How have judging standards changed?

[Michael G.]

After reading a few recent posts, I was just wondering how a c2 car that was judged in the early 90's and received a national Top Flight, Bloomington Gold and a Duntov would likely fare in today's judging? (Assuming it was still in pretty much the same condition). Anybody have an idea what areas of the car might see some different opinions than it got earlier, or where the earilier standards might be more (or less) severe?


Thanks, Mike

[Harmon C.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

If the car would be exactly the same and was all original the score could be about the same.Like a 100 mile car still showroom new. If the car had alot of repo parts the judges today would find lots of things NTFP and the score would be alot less. To compare a judge today with 400 judging points to a 50 point judge in 1990 would be like night and day. In 1990 their were less experts and now they all are.

[Tom H.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

I don't think the standards have really changed, but the available information has changed a ton. Look at a judging guide from 15 or 20 years ago and look at one now. Many revisions, corrections, and additions. I think a car with a high score today could possibly be a much better car than one that scored highly 15 or 20 years ago, just due to the fact that we know more about the cars and the procedures used to produce them than we did years ago.

Many thanks would have to go out to members here as well as other people who have spent countless hours studying and researching these cars so we can preserve and restore them to the highest standard.

[Gene M.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

Mike,
I feel the judging was more difficult years ago when clear coated, or non lacquer paint was a full deduction. Today incorrect clear coats and urethane paint is accepted. Also restamping was not accepted and was a full deduct. Today a detected restamp can still score points. Standards have been truly compromised to appeal to owners attaining higher scoring cars and not accepting the deductions rather than maintaining the restoration standard to as produced by GM. To the truly restored Corvette that is painted correctly with lacquer and maintains it's original block the judging has not really changed. Today it has just made it easier for "parts cars" or wrong motor drivers to make top flight.

[Ridge K.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

Mike,
I feel the judging was more difficult years ago when clear coated, or non lacquer paint was a full deduction. Today incorrect clear coats and urethane paint is accepted. Also restamping was not accepted and was a full deduct. Today a detected restamp can still score points. Standards have been truly compromised to appeal to owners attaining higher scoring cars and not accepting the deductions rather than maintaining the restoration standard to as produced by GM. To the truly restored Corvette that is painted correctly with lacquer and maintains it's original block the judging has not really changed. Today it has just made it easier for "parts cars" or wrong motor drivers to make top flight.

Gene, I assume you mean that, "today incorrect clear coats and urethane paint is accepted", to mean, that they are accepted, IF,....the door jams, wiper vents, and a few other areas (any other area the judge feels should be dull) are mechanically or chemically, "dulled" down.
Just last year there was an excellent post by a fairly new member who had just completed a total restoration of a 1967, and missed his top flight in first-time out NCRS judging, due to being docked 100% points on paint, with a base coat/clear coat paint job.
This lead to a couple intensive discussions on the TDB, about how this could happen. (losing 100% of paint points). By the way, several experienced judges, defended the loss of 100% of paint points. No criticism here, just my observation.
IMHO, judging appears much more difficult today, as opposed to the descriptions I've personally heard about 20+ years ago. The judges simply have much more knowledge base, today, as more and more "not as factory applied" issues have been discovered.
In November of 2008, NCRS judging chairman Roy Sinor offered a post with an explanation as to how someone could lose 100% of paint points. I saved his words.

Re: Paint Judging?
It is extremely hard to answer these questions and answer all of them appropriately.

First no where in any NCRS publication have you seen any wording that says your car must be painted with the material used at the factory. But you will see wording that says that your car must appear to be painted with the material originally used at the factory and as applied at the factory.

We are dealing with two unrelated but connected issues Body Color and Body Paint.

The standard for Body color reads:

Body Color

Originality 85

No Originality Deduction
body trim plate color code, if applicable. The shade and the metallic
content and/or size, if applicable, are consistent with that applied at the
factory.

Deduct 20% of Originality
body trim plate color code, if applicable. However, the color shade is not
consistent with the color shade applied at the factory.

Deduct 50% of Originality
body trim plate color code, if applicable. However, the metallic content
and/or size, if applicable, is not consistent with the metallic content/size
applied at the factory.

Deduct 100% of Originality
stinger, and/or hardtop is a non-factory color, an unavailable factory color
combination or it is applied in an inappropriate year of manufacture.

