6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

[William M.]

I'm sure this will spark a heated debate, but here goes ...

I have what I consider to be a very original '73 LS4 coupe. The car received a Top Flight at both chapter and regional meets. I have spoken to owners going all the way back to the original owner to find out what they did to the car ... fortunately, very little.

Now here's the problem: Anyone that looks at my starter or fan clutch agrees that they look original. My build date is 4/3/73, but the starter's dated 7/11/72 and the fan clutch's 8/16/72. Both fall out of the accepted 6 month window and as a result take a deduction in judging.

So in order to comply with this 6 month rule, I have now removed what I believe to be 2 factory installed parts and replaced them with 2 "correctly" dated parts that will make the judges happy. I fell guilty, as if I've betrayed the integrity of the car.

Isn't it possible that, considering the relative rarity of big blocks by 72/73, that these leftover parts were used more than 6 months after their production? I'm sure if they were laying around, they wouldn't just get thrown out - they'd find a way to use them.

[Terry M.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

You have to balance your "guilt" against how badly you believe you want those points. Tell us how many points was it that makes you feel guilty.

[Brian M.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

I would have left it as was and argued the point deduct. JMHO.

[Tom H.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

I'd take the hit if I was sure the parts were original. The judging guide is subject to change. An original car is always an original car. JMO.

[Jim C.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

William,

It sounds like you have a real nice Corvette. If you've ever read any of my responses/posts on this site, then you know that I'm a HUGE proponent of "keeping it original." If your car is Top Flight with or without the parts you mentioned falling inside the six month rule, then it really doesn't matter, as long as both sets of parts (pre and post six month) are ORIGINAL. Your Corvette is Top Flight either way. So, that's not a big problem. You're worried about the date codes. I totally understand that and would try to keep within the six month period if possible, particularly if I did not think the parts on the car were original to the car. But, I do agree with your logic, particularly if you believe, and have some research that suggests that the "older than six month parts" ARE original to the car. I think it's safe to assume that the factory would have used the appropriate parts on hand regardless of their date codes. I don't think the factory workers were too concerned about date codes. If the part was being used in the correct application, then it most likely went on the car. I'm not an expert on this stuff, and I'm basing my answer on what makes sense and my own similar experience with my current Corvette. I think the factory generally used the parts that were on hand. Hey, it's your car. Satisfy yourself. If you think the parts that fall outside the six month time period are original to the car, then I'd go with them. Really. I've done similar things with my current Corvette. Give up a few points. No big deal. There's no absolute science to any of this. ENJOY your car the way you want it. That's really what it's all about.

Jim C.

[Bill C.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

Bill,

One consideration with regard to the fan clutch ->
The Switzer clutches as compared to the NOS/available Eaton clutches are much more susceptible to bearing fatigue at the hub.
The hub bearings on the new clutches are somewhat noticeably "beefy'er".

You really don't want this - you will end up tearing the radiator/shroud and who knows what other parts - to heck.

If you drive the car, other than a few short trips or trailer it to car shows, then use the new clutch and don't worry about the 3-4 points you get dinged.

I have my original one, and it still works. I do not have it on the car.
I will go through the effort for the NCRS show to reinstall it, but that is as far as it is ever used.

As to your original post - if you believe beyond a reasonable doubt that your car is as delivered, then I would keep it that way. In the big picture a few points for date codes is not going to kill you. Keeping your car as delivered/assembled in my opinion is much more important.

My 2 cents...

[Harmon C.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

The fan clutch was the same used on all 73's so it's not a special 454 part so the factory would have had to find an old skid of parts. The starter would be eaiser to try to make a case for as it is a 454 only part but we judge by a standard and if the date is over the standard plan on getting a deduction. Like others have said a few points have little effect on the big picture.

[Roy B.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

I think the six months is to cover variables, people that have a vary early or late Corvette usually has problems when judging . Left over parts of one year to (early) to improved parts to (late) Corvettes . Take the 56 and 55 Corvette most parts are dated from the early years and even the design of a part . The early 55 parts are mostly dated 54 up to more then half the production of 700. The early 56's has a 55 heater in it.
I agree with Jim and Lisa , in most years more parts were made then Corvettes sold , so would they throw them out or use them up if they fit.

