Deductions for judging lacquer paint

[Terry M.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

Mike,
My earlier quotes are from the newest 66 judging manual.
Also , the first line in the new manual , above the flow chart says
"DOES THE BODY PAINT MATERIAL APPEAR TO BE THE FACTORY MATERIAL?" YES OR NO
The fact is that mine IS factory material. and I recieved a NO.
So my question is where did I go wrong? What would allow me recieve a YES and then just have the 20% deduction for over restoration?
Is it because I polished the sides and vents or because I painted under the front and rear valance's?

Dave,
For the 1966 TIM&JG they must have taken that wording from the Paint Judging Flow Chart because that is exactly the wording there. How clever of them. I was wrong in my belief that material was not the issue. So the judges determined that your paint does NOT appear to be the factory applied material. Regardless of what you know it is, they indicated by their deduction that it appears to not be like the factory applied lacquer. Without the testimony of those judges we are done. For the answers to your questions you will have to ask the judges, and of course the chance to do that is when they are present at the car and they can show you why they did what they did.

The back of the matrix states:
"Produced under assembly line conditions and 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 or area 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." (Bold is in original text.)
The advisory then goes on to talk about over-restoration in paragraph B. Then it goes on:
. Deduct 50% of originality - The body paint appears to have been refinished with a material not consistent with factory application, however, the appearance is consistent with factory application methods. Judge condition separately." (Bold is in original text.)

There is substantially more, but my keyboarding is done for the night. Of possible interest is the judging guidance on "Factory Applied Material" and "Factory Applied Methods." Given Mike Murray cited two pages in the new manual I would hazard a guess that the entire text of the Paint Judging Advisory is printed there.

[Stephen B.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

To all you gentlemen
I purchased a 1966 L79 new which I still own. The paint job sucked from the factory. No paint behind rear wheels low, minimal paint on rockers,and cracks in paint on top of front fenders.The more I rubbed on this car the shinyer it got were there was paint, including the door jambs.My point is why would I want to reproduce every cotton picking flaw some sorry replacement worker on Friday afternoon originally built into my car? When these cars were originally built GM was NOT known for their high standards of quality.We bought them because they were Fast.
Now fast forward, judging these is more about reproducing imperfection,and poor quality.These paint conversations interest me ,but also make me crazy when I hear the expert opinions of people that never worked in an auto plant or painted a car themselves.
To show how rediculous these issues have gotten, I was recently told by an NCRS judge that I shouldn't worry about over restoration of door jam areas. Just spray them with HAIR SPRAY for judging. How ridiculous this whole thing has gotten. Just one dedicated long time Corvette owners opinion.
Stephen Barrett (21558)

[Jim D.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

Very well stated Stephen. I completely agree. I can't see why anyone would want to reproduce the crappy paint job these cars came with when new.

[Michael W.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

Many members wish to pursue the highest level of NCRS Flight Judging awards they (actually their car) can achieve. To do so requires following the rules.

That's one good reason why factory imperfections are reproduced to the 9th degree.

I've always admired the NCRS membership in general for it's live-and-let-live attitude towards what other members do with their cars. This applies both here and at face to face meetings. This contrasts greatly with typical show and shine events or specific on line discussion boards where there is always one or two loud mouths that have NO tolerance for doing things anyway but their way.

[David K.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

They are painted that way because that is the standard - "How it came from the factory" and that is the owner's choice to do so in order to acheive certain NCRS awards. It is neither right or wrong it is just the standard for judging for this particular organization. It is "how it came from the factory" not "how it came from the factory after I polished it 100 times" or "after I repainted it better than the factory".

A corvette that receives top awards at the NCRS probably would not do well in standard car shows because the paint is not perfect and that is OK because the standard is different. Just as you would probably not expect to do well taking your red corvette to an all black mustang show, you probably should expect to receive deductions if you restored your car to different standards than the NCRS lays out.

I realize this is a little off subject and the original topic was about deductions for lacquer paint. What that boils down to is the interpetation of the standard. The NCRS, I believe, has done the best they can to make the juding consistant but it does come down to the opinion of the judges on any given day. To me the 0% and 100% deduct are fairly easy. It is the 20% vs the 50% that begins to blur. This is because someone can "over-restore" a lacquer paint job to the point that it does not apper to be "factory applied material".

Again it is all about opinion and if you feel the deduction appears to harsh there is an appeal process. You can take it to the team leader, then to the event judging chair and the up to Roy himself. If after all these experienced folks tell you the deduction is correct based on the judging standard thne you probably need to accept that it does not meet the judging standard. At that point your choices are 1) accept the NCRS award you are able to achieve with the paint as is 2) change the paint to meet the standard or 3) Campaign the car in a different venue where it may meet their standand better.

[Stephen B.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

Michael and David
While talking to various other very knowledgable club members and on this site it is the differing opinions on what actually was produced at the factory and the obsestion at times with one view point that bothers many. Every judge seems to have a slightly different opinion.It's not like a mathimatical equation that comes out the same every time.It is only my opinion ,but issues like this many times provent new members from joining this otherwise wonderful organization. It's not an exact science.
Respectfully
Stephen Barrett(21558)

[Gary C.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

If one starts with the basic premise that all of the vintage Corvette's finish and fit were crappy at best when they left the factory, that should put all the paint and fiberglass questions in proper perspective. Dealers almost always embellished the finish with buffing and waxing to make them prettier and easier to sell. JMTCW, Gary....

[Michael W.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

but issues like this many times provent new members from joining this otherwise wonderful organization.

As would showing intolerance for what others do with their cars.............

[Jim D.]

Re: Deductions for judging lacquer paint

As would showing intolerance for what others do with their cars.............

As would certain judges NOT deducting points for known correct items.