Deduct 100% of Originality
installed body trim plate color code, if applicable, or is a non-factory color
or is a factory color applied in an inappropriate year of manufacture.

Many will read this and say oh my gosh the 100% deducts are out of line. I submit they are not we are talking about the NCRS our judging standard reads:



So the above 100% deductions are certainly within reason given our judging standard and the small number of points that are applied to such a major item.



The standard for body paint which is where paint type comes into consideration reads

Body Paint

Originality 45 Condition 40

No Originality Deduction
finish or appears to have been refinished with the appropriate factory
applied material and appears consistent with factory application methods.
Judge Condition separately.

Deduct 20% of Originality - for either A or B below. All Corvettes were
produced under assembly line conditions subject to established
acceptable manufacturing conditions and tolerances.

A. The body paint appears to have been refinished with the
appropriate factory applied material, however, the degree of
coverage is inconsistent with factory application methods. Body
paint is evident on weather-stripping or trim which was applied after
the factory applied paint. Judge Condition separately.

B. Over-Restoration
Factory applied body paint typically has evidence of orange peel or
over spray in areas that are typical for that year of application.
Finishes that exceed typical factory standards shall receive
deduction. Judge Condition separately.

Deduct 50% of Originality
refinished with a material not consistent with factory application, however,
the appearance is consistent with factory application methods. Judge
Condition separately.



A. The body paint appears to have been refinished with a material not
consistent with factory application and the appearance is not
consistent with factory application methods. Total deduction for
Originality and Condition.

B. The presence of any custom paint modifications which shall include
lettering (any media), pin striping, race car numbers, race style
stripes, flames or any other non-factory inspired additions. Total
deduction for Originality and Condition.

Our judging standard also says that you must score at least 10% originality to gain condition points. This is the rub that causes such a large deduction in body paint.

[Jack H.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

In general, the car ought to score as it did in the early 90's with a few caveats:

(1) There is now a rather 'stiff' deduction for the use of 1-piece front clip components that wasn't in effect in earlier years. Reproduction, press-molded, jig assembled clip assy's are available now where they weren't in prior years.

(2) There's a standard deduction process for paint/color in terms of exterior paint that's new and we see MORE deductions for 'over-restoration' than we used to.

(3) There's a requirement for Team Leader inspection of the tags for cars factory equipped with trim tags that's new. If an older restoration vehicle was executed via trim tag replacement, there's a liklihood it'll be 'called' with a resulting bar against receiving Top Flight status regardless of overall score.

Those are the major changes I can think of which could make for significant judging outcome results today vs. yesterday...

[Grant M.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

Jack,

You mention the current availability of press-moulded, jig-assembled front clips. Would you recommend one of these as opposed to having someone (a body shop) "build-up" a front clip using all the various pieces? Secondly, I repeatedly see ads for I think "Corvette Image" out of Oregon, I believe, advertising such clips. Any opinion on their quality/fit?

Thanks,

Grant

[Jack H.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

That question is impossible to answer. You take away the specifics of WHO is doing the work of assembling individual panels, what his/her prior experience level is, Etc.

For example, we have one local paint/body man in town here who routinely gets $25K (or more) for a turn-key body job. It takes him about THREE YEARS to execute the job.

He starts by TOTALLY dissembling each car into individual body panel parts and hand re-assemblying those parts, making hand laid repairs as needed. His philosophy is the factory original assy process was quick & dirty to start with and can't be trusted (given a car's age & prior use) not to bend/flex and 'distrub' the finished exterior paint...

That's going OVERBOARD in my opinion, but it makes my point about the question being unanswerable without getting VERY specific!

Now, there are several sources for press molded, jig assembled clip components. Initially, these were greeted with GREAT acceptance as 'THE SOLUTION'. But, different restorers experienced different results, some complaining of porosity/panel composition problems that resulted in paint deterioration over time.

I can't comment on whose clip products fare with what success today. But, given the choice, I'd always opt to professionally hand repair a damaged factory original clip and/or seek a reasonably priced factory original donor clip for the job.

It's a matter of time, relative experience, and cost that can be VERY fuzzy to resolve...

[Eric J.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

If the car was "restored" to the 1990 era Judging guide, as often occured, then there may be some trouble. If the car was a fairly original car it should be OK as stated earlier, it may in fact score higher. Eric

[Dick W.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

Michael, one caveat if the car has changed hands since it was judged. Suppose the car had all the "unobtainium" parts when it was judged in the '90's. Sometime between then and now several or all of the "unobtainium" parts and pieces were replaced with repro or over the counter GM parts. (This happens more often that one realizes). That could/would make a tremendous difference in the score

[Gene M.]

