inconsistant judging

[Clem Z.]

Re: inconsistant judging

How exactly did you figure that out?

they are there to influence the bidding for club members cars just by their presence there or else they would not be there ??

[Gene M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Here we go again. We've all heard this before but there's no evidence yet that this is true. John once provided a citation to Iowa law that looked like you were correct, but upon closer review of that law it did not say that it was illegal to restamp a VIN. There was also some past discussion that there were Federal rules preventing restamping, but they were vague. Could you provide some evidence (like a reference to a law) that specifically states that it is illegal to restamp VINs? This would be helpful to anyone who is doing a "restoration".

Federal rules are further restricted by state law and codes.
Well, if you don't think messing with VIN's illegal try reading this:

http://www.boss302.com/legal.htm

[Michael W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

they are there to influence the bidding for club members cars just by their presence there or else they would not be there ??

Did you read that in your daily Pravda or is it that your anti-conspiracy theory tinfoil beanie hat fall off again?

Tell Patty to use more duct tape to hold it in place next time.

[Clem Z.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Did you read that in your daily Pravda or is it that your anti-conspiracy theory tinfoil beanie hat fall off again?

Tell Patty to use more duct tape to hold it in place next time.

to be honest when they announce that the corvette has won this or that NCRS awards it should be stated that award means nothing today as it only applied the day of the award.

[Paul J.]

Re: inconsistant judging

This probably should be in a new thread, but
From the 2009 CALIF Vehicle Code:

CAL VEHICLE CODE
SECTION 10750-10752

10750. (a) No person shall intentionally deface, destroy, or alterthe motor number, other distinguishing number, or identification markof a vehicle required or employed for registration purposes withoutwritten authorization from the department, nor shall any person placeor stamp any serial, motor, or other number or mark upon a vehicle,except one assigned thereto by the department. (b) This section does not prohibit the restoration by an owner ofthe original vehicle identification number when the restoration isauthorized by the department, nor prevent any manufacturer fromplacing in the ordinary course of business numbers or marks upon newmotor vehicles or new parts thereof.10751. (a) No person shall knowingly buy, sell, offer for sale,receive, or have in his or her possession, any vehicle, or componentpart thereof, from which any serial or identification number,including, but not limited to, any number used for registrationpurposes, that is affixed by the manufacturer to the vehicle orcomponent part, in whatever manner deemed proper by the manufacturer,has been removed, defaced, altered, or destroyed, unless the vehicleor component part has attached thereto an identification numberassigned or approved by the department in lieu of the manufacturer'snumber.
For the whole text:http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...ication+number

Thanks Don.

10750 (a) applys only to numbers used for the registration of the vehicle. I don't think any States use engine block and other part numbers for registration, but I don't know. Section (b) is similar to Iowa law, and it allows engine builders to restamp blocks. The only question is if reconditioned parts fall under the definition of "new". This is ambiguous enough that I doubt any judge could rule it illegal.

10751 is a real enigma, since it prevents the decking of a block. Once again, I doubt any DA would touch this, but I'll have to check. I'm having dinner with one tonight.

Paul

[Paul J.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Federal rules are further restricted by state law and codes.
Well, if you don't think messing with VIN's illegal try reading this:
http://www.boss302.com/legal.htm

Thanks, Gene, but this has nothing to do with restoration of engine blocks, or any other part. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 113 is entitled "Stolen Property". Most of the case notes deal with VINs on vehicles altered or changed in order to sell stolen or otherwise misrepresented cars. There are only a couple of references to parts, and these appear to be talking about chop shop activites. In all of these cases, criminal intent is the key. However, I'll have a DA look at it tonight and see what he thinks.

Paul

[Michael W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

to be honest when they announce that the corvette has won this or that NCRS awards it should be stated that award means nothing today as it only applied the day of the award.

Wouldn't that be a classic case of overstating the obvious? Would making such an announcement make any difference to someone with too much money that's already thinking with the wrong brain?

[Domenic T.]

Re: inconsistant judging

That's because we're discussing Flight Judging and judging consistency, not authenticating a car. Apples and oranges.

Michael,
help me with this as I have never had a car judged.

I thought they judged for authinticy and thats why I mentioned the acid lift.

But if I understand what you say it is only to look authentic?

DOM

[Gene M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Thanks, Gene, but this has nothing to do with restoration of engine blocks, or any other part. Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 113 is entitled "Stolen Property". Most of the case notes deal with VINs on vehicles altered or changed in order to sell stolen or otherwise misrepresented cars. There are only a couple of references to parts, and these appear to be talking about chop shop activities. In all of these cases, criminal intent is the key. However, I'll have a DA look at it tonight and see what he thinks.

