to find NOS.

So my question is: How are the GM replacement parts scored during flight judging. I know there are deductions but I want to get some idea of what the impact is. For the the example here, I have 1972 + fan, fan clutch, pulley and water pump on my 1969 427 all of which are incorrect. Even those these part cover several years; 1971 to 1975 I think, they do not cover 1969. So if I get GM restoration parts for these items, what is the ball park scoring strategy and impact.

Thanks,

Don

[Terry M.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

Don,
It doesn't matter to the judges where you get the parts. They judge the parts based on their deviation from the original configuration, date, finish, installation, and completeness.

Some of what you point out, for example the diameter of the shaft is difficult to detect, and might pass unnoticed at some meets. More likely to be detected is the configuration of the fan clutch. I would have to see the water pump to asses if it is different enough to warrant a deduction -- my crystal ball is foggy today. I was up too late last night. For the pulley, I would be more concerned about the finish than the size of the hole.

I don't have score sheets, so I can't quantify what you would lose. The score sheets are available for download from one of those buttons at the top of the page. I would doubt you would lose more than 5 points for originality -- but that is a SWAG on my part.

[Ray G.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

Hello Don;
Most of the time Point deductions, though my experience, are based on the judges opinion of;
The availability of original and restoration of same. ie; reproduction tires cost points because there are Corvettes w/ original tires still holding air and reproductions are almost never exact.

Another example; reproduction bolts and washers securing the large triangular splash pans under 65-7. The bolts are dead on with the correct head marking, but the free spinning captive washer is the wrong size. The correct size and thickness washers are available ate major hardware stores.

We try to restore the original parts whenever possible. Or get an original to compare w/ the reproduction item.

Remember the vendor is selling his item and the wording used in advertising is sometimes confusing.
A GM Reproduction part does not have to look the same, just perform the same function.

Thats my 2 cents. Hope it helps.
Ray

[Terry M.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

Hello Don;
Most of the time Point deductions, though my experience, are based on the judges opinion of;
The availability of original and restoration of same. ie; reproduction tires cost points because there are Corvettes w/ original tires still holding air and reproductions are almost never exact.

Ray, I don't doubt that judges MAY base their deduction on the availability of a suitable reproduction -- THEY SHOULD NOT DO THAT. That is absolutely THE worst reason for taking a point deduction, and when I was Team Leader it would earn the judge a time out from judging. I know some current Team Leaders who also will not tolerate that kind of behavior from their judges. We need to send people doing that to a judging school.

The ONLY reason for taking a point deduction for originality is the five items I mentioned in my post above (for ease of memory: FDICC ), and each of those is worth 20% of the available originality points. That is the entire story. The challenge for the judge should be to be able to identify the proper configuration, finish, installation, date, or completeness. The judge does not need to be conversant in which source has the best reproduction or how available a given part might be.

[Ray G.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

Hello Terry;

Appreciate your expert input, especially as a Team Leader.

Was just passing on my experience and what I see actually happen.

My comment are just my 2 cents.

No Critique or insult intended.
Ray

[Jack H.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

The answer, what's the deduction for this/that part, isn't that straight forward, but it's not 'rocket science' either. At NCRS we try to put our rules of the road down in writing and we have publications that serve as guidelines. These are available to all (including the general public) through the NCRS Merchandise Center.

First, there's a Judging Guide book specific to the year of Corvette in question. You'll find 'guidance' statements in these books here and there. This is the from the National Team Leader (NTL) in charge of that division of Flight Judging. It tells his team judges how to score this/that aspect of certain parts. Look there first for how to deal with a given part. All Corvettes had tires, all Corvettes had window glass, all Corvettes had a battery, Etc.

Next, we have a publication called the NCRS Judging Reference Manual. The JRM provides overall rules for owners, judges and the various award/recognition categories the club sponsors. It has a section for Standard Deductions which is intended to be a superset of scoring guidelines that transcend individual model years of Corvette.

Specifically, three rules apply in general to all parts:

(1) Section 4, Rule 6: addresses GM Service Replacement Parts

(2) Section 4, Rule 7: addresses Reproduction Parts

(3) Section 4, Rule 10: addresses Non-GM Replacement Part that are 'incorrect'.

At one time, the distinction between these categories was pretty clear. But, that distinction today is VERY blurry!

Consider shock absorbers. GM did a spin off of its captive suppliers including AC, Delco, and Delco Remy. Therefore, these companies are no longer 'GM'. Does that move the parts they supply today from Rule 6 to Rule 10?

If I go to the Chevy dealer and buy a set of shocks, they'll most likely come in a Delco box but be brand labeled parts made by Monroe or Gabriel in Mexico for Delco. Do these fall under Rule 6, Rule 7 or Rule 10? You can make an argument that all three rules apply!

Last, we have a judging policy (NOT enumerated in our published books) on how to score a given part's originality. This has been recited by others.

Basically, you divide the universe of originality with five axis: Finish, Date, Installation, Configuration and Completeness. You deduct 20% of the available originality points on a given line item for each axis of difference the current part exhibits compared to the known original part to determine the point deduction.

This can be tricky because some scoring lines contain multiple items. For example, front LH bumper includes the bumper and the fasteners used to attach it to the car. So, judges have to allocate, shooting from the hip, how many of the available originality points should be allocated to the major and minor parts a given line item embraces.

Bottom line, that's how our scoring system works. Yes, you may get a difference here/there from this/that judge, but in terms of the car's overall 4500 points, these differences in judgement SHOULD have minor/negligible effect on the bottom line outcome of the car during Flight Judging.

[Terry M.]

Re: Flight Judging and GM Restoration Parts

Hello Terry;

Appreciate your expert input, especially as a Team Leader.

Was just passing on my experience and what I see actually happen.

My comment are just my 2 cents.

No Critique or insult intended.
Ray

Ray, I wasn't being critical of you. I know such rational is used, and used a lot more often than I would like. Once is more often than I would like. I didn't mean to give the impression I was shooting the messenger.

It is a subject that gets my dander up -- as you can see. The late John Woods and I had a learning experience on this issue many years ago (and I won't tell you where it happened to protect the guilty), and it became a hot button for both of us after that.