NOM and judging

[Michael W.]

Re: NOM and judging

What is the engine machine code?

That's the 'other' stamp on the pad applied at the engine assembly facility. Typically one letter for the plant designation, (T or V), then 3 or 4 digits for the assembly date month and day, then a three letter code for the engine particulars.

[Michael W.]

Re: NOM and judging

Beyond the motor.
Originality points; my urethane bumper on my car rotted off, if I replace it with a tru-flex or fiberglass two piece bumper do I lose all originality and condition points? Is there a formula for these types of incidences? Same hold true for tires, I would not want to run biased tires from 1974 on my car. The same size and manufacturer, ok. They do not make reproduction tires for most C3's.

Thanks

Todd

A general rule in judging is to remember that things get judged on what they appear to be. A non GM, non urethane bumper may get a small deduction or no deduction depending on the judges in question and whether they see some feature that deviates from the appearance of an original bumper. Judges should not be trying to see how much flex the bumper material has- not appreciated by owners with fragile originals.

There's no reason any front bumper should get a complete deduct- unless it's off a F*rd Pinto or similar.

BTW- '74s were never equipped with bias ply tires. '73 and up had radials.

[Terry M.]

Re: NOM and judging

Beyond the motor.
Originality points; my urethane bumper on my car rotted off, if I replace it with a tru-flex or fiberglass two piece bumper do I lose all originality and condition points? Is there a formula for these types of incidences? Same hold true for tires, I would not want to run biased tires from 1974 on my car. The same size and manufacturer, ok. They do not make reproduction tires for most C3's.

Thanks

Todd

There is a formula for items like glass, tires, battery and some other common items -- but not for bumpers metal or rubber. The formula is in the NCRS Judging Reference Manual -- available from the "NCRS Store" Click the button at the top of the page.

"They do not make reproduction tires for most C3's." The truth of this statement depends on how you count. There are reproduction tires available for most of the C3s that show up for judging.

Why would you want bias ply tires on your 1974? Didn't it originally come with radials?

[Kenneth H.]

Re: NOM and judging

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't "The Last Sting Ray" receive a Top Flight a couple of years ago even though it didn't have it's original engine?

Thanks.

[Michael W.]

Re: NOM and judging

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't "The Last Sting Ray" receive a Top Flight a couple of years ago even though it didn't have it's original engine?

Thanks.

Yes it did. I believe it had a correctly configured restoration engine and as such, got no deduction in accordance with present rules.

[Tom L.]

Re: NOM and judging

You've sparked my curiosity. What do you mean by a "correctly configured restoration engine". Are you suggesting that a re-stamp is somehow acceptable or did the engine simply lose the points for the pad but had the correct casting # and date code?

[Jack H.]

Re: NOM and judging

You've sparked my curiosity. What do you mean by a "correctly configured restoration engine". Are you suggesting that a re-stamp is somehow acceptable or did the engine simply lose the points for the pad but had the correct casting # and date code?

There are a couple of meanings here. First, one test of 'properly configured' is the engine block/cylinder heads comming from the 'proper' foundry/engine assy plant (for SB Corvettes that's the Saginaw foundry & Flint engine plant).

Next, there's the aspect of date coding. Do the castings that can be date code read/verified, agree with the engine/car final assy dates?

Last, there's the stamp pad consideration. Do the numbers there agree with the car's configuration? Is font and placement 'correct' for what's known about originals from that era? And, do the underlying broach marks on the pad appear to be factory original?

Note all of these issues are 'appearance' related. Flight judging does not CERTIFY this/that car actually is factory correct/original! That's why there's a disclaimer on the back of our Flight Certificates to that effect.

We judge based on visual appearance and if it looks good enough, it flys. There's NEVER been a restriction/bar against building a car with a 'restoration' engine! Our motto is restoration/preservation. Why would we go penalize an inanimate object (the car) for the sins of its prior owners?

Yep, that Corvette lost it's factory original motor. Well, we've got to CRUSH it now...it's been a BAD Corvette and it needs to suffer!!

RUBBISH. The restoration standards have always been to make the car APPEAR to the trained eye as if it rolled off the assy line yesterday. Get that right with ALL of the underlying details, and you've got a winner!

What we DO strive to bar, is making this/that Corvette into something that it never was when it was originally built. That's to change a SB into a BB, make an FI car out of a base engine car, LOAD the sucka up with every conceivable factory option, Etc.

EXPECT that, perhaps, 50% of the top award winning cars from NCRS, NCCB, Etc. are equipped with 'restoration' engines under the hood. That's the real world...

[Michael W.]

Re: NOM and judging

You've sparked my curiosity. What do you mean by a "correctly configured restoration engine". Are you suggesting that a re-stamp is somehow acceptable or did the engine simply lose the points for the pad but had the correct casting # and date code?

Lynn,

There's a common misconception that NCRS 'accepts' restamped engines and another myth that NCRS 'certifies' cars as being 'authentic/genuine'. Jack has explained that there is no certification going on of any type.

With respect to engine pads, either it looks typical of factory production, or it doesn't. If a pad looks typical, then there's no deduct. This the same philosophy used on every other feature of a car. Why not the stamp pad?

[Harry S.]

Re: NOM and judging

Mikey, I agree with ya.