[Michael W.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

The six month rule is somewhat arbitrary - to the best of my knowlege no one actually went out and surveyed every possibility and concluded that there was a hard 183 day cut off without exceptions, as opposed to 190 or 200 or 210 etc, never mind the fact that the amount of total days within a given six month period varies. The 'six months' probably encompasses the vast majority of cars and components but not all.

As others have said, if you're convinced that these components are the orignals, put them back on.

[Jim D.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

I agree with Michael. Leave it the way you found it. My 74 LS4 car had a motor that was assembled 9 months before the car was built. I was the 3rd owner and knew the first 2 and had all the documentation from day 1. Was it the original motor - Absolutely. Was it outside the 6 month rule - Yes, and who cares. The Judging Guides are a reference, not the definitive law.

[Joe L.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

I'm sure this will spark a heated debate, but here goes ...

I have what I consider to be a very original '73 LS4 coupe. The car received a Top Flight at both chapter and regional meets. I have spoken to owners going all the way back to the original owner to find out what they did to the car ... fortunately, very little.

Now here's the problem: Anyone that looks at my starter or fan clutch agrees that they look original. My build date is 4/3/73, but the starter's dated 7/11/72 and the fan clutch's 8/16/72. Both fall out of the accepted 6 month window and as a result take a deduction in judging.

So in order to comply with this 6 month rule, I have now removed what I believe to be 2 factory installed parts and replaced them with 2 "correctly" dated parts that will make the judges happy. I fell guilty, as if I've betrayed the integrity of the car.

Isn't it possible that, considering the relative rarity of big blocks by 72/73, that these leftover parts were used more than 6 months after their production? I'm sure if they were laying around, they wouldn't just get thrown out - they'd find a way to use them.

William-----


Keep this in mind: it is EXTREMELY unlikely that pieces like the fan clutch and, especially, the starter with correct configuration and/or part number got on the car by happenstance as a field repair. It's even less likely that pieces with the correct configuration and/or part number AND with the dates you mentioned were installed on the car as part of a field repair.

If the dates had been 6 months AFTER the build date of the car, that would be another matter. In that case, it would be a virtual certainty that they were installed post-PRODUCTION.

[Grant W.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

William-----


Keep this in mind: it is EXTREMELY unlikely that pieces like the fan clutch and, especially, the starter with correct configuration and/or part number got on the car by happenstance as a field repair. It's even less likely that pieces with the correct configuration and/or part number AND with the dates you mentioned were installed on the car as part of a field repair.

If the dates had been 6 months AFTER the build date of the car, that would be another matter. In that case, it would be a virtual certainty that they were installed post-PRODUCTION.

I 100% agree with Joe on this. It was probably a warranty issue replacement. The date coding of parts is an inventory control which is related to warranty replacement.
There is some instances when the car is ready to roll off the assembly line and it doesn't restart. Finding out it is a defective carb. The replacement carb now installed is dated( maybe 2 weeks) after the final assembly date of the car.
Now to prove this is another bowl of noodles.
However when the refit was done a check list was provided with the car. But between the dealership at that time giving the paper work to the new owner is another thing. Dealers always want to sell a perfect car so most likely the check list or factory repair list was never given to the owner. It probably stayed in the filing cabinet of the dealership.
Hope this helps.
Grant

[Ridge K.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

Here's one of my favorite quotes I've seen in the five years I've been visiting the tDB, AND, it was from a pretty sharp, former team leader:

"Judging is, as some have said, a game. The purpose is for entertainment and education. Know the rules and play by them -- you and your car will have a lot more fun that way. The person who brings a football to a baseball game usually doesn't have much fun"

This post from a guy who just bought a restored part, to replace a part that I'm quite sure was original to my April '67 built Corvette. Ridge

[Michael W.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

Hope this helps.
Grant

Quite the opposite, you've confused the heck out of me.

[William M.]

Re: 6 Month Rule - Feeling Guilty

Quite the opposite, you've confused the heck out of me.

I'm confused as well. If these were warranty replacements, they'd likely have a later date, not an earlier date.