Dealer installed items

[Patrick H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Jack that is all well and good for those items which can not be easily removed (luggage rack and side view mirror), but why on earth would anyone want to have the same debate we are having here when they are on the judging field, for an item which can be removed in less time than it took any one of us to type our message?

I vote for the full deduction for gross stupidity if those easily removed items are present. Remove the floor mats, dealer installed compass and locking gas cap, and none of this will matter. You will not have to worry about whether the deduction is 30% or 100%. You all did like I did and retained your original gas cap, right? Or is that the real issue, and we are just dancing around it?

I'm too busy laughing to even type "LOL" right now.



To follow a branch of the argument further,
I recall a recent photo of a dealership in Canada that swapped the tires on most of their brand new Corvettes (in 1972?) and installed BF Goodrich Radial T/As. Are these now going to be adopted as "dealer installed accessories?" How about the FI motor swapped into a base motor car and a new dealer invoice typed out because the customer wanted an FI car in a certain color combo. Now dealer installed? Definitely a GM part.

Yeah, OK, extreme but you get the idea.

Patrick

[Keith L.]

Re: Dealer installed items

In my opinion it's apples and oranges. Completely different situations. If a locking cap had been a hole drilled in the original cap and a lock cylinder installed it would be treated like a right side mirror. Damage to original part and added part not judged. But you can't judge an original cap when it's not there. I'm kinda new but I get it.

[Harmon C.]

Re: Dealer installed items

To say a gas cap is like a luggage rack or a right hand mirror is not a good example of the issue you are trying to prove. In the case of the luggage rack and the RH mirror the item is added to the Corvette and can be rusty bent and total junk and recive the same deduction as a nice new part. The deduction is for the added holes or damage to the fiberglass panels not the added part.
In the case of the locking gas cap it has replaced the factory installed cap is gone so you must judge what you see. I have seen both smooth and rough finish chrome gas caps used on Corvettes and have no idea if both were sold over the counter by gm but it really does not matter.
Of the five areas of originality I think the locking cap fails the finish,configeration,date,completeness. That leaves installation and the original cap twists on and the locking cap pushes on. I think I will take the total deduction and if the owner wants some points he should find a cap he can buy in his price range. A cap with worn finish sells for five bucks or less at a swap meet.
If were taking sides I'm with Dick and Patrick on this one.

[Terry M.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Ding, ding -- Give that man (Keith) a cigar. He HAS got it.

[Patrick H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Ding, ding -- Give that man (Keith) a cigar. He HAS got it.

Yup.
However, thanks to the present Administration cigar prices (read: added taxes as of April 1) are up quite a bit.

[Pat M.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Well I don't know about now, but when my car was first judged the manual EXPLICITLY STATED I wasn't going to lose all the available points for a dealer installed locking gas cap, yet I did. IMHO, that was unjust, and should have been reversed. If the manual is in error, or is misleading, I think the owner should not lose points when relying on that mistake.

[Michael H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

I'm too busy laughing to even type "LOL" right now.



To follow a branch of the argument further,
I recall a recent photo of a dealership in Canada that swapped the tires on most of their brand new Corvettes (in 1972?) and installed BF Goodrich Radial T/As. Are these now going to be adopted as "dealer installed accessories?" How about the FI motor swapped into a base motor car and a new dealer invoice typed out because the customer wanted an FI car in a certain color combo. Now dealer installed? Definitely a GM part.

Yeah, OK, extreme but you get the idea.

Patrick

I completely agree with Patrick and Terry. I don't even understand why there's any debate, at all, on this locking gas cap issue. (or the luggage rack) Pretty simple from where I see it. I couldn't possibly have been installed at the St Louis plant and it isn't part of a "typical new car get ready" operation.
I thought the language in the JG was very clear.

A locking gas cap, even a genuine GM accessory, isn't anywhere near the configuration of the correct original that would have been on a new car when it arrived at the dealer.

I wouldn't be one bit offended if I were having a car judged and received zero for my locking gas cap.

[David A.]

Re: Dealer installed items

I have a related question...What if an owner has pop paperwork showing that sidepipes were ordered and the vette came from the factory without sidepipes. The owner refused to take delivery and the dealership got a set from the company that suplied GM and installed them. A dedicated NCRS member wants to have the car judged but might take a huge hit. But doesnt want to spend the dollars to change out entire exhaust. Any kind of exception???