[Terry M.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

[QUOTE=Gene Manno (8571);398989]
NCRS does not want exterior judges that are experienced restoration/paint people that can tell the difference in a heart beat between bc/cc or anything else and lacquer. I was told that 1st hand by Roy himself in a seminar. QUOTE]

Gene, I suggest there was some misunderstanding, or perhaps there is more context to your conversation with Roy.

I know of at least three National level exterior judges who have worked in the paint industry, and I have attended judging schools about paint at various events with all three of them leading the school. One of them is listed on the first page of The Restorer as the Paint/Body Advisor. These gentlemen give freely of their expertise, and base their observations on their professional experience. I would suggest to you that NCRS wants and needs their expertise.

When judging paint the issue is not what material the finish is, but rather the APPEARANCE of the finish, and how that appearance deviates from the factory applied finish. Perhaps Roy was trying to make the point that we don't need those individuals who CAN tell one finish material from another because that skill is unnecessary to the NCRS judging process. Even if these individuals, or others, can identify the type of modern finish used on a specific Corvette, it is NOT material to the judging process.

[Harmon C.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

[quote=Gene Manno (8571);398989]

[Grant M.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

Jack,

Thanks for that. It jives reasonable well with what a Corvette restoration shop in Buffalo told me many years ago when asked about having my front end repaired; it had been hit some number of years before I bought it and never properly repaired (headlight door fit issues on one side owing to bent/de-laminating panel from the header). The shop owner said that the pre-assembled front-ends (he didn't specifically refer to ones that include bonding strips etc--it was more of a broad statement) were difficult to 'fit' properly and recommended repair by replacing the fenders, bonding strips etc on a piece-by-piece basis. I think that's what I might pursue, given your (and his) advice.

Thanks again!

grant

[Jack H.]

Re: How have judging standards changed?

I politely disagree. Here's why.

"#1 is not true, there has always been deduction for evidence of body repair (viewed on underside also) including wrong body panels and missing bonding strips."

That's true, but we left the magnitude of the deduction up to the team judges. Now, our NCRS Judging Reference manual defines the deduction in a Winter 2005 update.

It speaks directly to the scoring line item "Body Fiberglass and Component Fit" worth 65 originality points and 55 condition points. It instructs judges to deduct 50% of the originality points for the presense of a 1-piece front end that has bonding strips affixed and a whoping 80% of the originality points for a 1-piece front end that lacks bonding strips.

Now, this line item covers the ENTIRE CAR. Figure you've got a front clip, doors/roof, and a rear clip and the front end constitutes roughly one third of the car's exterior body panels. A 50-80% 'hit' for the use of a 1-piece front clip is a HUGE penalty and this IS a new judging guideline...

"#3 it used to be if tags were found to be changed by any judge the flight judging for that car stops, period."

Untrue... In the past there were two judging separate judging rules ennumerated by the NCRS Judging Reference Manual. Section 2, Rule 1 dealt specifically with a car's VIN tag. It's unchanged.

It's well written and allows cars to be judged if they have what 'appears' to be the factory original VIN tag properly affixed, a valid State-issued replacement VIN tag, OR a properly documented GM supplied service replacement VIN tag. Without one of the three, the car can NOT be Flight judged.

But, the rule recognizes and teaches the existance of GM's VIN/Trim tag replacement program AND opens the door to allow judging of cars whose only sin was they 'lost' their factory original VIN tag through the prior ownership chain (State-issued tags are OK).

Now, trim tags used to be covered by the NCRS Judging Reference Manual under Section 4, Rule 13 in the Standard Deduction section. There was NO REQUIREMENT for a car to either have a trim tag affixed or that it be the correct/original. The penalty was a total deduction on those parts affected (exterior color, interior color and trim). The car could still be Flight Judged.

Now, the change brought about by the Winter 2005 re-write is to bar such cars from receiving Top Flight regardless of their score...

True a full deduction on exterior color, interior color and trim would make it impossible for a given car to Top Flight at the raw score level. But, I think it's still possible for a 'driver' car to garner the award with mileage driven credit. But, not today!

So, that's a judging policy change that's stiffer than before.