Paul

Paul, I think that is exactly what it covers. The block is a possible stolen item. As the original numbers are removed on the donor block deck. States interoperate the VIN as including a derivative of it. As it states:

"SUMMARY: Illegally removing or altering a vehicle identification number (VIN) or selling or possessing a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part with an altered or removed VIN constitutes a crime in most states. In order to impose liability, state courts normally require a culpable mental state on the part of the defendant in altering or removing a VIN or in possessing a vehicle or vehicle part with an altered or removed VIN. Some states, however, do not require any culpable mental state on the part of the defendant when selling a vehicle or vehicle part with a removed or altered VIN."

You need to look at this from a legal point of view as the car or any part of it fall under the word of "altered VIN". I would not have to defend a restamping just for the sake of obtaining a flight award. Just does not seem to hold much merit.

[Michael W.]

Re: inconsistant judging

But if I understand what you say it is only to look authentic?

DOM

Maybe even less than that- the idea is to make everything look typical of factory production. There is NO attempt to authenticate.

This point is why I disagreed slightly with the wording of Ken Hoffman's response.

[Paul J.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Paul, I think that is exactly what it covers. The block is a possible stolen item. As the original numbers are removed on the donor block deck. States interoperate the VIN as including a derivative of it. As it states:

"SUMMARY: Illegally removing or altering a vehicle identification number (VIN) or selling or possessing a motor vehicle or motor vehicle part with an altered or removed VIN constitutes a crime in most states. In order to impose liability, state courts normally require a culpable mental state on the part of the defendant in altering or removing a VIN or in possessing a vehicle or vehicle part with an altered or removed VIN. Some states, however, do not require any culpable mental state on the part of the defendant when selling a vehicle or vehicle part with a removed or altered VIN."

Right, this law applies if the block is stolen. That is the intent of this law. You need to think of this in legal terms. In concept the DA agreed with my interpretation, but he is going to spend some time with it and get back to me.

[Gene M.]

Re: inconsistant judging

Right, this law applies if the block is stolen. That is the intent of this law. You need to think of this in legal terms. In concept the DA agreed with my interpretation, but he is going to spend some time with it and get back to me.

Federal DA or State level?

In any event whenever a block is removed of its original number and re stamped with another VIN the reason is to deceive. The deception can be for as little as to gain points on the judging field or as major as to acquire big money selling the car once the show field award is achieved. The implication of the re stamped engine block is appear as original manufactured situation still in intact. But far be it from the truth is it is only an imitation of the original.

When the vehicle was created the major items were stamped with a serial number or a derivative of it that is associated with one and only one vehicle. It is not interchangeable with another vehicle and representing the same intent. To recreate this serial number on another piece is deception.

The legal world has no issue when pieces are removed and replaced that do not contain serial number. There is no intent to deceive here other than to improve the condition or appearance.

Replacing serial numbered pieces from another vehicle WITHOUT recreation of serial numbers is NOT deception as nothing is "covered up".

[Michael J.]

Re: inconsistant judging

I'm getting in late on this, but in my experience the engine pad stamp is the most subjective and hard for a judge to explain. Mine have been judged great-original, and NTFP, where the judge finally got flustered after all my requests for specifics on font, spacing, broach marks, etc. and said: "it just doesn't look right, too perfect and nice in my opinion". Also in my experience paint used to be the second most subjective, but now it seems to be much more consistent. I just wish the judging could get to that level on the engine stamps, everything else seems to be very consistent.

[Harry S.]

Re: inconsistent judging

I believe the reason paint became consistent is because the judges can only use their eyesight. No magnifying glass or broach buster. They also have to judge the paint with the doors closed and only open the doors if a decision can't be made. If it looks like factory applied (even if it was latex applied with a brush), it should pass. I know a rather broad exaggeration.

If the pad was judged with the naked eye and experience I would expect less inconsistency. You look at the pad, if it looks good it passes.

[Martin N.]

Re: inconsistant judging

This has been bugging me for awhile. I've been to two local chapter meets to have my car judged and after the first time I tried to correct some of the things that were incorrect so that I could get Top Flight because I wasn't off by much. So the second time I go and things that they said were correct the first time (such as engine stamping, etc) were no longer correct, which was a huge deduction. I even had my previous year judging sheets. They told me it was up to each judge. I spent alot of money and time to get the car right and it was very disappointing. I'm afraid to put more into the car because it just seems very inconsistant. Glad I got this off my chest.

LEN-
WOW! Your experience has brought me to admit to myself and this Board that I too am having issues about having my car judged. I've been a NCRS member for a little while and I always wonder where I'll (and my car) will fit in? The Tech & Judging guides are one thing, but where does an Indviduals heart & pocketbook fit in ? This is the BEST Advice Board to be involved with. THANK-YOU!

Marty