[Patrick H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

I have a related question...What if an owner has pop paperwork showing that sidepipes were ordered and the vette came from the factory without sidepipes. The owner refused to take delivery and the dealership got a set from the company that suplied GM and installed them. A dedicated NCRS member wants to have the car judged but might take a huge hit. But doesnt want to spend the dollars to change out entire exhaust. Any kind of exception???

I don't "think" that side exhaust shows up on the POP.

[David A.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Maybe terminology is wrong....Purchase order at dealership shows sidepipes ordered and paid for. Also documentation from the sidepipes supplier that they are also suppliers to GM.

[Dennis C.]

Re: Dealer installed items

I have a related question...What if an owner has pop paperwork showing that sidepipes were ordered and the vette came from the factory without sidepipes. The owner refused to take delivery and the dealership got a set from the company that suplied GM and installed them. A dedicated NCRS member wants to have the car judged but might take a huge hit. But doesnt want to spend the dollars to change out entire exhaust. Any kind of exception???

No... Just have to re-read the NCRS Judging Standard.

[Terry M.]

Re: Dealer installed items

No one at NCRS ever asked to see the purchase order for my car, and I have never seen the window sticker or purchase order examined to determine installed options at an NCRS meet. NCRS accepts the car as it is shown, and assesses the installed options based on how the factory would have installed them -- that is Typical Factory Production (TFP).

Your friend can expect the chassis judges to look for signs of bolts having been installed in the under car exhaust mounting holes. They will also look for signs of ground straps from the under car exhaust -- if the car is radio equipped. I believe there are other indicators of an under car exhaust having once been installed. If the judges find any of these or other indicators of the old under car exhaust he will have a most unhappy day.

It does not matter if the dealer installed the side exhaust or someone else did it -- the important fact is that the factory DIDN'T do it. THAT is the end of the story.

[Louis T.]

Re: Dealer installed items

Hi David,





Save the wave!

Louis

Roy

[Jack H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

The focus of this thread was two issues: (1) dealer applied undercoating and (2) dealer installed locking gas cap accessory. The question was: should the car have taken full deductions for these items?

The preponderance of replies was "Yes". I said "No" and I was speaking specifically to the locking gas cap. I cited NCRS judging rule(s) to support my position. I didn't talk about the undercoating...

In my opinion, the undercoating SHOULD be a full deduction item because it was dealer/owner inspired, a deviation from how the car left the factory and it's NOT one of the items listed as a legitimate dealer accessory.

Some argue other items could be classified as dealer accessories that thereby escape deduction(s). I don't buy that. If memory serves, MF Dobbins documents the full list of GM authorized dealer accessory items for each model year in his books. The locking gas cap was available for MANY years. Perhaps it's a healthy thing (list of then current dealer accessories) for NTL's to include in their JG books (appendix table?) since we do have rule making in this area and I seem to be relatively alone in understanding/citing the rule...

So, regardless of whether one can rationalize the ease of removing and replacing the locking gas cap with a factory stock part, there IS a judging rule that reads on it.

One NTL, Marvin Burnett, specifically addresses that this particular item in his JG book. It's beyond me how we don't have concensus here which was my point: similar items are judged differently by different judges in different divisions and that's not healthy in my book.

Out of 4500 total points, the issue IS a relative non-issue, but I've yet to hear someone speak to why the rule, as its written, doesn't apply. It seems to me like this is cut and dried. The locking gas cap, IF it's the correct original item called out by the dealer accessory parts list specific to that model year Corvette, can NOT take a bona fide full deduction pursuiant to our judging rules.

I'll now relinquish the soap box...

[Jack H.]

Re: Dealer installed items

One more comment... A former RMC Judging Chairman remembers working a regional meet where the NTL was a guy named Roy Sinor. The RMC judge had taken a full deduction for a particular car having a locking gas cap. He went to the team leader (also the then current NTL, Roy) for sign-off approval on the full deduction item.

Roy, instructed him to change the score from a full deduction to a partial deduction because there WAS a functional gas cap present and it was covered by the JRM's standard deduction rules.

Now, different division, different Corvette, different time frame, but the tale reinforces my point. We're treating the same part differently depending on who's doing the judging, and what his/her knowledge is of our judging rules...